Speaker 1: In a world of deceit, telling the truth is a
Speaker 1: revolutionary act. It's the David Knight Show.
Speaker 2: As a clock strikes thirteen, it's Monday, the second of February.
Speaker 2: You're of our lord, twenty twenty six. Well, we had
Speaker 2: some surprises over the weekend, didn't we large dump of
Speaker 2: Epstein files. Of course, it's still only about fifty percent,
Speaker 2: according even to the government. Where we learn more about
Speaker 2: our soulless elites who sold their souls a long time ago.
Speaker 2: Isn't it interesting how Trump was the guy who was
Speaker 2: going to protect us from the pedophile elites. It turns
Speaker 2: out he's protecting them instead. Maybe there's something we could
Speaker 2: learn from that about globalism and other things like that.
Speaker 2: And of course his pick for Federal Reserve. Now we
Speaker 2: see that the Fiat dollar evidently has been fixed. No
Speaker 2: more concerns about inflation. Debt is all fixed now with
Speaker 2: this new Fed pick. And we saw a shock and
Speaker 2: a price of gold and silver. We're going to talk
Speaker 2: about that today as well. And I guess one of
Speaker 2: the most surprising things to me was that there was
Speaker 2: no war over the weekend. You would think it'd be
Speaker 2: even more likely with the Epstein docks. I guess we
Speaker 2: could say he's going to wag the docks, but we're
Speaker 2: also going to take a look today and how to
Speaker 2: organize resistance. This is a lesson in tactics from people
Speaker 2: who's olds you may despise. It's something very important. Nevertheless,
Speaker 2: and Lania the film then put your.
Speaker 1: Little hand in.
Speaker 2: And with all that, it does seem like groundhog Day
Speaker 2: because it is groundhog Day today. I got you day,
Speaker 2: Rise and shine.
Speaker 3: Okay, cameras, rise and shine, and don't forget your bodies
Speaker 3: cut it's cold out there.
Speaker 4: Oh I got that right, didn't they?
Speaker 5: Every day?
Speaker 1: What is this? Miami beach hard?
Speaker 2: And you know second hazard is travel later today with that?
Speaker 6: You know that that blizzard, that blizzard.
Speaker 1: Oh well, here's the report.
Speaker 5: The National Weather Service is calling for a big blizzard. Thing.
Speaker 1: Yes, but you know there's another reason.
Speaker 2: Why it is groundhog Day. This keeps happening over and
Speaker 2: over again in February old.
Speaker 1: Okay, but the big question on everybody's list. Yeah, their
Speaker 1: chap lit on their chaplain, right a thing.
Speaker 3: Bill's gonna come out and.
Speaker 7: See a shadow pumps any film that's right with Chuck Chuckers.
Speaker 5: It's road hard.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and actually this morning he did see his or
Speaker 2: whatever did not see a shadow, whichever way it works. Anyway,
Speaker 2: he's predicting another six weeks so winter. That wasn't a
Speaker 2: hard prediction, was it. And of course what a great
Speaker 2: movie that is. Who wouldn't want to have endless chances
Speaker 2: to get one day right, just one day out of
Speaker 2: our life right, that we could get everything correct. Well,
Speaker 2: I think we can comfortably say that he got this
Speaker 2: one right this year, even though his predictions have been
Speaker 2: pretty poor. He's gotten it only right about thirty percent
Speaker 2: of the time, says a National Organization for Oceanic and
Speaker 2: Atmospheric whatever, noah, whatever they stand for. So they have
Speaker 2: a vested interest in saying that they do a better
Speaker 2: round than a groundhog. Maybe they do with all of
Speaker 2: their computers slightly better, But you could flip a coin
Speaker 2: sometimes and do a little bit better.
Speaker 4: You know.
Speaker 2: People started accumulating at three thirty in the morning. He
Speaker 2: gets up at about seven thirty seven twenty five, they said,
Speaker 2: is the average time that he comes out. So I
Speaker 2: guess you could say that the groundhog is smarter than
Speaker 2: many of us, isn't he If he waits to get
Speaker 2: up until the sun comes up. So last year there
Speaker 2: are about thirty thousand people there. I don't know this year, though,
Speaker 2: that storm is very significant, very much more like the movie.
Speaker 4: Quite a bit of a storm everywhere. Anyone.
Speaker 2: Still you might, yeah, you might. Well you're saying Lance,
Speaker 2: She said, you think the reason that everybody remembers this
Speaker 2: is why I think.
Speaker 4: So un remembers. Yeah.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the movie's the only reason anybody remembers the groundhog event.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 2: It certainly was a shot in the arm for them,
Speaker 2: wasn't it. It makes Poka music at three point thirty
Speaker 2: in the morning look.
Speaker 4: Great, doesn't it.
Speaker 2: Anyway, So we have I wonder if pucksatony Field does
Speaker 2: election predictions, because we had some interesting stuff that happened
Speaker 2: on Saturday. We had a Texas district that Trump had
Speaker 2: won by seventeen points, and this thing flipped massively in
Speaker 2: the other direction, something like a thirty two point swing
Speaker 2: since his election in twenty twenty four. And so the
Speaker 2: Democrats are getting very excited about this, and of course
Speaker 2: some things will change, but not for the better if
Speaker 2: we get Democrats in instead of Republicans. But Trump pleaded
Speaker 2: ignorance Sunday when asked about Texas Republican that he had.
Speaker 4: Endorsed just days ago. I don't know who this guy is.
Speaker 2: As they say, success has many fathers, but failure is
Speaker 2: an orphan. Right, So this orphan lost pretty big to
Speaker 2: a Democrat, double digit's loss. When asked about it on
Speaker 2: Sunday about the trouncing, Trump says, I don't know. I
Speaker 2: didn't hear about it. Somebody ran it where I don't
Speaker 2: have any idea what this is. Well, he's endorsed this
Speaker 2: candidate multiple times, most recently on the day before the
Speaker 2: election Friday. It was on Saturday, and so he pretended
Speaker 2: that he didn't know anything about it. On Sunday, he said,
Speaker 2: I'm not involved in that at all. It's a local
Speaker 2: Texas race. And the reporter said, but you endorse the Republican.
Speaker 2: Trump cut him off. He says, you mean I won
Speaker 2: by seventeen points and this person lost. Things like that happen.
Speaker 2: The problem is he's the reason we're seeing his popularity
Speaker 2: plummet for obvious reasons. And the reporter says, doesn't it
Speaker 2: worry you? And he says, well, you don't know whether
Speaker 2: or not it's transferable, but I'm not on the ballot.
Speaker 2: Know whether or not it's transferable. And this is the
Speaker 2: expectation games they all play, and the denial games they
Speaker 2: all play. You know, Trump likes to take credit for
Speaker 2: races that he had absolutely nothing to do with, and
Speaker 2: he distanced himself from other Saturday's results invites speculation that
Speaker 2: there's going to be a big switch going on when
Speaker 2: we get to the election in November. It was a
Speaker 2: thirty one and a half point swing in terms of
Speaker 2: the vote margin that this person won by versus what
Speaker 2: Trump did, which is a you know, again you're comparing
Speaker 2: Trump's race to this guy's race. Nevertheless, it was a
Speaker 2: strong Republican district. Why did you have a Democrat win
Speaker 2: by fourteen and a half points in a strong Republican
Speaker 2: district in Texas? There's something to see there. Since Trump
Speaker 2: took office, Democrats have flipped eight Republican held state legislative
Speaker 2: seats and special elections across five states. Republicans have flipped
Speaker 2: zero Democrat seats. And you know, I've mentioned many times
Speaker 2: what happened in twenty ten in North Carolina. You had,
Speaker 2: for the first time since reconstruction, a Republican legislature in
Speaker 2: the state of North Carolina. In two thousand and eight,
Speaker 2: North Carolina had gone for Obama. They didn't like what
Speaker 2: Obama was doing after two years, and so in twenty ten,
Speaker 2: all of the state offices went Republican. Of course, the
Speaker 2: congressional seats didn't change because those are picked in advance
Speaker 2: by the gerrymanderin. But then that did change because with
Speaker 2: a new legislature and at the state level they changed
Speaker 2: the district team in twenty ten, so then the Republicans
Speaker 2: got control of the congressional seats there. So this is
Speaker 2: how that goes. So I guess we should ask Pusatani
Speaker 2: Phil what's going to happen in November of the election.
Speaker 2: Just as likely he'd know that as he was the weather.
Speaker 2: The definition of domestic terrorism. A Fox News analyst pushes
Speaker 2: Trump to invoke the Insurrection Act against anti Ice radicals
Speaker 2: quote unquote, and this has now become a standard line
Speaker 2: for the women of Fox News, the nanny State girls.
Speaker 2: They want an insurrection Act, they want to kick off
Speaker 2: a civil war. They think they're going to skate right
Speaker 2: above it. Maybe they will, but this is not warranted.
Speaker 2: It wasn't warranted. With all the talk about an insurrection.
Speaker 2: In January, the sixth, of course, how soon they forget
Speaker 2: and they don't realize what they are setting up in
Speaker 2: terms of a precedent. So you had Fox News political
Speaker 2: analyst Lisa Booth, so, it's time for Trump to invoke
Speaker 2: the Insurrection Act because the anti ICE quote unquote radicals
Speaker 2: are violently attempting to subvert federal immigration law following the
Speaker 2: deaths of Renee Good and Alex pretty So. She was
Speaker 2: joined with other commentators there. They said, because these individu rules,
Speaker 2: these radicals are using violence to try to change government policy.
Speaker 2: That is the definition of domestic terrorism. Well, yes, you know,
Speaker 2: you use a threat of force or violence or terroristic
Speaker 2: acts to alter the political landscape, that's terrorism. It seems
Speaker 2: to me that same definition could apply to Ice and
Speaker 2: the Trump administration.
Speaker 4: That's really what they're doing.
Speaker 2: You want to go out there with masks and start
Speaker 2: attacking people. But of course that never applies to the government,
Speaker 2: does it. We're going to talk about some of the
Speaker 2: effective ways that they've organized against this and whether or
Speaker 2: not you agree with their goal. We need to always
Speaker 2: pay attention to the tactics. You know, as I said before,
Speaker 2: the end does not justify the means. In many cases,
Speaker 2: but sometimes even if you don't agree with the end
Speaker 2: goal a goal, you can learn something about the means
Speaker 2: that people are applying to this. We're going to talk
Speaker 2: about that coming up. So you had Anita Vogel also
Speaker 2: agreed with boost take, and we'd had Tommy Lauren pushing
Speaker 2: war as well. Yet three women, all of them want
Speaker 2: war reminds me being one of my favorite musicals. I
Speaker 2: guess I put in that category Pirates of Penzence. The
Speaker 2: women get out there, go ye heroes, go and die,
Speaker 2: fishing the guys onto war, and it's like, oh, wait
Speaker 2: a minute, I don't know if we want to go.
Speaker 2: That's what this has become. This is a chorus of
Speaker 2: go ye heroes, go and die, Let's have a civil war.
Speaker 4: That's Fox News for you. Vogel said.
Speaker 2: The protesters are fixated on helping illegal immigrants while displaying
Speaker 2: a lack of compassion for the families of people killed
Speaker 2: by illegal immigrants.
Speaker 4: Are you kidding me?
Speaker 2: You want to talk about a lack of compassion around
Speaker 2: killing and you want to completely ignore ice. What a
Speaker 2: pathetic parody Fox has become. If ever it was anything
Speaker 2: other than that, it's just amazing. It's bad or worse
Speaker 2: than CNN. Authoritarian women like this on the left staters right.
Speaker 2: So we got authoritarian women on the left, authoritarian women
Speaker 2: on the right, and I'm stuck in the middle with you.
Speaker 2: They all want war, Well, they're about to get it
Speaker 2: with Iran.
Speaker 4: I think.
Speaker 2: Military was working with a key Middle East ally to
Speaker 2: try to get them to cooperate. Maybe that's one of
Speaker 2: the reasons why this got delayed. It was interesting that
Speaker 2: Iran did live ammunition drills close to where the US
Speaker 2: military was. I think they really expected it this last weekend.
Speaker 2: So Trump is going to tamp down expectations and then
Speaker 2: do a sneak attack. I'm sure that's the way this
Speaker 2: will happen. So this isn't about nukes or about the
Speaker 2: missile program. This is about regime change, said a former
Speaker 2: senior US intelligence official who consults for Arab governments and
Speaker 2: is an informal advisor to the Trump administration. Remember when
Speaker 2: Trump said he was going to be the peace guy.
Speaker 2: He's all about peace, isn't he He wants to know
Speaker 2: about Peace Prize, He's got a board of Peace. But
Speaker 2: I think he's really bored of peace bo reed, and
Speaker 2: I think he wants more wars. He's been one of
Speaker 2: the most in your face people about them. Many times
Speaker 2: they'll try to come up with a pretense that is
Speaker 2: somewhat plausible to start the wars, even if they're the aggressors.
Speaker 2: But not with Trump. He just does it and dares
Speaker 2: you to stop him. Like everything else he does. Drop
Speaker 2: Site News was told the US war planners envision attacks
Speaker 2: that target nuclear, ballistic and other military sites around Iran,
Speaker 2: but will also aim to decapitate the Iranian government, in
Speaker 2: particular leadership and capabilities of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
Speaker 2: The thinking of the Trump administration, according to the source,
Speaker 2: is that a successful strike on Iranian leadership would be
Speaker 2: followed by Iranians returning to the streets to protest. Netna
Speaker 2: who is hoping for an attack, said the former senior
Speaker 2: intelligence official, and assuring Trump that Israel can help put
Speaker 2: in place a new government that is friendly to the West.
Speaker 2: How'd that work out last time? We did that in
Speaker 2: the fifties to wound up with the Ayatola. We haven't
Speaker 2: done too well with regime change, and Iran is one
Speaker 2: of the premier examples of our failure in terms of
Speaker 2: regime change. They took out most of ay who was
Speaker 2: elected in the was it fifty two I think, and
Speaker 2: they put in the Shaw of Iran, who was a
Speaker 2: tutalitarian bully, and that's how they wound up with this
Speaker 2: radical Islamic regime that spun back in the other direction.
Speaker 2: But most Americans don't really realize that we did that
Speaker 2: regime change back in the nineteen fifties. On Friday, Iran's
Speaker 2: form and of course the crime of the guy that
Speaker 2: we removed was to say that the oil belonged to
Speaker 2: Iranians or other than the Western oil companies, and so
Speaker 2: he was going to take more control of it. It
Speaker 2: was all about the oil. Like in Venezuela on Friday,
Speaker 2: Iron's foreign minister met with Turkish leaders to push forward
Speaker 2: a possible diplomatic solution. Regional countries have been engaged in
Speaker 2: attempts to establish a format for back channel talks, including
Speaker 2: a trilateral meeting involving Iranian, American and Turkish leaders. The
Speaker 2: problem is is that you've got people like Lindsay Graham
Speaker 2: and many people in the Trump administration who Lindsay is
Speaker 2: out there on a one man mission to get us
Speaker 2: involved in a war on the side of the Kurds.
Speaker 2: He's got his ways Kurds and ways. Anyway, the Lindsay
Speaker 2: Graham never saw war anywhere. They didn't want to get
Speaker 2: involved in it. So now he wants to get us
Speaker 2: involved with the attacks on the Kurds. And of course
Speaker 2: what happened with the Kurds. If you remember in the Bible,
Speaker 2: you have the Persians, you have the Babylonians, and you
Speaker 2: had the Meads, right, the Meads, Persians and the Babylonians. Well,
Speaker 2: they didn't when they split up the Middle East after
Speaker 2: World War II, British spy, they didn't give the Meads
Speaker 2: a homeland. Instead, what they did was they basically gave
Speaker 2: the Persians Iran, the Babylonians Iraq, and the Meads were
Speaker 2: left straddled in this area being attacked by both of them.
Speaker 2: And so their territory straddles both of these nations, and
Speaker 2: they're in constant conflict with people there, and so Lindsay
Speaker 2: Graham sees that conflict and he wants to get American
Speaker 2: troops involved. Saudi Arabia on Tuesday ruled out the use
Speaker 2: of its airspace for a potential US attack in Iran
Speaker 2: with a phone call with Mohammed Ben Salomon. This guy's
Speaker 2: more on his plate than he can handle. He's really
Speaker 2: upset because he's got to shut down this line. Remember
Speaker 2: that thing that he's going to spend. I forget what
Speaker 2: the amount was, the price tag. It was unbelievable, and
Speaker 2: it was this massive smart city out in the middle
Speaker 2: of the desert. It was a boondoggle from the beginning.
Speaker 2: We were laughing at it from the beginning, and back
Speaker 2: in twenty twenty four they scaled it back from hundreds
Speaker 2: of miles to one mile, and now even that looks
Speaker 2: like it's going to be shut down. So he's got
Speaker 2: other issues on his mind there, but he doesn't want
Speaker 2: to get involved with the war right now. The UAE
Speaker 2: also said on Monday that it would not allow its
Speaker 2: airspace to territorial waters to be used in any military
Speaker 2: action against Iran. So they're having trouble getting the Arabs
Speaker 2: to join with the Americans on an Israeli war. That's
Speaker 2: really what this is. So we're told that, of course,
Speaker 2: they thought it was going to unfold over the weekend,
Speaker 2: but the Iranian people are saying this isn't going to
Speaker 2: go the way Trump imagines. Carrying out a quick operation
Speaker 2: and two hours later tweeting that the operation is over.
Speaker 2: They said, from the Zionis regime to countries that host
Speaker 2: American military bases, all will be within range of our
Speaker 2: missiles and drones. And they point out that they had
Speaker 2: gone out of their way to telegraph what they're going
Speaker 2: to do when they did retaliatory attacks.
Speaker 4: It's kind of a face saving measure.
Speaker 2: Roni officials repeatedly set up the US attacks Iran, particularly
Speaker 2: if it aims to assassinate the country's leadership, it will
Speaker 2: respond with unprecedented counter strikes against US military facilities, oil
Speaker 2: infrastructures in the region and Israel, and so you might
Speaker 2: wind up seeing a major catastphe in terms of the
Speaker 2: oil industry. And of course Venezuela is not going to
Speaker 2: come online anytime soon. Since the Gods of War began
Speaker 2: October twenty three, the Iranians have mostly executed restraint in
Speaker 2: response to attacks that have been launched by both Israel
Speaker 2: and the United States. They've chosen to telegraph in advance
Speaker 2: attacks in order to minimize escalation before launching retaliatory strikes.
Speaker 2: Following previous Israeli attacks like the assassination of Hamasa's political leader.
Speaker 2: In July twenty twenty four, Tehran communicated through back channels
Speaker 2: to the US that it would be launching a brage
Speaker 2: of missiles and drones at Israel, thereby avoiding large scale
Speaker 2: casualties and escalation in fighting, and so the people in Iran,
Speaker 2: some of them were saying. Professor at the University of
Speaker 2: Tehran told drop site. In the past, a number of
Speaker 2: high ranking military officials made the decision to inform the
Speaker 2: US when they were attacking US bases. That idea was
Speaker 2: basically trying to ride out the Trump administration and not
Speaker 2: to confront him in a serious manner, to respond to him,
Speaker 2: but to respond in a very limited way so they
Speaker 2: don't start a huge war with the US. He said
Speaker 2: that the new leadership of the military in Iran has
Speaker 2: determined that the previous policy failed to deter US in
Speaker 2: Israeli aggression. So the numbers that I hear as the
Speaker 2: goal is to kill at least five hundred American soldiers,
Speaker 2: the casualties they need to have if Iran is attacked
Speaker 2: again is at least five hundred. I think the Iranian government,
Speaker 2: the Iranian military has decided to respond quite harshly this time.
Speaker 2: Because you cannot have a country when that country is
Speaker 2: threatened to be attacked militarily every other week. The revelation
Speaker 2: that the US has informed the leadership of regional allies
Speaker 2: that strikes and Iran could begin immediately comes amid ongoing
Speaker 2: efforts to mediate a last minute off ramp to a war.
Speaker 2: So did that work or is the strike still on?
Speaker 2: Too soon to tell, but you know, when we would
Speaker 2: look at this, I think many times about Flight eight hundred,
Speaker 2: the US flight that was shot down off the Long Island.
Speaker 2: I believe as part of a Navy drill. I think
Speaker 2: it was accidental, But of course the FBI covered that up.
Speaker 2: They went around and confiscated records from people. Similar thing
Speaker 2: had already happened a couple of years prior to that,
Speaker 2: the US was conducting military drills and they accidentally shot
Speaker 2: down an Iranian civilian airliner, killed over two hundred people. Now,
Speaker 2: as they admitted that, the Iranians had the evidence, unlike
Speaker 2: in America, where if you've got the evidence, the FBI
Speaker 2: comes around and confiscates it from you and threatens you. Right,
Speaker 2: so they had the evidence and it was pretty clear
Speaker 2: that was what had happened. And yet they didn't attack. Instead,
Speaker 2: they accepted monetary compensation for the families, which is actually
Speaker 2: a pretty minor it is. You know, they have the
Speaker 2: constant death, the Israel death to America chance that they
Speaker 2: do all the time. That is largely for domestic consumption.
Speaker 2: The sense that these limited strikes where they give advanced notice,
Speaker 2: that is also for domestic consumption. But I think that
Speaker 2: they realize they don't really want to have a full
Speaker 2: on war. However, it pushed against the wall. They have
Speaker 2: quite a few missiles, as they showed in that twelve
Speaker 2: day war with Israel. They also have access to the
Speaker 2: hypersonic missiles of China and Russia as well. So Ranians
Speaker 2: were stealing their windows and storing food and water as
Speaker 2: they prepared for an attack. However, we think here in
Speaker 2: the United States we don't ever have to prepare for anything,
Speaker 2: not for war. We're never going to come to our shores,
Speaker 2: right Well, it's very easy for that to happen now
Speaker 2: with the complicated infrastrucure we've got. Look at how many
Speaker 2: times our infrastructure has gone down, whether or not that
Speaker 2: is a cyber attack from somebody, or whether that's just
Speaker 2: the complexity of the infrastructure that keeps getting more and
Speaker 2: more complex, more and more fragile. It's hard to tell
Speaker 2: which one it is from where we all set, but
Speaker 2: the reality is is that it is very complex. It
Speaker 2: does fail all the time. It's just like software that
Speaker 2: we have and the technological devices that we have, they're
Speaker 2: getting worse and worse if you look at the updates,
Speaker 2: as a quarry doctor called it in shiittification, and that
Speaker 2: really is what is happening technology all the time, and
Speaker 2: our infrastructure as well. Does it need a little bit
Speaker 2: of help from some people who could sneak across the
Speaker 2: border and take out massive transformers for which there is
Speaker 2: no inventory. You'd have to wait a very long time
Speaker 2: to replace some of these things. We have such an
Speaker 2: amazingly vulnerable infrastructure. It just surprises me how we're going
Speaker 2: around trying to pick a fight. But of course all
Speaker 2: the Western leaders are doing that right now. Why are
Speaker 2: they doing that because they're already picked a fight with
Speaker 2: their own people over the immigration issues, trying to wipe
Speaker 2: out their own domestic cultures, trying to take the jobs
Speaker 2: of everyone, replace everyone, and put us in a police
Speaker 2: surveillance state using artificial intelligence. And so they know that
Speaker 2: what they're doing, and they know that when people figure
Speaker 2: that out, they're going to start to come for them.
Speaker 2: That's the other aspect of the art elect war that
Speaker 2: Hugo de Garris was talking about, not just coming after
Speaker 2: the technological elite, but coming after the political elites that
Speaker 2: are using this technology weaponized against US. So in Iran,
Speaker 2: as they said, as night fell, there was a tense
Speaker 2: sense of dread the fell over people at home and abroad.
Speaker 2: Rumors of an eminent US military strike took hold across Iran.
Speaker 2: I kept waiting for it to hit. I couldn't sleep
Speaker 2: until morning. I was waking up and straining to hear
Speaker 2: any sound of explosions. Let's see what happens tonight, said
Speaker 2: one guy, a forty three year old engineer living in Tehran.
Speaker 2: I mentioned this because I know there's gonna be some
Speaker 2: people out there they hear this are gonna good. I
Speaker 2: hate those Iranians. You're going to find these chickens come
Speaker 2: home to roost in America at some point in time.
Speaker 2: Just mentioning this, because do you really want to run
Speaker 2: the risk that we're going to have some kind of
Speaker 2: a war like this actually come to us. I think
Speaker 2: the chances of that happening are really high. So eventually
Speaker 2: is going to happen.
Speaker 5: The whole blowback thing of you think these people that
Speaker 5: couldn't sleep all night because they're waiting for America to
Speaker 5: bomb them or going to have any positive feelings toward
Speaker 5: the US.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, exactly how much more hatred can we jin
Speaker 2: up across the world? I mean, even got Trump's even
Speaker 2: got the Canadians hating us. You've never had any problem
Speaker 2: with that before. So one person who opposes a foreign
Speaker 2: attack in Iran said, people seem to be losing their minds.
Speaker 2: There's that kind of thinking in Iran too. They think
Speaker 2: that if the US strikes everything will be fine because
Speaker 2: the killing is committed by the Islamic Republic. People are
Speaker 2: becoming desperate. They no longer know what is in their
Speaker 2: interest and what is against them. You see, even if
Speaker 2: you're living in a repressive regime, and it is a
Speaker 2: repressive regime, make no doubt about it. But even if
Speaker 2: you live in something like that where they've killed they
Speaker 2: admit that they've killed over three thousand people. Others are saying, well,
Speaker 2: it's more like six thousand, and almost all protesters that
Speaker 2: are there, so when you see something like that happening,
Speaker 2: a lot of people are saying, we'll be better if
Speaker 2: we have a war, because then we get to overthrow
Speaker 2: this regime. They don't understand how war is going to
Speaker 2: affect them. According to government sources, and seventeen people, mostly
Speaker 2: security forces, were killed in the crackdown, because it's only
Speaker 2: the security forces that count, right. However, human rights groups
Speaker 2: outside of Iram believe the number is much higher, with
Speaker 2: some putting it at more than sixty five hundred people,
Speaker 2: the majority of them civilians. And so as many people
Speaker 2: are making their preparations, sealing the window, stocking up food,
Speaker 2: they said, when the bombs drop, there's not going to
Speaker 2: be any distinction between the regime and the opposition. In
Speaker 2: other words, they're going to be dropping bombs on everybody.
Speaker 2: And that's one of the things that I think is
Speaker 2: a miscalculation in terms of bombing countries, thinking that you're
Speaker 2: going to change their mind about something, it only galvanizes them.
Speaker 4: And so.
Speaker 2: When the Americans start raining death and the Israeli start
Speaker 2: raining death from the skies on these people, they're going
Speaker 2: to it's going to consolidate support for the suppressive Iranian regime.
Speaker 2: No matter how bad the regime is, people are going
Speaker 2: to go to it because they see it as a
Speaker 2: means of stopping this. We've always seen this with civilian
Speaker 2: bombing campaigns, but of course we don't make the distinction
Speaker 2: between civilians and people in the military anymore, not since
Speaker 2: World War Two.
Speaker 5: There are some interesting parallels between this and ICE in
Speaker 5: that they aren't going to you know, the whole thing
Speaker 5: of when the bombs fall, there won't be any difference
Speaker 5: between the regime and the opposition. When the police state comes,
Speaker 5: they're going to be coming for the citizens as well,
Speaker 5: using immigrants, the illegal immigrants as a excuse.
Speaker 2: And I'd just say to Tommy Lauren and this booth
Speaker 2: person and the other one, I forget what her name was,
Speaker 2: when a civil war happens, you know, there's not going
Speaker 2: to be you're all your political tribalism and what you're
Speaker 2: telling people in order to get your cushy job, that's
Speaker 2: all out the window. So when the war begins, they said,
Speaker 2: when is it going to be? In social media, which
Speaker 2: became accessible again after three weeks internet blackout during the
Speaker 2: crackdown on protests, is now filled with advice on how
Speaker 2: to survive missile attacks and bombs. The list of precautions
Speaker 2: is long. Stock enough food and water for ten days,
Speaker 2: keep a first aid kit within reach, Place ID and
Speaker 2: essential documents in a quick bag for quick evacuation. Keep
Speaker 2: emergency exits clear, move to open spaces at the sound
Speaker 2: of an explosion, Lie on the ground next to a wall.
Speaker 2: Dozens of similar tips circulating on Persian language platforms. And again,
Speaker 2: war is a horrible thing, as one leftist activists there said,
Speaker 2: I've opposed the theocratic rulers since the nineteen seventy nine
Speaker 2: revolution when the ietotal came in. He said, this regime
Speaker 2: has executed my closest comrades after the revolution and is
Speaker 2: now killing our children. I have no sympathy for it,
Speaker 2: but I also hate war. War will destroy everything left
Speaker 2: for us. That's exactly right. I wish Americans could understand
Speaker 2: that and think that way, But of course they're having
Speaker 2: trouble getting their fellows citizens there in Iran to understand
Speaker 2: that as well. Our lives and our deaths have become entertainment,
Speaker 2: said one of them, A game for others. That really
Speaker 2: does sum up what's going on in Washington, doesn't it.
Speaker 2: With Lindsey Graham and Donald Trump and these other warmongers
Speaker 2: discuss me. It's a game of entertainment for Warpete. He's
Speaker 2: the guy that bothers me the most because he's so
Speaker 2: vocal about being a Christian and wearing that on his
Speaker 2: sleeve or his tattoos, and yet he is one of
Speaker 2: the most vocal people in terms of pushing for mass
Speaker 2: murder lethality. And what they did in Venezuela was inexcusable.
Speaker 2: It was a war crime, it was murder. And so
Speaker 2: he says, what a miserable people we are, said, one
Speaker 2: of them are rulers massacred people in this streets. And
Speaker 2: you got the Shaw Junior has become the face of
Speaker 2: the opposition abroad. And our enemy is a fool like
Speaker 2: Donald Trump. Like a common cause with this guy or
Speaker 2: a woman who said this. That's just like America, isn't it.
Speaker 2: And so let's talk about our common cause and what
Speaker 2: we have. There's an interesting article on The Atlantic talking
Speaker 2: about em and Bundy. M and Bundy is all alone.
Speaker 2: They said the anti government militia leader can't make sense
Speaker 2: of his allies support for ice violence. See EM and
Speaker 2: Bundy is EMM and Bundy and I are really on
Speaker 2: the same page with us, and we are totally ostracized
Speaker 2: by most conservatives out there. That's what they're talking about.
Speaker 2: Em and Bundy. After the Bundy Ranch stand off, of
Speaker 2: course you had the fiasco and malhur and I've had
Speaker 2: several interviews with him and Bundy, but it's always been
Speaker 2: difficult to get him to talk to me because he's
Speaker 2: been taken captive by some people who use him to
Speaker 2: get popularity. And I'm talking about Pete Sentilly in particular.
Speaker 2: It was very difficult to go there and get interviews
Speaker 2: with him and Bundy because Pete Sanilli was always trying
Speaker 2: to stop that. And he's somebody who I remember when
Speaker 2: we were at the Bundy Ranch standoff. One day, we're
Speaker 2: driving in Josh and I. He was the guy who's
Speaker 2: running the camera and we were driving in and he
Speaker 2: had Roy I can't remember that Roy Cooper anyway, That's
Speaker 2: that's the guy in North Carolina. I'm sorry having a
Speaker 2: senior moment here, but Roy Potter eventually comes. Roy Potter
Speaker 2: was there and he was yelling and screaming at Pete Santillia,
Speaker 2: what in the world is going on? We drove past him,
Speaker 2: saw them yelling and screaming. Later on, Roy Potter came
Speaker 2: to me and he's said, do you know what he did?
Speaker 2: It was the day before we got there. He said,
Speaker 2: there's this caravan of cars and Pete Santill he was
Speaker 2: in the front, and he said, he stopped the car
Speaker 2: and he got out and he grabbed his camera, knowing
Speaker 2: that there's going to be a confrontation, started filming. But
Speaker 2: he set up the confrontation essentially, That's what Roy Potter
Speaker 2: was saying. And he had gone to the guy who
Speaker 2: was in charge Love was his name, the guy who
Speaker 2: was in charge of BLM in Nevada. And this guy,
Speaker 2: I used to refer to him as the Ministry of Love,
Speaker 2: because this guy just wanted to have conflict and he
Speaker 2: was doing everything he could to escalate the situation. As
Speaker 2: a matter of fact, his counterpart in Arizona had criticized Love.
Speaker 2: He said, I went to one of these meetings and
Speaker 2: it was ridiculous what he was doing. Everything he did
Speaker 2: was designed to increase the conflict and the likelihood of
Speaker 2: a conflict. This is what you see happening in Minnesota
Speaker 2: as well. And so the BLM, his component, his counterpart
Speaker 2: rather and Arizona disagreed with what he was doing, and
Speaker 2: you had a lot of people in BLM that disagreed
Speaker 2: with what Love was doing. And so as a matter
Speaker 2: of fact, one of them was responsible for stopping these
Speaker 2: political persecutions, not prosecutions persecutions. You had a BLM whistleblower
Speaker 2: whose information caused a complete reversal of this. The judge
Speaker 2: was railroading people left and right, sending him to jail.
Speaker 2: And once this person put out said this is what
Speaker 2: really happened as a BLM agent, then the judge shut
Speaker 2: down the trial of the bundies with prejudice, meaning they
Speaker 2: couldn't come back after them again.
Speaker 4: And so.
Speaker 2: There was a difference within the government. You had some
Speaker 2: good people who were there and you had some people
Speaker 2: who were real provocateurs. You had provocateurs on the other
Speaker 2: side as well, like Pete Santilly, and so you know,
Speaker 2: there was bad blood with Pete Sentilly and Alex Shones.
Speaker 2: Now they have made common cause, which I think is
Speaker 2: kind of interesting now that Alex has changed the two
Speaker 2: of them are. But so after this standoff, m and
Speaker 2: Bundy went to the Malheur thing and they wanted to
Speaker 2: help these ranchers are being railroaded up there, but the
Speaker 2: ranchers didn't want help. They wanted to just go to jail.
Speaker 2: I mean, one of the craziest things. And it really
Speaker 2: was a horrific thing they did to that family. And
Speaker 2: that was the BLM that was up there as well.
Speaker 2: But I was concerned about that from the very beginning
Speaker 2: because a couple of days before that started, you had
Speaker 2: Pete Santella, he arrested I think it was in Ohio
Speaker 2: over a weapons charge and there was a lot of
Speaker 2: information about that in the news and then and there
Speaker 2: were several aspects of that weapons charge. And the next day,
Speaker 2: you know, they just let him go and drop all
Speaker 2: the charges and he goes straight to this protest at
Speaker 2: the Malheur thing. I thought that was very suspicious. I
Speaker 2: still think it's very suspicious. And when Travis and Joe
Speaker 2: Biggs went to cover that initially at Malhere, he did
Speaker 2: everything he could to keep them away at that point
Speaker 2: as well. And so it's it's kind of interesting to see.
Speaker 2: And I've had a difficulty talking to em and Bundy because,
Speaker 2: like I said, you know, he's been you know, these
Speaker 2: people don't like me, and you know, oh you know,
Speaker 2: don't talk to David Knight. He's a fed. It's like
Speaker 2: I didn't set them up. I didn't record this stuff
Speaker 2: and let it go like piece until he did anyway.
Speaker 2: Not long ago, says Atlantic m And Bundy was the
Speaker 2: most famous right winging militia leader in America. His two
Speaker 2: armed standoffs had made him the face of the Patriot movement,
Speaker 2: a loose assemblage of anti government extremists, Second Amendment maximalists,
Speaker 2: and more than a few white nationalists. Even some mainstream
Speaker 2: elements of the Republican Party embraced him as a modern
Speaker 2: folk hero, but Bundy's criticism of the Trump administration's immigration
Speaker 2: crackdown now threatens to make him a pariah within his
Speaker 2: own community. In November, Bundy self published a long essay
Speaker 2: titled The Stranger, in which he labeled the Trump Administration's
Speaker 2: treatment of undocumented immigrants a moral failure. To call such
Speaker 2: people criminals for lacking official permission to be in the country,
Speaker 2: he said, is to forget the moral law of God,
Speaker 2: the historical truth of our founding, and the constitutional ideals
Speaker 2: that continue to define justice. Mundy told his audience that
Speaker 2: ICE's conduct clearly looks like tyranny, quote unquote, if the
Speaker 2: government threatened his family, he said he would fight back
Speaker 2: by whatever means necessary. Now, I am not for open borders,
Speaker 2: and I have this has been one of my departures
Speaker 2: of the Libertarian Party from the very beginning. I always
Speaker 2: put a footnote on that they would have ten questions
Speaker 2: about civil liberties issues, ten questions about economics, and the
Speaker 2: one question out of twenty that I had a difference
Speaker 2: with him on was on immigration. I said, you've got
Speaker 2: to stop the welfare state first, and then we can
Speaker 2: talk about having open borders. If you don't have any
Speaker 2: welfare state, I'm fine with open borders. But the other
Speaker 2: aspect of it is is that if they violated your
Speaker 2: immigration law, be treated just for that one thing as
Speaker 2: if they are a murderer and a rapist. And this
Speaker 2: is why the Trump administration knows that, and they pretend
Speaker 2: that they're only rounding up people who are rapists and murderers.
Speaker 2: Question is, why are known rapists and murderers wandering around
Speaker 2: in America loose? It's because we have a broken justice
Speaker 2: system that sets them loose, and so the real criminals
Speaker 2: are being set loose, and they're treating people who basically
Speaker 2: broke the law, but it's like a misdemeanor. They're treating
Speaker 2: them as if they were rapists. When they let the
Speaker 2: rapists go and the murderers go. That's what's really happening, folks.
Speaker 2: And it's a deliberate policy because they want to create conflict,
Speaker 2: just like Love did and the Bundane Ranch stand off.
Speaker 5: Anyway, if you had different police forces for every different
Speaker 5: type of crime, So you arrest some guy for breaking
Speaker 5: and entering, oh there's a warrant for assault, Well let
Speaker 5: him go and we'll inform the assault police that we
Speaker 5: let him go. It is patently absurd, and yet it's
Speaker 5: presented as the only way to stop in immigration is
Speaker 5: through this ridiculous authoritarian ice thing. I saw a great
Speaker 5: tweet that was I love how we've set this up
Speaker 5: so that you're ivor on team unlimited Immigration Unlimited. Some
Speaker 5: alise our team police State.
Speaker 4: That's right.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I'm not either one of those teams. It's this
Speaker 2: person in the Atlantic. So I spoke with Mandy a
Speaker 2: few hours after the federal immigration agents shot and killed
Speaker 2: Alex Pretty He said to me on the phone, he said,
Speaker 2: it's sickening just to say the parallels of history repeating itself.
Speaker 2: It's November essay. He had compared the administration's treatment of
Speaker 2: immigrants to the internment of Japanese Americans during World War Two.
Speaker 2: He said, when it comes to the more humanitarian side
Speaker 2: of it, I think the left has it much more
Speaker 2: correct than the nationalist right. He said, Bundy, to be clear,
Speaker 2: has not gone woke. And this is the other thing
Speaker 2: to me. You know, it's like how that word has
Speaker 2: been co opted and altered and applied as a pejorative
Speaker 2: to anybody that disagrees with the so called conservatives, and
Speaker 2: I call them, you know, they're worse than neo cons
Speaker 2: They're Trump cons. He believes that Democrats, who he calls
Speaker 2: communist anarchists, are spurred by wickedness, so he says, are Republicans,
Speaker 2: whom he calls nationalists. He believes the government has no
Speaker 2: business providing virtually any social services. He believes that homosexuality
Speaker 2: is a sin. And I don't ask him about vaccination requirements,
Speaker 2: and of course I know where he is on that
Speaker 2: as well. He and I are exactly aligned on all
Speaker 2: the issues that I know that he's publicly spoken about.
Speaker 2: And when it comes to vaccination, stuff when it comes
Speaker 2: to COVID stuff and Idaho. He was a leader of
Speaker 2: the resistance there because things are pretty bad in Idaho
Speaker 2: with the Republican governor Brad Little like a dictator, even
Speaker 2: dismissing the Republican legislature when they came together, We're going
Speaker 2: to come together for a special session to shut it down.
Speaker 2: It's because Brad Little, like most of these Republican governors
Speaker 2: and Democrat governors, were getting massive amounts of money from
Speaker 2: the Trump administration. They were getting money that was bigger
Speaker 2: than the state budget, all under their individual control. So
Speaker 2: it wasn't just bribery and blackmail, financial bribery, financial blackmail,
Speaker 2: but it was also Trump giving massive amounts of money
Speaker 2: to governors, and they knew what they could do with
Speaker 2: that money. It's like, here are some of my dictatorial power.
Speaker 2: I'm going to share it with you, and they did
Speaker 2: it that way. And so I thought it was very
Speaker 2: interesting that in response to medical kidnapping and hospitals, both
Speaker 2: with COVID and otherwise, he organized a group to call people.
Speaker 2: It's called I think the People's Network something like that.
Speaker 2: I thought that was a great idea. I covered that
Speaker 2: I interviewed him on that, and I thought it was
Speaker 2: an excellent idea. It was decentralized. I'm going to talk
Speaker 2: about that next from a left perspective, what is happening
Speaker 2: in Minnesota. I think that was a very effective idea
Speaker 2: in terms of implication implementation. However, it fell very flat.
Speaker 2: I signed up for it, put my name there publicly
Speaker 2: that I would sign up for it, and I could
Speaker 2: never get any information from anybody other than Emmon about
Speaker 2: what was happening. I don't know if nobody else signed
Speaker 2: up for it in Texas or what, but I thought
Speaker 2: it was a very effective way. Basically, it was going
Speaker 2: to be a way to alert people as to what
Speaker 2: was happening. Same thing that you see happening in Minnesota,
Speaker 2: where they have networks and they let other they have
Speaker 2: phone numbers and they call other people and they show
Speaker 2: up in mass to protest something. If somebody's kidnapped at
Speaker 2: a hospital, for example, and so you know, because you
Speaker 2: didn't want to get their vaccines, they're not going to
Speaker 2: let you take your kid home or something like that,
Speaker 2: you could show up in mass and get public attention
Speaker 2: to it. Sometimes you could get the hospital to release
Speaker 2: them as well. So it was a very effective thing.
Speaker 2: But I put my name in it and nobody ever
Speaker 2: contacted me, and I could never find anybody to contact,
Speaker 2: So I was like, Okay, well, I don't know what's
Speaker 2: going on with it, but that's the right idea. Perhaps
Speaker 2: Bundy's central belief is the inviolability of individual liberty, and
Speaker 2: he's also very strong in the Constitution as well, and
Speaker 2: in this he has remained fairly consistent over the years.
Speaker 2: During the first Trump presidency, he took heart, took heat
Speaker 2: from some of his followers for opposing the administration's anti
Speaker 2: immigration agenda. And when I first spoke with him a
Speaker 2: few years ago, says the writer of this Atlantic piece,
Speaker 2: he rated those views. If he has become something of
Speaker 2: an outcast, that testifies less to a transformation in his
Speaker 2: thinking than to a broader realignment of the far right.
Speaker 2: Bundy and his relative ideological fixity offers a stable reference
Speaker 2: point against which to measure the shift of the right
Speaker 2: due to the influence of Trump. They've been captured, right,
Speaker 2: They've been captured by these tribes. In twenty fourteen, Bundy
Speaker 2: and his father Cliven, part of that Bundy standoff there,
Speaker 2: and they were avatars of a conservative belief in the
Speaker 2: importance of individual liberty and the righteousness of resistance, even
Speaker 2: armed resistance if necessary to government tyranny. And a Fox
Speaker 2: News poll asking thousands of viewers whether they were Team
Speaker 2: Cliven Bundy or Team federal Government, ninety seven percent answered
Speaker 2: Team Cliven. Several Republican US senators publicly defended the family.
Speaker 2: Sean Hannity repeatedly had Cliven on a show. As a
Speaker 2: matter of fact, that's another story. I got there, and
Speaker 2: you know, we started covering it, and then CNN shows
Speaker 2: up and Fox News shows up, and I go to
Speaker 2: interview Cliven, and he says, well, we can't do an
Speaker 2: interview here because we agreed to give Sean Handy an
Speaker 2: exclusive on it. Is that okay, Well, how about if
Speaker 2: you just let me shoot you with the trees behind you.
Speaker 2: He won't know where these trees are, you know, he
Speaker 2: doesn't know that we're doing it at your house. And
Speaker 2: so he agreed to do that. And you know, that's again,
Speaker 2: it's like Pete Sentanelli. They go in, they try to
Speaker 2: get exclusives with people, and that's the thing that always
Speaker 2: makes it more difficult to be able to talk to
Speaker 2: people when you get out there. Two years later, Emmon
Speaker 2: led a six week occupation of the mault Here National
Speaker 2: Wildlife Refuge that left with the death of La Boy Finnicum.
Speaker 2: They characterize it here in the Atlantic as a one
Speaker 2: rancher dead shot down by police officers after a backwoods
Speaker 2: car chase. That's not what happened at all. That is
Speaker 2: not at all what happened. He was ambu And as
Speaker 2: a matter of fact, where were they going in that
Speaker 2: car when they started? They pulled over and they had
Speaker 2: snipers shooting into the car the people that were there,
Speaker 2: and Cliven, not Clive Lavoy Fennicum got out with his
Speaker 2: hands up in order to save the other people that
Speaker 2: were in the car. They shot him in the back.
Speaker 2: As I saw, there was another one of these Randy
Speaker 2: Weaver Branch Davidian type of things. They were on their
Speaker 2: way to a community meeting. They were out there explaining
Speaker 2: to people what the BLM was up to in various states,
Speaker 2: and there was a sheriff in the county that was
Speaker 2: going to be leading that meeting. There were not lawless
Speaker 2: radicals out there fighting the government in every way. They
Speaker 2: were appealing to the lesser magistrate. That's what they were
Speaker 2: really doing when they murdered Lavoy Fennicum. From twenty twenty
Speaker 2: two to twenty twenty three, Emmon was embroiled in a
Speaker 2: slow motion standoff with local and state law enforcement and
Speaker 2: Idaho stemming from his refusal to pay a fifty two
Speaker 2: million dollar judgment against him and a high profile defamation case,
Speaker 2: and that I don't know anything about because I've lost
Speaker 2: track with him. At that point, I reached out to
Speaker 2: a number of those who had stood with Bundy at
Speaker 2: Bunkerville at Malheur, and afterward. None of them would condemn ice,
Speaker 2: and some expressed enthusiastic support, says The Atlantic. Here this writer,
Speaker 2: when I asked Nick Ramlow, a Montana militia member of
Speaker 2: Bundy's People's Rights Network that's what it's called, People's Rights Network,
Speaker 2: about goods killing, he referred me to a recent Supreme
Speaker 2: Court opinion and stress, quote a jury will make a
Speaker 2: determination of liability when a civil suit is brought unquote.
Speaker 2: In other words, Ramlow, who once told a sheriff that
Speaker 2: he quote better keep his nose clean unquote because Ramlow
Speaker 2: had a bigger army than he does, didn't want to
Speaker 2: comment one way or the other until the Court's weighed in, well,
Speaker 2: of course, we know the federal government is not going
Speaker 2: to police its own and so if there's any justice
Speaker 2: at all, it'll be in a civil lawsuit. I think
Speaker 2: that's a pretty pathetic approach to that. Eric Parker, who
Speaker 2: in twenty fourteen made a name for himself by training
Speaker 2: a semi automatic rifle on federal agents at the Bundy
Speaker 2: Ranch and who is now the head of the Real
Speaker 2: three Percenters of Idaho, had nothing but praise for the
Speaker 2: agent who killed Good. Isn't that amazing? This is why
Speaker 2: I said, the blindness from the people that were there
Speaker 2: on January sixth, and now the blindness from the people
Speaker 2: that were there at the Bundy Ranch standoff, what is
Speaker 2: the matter with them?
Speaker 4: He said?
Speaker 2: I mostly think it's important to note how impressive it
Speaker 2: was to get those first two shots off in under
Speaker 2: a second. So it's great that he was able to
Speaker 2: get a couple of shots off and very quickly to
Speaker 2: murder a woman who was driving away and was not
Speaker 2: a threat to him, and to make her a threat
Speaker 2: to anybody who was on the road ahead of her,
Speaker 2: because now he got a dead person behind the wheel
Speaker 2: of a car. That is against police procedure. As well
Speaker 2: as homeland security procedure. Lee Rice, a longtime people's rights
Speaker 2: member a steadfast Bunday supporter. He participated in the Oregon standoff,
Speaker 2: told me when I first met him in twenty twenty
Speaker 2: three he didn't quote believe in the government running roughshot
Speaker 2: over you unquote. But when I spoke to him recently
Speaker 2: about ICE's tactics in Minnesota, he said, quote, I'm supportive
Speaker 2: of what's going on because we need to get those
Speaker 2: clowns out of here unquote. Which clowns would those be?
Speaker 2: You mean the smallies that nobody paid any attention to
Speaker 2: in the first Trump administration or even in the second
Speaker 2: Trump administration, until you had that report that went viral,
Speaker 2: and then somehow they discovered that these people were there.
Speaker 2: And as I said before, this is a problem of
Speaker 2: fraud and corruption, most likely fraud and corruption of the
Speaker 2: mayor and the governor there, of the governor of Minnesota.
Speaker 2: And so you go after Fry, and you go after Walls,
Speaker 2: and you go after them with accountants and lawyers. You
Speaker 2: don't go door to door trying to create conflict. This
Speaker 2: is what Love did at Bundy Ranch, and this is
Speaker 2: what Trump is doing.
Speaker 4: Same thing.
Speaker 2: That's happening, and these people are completely blind to it
Speaker 2: makes me so angry when I see this good deserved
Speaker 2: what she got, he said, because she had sided with
Speaker 2: undocumented immigrants. I've seen this attitude over and over against
Speaker 2: so much so on Twitter. I'd hoped that it was
Speaker 2: bots that were out there. Unfortunately it's people who think
Speaker 2: like bots on the whole. Bundy's former ally seem to
Speaker 2: remain solidly in favor of masked, armed federal agents. Just
Speaker 2: the other day, Bundy told me he had a contentious
Speaker 2: conversation with a militant who had joined him at Malhere.
Speaker 2: Bundy had always thought that he and his supporters stood
Speaker 2: for a coherent set of Christian libertarian principles that had
Speaker 2: united them against federal power. He said, we agreed that
Speaker 2: there's certain rights that people have that they're born with,
Speaker 2: and everybody has them equally, not just in the United States,
Speaker 2: but on this topic, they're willing to completely abandon that principle.
Speaker 2: And folks, when you do that, you give a free
Speaker 2: pass to the government to violate every bit of the Constitution,
Speaker 2: the bill rights if somebody is foreign in your country.
Speaker 2: Guess what, when they get used to doing that, it
Speaker 2: feels good to law enforcement not have to be encumbered
Speaker 2: by the law, by the chains of the Constitution, and
Speaker 2: they're going to start doing that to you as well.
Speaker 2: And you know, when we look at the way we
Speaker 2: conduct war and how we start wars, how we target
Speaker 2: civilian populations, what is that about. That's about not understanding
Speaker 2: that we're all created in the image of God. And
Speaker 2: it's a complete rejection of both Christian and libertarian principles.
Speaker 2: He said, we agreed there's certain rights that you're born with,
Speaker 2: but these people are completely willing to abandon that principle,
Speaker 2: in all the principles. Quite frankly, he finds us ideological
Speaker 2: betrayal totally baffling. He would start to say something and
Speaker 2: he say, I can't understand how much they think, and
Speaker 2: then he just break it off. He says, it just
Speaker 2: doesn't make sense to me. He finally said, it's scary. Actually,
Speaker 2: I think it is as well. I'm more afraid of
Speaker 2: a polarized people in a country who want to kill
Speaker 2: each other. These two tribes that they've created that want
Speaker 2: to kill each other and anybody else who gets in
Speaker 2: the way that's not a part of their tribe. I'm
Speaker 2: more concerned about that even than an out of control government.
Speaker 2: Like I said before, you know the drug cartels and
Speaker 2: anything which are created by our failed drug war. But
Speaker 2: they as dangerous as they are, and they are dangerous,
Speaker 2: they're not as dangerous as a gang that comes out
Speaker 2: of the federal government that kills with immunity. They don't
Speaker 2: have to watch their back to be prosecuted. There's no
Speaker 2: police coming for them. They are the police. That's the
Speaker 2: most dangerous situation that you can have. But when you
Speaker 2: create a population that wants to kill each other, and
Speaker 2: this is being stoked by everybody from Fox News to
Speaker 2: Alex Jones, so em And Bundy is politically adrift. He
Speaker 2: certainly sees no home for himself on the communist anarchists left,
Speaker 2: nor does he identify anymore with a nationalist right and
Speaker 2: its authoritarian tendencies. The people who supported him have by
Speaker 2: and large left him behind. He feels, he told me,
Speaker 2: told me a little bit alone.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Politically homeless. That was the term that we always used
Speaker 2: as libertarians. You know, are you politically homeless? Take our quiz?
Speaker 2: Maybe if you don't like the Republicans and Democrats, maybe
Speaker 2: you would like the approach that we're taking. But the
Speaker 2: libertarians have abandoned their principles as well. I saw them
Speaker 2: throw that all out the window in twenty twenty, as
Speaker 2: the government was locking us down with COVID, you had
Speaker 2: the presidential campaigns to be run by Joe Jorgensen, who
Speaker 2: I know pretty well. I couldn't believe what she was doing.
Speaker 2: The only Libertarian who was running for office that stood
Speaker 2: up and said anything about it was Donald Rainwater, who
Speaker 2: was running for governor in Indiana. All the rest of
Speaker 2: them did absolutely nothing. They just said go along with
Speaker 2: whatever the government is doing. So yeah, M and Bundyfield's alone.
Speaker 2: So it truly is amazing. Well, we're going to take
Speaker 2: a quick break and when we come back, we're going
Speaker 2: to talk about the tactics. This is something from the
Speaker 2: Free Thought Project. It's actually an article from the Center
Speaker 2: for a Stateless Society. And he's a leftist anarchist, and
Speaker 2: he's talking about what's going on in Minneapolis. And I
Speaker 2: think what is really not appreciated by conservatives is they
Speaker 2: think that there's always some kind of top down organized structure.
Speaker 2: And that's what he's talking about here, networks versus hierarchies.
Speaker 2: What is happening. There is a network, and of course
Speaker 2: all the people who are trying to make excuses for
Speaker 2: this say, oh, that's all being organized by George sorows
Speaker 2: there is some money from Soros is coming in there.
Speaker 2: But the point of networks versus hierarchies is that there
Speaker 2: isn't any leader there. That's what everybody was saying about Antiphah,
Speaker 2: for example. I don't agree with Antiphah at all. I
Speaker 2: think they're very dangerous. However, if you look at their
Speaker 2: strategies of decentralization and of networking versus a hierarchy, you
Speaker 2: know they don't have a hierarchy, which is why all
Speaker 2: of these reports that are coming out, all of them.
Speaker 2: But the majority of the knee jerk reaction with all
Speaker 2: this stuff is, let's find out where Soros is inserting
Speaker 2: money into this. He is not at the top of
Speaker 2: the food chain for all that he provides a lot
Speaker 2: of money for it. But these people are organizing on
Speaker 2: their own. And we'll talk about that when we come back.
Speaker 2: We're going to take a quick break and we will
Speaker 2: be right back. Stay with us.
Speaker 3: M the.
Speaker 5: Any I think the I.
Speaker 1: Think they using free speech to free minds. It's the
Speaker 1: David Knight Show.
Speaker 8: Tell Alexa to add the APS Radio skill and have
Speaker 8: access to the best channels anywhere from country to blues,
Speaker 8: classic hits to news, APS Radio curates and incredibly diverse
Speaker 8: playlists for you to enjoy. Get details at apsradio dot com.
Speaker 2: All right, welcome back. I'm going to take some of
Speaker 2: the comments that are here and Star Barkley, thank you
Speaker 2: very much for the tip. And I should have mentioned
Speaker 2: this earlier. I wanted to thank everybody. We made our
Speaker 2: goal for the month, which is really surprising. A lot
Speaker 2: of it came in the very last minute, and so
Speaker 2: thank you so much to everybody who supported us. And
Speaker 2: by the way, Ryan has sent us some of the
Speaker 2: medallion coins so we're gonna bring those back out again.
Speaker 2: They went out pretty quickly and there was only one
Speaker 2: hundred of them I think the first time, so we're
Speaker 2: going to be putting those back on the website. So
Speaker 2: thank you so much for the support everyone. We really
Speaker 2: do appreciate it. Happy Groundhog Day, says Star Barkley. The
Speaker 2: Epstein revelations are heating up with the Rothschild's Chick and
Speaker 2: her emails to Epstein and Ukraine. Thanks for all you do. Yeah,
Speaker 2: I saw another connection with the Rothschilds, and that was
Speaker 2: Steve Bannon took it avantage of this to release what
Speaker 2: was it about an hour of the many, many hours
Speaker 2: of interviews that he had with Epstein, he became he
Speaker 2: was going to be the pr guy for Epstein. Just
Speaker 2: think about why is he the darling of the right?
Speaker 2: Why is Steve Manner the darling of the right. But anyway,
Speaker 2: he was asking him, you know how he got involved
Speaker 2: in some of these things, and he starts talking about
Speaker 2: although the Rothschilds did this, and Ross Childs did that.
Speaker 2: He goes Steve Manner says, wait a minute, how did
Speaker 2: you get involved with roths Chiles. I think that's something
Speaker 2: of a rhetorical question, don't you. I Mean, we pretty
Speaker 2: much understand how he got involved with them. But he
Speaker 2: was at the center of a lot of different things.
Speaker 2: In the school where he was a teacher, the headmaster
Speaker 2: was Bill Barr's father. You know, so that when you
Speaker 2: look at this stuff, it truly is amazing. You know,
Speaker 2: you see Ken Starr coming back in all this stuff
Speaker 2: and everything. It's very much like a little Dickens novel.
Speaker 2: There's this little tiny, you know, click of people that
Speaker 2: just keep coming back into each other's spheres. Truly is amazing,
Speaker 2: and so we're going to talk about that. I wanted
Speaker 2: to talk about the overall news first, and I've got
Speaker 2: this other article. I want to talk about the higher
Speaker 2: structure of this because look, folks, it's not going to
Speaker 2: get fixed from the top down.
Speaker 4: It really isn't.
Speaker 2: And even if we were to get these pedophile rascals
Speaker 2: out of government, there'll be other people will take their
Speaker 2: place who may be as bad or worse. I mean,
Speaker 2: I don't know that Stephen Miller was ever involved with Epstein.
Speaker 2: There's no indications so far that he was, because he
Speaker 2: didn't have any money at the time. Right, not to
Speaker 2: say that he wouldn't be up for it at this
Speaker 2: point in time, but who knows. I have a very
Speaker 2: low esteem of Stephen Miller pee Wee German, but there's
Speaker 2: people like him. There's still going to be there even
Speaker 2: if these pedophiles, these billionaire pedophiles, were taken out Kuda
Speaker 2: being thank you very much for the tip. I appreciate that,
Speaker 2: says Highland's good to hear from you. I've been listening
Speaker 2: to the show since twenty fifteen, even on INFO wars.
Speaker 2: David has always had the voice of reading well, thank you,
Speaker 2: stemming from the values of Jesus Christ, and he's never changed. Well,
Speaker 2: thank you, appreciate that. Audi, good to see you. Audi
Speaker 2: Mardern Retro Radio. Let us know how the show is going.
Speaker 2: I need to get you on talk about your show.
Speaker 2: It's all a lie. He's absolutely right, says the Interaction
Speaker 2: Act was the plan all along. If there's any chaos,
Speaker 2: you can count on government to manufacture it. That's what
Speaker 2: I was saying the other day. It's like, be aware
Speaker 2: when you've got a government manufactured problem, and the border
Speaker 2: is the border is a Republican Democrat manufactured problem. They
Speaker 2: would use it for election purposes, but now they're using
Speaker 2: it for police surveillance state purposes. Folks, beware when the
Speaker 2: government creates a problem and then offers you as the
Speaker 2: only solution, just like the vaccine, the only solution is
Speaker 2: a police surveillance state. It's a setup. It's exactly what
Speaker 2: it is. Whenever they create the problem, offer you a
Speaker 2: tautalitarian solution, don't fall for it. Thebreu twenty twenty nine.
Speaker 2: A democratic controlled Congress is exactly what Democrat colligular Trump
Speaker 2: desires to serve his dystopian rubber stamp agenda. Exactly right. Yeah,
Speaker 2: he's supposedly not a part of them.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 2: He's not a Democrat, just like he's not a pedophile.
Speaker 2: He's not a globalist, just like he's not a pedophile.
Speaker 2: People need to start to figure out what this guy is.
Speaker 2: It's been all It's been right in your face from
Speaker 2: the very beginning, hasn't it, especially from twenty twenty on.
Speaker 2: Pauzano Avante seventeen seventy six, former Trump national security advisor,
Speaker 2: said the idea to acquire Greenland came from none other
Speaker 2: than Ronald Louder. Now Ronald Louder's son in law will
Speaker 2: become FED chairman in May at the end of Powell's
Speaker 2: term upon confirmation. I think they've got a different now.
Speaker 2: I think it's worsh because I was laughing about they're
Speaker 2: going to try to whitewash all of this stuff with
Speaker 2: this new FED chairman. We're going to whitewash the federal
Speaker 2: budget deficit. All the problems have been solved, according to
Speaker 2: the Wall Street people. And he saw what happened. I
Speaker 2: guess over the weekend with gold and Silver, after Trump
Speaker 2: announced his choice for a Federal Reserve chairman, worsh and so,
Speaker 2: I don't think they've solved anything, folks. I don't think
Speaker 2: he's doing anything as he changes the chair of the
Speaker 2: Federal Reserve. He's rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
Speaker 2: That's all that's really happening. And I think Trump will
Speaker 2: get his way with whoever he puts in. I don't
Speaker 2: think he's going to put in anybody that isn't going
Speaker 2: to do everything that he wants. Audi says, so Audi
Speaker 2: mrr says, so Trump is basically willing to sacrifice five
Speaker 2: hundred military servicemen to justify ramping up war any number
Speaker 2: of people. They don't care. As a matter of fact,
Speaker 2: you know, when you look at it, this is one
Speaker 2: of the problems I always had with the people said, well,
Speaker 2: nobody dies at this event or whatever. That became a
Speaker 2: regular thing after Steve Patannik and others sold that through
Speaker 2: Alex Jones, well nobody died. It serves their purpose. When
Speaker 2: people die, it gets people angry. It gets people to
Speaker 2: fall in line behind them, in the same way that
Speaker 2: when you bomb a civilian population. When Hitler bombs London,
Speaker 2: what happens does it break the morale of the people
Speaker 2: in London. No, it galvanizes them against Hitler. And so
Speaker 2: it's the same type of thing. You want to have
Speaker 2: those casualties. You want the Japanese to attack Pearl Harbor.
Speaker 2: That's the way these the Machiavilian ways, these sobs operate.
Speaker 2: Truly amazing. Sola cat in nineteen eighty. The government creates
Speaker 2: problems then always brings in more tyranny as a solution
Speaker 2: to that problem. Absolutely, becauzon Avante seventeen seventy six. Did
Speaker 2: you hear about the new proposed gun law in Virginia
Speaker 2: where they want to charge gun owners whose guns have
Speaker 2: been stolen with a crime. Yeah, that's I'm sure that's
Speaker 2: going to be There's a lot of novel approaches to it.
Speaker 2: We've seen some novel approaches from Trump himself and his
Speaker 2: first administration. Just wait for that to fall. He's been
Speaker 2: very anti Second Amendment and it's cost him a lot
Speaker 2: of support with Republicans. It's one of the other things
Speaker 2: that's going to be a factor, I think in the
Speaker 2: midterm elections. But I see the elections as more selections
Speaker 2: than anything else. Anyway, Let's talk about what we can do.
Speaker 2: And again this is coming from the perspective of people
Speaker 2: on the left who are pro illegal immigration and all
Speaker 2: the rest of that just open the borders and flood everybody,
Speaker 2: in which I don't agree with. I don't agree with
Speaker 2: that end goal. I also don't agree with the tactics
Speaker 2: of the Trump administration and the tactics of ICE, and
Speaker 2: a lot of law enforcement don't either. He had a
Speaker 2: lot of police chiefs in Minnesota who spoke out against that.
Speaker 2: You've had police chiefs and other areas that have spoken
Speaker 2: out against what is happening with this, and so it's
Speaker 2: important to separate the tactics from the end goals. Whether
Speaker 2: or not you agree with the end goals. Even if
Speaker 2: if the end goal is bad, you can learn something
Speaker 2: if the tactics are good. And if the end goal
Speaker 2: is good and the tactics are evil, that is a
Speaker 2: very dangerous precedent setting thing. So let's take a look
Speaker 2: at this. This is a story from the Free Thought
Speaker 2: Project and the author is coming from Center for a
Speaker 2: Stateless Society. He said, for some time, I've been thinking
Speaker 2: about writing a review of Kevin Carson's book The Desktop
Speaker 2: Regulatory State, and he said helped to make him an
Speaker 2: anarchist back in twenty sixteen. Well, anyway, I think there
Speaker 2: is a legitimate role for government, but you've got to
Speaker 2: have some legitimate people in.
Speaker 4: There who are going to be held to some rules.
Speaker 2: You can't have lawless criminals and effectively run a government.
Speaker 2: It's going to be a lawless criminal government if you've
Speaker 2: got people like Trump at the top. And so he says,
Speaker 2: citizens fought back in a way that is seemingly a
Speaker 2: textbook application of what Carson wrote about, and that book
Speaker 2: to the point that if a second edition is over public,
Speaker 2: which I wouldn't be surprised if I had an entire
Speaker 2: subsection that was a case study and networked resistance. For
Speaker 2: those who haven't read the book, a significant part of
Speaker 2: it is about establishing what Carson sees as a primary
Speaker 2: conflict going forward, namely a conflict between networks and hierarchies.
Speaker 2: And as I mentioned before, you know, the People's Rights
Speaker 2: Network MM and Bundy saw the same thing. And of
Speaker 2: course he doesn't, you know, like me, he doesn't share
Speaker 2: any of the goals of the communists, But how do
Speaker 2: we keep this government in check? You know, you had
Speaker 2: at the time of the revolution, the way people communicated
Speaker 2: with each other was you know, writing stuff down and
Speaker 2: written notes and kind of passing them along. You had
Speaker 2: the committees of correspondence. Well, technology has changed that a
Speaker 2: little bit, and now you've got encrypted messaging systems and
Speaker 2: the government and many of those on the right who
Speaker 2: want to support Trump see nefariousness in that. I see
Speaker 2: an opportunity, and that an opportunity to push back against
Speaker 2: the government that is out of control. I think we
Speaker 2: need to look at these different structures like jury nullification
Speaker 2: and state nullification. We need to look at these because
Speaker 2: the evil is primarily coming from Washington. Regardless of whether
Speaker 2: it's a Republican or Democrat or whoever it is that's
Speaker 2: in charge there, it's coming from Washington. He says, I'm
Speaker 2: not personally involved in the fight of Minnesota, but it
Speaker 2: certainly seems like Minneapolis is utilizing a network to fight
Speaker 2: against a hierarchy.
Speaker 4: He said.
Speaker 2: The movement is not leaderless, but it is leader full.
Speaker 2: Said one person. There are no there are no few
Speaker 2: specific people who could be arrested to stop the movement.
Speaker 2: It's built out of so many interlocking networks. Even if
Speaker 2: a bad actor managed to disrupt an individual piece of
Speaker 2: the network, the disruption would be minimal. The network is
Speaker 2: democratic in the sense that it is run by the
Speaker 2: people who are part of it, rather than by some
Speaker 2: vanguard of leaders. People are listening to only when their
Speaker 2: ideas actually appeal to people. And again, this is what
Speaker 2: Amman Bundy was trying to do to set up a
Speaker 2: people's rights network. The basic strategy employed by people on
Speaker 2: the ground is identifying cars used by agents, following them,
Speaker 2: alerting others to their presence through the use of horns
Speaker 2: and whistles, and photographing or videotaping them when they try
Speaker 2: to accost and kidnap people on the street, while getting
Speaker 2: the information of the people they seize. And so I
Speaker 2: got to say, you know, to me, when I look
Speaker 2: at this, where is the criminality in this?
Speaker 4: Okay?
Speaker 2: They want to say that filming them is a crime.
Speaker 2: They wear masks, they don't want to be filmed. I
Speaker 2: have no sympathy for that argument. The more you wear masks,
Speaker 2: the more you need to be filmed. What are you
Speaker 2: trying to hide if you're doing If you're decent and
Speaker 2: honest and law abiding, you don't need a mask. It
Speaker 2: just tells you what these people's attitude is. But when
Speaker 2: we talk about blowing horns and whistles and things like that,
Speaker 2: have you ever been on the road and somebody flashed
Speaker 2: their rights because there's a speed trap right over the hill.
Speaker 2: I have been helped by that many times, and I've
Speaker 2: tried to do that to help other people as well.
Speaker 2: What is the harm in that? I mean, should we
Speaker 2: be chased? And you've had some situations where some cops
Speaker 2: have come after people who alerted others to their presence.
Speaker 2: I support that, and I support it here for the
Speaker 2: same reasons. You need to Who watches the watchers?
Speaker 4: Right?
Speaker 2: You know, we have to have government, they say, But
Speaker 2: because we're not angels. But because we're not angels, you
Speaker 2: need to watch the government. So who watches these people
Speaker 2: who watch us? That's us. We're the ones who watch
Speaker 2: the watchers. And that's what they hate so much. Out
Speaker 2: maneuvering a hierarchically structured enemy with superior firepower instead of
Speaker 2: directly confronting them. As nothing new, this is the bread
Speaker 2: and butter of successful gorilla insurgencies, and I would say
Speaker 2: even like the American Revolution, Washington didn't have much success.
Speaker 2: As a matter of fact, the surrender of Cornwallis there
Speaker 2: in Yorktown was pretty much a fluke and it would
Speaker 2: never have happened without support of the French government. All
Speaker 2: the victories that had happened in the American Revolution were
Speaker 2: done because of gorilla type of firing. And think of
Speaker 2: conquered in Lexington right where the British come to confiscate
Speaker 2: the canons that belonged to the citizens as well as rifles,
Speaker 2: and then they were shot at from you. They didn't
Speaker 2: line up and confront them, which was a standard way
Speaker 2: that people fought wars at that point in time. It
Speaker 2: was a guerrilla war and that was where their victories
Speaker 2: came from. And if you look at the Civil War,
Speaker 2: I think that would have been successful for the South
Speaker 2: if they would have fought it as a guerrilla war.
Speaker 2: That was basically the attitude of Nathan Bedford Forest, and
Speaker 2: he was very successful. He fought in an unconventional way.
Speaker 2: It's like, I'm going to fight by your rules. I'm
Speaker 2: going to fight and the type of ways that's going
Speaker 2: to win. And I think if they would have done that,
Speaker 2: they would have been successful.
Speaker 5: Cavalry sold off shotguns instead.
Speaker 2: Of savers, that's right, that's right, and so which I've
Speaker 2: talked about many times because of the Supreme Court ruling
Speaker 2: that said the sawd off shotgun can be illegal as
Speaker 2: part of the FDR Firearms Act because it was never
Speaker 2: used by the military, and it's like, that's an absolute lie.
Speaker 2: It was used by cavalry during the Civil War, and
Speaker 2: it was used in trench warfare and World War One
Speaker 2: as well. So what Minneapolis leverages is real time encrypted
Speaker 2: communications through phone apps like Signal, but also through radio networks.
Speaker 2: Such non violent swarming tactics amplified by many too many
Speaker 2: communications technology has been around for a while. Carson draws
Speaker 2: some classic work of RAND think tankers and their concept
Speaker 2: of net war. They argued that advances in communication technology
Speaker 2: had enabled decentralized swarms to overwhelm more powerful, hierarchically organized targets.
Speaker 2: Networks operate by swarming their opponents like bees or like
Speaker 2: white blood cells, more like organisms than like machines. They
Speaker 2: approach stealthily and from many directions and offense. In defense,
Speaker 2: they can react like antibodies, moving toward points of attack.
Speaker 2: NetWars line between offense and defense can be blurred, leaving
Speaker 2: opponents unclear about what is occurring and how to respond
Speaker 2: and again, how did they swarm people? They swarmed them
Speaker 2: with cameras to witness what these masked mobsters from DC
Speaker 2: are doing. So I hardly agree with that. So it
Speaker 2: is a popular front, an actual popular front. The broad
Speaker 2: moral consensus that ice should be fought is one of
Speaker 2: the distinctions between the networks and the hierarchies. People are
Speaker 2: intrinsically motivated to act because they believe in what they're doing,
Speaker 2: not because they're being forced, and so they can be
Speaker 2: trusted to do the right thing. It's not because they've
Speaker 2: been ordered, not because they are being paid, but because
Speaker 2: they believe they're doing the right thing. Bonds formed under
Speaker 2: pressure of negative double digit windchill are key to understanding
Speaker 2: what is happening in Minnesota. One person said, it's impossible
Speaker 2: to get through a Minnesota winter without help, and only
Speaker 2: sometimes does that assistance come from your neighbors. The stories
Speaker 2: about people shoveling out or snow blowing an entire blocks
Speaker 2: driveway without being asked and with no compensation are true,
Speaker 2: But the real miracles and just as common, are the
Speaker 2: times when strangers stop to help someone shovel out a
Speaker 2: car that's caught in a snow bank, or to bring
Speaker 2: out the kitty litter from their trunk and put it
Speaker 2: there for just this kind of emergency.
Speaker 4: For traction.
Speaker 2: I can't tell you one story about that happening to me.
Speaker 2: I have at least three or four. The pund is irresistible.
Speaker 2: Minnesotans have always declared common cause against ice. They've just
Speaker 2: changed their focus to the ice that you can't use
Speaker 2: for hockey practice. You can dismiss it as a joke
Speaker 2: until someone at a cafe gives you a spare scarf
Speaker 2: because you can't find yours. People offer assistance, without hesitation,
Speaker 2: without question. I don't think I've ever heard someone dismiss
Speaker 2: thinks with just pay it back someday, it says. I
Speaker 2: don't think I've ever even heard someone say that, just
Speaker 2: dismiss it, just pay it back someday. There's also the
Speaker 2: technical infrastructure that powers the resistance, in the form of
Speaker 2: an app like Signal. The crypto war is the nineties,
Speaker 2: which made encryption legal for everyday people to use, and
Speaker 2: the work to build, popularize, and maintain Signal or what
Speaker 2: has enabled protesters securely to communicate in ways that frustrate
Speaker 2: regime's surveillance attempts. And boy are they upset about that.
Speaker 2: In the EU and in Washington, they want to stop encryption.
Speaker 2: The specific structure of used encrypted group chats means that
Speaker 2: the resistance is more resilient. So you can have somebody
Speaker 2: that breaks into that, but they're going to get into
Speaker 2: just an individual chat, and then there's going to be
Speaker 2: others that are going to be encrypted. They said, this
Speaker 2: is much different than when people organize over public facing
Speaker 2: social media. And we saw that during COVID, when people
Speaker 2: said there's going to be a protest against these COVID
Speaker 2: lockdown measures. This happened in Australia, and so we're going
Speaker 2: to allgether at such and such a place at such
Speaker 2: and such a time. Next thing, you know, we've got
Speaker 2: video of the thugs in uniform showing up at this
Speaker 2: woman's house and she's pregnant, pregnant woman and arresting her
Speaker 2: because she posted that on Facebook. That's why it's important
Speaker 2: to have encryption. It's worth talking about the broader political
Speaker 2: implications of all this. The reason people are acting this
Speaker 2: way is not because they have a formal understanding of
Speaker 2: the principles and swarming or of net war, but because
Speaker 2: they saw other people doing something that was effective that
Speaker 2: they could do themselves. The reason Minneapolis resistances worked so
Speaker 2: well is that it consists of forms of activity that
Speaker 2: require minimal buy in. In terms of ideology, secret police
Speaker 2: shouldn't abduct my neighbors, as why they think, and in resources,
Speaker 2: all you need is a phone, a whistle, or a car.
Speaker 4: You know, when you looked at.
Speaker 2: The Bundy ranch, it was very different, had a lot
Speaker 2: of people who were angry about what was happening there.
Speaker 2: Some of the people that I talked to that were
Speaker 2: there had been farmers in that area, and Clive and
Speaker 2: Bundy and his family were the last people who had
Speaker 2: a farm in that area. The rest of them had
Speaker 2: been run out by the federal government under absurd pretenses
Speaker 2: about the desert tortoise and things like that. And actually,
Speaker 2: as Cliven pointed out, the desert tortoise had thrived with
Speaker 2: cattle there. They were able to get moisture from the
Speaker 2: cattle droppings that were there. And at the same time,
Speaker 2: the BLM had taken all these desert tortoises and tried
Speaker 2: to make you this precious situation out of it, and
Speaker 2: they wound up killing hundreds of them through mismanagement so
Speaker 2: he said, they're thriving out here in the desert with
Speaker 2: our cattle, but when the BLM takes them, they can't
Speaker 2: manage to keep them alive. But I had a lot
Speaker 2: of people that I talked to who had been neighbors
Speaker 2: in the past of the Bundies and they had been
Speaker 2: driven out by the federal government and they were there
Speaker 2: with agreements. Now, the situation and the Bundy Ranch, it
Speaker 2: wasn't just horns and whistles that people had in cameras.
Speaker 2: Of course, they came with guns, and it was a
Speaker 2: very touch and go situation. As a matter of fact,
Speaker 2: there were so many people guns that the BLM guys
Speaker 2: who wanted to fight were outnumbered, and that's the way
Speaker 2: you stop it. They were the ones who wanted to
Speaker 2: initiate a fight, and they were on the minority side
Speaker 2: with that. But the other thing about the Bundy Ranch
Speaker 2: standoff that I think was significant was they had an immediate,
Speaker 2: achievable goal. And that's part of the problem with a
Speaker 2: lot of these protests that are out there. It protests
Speaker 2: something that is really big and nebulous, and there's no
Speaker 2: way that you're going to get that changed. It's just
Speaker 2: redressing your grievances, but no change is going to be coming.
Speaker 2: He had a very specific goal. I want the cat,
Speaker 2: my cattle that you skull from me. I want those
Speaker 2: back right now or going to come take them. And so,
Speaker 2: you know, there's certain things about the Bundy ranch standoff
Speaker 2: that are applicable and transferable, other things that really aren't.
Speaker 2: But those are things I think that made it successful.
Speaker 5: You know, I'd never really thought about the justification for
Speaker 5: it all that much. The whole desert tortoise thing, how
Speaker 5: they take ranchers that have this working, successful ecosystem. They've
Speaker 5: got to keep these animals alive, and they want to
Speaker 5: remove all the animals except for the one animal in
Speaker 5: this ecosystem, the desert tortoise, and expect it to do better.
Speaker 5: You know, as you said, the plants that they're eating
Speaker 5: are getting fertilized by the cows.
Speaker 2: It's an ecosystem, and the cow dying was a source
Speaker 2: of moisture for the desert tortoise. And what are the
Speaker 2: cows get that moisture? It was from all the water
Speaker 2: infrastructure that the farmers had put in there. Because the
Speaker 2: farmers were there, His family and these other families had
Speaker 2: been there many decades in some cases like one hundred
Speaker 2: years before the BLM was even created, and they were
Speaker 2: doing land management on their ranches and farms that were there.
Speaker 2: So again, when we look at the tactics of this,
Speaker 2: some push came to show the people of Minneapolis didn't
Speaker 2: wait around for a verticalist structure to form that they
Speaker 2: could resist the encroachment of institutional measures. They didn't wait
Speaker 2: for a formal organization to see strategically start strategically directing people.
Speaker 2: Although the Democratic Socialists of America are part of the resistance,
Speaker 2: they are doing it themselves. And this is the folly
Speaker 2: and the blindness of the right. They think that they
Speaker 2: are so vertically oriented they are projecting that onto other people.
Speaker 2: And if the right will who wants to change things,
Speaker 2: they need to start getting into more of a network
Speaker 2: mindset like the Democrats are. And I think they are
Speaker 2: being done a disservice by people on Fox News and
Speaker 2: then for wards every time they say, well, what source
Speaker 2: doing is some network here where Sourus is funneling money in. Yes,
Speaker 2: there's some money that is coming into some of these people,
Speaker 2: and we saw that in a big way with the
Speaker 2: Black Lives Matter riots. But this is a bit different
Speaker 2: what is happening here. And so again they freak out
Speaker 2: about George Soros, but they don't care at all about
Speaker 2: the fact that Sorous's right hand man, Scott Bessent, is
Speaker 2: now the right hand man of Trump. Nothing to see there,
Speaker 2: Just move along, right, and now one last thing and
Speaker 2: then we'll get onto the Epstein stuff. Of course, that
Speaker 2: video of Alex Pretty kicking a cop matters. It's actually
Speaker 2: coming from leftist media eye and I have a different
Speaker 2: way of seeing this as well. So you've probably seen this.
Speaker 2: I didn't show it. It gets very angry, He's yell
Speaker 2: and screaming at him. He kicks the car a couple
Speaker 2: of times. Then one of the kicks even kicks out
Speaker 2: the tail light of the car. I said, you know,
Speaker 2: it's kind of interesting to see how flimsy cars are anymore.
Speaker 2: I don't think you do that to nineteen fifties chrome
Speaker 2: and metal car. But anyway, he gets into a scuffle
Speaker 2: with him, and when I saw that, my thought was,
Speaker 2: what is that not? What does that tell us about Pretty?
Speaker 2: Oh well, now Preddy is a bad guy and he
Speaker 2: deserved to be killed. No, they didn't shoot him that day.
Speaker 2: They didn't even arrest him that day, So what does
Speaker 2: that tell us? Does that tell us then that a
Speaker 2: couple of weeks later, the murder of preddy Is is valid.
Speaker 2: It wouldn't have been valid for them to kill him
Speaker 2: that day. They could have arrested him or whatever, and
Speaker 2: if he resisted arrest, who knows what would have happen.
Speaker 2: But that's not what happened. The ICE agents there on
Speaker 2: that day acted very differently than the ones a couple
Speaker 2: of weeks later. So what does that tell us? It
Speaker 2: tells us that ICE is precious, arbitrary and has different standards.
Speaker 2: All these agents are doing whatever they please. That's what
Speaker 2: it tells us. You've got this verticalist structure that is
Speaker 2: not structured at all. Quite frankly, these guys are free
Speaker 2: to do whatever they wish. And you can see that
Speaker 2: on one day when he's much poorer, behaved and could
Speaker 2: have reasonably been arrested for that, that they don't arrest him.
Speaker 2: They certainly don't kill him. Then on another day, when
Speaker 2: he's just filming, they kill him. What's going on with that?
Speaker 2: What's different Ice agents? And I think it tells us
Speaker 2: everything about Ice. This is not a reflection on him
Speaker 2: that they would like to believe, as this person says,
Speaker 2: for those on the right determined to justify the events
Speaker 2: of January the twenty fourth, when he was shot dead,
Speaker 2: this shows that this is an answer to their prayers,
Speaker 2: right because it gives them tribal validation. For those on
Speaker 2: the left who fetishize the historially structive behavior, it was
Speaker 2: something to be hand waved away an the irrelevant even
Speaker 2: disgusting smear of a dead man. Well, it's neither of those.
Speaker 4: Actually.
Speaker 2: This person says that they didn't come anywhere close to
Speaker 2: warranting the rest of the use of lethal force on
Speaker 2: either of those days, and to site that is a
Speaker 2: justification for his death a week and a half later
Speaker 2: of what appeared to be a much less charged moment
Speaker 2: is an intellectual as well as a moral error. American
Speaker 2: citizens are entitled to make mistakes, even egregious ones, without
Speaker 2: paying the price for them with their life. And I
Speaker 2: would say again, my take on this was different than
Speaker 2: this writer because to me, it shows the arbitrary, capricious
Speaker 2: nature of ice and the fact that a they're not
Speaker 2: trained in terms of law enforcements that you don't shoot
Speaker 2: into moving car if they're not, say, shooting at people.
Speaker 2: This has been a long standing rule by many many
Speaker 2: police departments and by the Department of just by Homeland Secure. However,
Speaker 2: what it shows is that these guys are just giving
Speaker 2: cart Blanc to do whatever they feel like. I think
Speaker 2: that's really what is happening here. And we need to understand, folks,
Speaker 2: that the politicians at the top are not accountable. They're
Speaker 2: not going to change all of this. Change should come,
Speaker 2: should be done, I think from the bottom up. And
Speaker 2: this is where I think the horizontal networks are very
Speaker 2: important to shine the light on this stuff. Ideally, there
Speaker 2: ought to be a trial by combat with the elites.
Speaker 2: You ought to have Trump versus Waltz. And I don't
Speaker 2: mean they go out and fight with clubs. I mean
Speaker 2: they go into a courtroom, each of them armed, the
Speaker 2: lawyers and accountants, and that's where the fight needs to
Speaker 2: be had. Instead, they have got a different kind of
Speaker 2: trial by combat, and that's what they're ice agents. We're
Speaker 2: going to take a quick break and we'll be right
Speaker 2: back and talk about Epstein will be right.
Speaker 1: Back analyzing the globalists next move. And now that Deep
Speaker 1: and Nut.
Speaker 2: Show comments here to fight tire at seventeen seventy six.
Speaker 2: This is all about getting Americans accustomed to seeing Gestapo
Speaker 2: thugs on the street. Maybe to get people to fully
Speaker 2: accept martial law. Well, it doesn't take much prodding, does that.
Speaker 2: I mean we saw that with COVID lockdowns. That was
Speaker 2: medical martial law, but it was martial law. They did
Speaker 2: the best they could to get that going. It's all
Speaker 2: predictive programming, isn't it. It's all getting people accustomed to this,
Speaker 2: and of course locking everybody down and then handing them
Speaker 2: a stimulus check as well. That was programming for universal
Speaker 2: basic income that Trump was doing. So hopefully people will
Speaker 2: see through some of this or starting to see through
Speaker 2: some of the vaccination stuff as well. Ryan and McCartney,
Speaker 2: the stormtroop are so welcome here. Yeah, here in Tennessee,
Speaker 2: and that is what they want people to see. Yeah,
Speaker 2: I haven't seen any military presence around here. Maybe they're
Speaker 2: in focused in Nashville and Memphis or something like that.
Speaker 2: Those are the Democrat cities. There is such an overarching
Speaker 2: political aspect of this, tribal aspect of this that is
Speaker 2: also a key thing to understand. Solocat nineteen eighty Fox
Speaker 2: News website is saying Millennia's new quote unquote documentary is
Speaker 2: a success with seven million in box office profits over
Speaker 2: the weekend. Actually that's not profits, that's their long way
Speaker 2: from making a profit, as you point out, that's their gross,
Speaker 2: that's their take. But they failed to mention that it
Speaker 2: cost forty million to make. Actually forty five million, I think,
Speaker 2: and maybe forty anyway, the total now me, I think
Speaker 2: you're right, forty million, and it was thirty five that
Speaker 2: they spent to advertise it, because usually if they got
Speaker 2: a big budget picture, they're going to spend about the
Speaker 2: same amount on po are that they do in making
Speaker 2: the film. I've got a lot to say about this
Speaker 2: Millennia film. I hope we got time to get to it.
Speaker 2: I'm going to go through the Epstein stuff pretty quickly
Speaker 2: because it's not really anything that we haven't already known.
Speaker 2: I mean, there are some new revelations in there about
Speaker 2: some scoundrels like Bill Kays, and we see some deeper
Speaker 2: rele revelations about scandals like Andrew, the man who was
Speaker 2: formerly known as Prince that's gotten the people in the
Speaker 2: UK very upset with him. Picture of him on all
Speaker 2: fours over a woman who appears to be unconscious on
Speaker 2: the floor. It's hard to tell with reactions that are there.
Speaker 2: But of course the timeline of what Andrew was saying
Speaker 2: was totally false. I got him into a lot of
Speaker 2: trouble in the UK as people went back and said, well,
Speaker 2: you said that you stopped talking to him after you
Speaker 2: didn't talk to him after he got convicted, But that
Speaker 2: absolutely was not true. So they released about three and
Speaker 2: a half million files. They have said that there's six
Speaker 2: million of them, and Todd Blanche, who is the Deputy
Speaker 2: of Attorney General, they said that's it, We're not going
Speaker 2: to have anymore. Probably so Thomas Massey and Rocanna, who
Speaker 2: put together the law that has just they've thumbed their
Speaker 2: nose at Why would you think that they would comply
Speaker 2: with a law that you pass about this type of
Speaker 2: thing when they thumb their nose of the constitution constantly. Anyway,
Speaker 2: Blanche claimed that some of the tens of thousands additional
Speaker 2: documents were not being made public, both because the presence
Speaker 2: of child sexual abuse material. Well, you know, they have
Speaker 2: redacted a lot of stuff. I mean, we see people
Speaker 2: that are there that are all blurred out. I don't
Speaker 2: know why that would be an issue, except that it
Speaker 2: would just be too incendiary if you see a child
Speaker 2: that is all blurred out setting next to Donald Trump,
Speaker 2: for example. So many of the documents made available to
Speaker 2: the public on Friday did in fact contain names and
Speaker 2: other sensitive information about women that Epstein abuse. That's what
Speaker 2: some of the lawyers of the victims have complained about.
Speaker 2: They said, look, they redacted it information about these billionaire predators,
Speaker 2: but they released the names of some of the victims.
Speaker 2: As a matter of fact, some of them they actually
Speaker 2: capitalized their name all upper case, so you would see
Speaker 2: it there. So they said it was a betrayal. Yes,
Speaker 2: it is Blanche who previously worked as Trump's personal criminal
Speaker 2: defense attorney.
Speaker 4: I think maybe he's still in that role.
Speaker 2: This is also the guy who went to Glaine Maxwell
Speaker 2: and spent a great deal of time with her, and
Speaker 2: as a result of that interview and the negotiations evidently
Speaker 2: back and forth, she got moved to Club fed, which
Speaker 2: he's got very nice accommodations.
Speaker 1: Now.
Speaker 2: Well, Blanche insisted that the Justice Department did not protect
Speaker 2: Trump and its decisions about what to redact and to release.
Speaker 2: That's the amazing thing, the fact that they will lie
Speaker 2: to your face about this stuff has already come out
Speaker 2: many many times, have they've tried to redact it. And
Speaker 2: even if that had, and if you don't believe those reports,
Speaker 2: you look at the first group of files that they
Speaker 2: put out, and they put it on a website where
Speaker 2: you could search it, and if you typed in Trump,
Speaker 2: it wouldn't find anything. But if you typed in Trump
Speaker 2: space you could find it. And so obviously somebody had
Speaker 2: put something there to specifically block searches of Trump. They
Speaker 2: just did it ineptly, and so that is absolutely not true.
Speaker 2: The documents themselves contained two thousand videos one hundred and
Speaker 2: eighty thousand images related to Epstein, including a large cache
Speaker 2: of commercial pornography, in addition to the homemade abuse material
Speaker 2: depicting Epstein's under age victims. It appears to contain a
Speaker 2: large number of uncorroborated teap tips as well to authorities
Speaker 2: from members of the public about Epstein's conduct, several of
Speaker 2: which come from people who claimed in their message to
Speaker 2: have been abused by Donald Trump. And again, one of
Speaker 2: these claims that I saw about pedophile rape was hearsay,
Speaker 2: and so that is not admissible in course, so somebody
Speaker 2: said so and so told me that they had been
Speaker 2: raped by Donald Trump when they when she was thirteen
Speaker 2: years old. Well that's not admissible, you have, but the
Speaker 2: FBI the same token. The FBI did not investigate these
Speaker 2: Over and over again, you see many of these really
Speaker 2: outrageous claims that the FBI had no response to it.
Speaker 2: That they get something that is really horrific crime like
Speaker 2: that and they just ignore it. That was a response
Speaker 2: over and over again.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 5: I saw someone had a tweet saying exactly that that
Speaker 5: someone reposts as a meme. It's like, so, I'm saying
Speaker 5: that the FBI just gathered hundreds of documents on these
Speaker 5: criminals that obviously were committing crimes and didn't do anything.
Speaker 2: They just claimed, right, that's right, over and over again.
Speaker 2: And some of the worst crimes here, they just did absolutely.
Speaker 5: Nothing, got top men working on it.
Speaker 4: To hide it. Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 2: So they said, there's no index, no explanation of how
Speaker 2: or when particular documents are obtained. So the full picture
Speaker 2: is going to take quite a time for journalists to
Speaker 2: pieces together. And like I said before, this is the
Speaker 2: way they do this stuff typically in the past, and
Speaker 2: I get information from the government. They just give me
Speaker 2: a big data dump of pages, you know, just pages
Speaker 2: of printed out and you know, where do you start
Speaker 2: with this? How do you know where's the context? How
Speaker 2: do you get any of this stuff? And so even
Speaker 2: though these are documents that can be sealed search rather
Speaker 2: because of computer documents on a website, there's no context
Speaker 2: for any of them. It's unlikely the new material will
Speaker 2: call the public's interest in the case or mitigate their
Speaker 2: sense at Epstein and his impunity represent a paradigmatic example
Speaker 2: of the ruling elite's personal corruption, their imperviousness to law
Speaker 2: or consequences, and they're back scratching malignant coziness with each other.
Speaker 2: Well put, that's from the Guardian. But really, I guess
Speaker 2: at the beginning of the program, all of this QAnon
Speaker 2: stuff and the nonsense that Alex shows herself, Oh yeah,
Speaker 2: Trump's rounding up these pedophile rings anything Michael Flynn and everything,
Speaker 2: none of that was true. He's protecting the pedophile He
Speaker 2: was part of the pedophile ring, and he's protecting the
Speaker 2: pedophile ring. Nothing could be further from the truth. It's
Speaker 2: exactly the opposite, and the same thing is going on
Speaker 2: with the globalists as well. So Epstein was integrated in
Speaker 2: the social life of some of the world's most powerful people.
Speaker 2: To put it modly, even after he was initially convicted
Speaker 2: of charges relating to child sexual abuse in two thousand
Speaker 2: and eight. As a matter of fact, it also came
Speaker 2: out not as much as kind of swamped by this
Speaker 2: release of information, but Gleayne Maxwell was appealing her conviction
Speaker 2: because she said, there's at least twenty nine other people
Speaker 2: that are there. I'm supposedly trafficking these It was convicted
Speaker 2: of trafficking these people, but the ones that I trafficked
Speaker 2: them too, are going free. Totally true. So Richard Branson
Speaker 2: was there. Anytime you're in the area, would love to
Speaker 2: see you, he wrote to Epstein, as long as you
Speaker 2: bring your harem Elon Musk has previously posted on Exit
Speaker 2: Epstein quote to try to get me to go to
Speaker 2: his island, and I refused uppercase, but the emails show
Speaker 2: a different relationship between Musk and Epstein, and twenty twelve,
Speaker 2: Musk wrote to Epstein with enthusiasm about the prospect of
Speaker 2: visiting the pedophile's former Caribbean island. What day and night
Speaker 2: will be the wildest party on your island. I'd like
Speaker 2: to show up. So he's actually begging Epstein to let
Speaker 2: him come to one of the parties. Now, the interesting
Speaker 2: thing is you've got people who are coming to Musk's
Speaker 2: defense and saying the very fact that he was demanding
Speaker 2: that these documents be released, says that he didn't do
Speaker 2: anything wrong.
Speaker 4: You think that's the case. So Trump do the same thing.
Speaker 5: There seems to be some confusion over it because the
Speaker 5: first email between Elon and Epstein is him asking to
Speaker 5: go to the party and Epstein's assistant says, oh, sorry,
Speaker 5: you can't come. We're winding down the operation on the island.
Speaker 5: So people have been making these memes of Elon wanted
Speaker 5: to go but he was refused, But after that he
Speaker 5: did go several times.
Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2: It's not Gilligan's Island either, although they probably did have
Speaker 2: a professor and an actress and all these other people
Speaker 2: that certainly did have the billionaires there. Jay Thurston Howell
Speaker 2: was not involved at Epstein Island. He was in a
Speaker 2: different island. Scandal reveals the untrustworthiness and the mendacity of
Speaker 2: the very elite. Said Trump and his movement now represent
Speaker 2: the ones that they were going to get rid of right,
Speaker 2: So there's fifty three hundred plus Epstein files that mentioned Trump.
Speaker 2: In an exhaustive analysis done by The New York Times,
Speaker 2: they did a deep dive into this. They said that
Speaker 2: they have set up a proprietary search tool. We've probably
Speaker 2: got some AI that's running through. That's how you're going
Speaker 2: to sort through that level of documents. There. They said
Speaker 2: they found more than thirty eight thousand references to Trump,
Speaker 2: his wife, mar Lago club in Florida, and other related
Speaker 2: words and phrases in the latest batch of emails, the
Speaker 2: government files, videos, and other records released by the Justice Department.
Speaker 2: They said previous installations of the Epstein files, which the
Speaker 2: Department released late last year, included another one hundred and
Speaker 2: thirty files with Trump related references. The files are peppered
Speaker 2: with references to mister Trump, a close friend of Epstein's
Speaker 2: until the early two thousands, and we've gone over all
Speaker 2: that kind of stuff before. But again, many unverified tips
Speaker 2: are where you find Donald Trump there. And I think
Speaker 2: one of the most interesting things is the explanation from
Speaker 2: Trump's former personal defense attorney who is now the assistant
Speaker 2: who's now the deputy attorney General Todd Blome and he said, well,
Speaker 2: you know, you don't see Trump in there now, And
Speaker 2: because they did have several files that were up there
Speaker 2: and people grabbed the links to them, and then later
Speaker 2: in the day the Department of Justice purged those files
Speaker 2: after they put them up, perhaps not understanding what was
Speaker 2: in them, and then after people started saying look at
Speaker 2: this one, they pulled those files down. So now Todd
Speaker 2: Blanche can say, well, we don't have any files with Trump,
Speaker 2: and we got rid of those the day the next day.
Speaker 2: So the some of the new files are duplicates of
Speaker 2: files released last year. But in reality, pretty much I
Speaker 2: don't see too much that is earth shattering.
Speaker 4: I mean, we.
Speaker 2: Knew of Bill Gates's relationship with Epstein. There was a
Speaker 2: lot of talk about the fact that it was at
Speaker 2: the center of his divorce with Melinda Gates. What was
Speaker 2: new that came out was an email going, well, it
Speaker 2: was actually Jeffrey Epstein a kind of note to self,
Speaker 2: you know, complaining to himself. And that's what a lot
Speaker 2: of this stuff is. Jeffrey Epstein writing things about people
Speaker 2: that had come to his island kind of his own
Speaker 2: email system to himself, and he was talking about how
Speaker 2: Bill Gates, with tears in his eyes, was asking him
Speaker 2: how he could give antibiotics to his wife without her
Speaker 2: knowing it, you know, surreptitiously because he had been exposed
Speaker 2: to it, had caught a sexually transmitted disease, and he
Speaker 2: was afraid she was going to get the STD And
Speaker 2: that's about the time they got divorced.
Speaker 5: You would think Gates would be the expert on drugging
Speaker 5: people against their will.
Speaker 4: That's right.
Speaker 5: They were all to tell him anything about that.
Speaker 2: We were laughing about that. Sayo is that when he
Speaker 2: started the mosquito stuff. I haven't heard him talk about
Speaker 2: give a transferring antibiotics via mosquito, but maybe that's it.
Speaker 2: We started thinking about it. So Trump's name was removed
Speaker 2: from many of these documents, and this is Jerusalem Post
Speaker 2: as a matter of fact, taking screenshots of the Department
Speaker 2: of Justice and a page not found after there were
Speaker 2: already information that came out. And of course one of
Speaker 2: the most salacious things was an event they called the
Speaker 2: Calendar Girls. And I'm not going to get into the
Speaker 2: details of that, but some of the people named at
Speaker 2: these disgusting parties, so they got into what happened at
Speaker 2: some of these parties, and it truly was amazing, and
Speaker 2: these things were taken down. Some of the people named
Speaker 2: the parties were Elon Musk, Donald Trump Junior, Ivanka Trump,
Speaker 2: Eric Trump, Alan Dershowitz, and attorney Bob Shapiro, and so
Speaker 2: all the usual suspects, isn't it One Epstein survivor was
Speaker 2: really angry about the DOJ redactions, as I said earlier,
Speaker 2: the fact that they would cover up so much of
Speaker 2: this information about predators and what happened, and then not
Speaker 2: act information about victims. And so that is also a
Speaker 2: common complaint that we're seeing here. One of the things
Speaker 2: that Epstein said in one of these emails to Larry Summers,
Speaker 2: he said, the world does not understand how dumb Trump is.
Speaker 2: This is a guy who hung out with him, they
Speaker 2: were like best friends for about fifteen years or something
Speaker 2: like that, and he says, nobody understands just how dumb
Speaker 2: this guy is.
Speaker 4: Well, we're starting to get a clue.
Speaker 2: I think even some of his supporters are starting to
Speaker 2: get a clue about how stupid Trump is. And then
Speaker 2: there's this Epstein's sex empire was a KGB honeytrap. Let
Speaker 2: me tell you, I think this is a misdirection to
Speaker 2: steer people away from Massad's influence.
Speaker 4: There.
Speaker 2: The same thing was said about Glenn Maxwell's father, Robert Maxwell.
Speaker 2: He was heavily involved with Russia with KGB. He was
Speaker 2: giving information to British Service m I five or m
Speaker 2: I six, I can't remember which is which, but he
Speaker 2: was trading information to them. And this is something we
Speaker 2: saw from Jonathan Pollard as well. Remember when Jonathan Pollard
Speaker 2: stole these very sensitive secrets that would compromise US military
Speaker 2: and US military personnel's lives, that he gave that information
Speaker 2: to Israel. Israel then exchange use that information to get
Speaker 2: Israeli prisoners out of Russian jails, and so they used
Speaker 2: it for their own purposes. So they had their back
Speaker 2: channels with Russians as well. Robert Maxwell was seen by
Speaker 2: many to be available to anyone who would pay him.
Speaker 2: So he would work with British intelligence, he would work
Speaker 2: with Russian intelligence, but he was primarily a Massad guy.
Speaker 2: And when he died, they gave him honors and so
Speaker 2: forth as part of that. So I think that that
Speaker 2: absolutely was a part of this. And I think when
Speaker 2: you look at Jeffrey Epstein, he's somebody who's going to
Speaker 2: work with any of these disgusting spy organizations.
Speaker 4: Yes, lads.
Speaker 5: And the idea that if there's a connection to the
Speaker 5: KGB then it couldn't be Massad is ridiculous. Like these
Speaker 5: organizations all work together, CIAKGB and Masad. Like that guy
Speaker 5: that pardoned that Trump recently pardoned, he was getting information
Speaker 5: that he got from the US government and gave to
Speaker 5: Israel that they sold to the KGB.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Absolutely, And it's not just the Russian KGB, it's also
Speaker 2: Russian mafia.
Speaker 4: What they were doing.
Speaker 2: This is this whole thing was a honeytrap and all
Speaker 2: this information was being sold by Jeffrey Epstein whoever was
Speaker 2: going to pay him for it, and they could all
Speaker 2: were anxious to get information on these billionaires in order
Speaker 2: to blackmail them and politicians as well. So I think
Speaker 2: that is a misdirection. At the center of it is Massad.
Speaker 2: But also you have connected the CIA to KGB, probably
Speaker 2: British intelligence and Russian gangs as well. Now, some of
Speaker 2: the really horrific implications there of Donald Trump that were
Speaker 2: taken down within twenty minutes they were gone. There were
Speaker 2: accusations multiple accusations of rape as well as pedophile rape.
Speaker 2: And I said, once you look at the allegations, you
Speaker 2: can see why these documents were put back under wraps.
Speaker 4: There were pedophile allegations.
Speaker 2: Like I said before, one of them was a friend
Speaker 2: told me that this happened. Again that would not be admissible.
Speaker 2: You could say that that was the purpose of the
Speaker 2: Department of Justice taking it down. However, when you look
Speaker 2: at the response from the FBI, the response was we
Speaker 2: didn't do anything about it, right over and over again.
Speaker 4: That's the thing.
Speaker 2: So that's where the problem is, the fact that the
Speaker 2: FBI is not investigating any of these allegations, even though
Speaker 2: something that is a friend told me that this happened
Speaker 2: to someone else, a friend of theirs. That's not something
Speaker 2: that you would get in indictment for, but it's certainly
Speaker 2: something that you would hope in a better world they
Speaker 2: would investigate, but not in this world. Another complaint tells
Speaker 2: us at age sixteen, while modeling, they grow attended big
Speaker 2: orgie parties at Epstein's New York Residents Victoria's Secret Models
Speaker 2: and people like Bill Clinton and Donald Trump. And I said,
Speaker 2: this all along. If you look at Trump and the Clintons.
Speaker 2: They were pals or buddies. He gave them money and
Speaker 2: they partied together all the rest of the stuff. And
Speaker 2: of course they have the same view of the Constitution,
Speaker 2: same view at the Second Amendment, and all the rest
Speaker 2: of this stuff. Trump is a tax and spend democrat
Speaker 2: when you get to the policies, but when you look
Speaker 2: at the rest of the stuff, he is as degenerate
Speaker 2: as the Clintons themselves. The complaint further claim to have
Speaker 2: been victimized as a Trump owned golf course in California
Speaker 2: between nineteen ninety five and ninety six excuse me, allegations
Speaker 2: of orgeres in which some girls went missing, rumored to
Speaker 2: have been murdered and buried at the facility. Complainant reported
Speaker 2: being threatened by Trump's then head of security that if
Speaker 2: she ever talked of what went on there or who
Speaker 2: she saw, she would end up as fertilizer for the
Speaker 2: black for the back nine holes, just like the other women.
Speaker 2: Of course, he uses a much different term for the women.
Speaker 2: Then there was the alleged murder of a newborn child.
Speaker 2: One woman said she was trafficked and raped when she
Speaker 2: was thirteen years old. She was pregnant in nineteen eighty four,
Speaker 2: she also reported that there were high profile individuals involved
Speaker 2: in her sex trafficking and the murder and the disposal
Speaker 2: of her newborn daughter. She reported that Trump participated regularly
Speaker 2: in paying money to force her into prostitution. Trump was
Speaker 2: present when her uncle murdered her newborn child. She said,
Speaker 2: there's spot from the Justice Department. Was no contact made.
Speaker 2: They didn't bother to look another one. The victim, who
Speaker 2: was a miner, was drugged and wound up on a bed.
Speaker 2: When she came to, she was naked and had three
Speaker 2: hundred dollars on the bad. In two thousand and two
Speaker 2: thousand and five, Sir Ivan Wilseig hosted a party where Epstein,
Speaker 2: Sammy Sosa, and Trump were in attendance. Patti Labelle's PR
Speaker 2: agent stood at the door at the party. Of the
Speaker 2: caller met an individual who was approximately eighteen to twenty
Speaker 2: three years of age who was brought in from Oklahoma
Speaker 2: for a modeling job but then sold to a man
Speaker 2: in France, several women were being auctioned and a woman
Speaker 2: possibly known as Collette Lnu was the madam and so again.
Speaker 2: The Department of Justice response is the phone number that
Speaker 2: was provided was bad, so we didn't follow through with
Speaker 2: anything else on the And then the Calendar Girls thing,
Speaker 2: which I really can't go into any details here on
Speaker 2: the broadcast. This is a party that was at mar Lago.
Speaker 2: It's calendar girls. They were bringing in young children, and
Speaker 2: Trump was the one kind of MC who would auction
Speaker 2: them off. And some of the things that they were
Speaker 2: doing to these girls that's alleged in this is really unbelievable.
Speaker 2: But those who were who are present, Elon Musk, Donald
Speaker 2: Trump Junior, Ivanka Trump, Eric Trump, Alan Dershwitz, as I
Speaker 2: said before they were there, the calendar girls thing is
Speaker 2: one of the most heinous revelations that are here. And
Speaker 2: of course those things have now been removed by the
Speaker 2: so called Department of Justice.
Speaker 4: So this is.
Speaker 2: In a sense, it's not really all that different. But
Speaker 2: I think it is kind of interesting that in the
Speaker 2: wake of all all this, Trump's response is to say,
Speaker 2: I'm going to sue Michael wolf And I've said this before.
Speaker 2: What is he going to sue Michael Wolfe for? He says, well,
Speaker 2: he was colluding with Jeffrey Epstein to harm me, and
Speaker 2: when I was running for president twenty fifteen, what he
Speaker 2: was said in the emails when he was talking to Epstein.
Speaker 2: What Trump is referring to is he said, you're going
Speaker 2: to be the achilles Heel of Trump. But he goes,
Speaker 2: don't respond to this stuff. Just let him hang himself
Speaker 2: when they ask him the questions. You don't have to
Speaker 2: do anything. And so I don't see where Trump has
Speaker 2: any basis to sue him on that. What I think
Speaker 2: is interesting is the dog that did not bark because
Speaker 2: what Michael Wolfe has said is that and what Milania
Speaker 2: has sued other people who are threatened to sue people
Speaker 2: billions of dollars because Michael Wolfe said that Jeffrey Epstein
Speaker 2: told him that he had brought the two of them
Speaker 2: together and that Milania was one of Jeffrey Epstein's roles. Well,
Speaker 2: she has threatened to sue people who reported what Michael
Speaker 2: Wolfe said, but she didn't sue Michael wolf Finally they
Speaker 2: threatened to sue Michael Wolfe. He says, well, I'm not
Speaker 2: gonna wait for you sue me. I'm going to sue
Speaker 2: you for trying to intimidate me. And when Trump talked
Speaker 2: about this, he didn't talk about what Michael Wolfe said
Speaker 2: about Milania. Instead, he just talked about what they said
Speaker 2: about how Jeffrey Epstein was going to be a problem
Speaker 2: for Trump because of the long friendship. So I think
Speaker 2: that is kind of interesting here and again, Steve Bannon
Speaker 2: released some of his interviews with Jeffrey Epstein. He's got
Speaker 2: fifteen hours that remain unreleased. I think what he did
Speaker 2: release was one or two hours. But he decided that
Speaker 2: he was going to capitalize on all this publicity as well.
Speaker 2: I mean, we stop and think about it. One of
Speaker 2: the people that has got their neck on the line
Speaker 2: here is a Goldman Sachs lawyer. But you know, Steve
Speaker 2: Bannon worked for Goldman Sachs. He tried to help Jeffrey
Speaker 2: Epstein in terms of pr How does he have any
Speaker 2: credibility with anybody? I just don't understand that at all.
Speaker 2: So I want to take a little bit of time
Speaker 2: here before I get any bogged down, name some of
Speaker 2: these allegations and talking about what really happened with the
Speaker 2: Millennia film, because I think that's kind of interesting as well.
Speaker 2: Terms of people that have been implicated in terms of pictures,
Speaker 2: new pictures that came out in this release was the
Speaker 2: director of her film, Radner Ratner, and there's a picture
Speaker 2: of him this New Documents of a woman on the couch
Speaker 2: next to Jeffrey Epstein. I think it's kind of interesting.
Speaker 2: These guys are so corrupt. They sit there, they pose
Speaker 2: with these women, many of them under age, and you know,
Speaker 2: they're waving to the camera and all this kind of
Speaker 2: stuff like at a party. And this is you know,
Speaker 2: these these pictures that have come out with us, not
Speaker 2: necessarily something that was taken with a hidden camera to
Speaker 2: blackmail them later. I mean, they're actively posing and waving
Speaker 2: to twenty twenty six. Hey, hey, oh of you in
Speaker 2: twenty twenty six. This is what I was during twenty
Speaker 2: years ago. This guy has He's directed some major budget films.
Speaker 2: He directed the two thousand and six X Men film,
Speaker 2: which I don't know. It had a big cast in it,
Speaker 2: but I don't know how it did in terms of
Speaker 2: box office. In terms of critics, it got like six
Speaker 2: point six. He also did Dwayne Johnson, you know, the Rock.
Speaker 2: He did a Hercules film with him, which got a
Speaker 2: six point zero on IMDb. So he's done a lot
Speaker 2: of films, but not a lot of good films. And
Speaker 2: he was somebody whose career basically was ended in all
Speaker 2: the me too stuff back in twenty seventeen, a lot
Speaker 2: of allegations of sexual misconduct, so he hadn't this is
Speaker 2: his first rodeo since his sexual misconduct stuff. They bring
Speaker 2: him back to do Millennia. How appropriate? And so what
Speaker 2: else I think is interesting about this is that two
Speaker 2: thirds of the people who are on the credits are
Speaker 2: asking to have their names removed from grants. And it's
Speaker 2: almost as many reactions as we've got in the Epstein documents,
Speaker 2: isn't it. I think that tells us a great deal
Speaker 2: about this. But of course the money that it made,
Speaker 2: that is being portrayed by the right as a vindication,
Speaker 2: even though people have savaged it in terms of the critics.
Speaker 2: It was projected initially to only be about three million.
Speaker 2: They thought it was going to do. Then as some
Speaker 2: of the initial box office figures started coming in, they
Speaker 2: protected it up to eight million. Turns out that it
Speaker 2: did seven million. But again this is and you were
Speaker 2: right earlier. It was forty million dollars to make the film,
Speaker 2: another thirty five million dollars on marketing, so seventy five
Speaker 2: million dollars and it's dying fast at the box office.
Speaker 2: I guess we could say Millennia doesn't have legs.
Speaker 1: But.
Speaker 4: It was.
Speaker 2: This is what Marine Daut had to say. The riddle
Speaker 2: of the Slovenian Sphinx has been solved. It turns out
Speaker 2: there was no riddle, no enigma, no mystery, no dark anguish. Basically,
Speaker 2: there was no there there. To paraphrase Gertrude stein Right
Speaker 2: added that the movie shows Milania exactly where she wants
Speaker 2: to be, in the bosom of a corrupt family that
Speaker 2: is prostituting the people's house. Dowd also said, you talked
Speaker 2: about the amount of money that was there. Said this
Speaker 2: is particularly gross given the fact that Amazon is engaged
Speaker 2: in mass layoffs. They've laid off sixteen thousand people, and
Speaker 2: he is also severely cutting back at Amazon. He's severely
Speaker 2: cutting back at the Washington Post as well. So scenes
Speaker 2: from the movie, according to Dowd, included Milania persuading Trump
Speaker 2: to declare himself a unifier. I can say that is
Speaker 2: definitely not one thing he is. He is the biggest
Speaker 2: divider I've ever seen. She seems oblivious to the fact
Speaker 2: that his Rhetorican policies are designed to enrage and to
Speaker 2: divide said marine. Another scene, Milania and her son Baron
Speaker 2: do not want to get out of the limo during
Speaker 2: one of the inaugural parades over fears of political violence,
Speaker 2: again without acknowledging that her husband has been provoking violence
Speaker 2: and we can see that now everywhere. Essentially, she has
Speaker 2: a warm chat at one point about her immigrant roots
Speaker 2: with a designer who is an immigrant from Laos, ignoring
Speaker 2: that her husband has torn America apart.
Speaker 4: But you know what, this.
Speaker 2: Guy that ice just kidnapped and drug out in ten
Speaker 2: degree weather in his underwear, who had been a citizen
Speaker 2: of the US since ninety five and had never had
Speaker 2: any issues of the law. He was from Laos. How
Speaker 2: about that? Maybe he should be in the movie? You think,
Speaker 2: Well again, Maga is beating his chest and saying this
Speaker 2: is great. Ninety nine percent of the audience loves it.
Speaker 2: Can you imagine anybody going to see this thing that
Speaker 2: isn't already a died in the Wolf fan of Milania.
Speaker 2: Here's the official trailer.
Speaker 6: Here we go again.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, that hat she wore. I was gonna many
Speaker 2: of you've seen Spy versus Spy from Mad Magazine. I
Speaker 2: was going to put up a meme and say who
Speaker 2: wore best be the peace? You know, That's all I
Speaker 2: can take of this vanity piece here. But you know,
Speaker 2: I imagine she had a lot to say to children,
Speaker 2: because she's a lot of friendal advice.
Speaker 6: Does he wears night vision goggles that make everyone green?
Speaker 6: Everything green? I bet he'd liked that, because Santa likes green.
Speaker 4: She should have done green Acres the sequel.
Speaker 6: Of usles, because he might like read better.
Speaker 2: And then, of course she knows what our children need.
Speaker 4: They need AI.
Speaker 6: As leaders and parents, we must manage AI's growth responsibly
Speaker 6: during this primitive stage. It is our duty to treat
Speaker 6: AA as we would our own children. Empowering, but we'd
Speaker 6: watchful guidance.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, treat it as our own children. As a
Speaker 2: matter of fact, you got all the usual suspects and
Speaker 2: sycophants out there, people like Pastor Robert Jeffries, the first
Speaker 2: Baptist Dallas. This is a guy who was working with
Speaker 2: Curtis Chang, if you remember, and Curtis Chang was given
Speaker 2: a large amount of money from the Trump administration to
Speaker 2: get pastors to convince people that they that a this
Speaker 2: is not the mark of the Beast or anything preparing
Speaker 2: people for the mark of the beast. It's not harmful.
Speaker 2: You need to do this to love your neighbor, and
Speaker 2: on and on and on, literally injecting the kool aid
Speaker 2: into people. And so now he's out there praising this
Speaker 2: film and say everybody needs to go see this. So
Speaker 2: that's what they're getting, and that's going to last for
Speaker 2: about a week or whatever. But they said this best
Speaker 2: opening for a documentary where they spent a lot of
Speaker 2: money to their people to get them to show up,
Speaker 2: But is it going to make a profit? Far from it.
Speaker 2: As a matter of fact, I went back and I
Speaker 2: looked at they want to talk about the amount of
Speaker 2: box office that took against I thought, let's go back
Speaker 2: and look at documentaries, which that's a tremendous amount of
Speaker 2: money for a documentary. And so went back and looked
Speaker 2: over the weekend, what is the average median budget over
Speaker 2: the last twenty years for documentaries and what is the
Speaker 2: average and median box office for these documentaries over the
Speaker 2: last twenty years. And I thought that was very interesting
Speaker 2: because what we see is that the average budget was
Speaker 2: approximately five hundred thousand. Of course, averages are going to
Speaker 2: be moved up if you've got one big budget film
Speaker 2: that comes in. So if you look at the median budget,
Speaker 2: in other words, how many half of them above this
Speaker 2: amount and half of them under that amount, that takes
Speaker 2: it down to three hundred and fifty thousand. They spent
Speaker 2: forty million, not a half a million, not a third
Speaker 2: of a million, but forty million for this documentary. And
Speaker 2: then what do they typically make? Well, it turns out
Speaker 2: that the average again the average budget was five hundred thousand,
Speaker 2: and the average box office was six hundred and fifty
Speaker 2: eight thousand. But if you look at the median budget,
Speaker 2: and this is over the last twenty years averaging together documentaries,
Speaker 2: if you look at the median budget three hundred and
Speaker 2: fifty thousand, and they would make under one hundred thousand.
Speaker 2: She was paid twenty eight million of the forty million
Speaker 2: dollar budget.
Speaker 4: Seeing that semed fishy to you.
Speaker 2: Does that seem like a box office triumph to you?
Speaker 2: You know, we didn't get to gold and silver today,
Speaker 2: and really do let me just let's hold it a
Speaker 2: little bit here, lance and let me talk a little
Speaker 2: bit about gold and silver before we end the program,
Speaker 2: because that was a big deal of the weekend, you
Speaker 2: had a tremendous sell off, and you had gold, which
Speaker 2: for the month of January had gone up just in
Speaker 2: the month of January twenty nine and a half percent.
Speaker 2: It went down ten percent of the weekend. Silver had
Speaker 2: gone up over the month of January sixty eight and
Speaker 2: a half percent. It went down by thirty percent. As
Speaker 2: a matter of fact, I had somebody who was not
Speaker 2: a fan of gold and silver, and they sent that
Speaker 2: to me and said, laughing, oh, look, you know, silver
Speaker 2: is down by like twenty two percent. Was actually down
Speaker 2: by thirty percent. But that was just in one month.
Speaker 2: What is it year over year? Well, even with this
Speaker 2: big drop and sell off of the weekend seventy percent,
Speaker 2: gold was still up year over year. And of course
Speaker 2: it is still up even over the month. I mean,
Speaker 2: if it went up nearly thirty percent in the month
Speaker 2: and then dropped ten percent, still up for the month.
Speaker 2: Same thing about silver up nearly sixty nine percent and
Speaker 2: then dropped by thirty percent, still up significantly in just
Speaker 2: one month. But gold and silver, gold year to year
Speaker 2: up seventy percent, Silver year to year up one hundred
Speaker 2: and sixty six percent. You know, what is bitcoin doing
Speaker 2: for example, well, month to month bitcoin was down twelve percent.
Speaker 2: Year to year, bitcoin is down twenty two percent from
Speaker 2: what it was last year. The bottom line is that
Speaker 2: if you really think that Trump's pick at the Federal
Speaker 2: Reserve is going to fix the Fiat dollar, it's going
Speaker 2: to fix the budget deficit and all these other structural
Speaker 2: problems that have been accumulating. If you think it's really
Speaker 2: going to fix the flight away from the dollar after
Speaker 2: what Biden and Trump have done with sanctions, I don't
Speaker 2: think that's going to happen. I see this as another
Speaker 2: one of these issues, just like Yukon Cornelias said.
Speaker 4: Commercial with Yukon Cornelius.
Speaker 2: Because everybody was thinking that bitcoin was going to be
Speaker 2: the way to go because Trump is going to do
Speaker 2: everything to fix bitcoin, and so we saw a dip
Speaker 2: in the price of gold and silver that lasted for
Speaker 2: a few weeks, and then people realize that Trump really
Speaker 2: wasn't going to do this bitcoin reserve. I hope he doesn't.
Speaker 2: It'd be a tremendous pumping dump and waste of tax
Speaker 2: payer money. But after people realized that wasn't going to happen,
Speaker 2: then gold and silver resumed. In terms of reacting to
Speaker 2: the real world that is out there. I think the
Speaker 2: same thing is going to happen here. When you have
Speaker 2: something that goes up the tremendous amount that gold and
Speaker 2: silver went up, there's going to be a retracing and
Speaker 2: a consolidation, and then I think it's going to continue
Speaker 2: to go because I don't think any of the fundamentals
Speaker 2: have changed. As I said at the very beginning of
Speaker 2: the program, changing the chair of the Federal Reserve is
Speaker 2: no different than rearranging the tech chairs on the Titanic.
Speaker 2: Folks were still headed for the Iceberg, and they're not
Speaker 2: talking about that. They're not warning anybody about that. And
Speaker 2: we are nearer, by God to the to this financial
Speaker 2: crash and implosion than we have ever been. And so again,
Speaker 2: if you want to get into something that is when
Speaker 2: you look at some of the alternatives, right, why are
Speaker 2: central banks and others buying gold rather than treasure bills.
Speaker 2: It's not just because the weaponization of financial markets, but
Speaker 2: it's also because the interest rates right now are at
Speaker 2: about three to three and a half percent that they're
Speaker 2: paying people on these treasury bills, and yet you know
Speaker 2: the that's about what inflation is. So the best case
Speaker 2: example is maybe you're going to break even at zero
Speaker 2: growth if you're investing in that, and then what's the
Speaker 2: other alternative are you going to invest in the stock market.
Speaker 2: There's only a couple of stocks that are going up,
Speaker 2: and the stocks that are going up look like they
Speaker 2: are involved in the irrational exuberance over the artificial intelligence market.
Speaker 2: I think the best approach, as Tony Ardeman has said
Speaker 2: many times, is dollar cost averaging. Gradually accumulate the stuff
Speaker 2: over time to even out these spikes and troughs and
Speaker 2: things like that, get it over a period of time.
Speaker 2: You can do that as a regular savings program with Wolfpack,
Speaker 2: which is something that nobody else I know of does,
Speaker 2: and you can find where all that stuff is at
Speaker 2: Davidnight dot gold. Thank you for joining us, Have a
Speaker 2: good day and good luck investing in this difficult environment.
Speaker 2: So we'll go ahead and in the show here lands.
Speaker 3: Right, boys and girls, there's.
Speaker 7: A post election sale on silver and gold.
Speaker 3: Trump euphoria has caused a nip in silver and gold.
Speaker 3: It's time to buy some medals with via doors before
Speaker 3: they come to there. Since go to Davidknight dot gold
Speaker 3: to get in touch with the wise Wolf himself, Tony Harterburn.
Speaker 7: He knows where to look to find silver and gold.
Speaker 4: You're beyond.
Speaker 2: The common man. They created common Core and dumb down
Speaker 2: our children. They created common past, track and control us.
Speaker 2: They're Commons project to make sure the commoners own nothing
Speaker 2: and the communist future. They see the common man as simple,
Speaker 2: unsophisticated ordinary. But each of us has worth and dignity
Speaker 2: created in the image of God. That is what we
Speaker 2: have in common. That is what they want to take away.
Speaker 2: Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation. They desire
Speaker 2: to know everything about us, while they hide everything from us.
Speaker 2: It's time to turn that around and expose what they
Speaker 2: want to hide. Please share the information and links you'll
Speaker 2: find at the Davidnightshow dot com. Thank you for listening,
Speaker 2: Thank you for sharing. If you can't support us financially,
Speaker 2: please keep us in your prayers. Ddavidnightshow dot com