Speaker 1: Using free speech to free minds.
Speaker 2: You're listening to the David Night Show.
Speaker 1: As the clock strikes thirteen, it's Friday, twenty third of August.
Speaker 1: You're of our Lord twenty twenty four. Well, we're going
Speaker 1: to take a look at some late breaking news about RFK,
Speaker 1: Junior and Trump. We're also going to take a look
Speaker 1: at the connection to Bilderberg for all of these candidates,
Speaker 1: and there's quite a few connections to that. We're going
Speaker 1: to take a look at what some of the people
Speaker 1: have been saying at the d and C Dilation and
Speaker 1: Courage Convention. We will look at a very troubling report
Speaker 1: about a journalist who was arrested under terrorism charges for
Speaker 1: speaking out against the terrorism new terrorism law affecting free
Speaker 1: speech and the free press in the UK. And we're
Speaker 1: also going to take a look at Floride. The government
Speaker 1: has finally admitted that it's bad, but the press has
Speaker 1: a very interesting way of covering up for it. And
Speaker 1: regardless of whether it's bad or regardless of whether or
Speaker 1: not you believe the cover up, the CEC wants to
Speaker 1: continue it. We'll be right back. Well, it's not much
Speaker 1: of a secret anymore. Everybody's been talking about I talked
Speaker 1: about it for a couple of days here, the fact
Speaker 1: that RFK Junior is going to suspend his campaign. As
Speaker 1: a matter of fact, he's in Arizona. He's on the
Speaker 1: ballot in Arizona. But then this paperwork was just put
Speaker 1: out a few hours ago saying that it's done on
Speaker 1: the twenty second of August statement of withdrawal voluntarily from
Speaker 1: the ballot. So the announcement that's going to happen is
Speaker 1: at eleven am their time, but it's going to be
Speaker 1: two pm Eastern time, so it to be after this show.
Speaker 1: And then the question is not only has he said
Speaker 1: no question that he's suspending his campaign again, his vice
Speaker 1: presidential candidate Nicole Shanahan had said, well, you know, we
Speaker 1: can continue on with this and hope that we get
Speaker 1: five percent or whatever. They're right at five percent. Now
Speaker 1: to you, they're not going to get five percent if
Speaker 1: they continue on with it. This is a phenomenon that
Speaker 1: we see all the time. So I say, this is
Speaker 1: going to be a really tough year for me, because
Speaker 1: as you get closer and closer to the election, everybody
Speaker 1: starts buying into this lesser of two evils thing. Everybody
Speaker 1: pretty much leaves these they're not happy with either of
Speaker 1: the candidates, and so for a long time they'll say, well,
Speaker 1: I'm not going to I'm going to go with the
Speaker 1: third party candidate. But they cave at the last minute,
Speaker 1: and so you typically see the candidates bringing in maybe
Speaker 1: a third of what they had initially polled at the
Speaker 1: high point at that and so he's going to finish
Speaker 1: with a one or two percent if he stays in.
Speaker 1: So he wants to cut a deal with Trump. And
Speaker 1: of course, during the Trump convention, and I call it
Speaker 1: the Trump Convention because there's not much left the Republican
Speaker 1: Party except for Trump. During the Trump Convention, he was
Speaker 1: calling RFK Junior. There was indication that Trump is, you know,
Speaker 1: come join me, It'll be good for you, all that
Speaker 1: kind of stuff, and his son was very upset about
Speaker 1: which would indicate to me that he had signaled to
Speaker 1: his Trump to his son that he was going to
Speaker 1: join Trump at the time. I think that's why his
Speaker 1: son leaked it. And then his vice presidential campaign running mate,
Speaker 1: his vice presidential running mate for his campaign came out
Speaker 1: and pretty much said that was what was going to happen,
Speaker 1: but it will not happen until if it does after
Speaker 1: the well, he's going to drop out, but what he's
Speaker 1: going to do in terms of joining with Trump will
Speaker 1: not be known precisely until two pm. But I think
Speaker 1: what will happen is at eleven am their time, he's
Speaker 1: going to drop out, perhaps endorse Trump, and then get
Speaker 1: to speak at the evening convensioned as I said yesterday,
Speaker 1: but the evening rally. But there is a hitch in
Speaker 1: this that has now emerged. We'll take a look at that.
Speaker 1: A source tole CNN, people close to Kennedy or and
Speaker 1: talks with Trump's team to endorse him tonight at the
Speaker 1: rally there Phoenix. Why else would both of them be
Speaker 1: in Phoenix? But a spokesperson for the Kennedy's declined to
Speaker 1: say whether or not he planned to drop out or
Speaker 1: why he chose Arizona for a speech where we've already
Speaker 1: got the paperwork that's been turned in, and I don't
Speaker 1: know why he would be in Phoenix. I mean, it's
Speaker 1: a big secret, right loll. They think that we don't
Speaker 1: know all these things. It's just amazing. And then of
Speaker 1: course Trump, the flattery from Trump, it's very telling. He's
Speaker 1: a brilliant guy. He's a very smart guy. I've known
Speaker 1: him a very long time. I didn't know he was
Speaker 1: thinking about getting out, But if he is thinking about
Speaker 1: getting out, certainly I would be open to him getting out. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's right. Just wait until he's been there a short
Speaker 1: time and Trump can make a better deal with somebody
Speaker 1: else to replace him, and it's You'll be a different
Speaker 1: story then, won't it. Last month during the R and
Speaker 1: C convention, he called it was a phone call I
Speaker 1: was talking about. And so it looks increasingly unlikely that
Speaker 1: he'll be able to make the debate stage twin Trump
Speaker 1: and Harris's face off next month, said the local Arizona paper.
Speaker 1: You think so, that's what it was designed for. Look,
Speaker 1: as I said, from the beginning, all these people were
Speaker 1: concerned about the election. I said, We've always had problems
Speaker 1: with vote counts being dishonest. But I said, the biggest
Speaker 1: problem is ballot access and debate access. See, if you
Speaker 1: rig the ballots by who gets to run, If you
Speaker 1: rig the debates, then the election is rigged even before
Speaker 1: you start counting the votes. And then, of course Trump
Speaker 1: added a whole new wrinkle of corruption with a vote
Speaker 1: by mail because of the fake pandemic and lockdown. But
Speaker 1: RFK Junior had this to say yesterday about ballot access.
Speaker 3: I thought it went really well. I mean, I shouldn't
Speaker 3: be here right now.
Speaker 1: There is a court case.
Speaker 3: In Chicago talking about their commitment to voting rights and all,
Speaker 3: you know, tens, maybe hundreds of millions of dollars to
Speaker 3: keep me off the ballot. You know, I was raised
Speaker 3: the Democratic Party, my father, Robert Kennedy, my uncle John Kennedy,
Speaker 3: at a time when the primary thrust of the Democratic
Speaker 3: Party in that era was to make sure that every
Speaker 3: American could vote, where people in our country were being
Speaker 3: denied the right to vote, that every American could vote
Speaker 3: for the person they wanted. There's a million people in
Speaker 3: this country who signed petitions trying to give me on
Speaker 3: the one hundred and forty five thousand. At least people
Speaker 3: here in New York Stay said they want to see
Speaker 3: me on the ballot. Why is the Democratic Party trying
Speaker 3: to disenfranchise those people.
Speaker 2: You don't know.
Speaker 3: What's happened to the party. I don't think my father
Speaker 3: would recognize this party that.
Speaker 2: I don't think that my.
Speaker 3: Uncle would recognize this party.
Speaker 1: Sorry about that noise on there New York posting up
Speaker 1: your game. Maybe they got that from somebody else. You know,
Speaker 1: that's a I think we're hitting their mic or something.
Speaker 1: But yeah, he's exactly right. Who you know, not just
Speaker 1: his father and his uncle. RFK and JFK founders wouldn't
Speaker 1: recognize this country. They allowed multiple parties there. We didn't
Speaker 1: get to a two party system until after the Civil War,
Speaker 1: where we consolidated power into one party, into the Republican
Speaker 1: Party at that point in time. But yeah, it was
Speaker 1: if you're going to control the ballot, if you're not
Speaker 1: going to let people have access to any of these candidates. Look,
Speaker 1: you know doctor Shiva, the Libertarian Party candidate, the Green
Speaker 1: Party candidate. You don't have to support a particular candidate
Speaker 1: to just say, well, we ought to have if we're
Speaker 1: going to have elections, let's have open elections. Let's have
Speaker 1: honest elections instead of curated and controlled elections. Curated and
Speaker 1: controlled by the Republicans and Democrats. They've run. They've maintained
Speaker 1: this duopoly with their lawsuits and their laws that they
Speaker 1: put on. I mean, they have kept everybody else off
Speaker 1: the ballot. It is disgusting. That's where my contempt. For
Speaker 1: this electoral system operates. If you look at it, you
Speaker 1: cannot help but have contempt. And so now he's participated
Speaker 1: in it. Now he's got his object lesson his idealism,
Speaker 1: and his rose colored glasses have been removed, slapped off
Speaker 1: of his face as he's been slapped with lawsuit after
Speaker 1: lawsuit to keep him off the ballot. Same with doctor Shiva.
Speaker 1: I was talking to the other day, and as he
Speaker 1: pointed out, you know, all of the ballots ought to
Speaker 1: be open if you've got an issue, even with doctor Shiva,
Speaker 1: a citizenship issue that some people have an issue with,
Speaker 1: and that is something you know, what is the meaning
Speaker 1: of the fourteenth Amendment and so forth, and so if
Speaker 1: you want to have a debate about that, fine, but
Speaker 1: allow people to run for office. And then if you decide, well,
Speaker 1: they're not qualified and we need to have a clarification
Speaker 1: for that. I think we need to clarify all of
Speaker 1: that stuff about natural born citizens and what rights they
Speaker 1: have and anything with these open borders. That all needs
Speaker 1: be a discussion, and there needs to be and you know,
Speaker 1: votes for doctor Shiva would bring that into where we
Speaker 1: could have a discussion of that important issue. So He said,
Speaker 1: at least on hundred forty five thousand people in New
Speaker 1: York have signed something they'd like to see me on
Speaker 1: the ballot. He's saying that outside the courtroom there in
Speaker 1: New York. Why is the Democrat Party trying to disenfranchise
Speaker 1: those people? And he says, my father and uncle would
Speaker 1: not recognize this party, wouldn't recognize this country either. Commenters
Speaker 1: said things like the Party of Democracy quote unquote removed
Speaker 1: their candidate via a coup, installed a nominee without a
Speaker 1: single vote, as trying to imprison their main political opponent
Speaker 1: and keep any other potentially viable alternatives off the ballot.
Speaker 1: And of course that last is something they've been doing
Speaker 1: for a very long time. The Democrat Party in Florida
Speaker 1: shut down the primaries there. They only wanted to have
Speaker 1: Biden on the ballot, and then they decided, I think
Speaker 1: we'll have Lalla on the ballots. Kick Biden out of there.
Speaker 1: Trump will be attending the rally late tonight and Glendale, Arizona,
Speaker 1: but there is a hitch, not a foregone conclusion that
Speaker 1: he will endorse Trump Jack for Soviet said. Sources close
Speaker 1: to the RFK campaign say he's not yet decided on
Speaker 1: dropping out and endorsing Trump. There is an internal war
Speaker 1: that is happening within the camp, with Nicole as vice
Speaker 1: presidential candidate, urging him to join forces with Trump, but
Speaker 1: his wife, Cheryl Hines, urging him to just drop off
Speaker 1: the ballot in swing states and not endorse. So he's
Speaker 1: got a problem, you know. RFK Junior's got to choose
Speaker 1: between his running mate and his mate. What are we
Speaker 1: going to do? She loves me, she loves me not.
Speaker 1: This is really like high school student council elections, isn't
Speaker 1: it the melodrama? But I think that his wife has
Speaker 1: shown that she kind of rules the roost. Do you
Speaker 1: remember twenty twenty one? Do you remember December twenty twenty one?
Speaker 1: The Christmas party December twenty twenty one. As RFK Junior
Speaker 1: had spent the year warning people about these shots and
Speaker 1: these Trump shots, his wife, as part of their Christmas party,
Speaker 1: sent out invitations telling any potential guests that they had
Speaker 1: to get COVID shots improve it, and they also had
Speaker 1: to take a COVID test before they came to the
Speaker 1: party at RFK Junior's house. That was widely reported. This
Speaker 1: is a People Magazine thing.
Speaker 2: Here.
Speaker 1: Politico also talked many many outlets talked about it. We
Speaker 1: talked about it. I talked about it on Kennedy had
Speaker 1: said whether they say and people he left guest surprised
Speaker 1: when his party invitationsts then be vaccinated and take COVID
Speaker 1: tests before coming to his home. I mean, he's kind
Speaker 1: of like Jack Joe Rogan. Joe Rogan was doing the
Speaker 1: same thing. You couldn't come into his studio unless you
Speaker 1: had COVID tests and things like that. I don't know
Speaker 1: if he required vaccines or not, but Joe Rogan was
Speaker 1: totally on board with this. The cooties superstition, they called
Speaker 1: a pandemic. I guess I'm not always the boss in
Speaker 1: my own house, said RFK Junior. Plitico also reported that
Speaker 1: the event was for Chrissy Hines's friends within the entertainment industry,
Speaker 1: and Kennedy was not in the loop about what the
Speaker 1: invitations had listened. So can you imagine the discussion that
Speaker 1: they're having at home. No, you can't hang out with Donald,
Speaker 1: you can't endorse him. Just imagine what Larry David would say.
Speaker 1: I'd never work in that town again. You probably won't anyway.
Speaker 1: But RFK Jr. This is the why a revolver puts
Speaker 1: it RFK Jr. On the verge of earth shattering political
Speaker 1: move making it nearly impossible for Democrats to steal the election.
Speaker 1: Do you believe that? I don't believe that for a minute.
Speaker 1: Is got that totally wrong. I think, look, this is
Speaker 1: all going back to the stolen voter id are They
Speaker 1: always pull this up and they say, well, you know,
Speaker 1: you're stealing voters from the Republicans, or you're stealing voters
Speaker 1: from the Democrats or whatever. There are some people who
Speaker 1: may do that. I don't think that's going to be
Speaker 1: the case, not much at all. As I said before,
Speaker 1: most people, unless they are hardcore supporters the independent or
Speaker 1: third party candidate, most people at the very end, well
Speaker 1: I really hate this guy, but I just the other
Speaker 1: guy is so bad. I just got to vote for
Speaker 1: this guy. I know he's not perfect, but I got
Speaker 1: to vote. You know the drill everybody. You hear that
Speaker 1: from everybody. So I don't think that's going to be
Speaker 1: the case. You know, the reason that it falls away
Speaker 1: in the polls to being only about a third or so,
Speaker 1: and the number of people who said they're going to
Speaker 1: vote for the independent or third party candidate is because
Speaker 1: those people don't have any real commitment, and the people
Speaker 1: have a real commitment are if that candidate dromps out,
Speaker 1: they're not going to vote. As Kim Block said when
Speaker 1: I had him on, he had been hired by the
Speaker 1: Trump administration or the Trump teamer should say campaign to
Speaker 1: you go back and audit the stuff. He said, They've
Speaker 1: had a lot of ballots where there was no vote
Speaker 1: for president. They would vote down ballot, Republican ballots who
Speaker 1: are voting down ballot but not voting for president. That's
Speaker 1: the kind of thing you'll have if somebody is really
Speaker 1: there's not another choice out there. So I don't think
Speaker 1: these voters belong to the Republicans or Democrats. If they're
Speaker 1: really going to vote for Kennedy, and the people who
Speaker 1: are really going to vote for Kennedy, it is a
Speaker 1: small fraction of the five percent that you see there
Speaker 1: right now. It's the stolen vote fantasy. So I think
Speaker 1: that's really what's going to happen, and I don't think
Speaker 1: it's going to have that much of an issue. If
Speaker 1: you had people who are totally committed to rfk jor
Speaker 1: they were committed to him because they believe that he
Speaker 1: was committed to certain policies and that neither Trump, nor
Speaker 1: Biden nor La Law were committed to those policies, and
Speaker 1: they're just going to see him as somebody who sold out.
Speaker 1: And what did he sell out for? Well, NBC is saying,
Speaker 1: is rfk Jor trying to angle to be Trump's health secretary?
Speaker 1: First of all, I don't think that'll ever happen. That's
Speaker 1: too valuable a position Trump held out and used rfk
Speaker 1: Jor to get millions of dollars from big pharmaceutical companies.
Speaker 1: Maybe if there was this implication that rfk Jor is
Speaker 1: going to endorse if he endorses Trump, and then there's
Speaker 1: this fear from big pharmaceutical companies that he would actually
Speaker 1: be running all of HHS. Can you imagine the tens
Speaker 1: of millions of dollars that Trump could squeeze out of
Speaker 1: them and then put somebody else in there. Because I
Speaker 1: think that's what this is truly about. He's advocated for
Speaker 1: dismantling core functions of HHS, just get rid of all
Speaker 1: of it. For weeks, Kennedy's campaign has floated his interest
Speaker 1: in a cabinet position a future Trump White House, which
Speaker 1: that while publicly denying that he would accept it. Jd
Speaker 1: Vance said on Wednesday that there was no quit pro
Speaker 1: quote deal to offer Kennedy a cabinet post in exchange
Speaker 1: for the endorsement, and that any conversations, that's in spite
Speaker 1: of the leaked video, that any conversations about a future
Speaker 1: role would be separate. And of course if they put
Speaker 1: him in as HHS secretary. Remember Alex Azar, the CEO
Speaker 1: of Eli Lilly, got that position after a Pfizer and
Speaker 1: Eli Lilly and a lot of other pharmaceutical companies kicked
Speaker 1: up millions each and did it because Kennedy was called
Speaker 1: to Trump Tower and said, yeah, we need to have
Speaker 1: a commission where we're going to look at the safety
Speaker 1: of vaccines. Can you imagine if it was put out
Speaker 1: that they were going to put Kennedy in charge of HHS,
Speaker 1: how freaked out big pharma would be. They would cough
Speaker 1: up a lot of money. HHS Secretary Alex's are that
Speaker 1: Trump put in after the donations from big pharmaceutical companies
Speaker 1: left there for four years. All four years the guy
Speaker 1: who at the end of January twenty twenty declared that
Speaker 1: there was a pandemic emergency. He's the one that declared
Speaker 1: there was an emergency. Trump on Friday the thirteenth, March
Speaker 1: the thirteenth, released the money for the emergency, but it
Speaker 1: was Alex Czar, HHS secretary, who said this is an
Speaker 1: emergency the end of January. Again, it was the money
Speaker 1: that was Trump's involvement, the money, the cheerleading, the people
Speaker 1: that he put in charge of this, like Fauci and
Speaker 1: Burks and Redfield and all the rest of them. But
Speaker 1: the actual declaration of it was by Alex Czar. And
Speaker 1: Alex Czar described being HHS secretary. He says, it's like
Speaker 1: having you're having a shocking amount of power by the
Speaker 1: stroke of a pen quote unquote. And what did he
Speaker 1: do with that stroke of the pin? Kicked off? The
Speaker 1: emergency went no emergency. Nobody was dying, not in the US,
Speaker 1: not in Italy, not in China, not in January of
Speaker 1: twenty twenty, no nothing. It's a full online. But he's
Speaker 1: head of a department that has more than a one
Speaker 1: and a half trillion with a t budget. So do
Speaker 1: you think that if you can get control of a
Speaker 1: department that has a budget of trillions would be worth
Speaker 1: dropping a few million so you can get back tens
Speaker 1: of billions. That was the calculation for Trump during the
Speaker 1: transition period. That's exactly the way they worked. They gave
Speaker 1: millions and they got back tens of billions during warp
Speaker 1: speed and nobody bothers them. Not going to be harassed
Speaker 1: by the FDA, not by anybody. The current secretary, Javier Basera,
Speaker 1: was an Attorney General of California. He doesn't have any
Speaker 1: any connection to anything that's remotely like help right. What
Speaker 1: was his connection? His only connection to health was the
Speaker 1: fact that he sued the Center for Medical Progress and
Speaker 1: David D. Lighton. He continued the suit that La Law
Speaker 1: had started Commie Law Tommy La La after the Plan
Speaker 1: parenthood whistleblowers well on the whistle saying they're killing babies
Speaker 1: for their body parts. And then we find out that
Speaker 1: they're killing babies for the body parts. And the customer,
Speaker 1: one of the big customers, is the NIH right there
Speaker 1: under the HHS, P HHS, overseas thirteen agencies, including the FDA,
Speaker 1: the CDC, and the NIH. Fauchies you know was the
Speaker 1: NIAI d under the NIH on the campaign trail and
Speaker 1: podcasts and in news interviews, Kennedy has described wanting to
Speaker 1: dismantle those offices and rebuild them with like minded fringe figures. No,
Speaker 1: just dismantle them. You don't need them. It's not you
Speaker 1: can't find it in the constitution. The founders wouldn't recognize HHS,
Speaker 1: r FK at least three letter I remember when they
Speaker 1: were doing that. Oh we got JFK, Now, we got RFK,
Speaker 1: Now we got LBJ and all of that is this
Speaker 1: kind of stuff, and just to stop it. Now we've
Speaker 1: got a plethora of three letter agencies as part of
Speaker 1: their legacy. No, the Constitution doesn't recognize any of these agencies.
Speaker 1: There is no authority for the federal government to be
Speaker 1: involved in food or drugs, or to be involved in
Speaker 1: your help, none whatsoever. That should all be a state function.
Speaker 1: It's not in the constitution. It's not in the constitution
Speaker 1: for reason. So you don't want to make it serve you. See.
Speaker 1: That's the problem, and that's where we are with all
Speaker 1: of these people. Everybody wants a law to control everything,
Speaker 1: to micromanage them, to control their enemies and to help them.
Speaker 1: And they want these laws to be everything to be solved.
Speaker 1: In Washington, they want to make a federal case out
Speaker 1: of everything. And this is everybody across the political spectrum
Speaker 1: now pretty much even including in many cases libertarians. Now
Speaker 1: it's amazing to me. So we're going to get a
Speaker 1: lot of government hard because of this. The agencies have
Speaker 1: become sock puppets for the industries that they regulate, says NBC.
Speaker 1: Says NBC. Everybody knows it. So why are we continuing
Speaker 1: on with this charade? And so Kennedy said, I'm going
Speaker 1: to say to the NIH scientists, God bless you all,
Speaker 1: thank you for your public service. We're going to give
Speaker 1: infectious disease a break for about eight years. So then
Speaker 1: NBC goes to doctor Paul Offit, the guy who has
Speaker 1: been one of the biggest vaccine pushers. I guess you
Speaker 1: could call them a prick, but he says Paul off
Speaker 1: It says, he will no doubt try to perform studies
Speaker 1: that prove his views. You mean, like you do now
Speaker 1: and further weekend America's trust in vaccines. That's what you're doing,
Speaker 1: Paul Offit. You cherry picked the studies, You cherry pick
Speaker 1: what they're gonna do. You throw away the stuff you
Speaker 1: don't like, and you've undermined America's trust in vaccines. Thank
Speaker 1: you for doing that, Thank you for your service. No
Speaker 1: doubt he'll try to eliminate all mandates. Can you imagine
Speaker 1: why would we want to eliminate all mandates? Paul Offit?
Speaker 1: What mandates? Who's your authority for that in the constitution?
Speaker 1: Do we want to live in a society like that?
Speaker 1: Regardless of whether it's in the Constitution or not. Is
Speaker 1: that what we want? No, that's what Paul Offit wants.
Speaker 1: That's what pharmaceutical people want. They want to force you
Speaker 1: to buy what they sell. And this is what they're
Speaker 1: doing with everything. They want to force you to buy
Speaker 1: a bat battery electric vehicle. They want to force you
Speaker 1: to have all electric appliances. Whether or not that's what
Speaker 1: you want, It doesn't matter whether the data shows that
Speaker 1: he's wrong. He's still going to be convinced that he's right.
Speaker 1: Talk about projection. This is off It. That's exactly what
Speaker 1: he does. So last year, Kennedy told a group of
Speaker 1: anti vaccine doctors and influencers assembled for a health policy
Speaker 1: roundtable that he would surround himself with dissidents. He said, well, look,
Speaker 1: let's understand that real science is only moved forward by skepticism.
Speaker 1: Prove it, prove it. It's not moved forward. Science goes
Speaker 1: backwards at atrophies and dies when you just accept as
Speaker 1: truth unproven assertions by people and positions of power and influence,
Speaker 1: people who are at the sacred institutions that you're not
Speaker 1: allowed to ever question. You know what they are. We've
Speaker 1: seen this over and over again. No, real science only
Speaker 1: advances when somebody questions the assumptions. And many times there
Speaker 1: are assumptions that have been there for decades or centuries
Speaker 1: or even longer. When somebody comes along and questions that assumption,
Speaker 1: and then you have real science and you have scientific advancement.
Speaker 1: If the thing is real, it can withstand the questioning.
Speaker 1: So Jeffrey Tucker asks, what's really going on at the
Speaker 1: federal agencies? Years ago as an intern in DC and
Speaker 1: long before the agencies all locked their doors to visitors. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's what we have seen now. It is amazing how
Speaker 1: they have circled the wagon and they have assumed this
Speaker 1: cloak of secrecy like they were the CIA. You look
Speaker 1: at some of these seminal issues that emerged about the
Speaker 1: middle of the twentieth century. One of them is this
Speaker 1: cloak of secrecy. Well, I'm sorry, that's classified type of thing.
Speaker 1: How everybody is using that even when they don't do
Speaker 1: classified work to not talk to you. As a reporter,
Speaker 1: I see it. I would see it all the time
Speaker 1: when I go around and talk to these people. And
Speaker 1: the other part of it is that they don't want
Speaker 1: to talk to you because it may reflect on them poorly.
Speaker 1: But there's this cloak of secrecy that is everywhere in Washington, DC.
Speaker 1: Don't question what I do. Years ago, as an intern
Speaker 1: in DC, and long before the agencies all locked their doors,
Speaker 1: I had the occasion to put around the Department of
Speaker 1: Transportation and the Department of Housing and Urban Developments, said
Speaker 1: Jeffrey Tucker. These were obviously not normal workplaces. To my amazement,
Speaker 1: they were mostly dark, empty and quiet, and the employees
Speaker 1: did not seem in the slightest bit busy doing anything
Speaker 1: at all. It was kind of spooky. It then occurred
Speaker 1: to me that these many hundreds of agencies and millions
Speaker 1: of employees are not really covered well by the media
Speaker 1: much at all, and certainly not in any detail. They
Speaker 1: mostly operate without any oversight for the periodic reporting done
Speaker 1: for Congress and the sporadic accounting reports from the Government
Speaker 1: Accounting Office that are mostly ignored. So that's one side
Speaker 1: of it. The other side of it, you know, the
Speaker 1: secrecy that came from the military industrial complex and the
Speaker 1: newly created intelligence community after World War to the other
Speaker 1: side of all this came from the irs. The irs
Speaker 1: for the longest time, people write books like a law
Speaker 1: unto itself. The fact that they would have they would
Speaker 1: write the rules that they would have their own court
Speaker 1: where they would determine whether or not you had violated
Speaker 1: those rules. That type of thing, and where you had
Speaker 1: no presumption of innocence. They didn't have to prove that
Speaker 1: you owed the tax. You had to prove that you
Speaker 1: didn't owe the tax. So when you create and that's
Speaker 1: the process that they have now applied to all of
Speaker 1: these alphabet agencies. The idea that if the bureaucracy creates
Speaker 1: a rule and you violate that rule, there's no presumption
Speaker 1: of innocence, there's no due process, there's no protection against
Speaker 1: excessive fines. The Bill of Rights doesn't apply to you whatsoever.
Speaker 1: Because this is some new construct that has been created
Speaker 1: outside of the government and your elected people and so
Speaker 1: when Nancy Pelosi says, we just got to pass Obamacare
Speaker 1: to find out what it's in it, we're going to
Speaker 1: kick it over to the alphabet agencies and they're going
Speaker 1: to decide what's in it. They will regulate it. It's
Speaker 1: a horrific system that's there. Now he doesn't talk about
Speaker 1: that aspect of it, but that's the two systems. It's
Speaker 1: a secrecy, and it's the pretense that, you know, playing
Speaker 1: the semantics saying a rule is not a law. If
Speaker 1: it were a law created by your elected representatives, then
Speaker 1: we would have to follow the constitution. But we are
Speaker 1: not under the constitution. We are a bureaucracy. So he said,
Speaker 1: going back to what he said, there's one organization that
Speaker 1: looks at this stuff. Open the books. They started with
Speaker 1: an idealistic idea of telling people what the operations of
Speaker 1: these agencies are really like. They focus on the mundane
Speaker 1: accounting and the goings on at normal civilian agencies. In
Speaker 1: other words, they're not getting into areas where there really
Speaker 1: is anything that is secure, but they guard it as
Speaker 1: if it were secure. For example, in a report to Congress,
Speaker 1: the Biden administration redacted in other words, head three hundred
Speaker 1: and fifty thousand names and two hundred and eighty thousand
Speaker 1: work locations from the payrolls. Imagine that two hundred and
Speaker 1: eighty thousand work locations they have for this massive bureaucracy.
Speaker 1: And this is just the civilian side of it, non
Speaker 1: classified stuff. And when you look at that, you know,
Speaker 1: I mean that's only you've got three hundred and fifty
Speaker 1: thousand names, you got two hundred and eighty thousand work locations.
Speaker 1: I mean, do they have like each of these people
Speaker 1: have their own private work location or something. These employees
Speaker 1: are not spies or intelligence officers. They are rank and
Speaker 1: file workers within the alphabet soup of traditional federal agencies
Speaker 1: like education, health, and health services, where the EPA or
Speaker 1: the IRS. As a result, the organization couldn't tell who
Speaker 1: was working, where they were located, and what they were doing.
Speaker 1: It's a secret. I would have to kill you if
Speaker 1: you found out. So that's why I said, it's this
Speaker 1: cloak of secrecy that they brought in for the spy agencies.
Speaker 1: It's now metastasized everywhere. It's a lack of due process
Speaker 1: and the tierny dictatorship that was brought in to collect
Speaker 1: taxes and that's now metastasized to all these different agencies.
Speaker 1: The average pay and one hundred and nine of one
Speaker 1: hundred and twenty five federal agencies was more than one
Speaker 1: hundred thousand dollars per employee. And after just three years,
Speaker 1: federal employees received forty four days off eight point eight
Speaker 1: full work weeks off of paid time. That was and
Speaker 1: a friend who has worked for the EPA and research
Speaker 1: Trungle Park, we had a church together and he was
Speaker 1: it was a conservative libertarian guy. He had his and
Speaker 1: his wife had started their own business, but he did
Speaker 1: not want to leave his He hated the government, but
Speaker 1: he wasn't about to leave that cushy position at the
Speaker 1: EPA because of this kind of stuff. I mean to
Speaker 1: pay the vacations and all the rest of the stuff.
Speaker 1: And even as the EPA, and the reason all this
Speaker 1: stuff came up was because they were The business that
Speaker 1: he and his wife are running was periodically, like a
Speaker 1: couple of times a year they would have this big
Speaker 1: sale where everybody they would administer it and everybody would
Speaker 1: sell their use clothes and use toys and all kinds
Speaker 1: of stuff like that. So it was a big fare
Speaker 1: where people could buy and sell stuff cheap, right, and
Speaker 1: EPA was looking at the time about even banning the
Speaker 1: sale of anything that might possibly have any lead in it.
Speaker 1: So if you've got some genes, they might have lead
Speaker 1: in the zippers, so you can't sell that again. And
Speaker 1: it was like, can you believe this? It's like you
Speaker 1: work for these people. Employees took nearly a year in
Speaker 1: some instances to update their duty station, which meant that
Speaker 1: the department couldn't verify whether or not they were showing
Speaker 1: up to work because they didn't know where they were
Speaker 1: supposed to be. So, I mean, this is what you
Speaker 1: find with the government. I wonder everybody talks about a
Speaker 1: byzantine bureaucracy and just how it got out of control,
Speaker 1: and the Byzantine empire. I wonder, I bet it pales
Speaker 1: in comparison to what we have. And that is our hope.
Speaker 1: This big, wasteful, stupid things, just this rotten tree stump
Speaker 1: waiting for the right wind to blow it over. Anyway,
Speaker 1: thanks to nearly a century and a half of gradual accumulation,
Speaker 1: these agencies have a permanent life. The employees cannot be
Speaker 1: fired except for egregious actions, and the elected president has
Speaker 1: no control over them. Let me repeat that, and the
Speaker 1: elected president has no control over them. Trained swamp, well,
Speaker 1: the swamp is theoretically under the president, but the president
Speaker 1: has no control over them. He can only appoint agency heads.
Speaker 1: But then the battle becomes hundreds of people versus millions
Speaker 1: of people, and hundreds appointees are new at their job,
Speaker 1: and they're easily driven out by hints of financial impropriety
Speaker 1: that are real or made up. Just take a look
Speaker 1: at what happened to Scott Pruitt. He started doing some
Speaker 1: things at the APA. They got rid of him, made
Speaker 1: up stuff. The permanent class of middle state bureaucrafts, with
Speaker 1: all the institutional knowledge, know precisely where the power resides.
Speaker 1: It is with them. There's an excellent British series that
Speaker 1: we used to watch as a family, a lot of fun. Yes, Minister,
Speaker 1: remember that Travis. That's really that was really good because
Speaker 1: this guy gets elected and the guy who is that,
Speaker 1: the bureaucrat, just completely controls him. It's very much like
Speaker 1: Jeeves and Wooster. You know, we have this rich kid
Speaker 1: and the wise butler who's doing everything for him. This
Speaker 1: system of administrative hegemony has not been seriously tested in
Speaker 1: court and it's contrary to everything the Constitution ever imagined,
Speaker 1: says Jeffrey Tucker. It is, folks, taxation without representation, and
Speaker 1: worse than that, or as bad as that, it is
Speaker 1: regulation without any representation. The real solution is a complete
Speaker 1: rethinking of government itself, says Jeffrey Tucker. Every single candidate
Speaker 1: should be asked to explain their answer to a basic question.
Speaker 1: And I absolutely agree with him, and you will never
Speaker 1: hear this asked by ABC, CBSNBC, Fox, MSNBC, CNN any
Speaker 1: of these people. Here's the question. They should all be asked, what,
Speaker 1: in your view is the role of government? Would you
Speaker 1: think that'd be a reasonable question to ask them each
Speaker 1: and every time? No, No, they would ask them what
Speaker 1: do you think of Roby Wade? But they won't say
Speaker 1: what do you think the role of government should be?
Speaker 1: He says, whatever the answer is, all the existing practices
Speaker 1: of government need to be assessed in light of that,
Speaker 1: and voters should evaluate their answers with an even more
Speaker 1: fundamental question. When we look at that, we want to
Speaker 1: say what kind of society do we want to live in?
Speaker 1: Do you want to live in a free society or
Speaker 1: one that is centrally managed and controlled. And you see
Speaker 1: the reality is is that both Trump and la Law
Speaker 1: uh and you know RFK Junior. Oh yeah, I want
Speaker 1: to control, I get rid of some of these and
Speaker 1: put my people in all this. They all want to
Speaker 1: micro manage your life. And that's what the voters demand. See,
Speaker 1: the voters have really thought this through, I think for
Speaker 1: most part, and I think if you really push them,
Speaker 1: they would say, well, we value safety and comfort and convenience,
Speaker 1: and we don't value liberty, and we want the government
Speaker 1: to provide safety and comfort. Now the paths to safety
Speaker 1: and comfort and all the rest that we can't agree
Speaker 1: on how to get there. You see. But Trump and
Speaker 1: Harris and all they all have the same idea that
Speaker 1: the government, the federal government especially should fix everything for us.
Speaker 1: That these politicians are the saviors that are going to
Speaker 1: do everything for us and keep us safe. So here's
Speaker 1: an example. Mess dot org the problem with Trump's Agenda
Speaker 1: forty seven for homeschoolers. So his program that he's putting
Speaker 1: out there is Agenda forty seven. Homeschooling, says, MESS has
Speaker 1: never been an experiment parents teaching their children the individual
Speaker 1: and unique things which they believe they should know. Has
Speaker 1: not only been the way of life before public school
Speaker 1: experiment government school, but it is the most libertarian way
Speaker 1: to address the total government failure and the inefficient model
Speaker 1: of so called education. It's also the Christian way to
Speaker 1: raise your kids to take ultimate responsibility. God did not
Speaker 1: say it takes a village to raise a child. That
Speaker 1: was Hillary Clinton. She thinks she's got so Beware of
Speaker 1: the fifth column candidates who tell you that they're on
Speaker 1: your side, they said. Though Trump's Agenda forty seven makes
Speaker 1: them seem like a champion of homeschoolers, it's another bait
Speaker 1: and switch. Laying the groundwork for total government oversight, has
Speaker 1: a potential for demanding our cane metrics from the same
Speaker 1: establishment from which the homeschoolers are escaping. One of the
Speaker 1: upsides to homeschooling, among many, is that it allows parents
Speaker 1: to take charge of their children's education, free from government intervention,
Speaker 1: free from bureaucratic red tape. And Trump knows that money
Speaker 1: controls people. And this is why I haven't cut him
Speaker 1: any slack on anything that he did in twenty twenty
Speaker 1: to us as part of the so called pandemic, because
Speaker 1: he knows that the money is the controlling strings for everything,
Speaker 1: and he cut the money, he cut the checks. You know,
Speaker 1: he even said it recently, well, you know, I don't
Speaker 1: like what's going on in the schools or the transgender stuff.
Speaker 1: When I become president, we're going to cut the funding
Speaker 1: for that. And of course I use that example all
Speaker 1: the time to try to explain to the MAGA people.
Speaker 1: When Obama said, well, if you don't put boys in
Speaker 1: the girls showers, I'm going to cut your funding, Trump says,
Speaker 1: if you do put boys in the girls, I'm going
Speaker 1: to cut your funny But here's the bottom line. They
Speaker 1: both know that the funding is the way the federal
Speaker 1: government controls things without having to call into without having
Speaker 1: anybody challenge you over the tenth Amendment. It's the way
Speaker 1: that you control things over which you have no legitimate authority.
Speaker 1: You bribe people or you blackmail them, saying I'm going
Speaker 1: to remove the money that you've become addicted to. And
Speaker 1: we don't want that to happen with homeschooling. Don't ever
Speaker 1: take their money. Trump pledged to allow homeschool parents to
Speaker 1: use five hundred and twenty nine education savings accounts to
Speaker 1: contribute up to ten thousand dollars a year per child,
Speaker 1: completely tax free, in order to spend on costs associated
Speaker 1: with homeschool education. What are the stipulations behind taking this
Speaker 1: money from the government, asked mess Well, there'll be none
Speaker 1: at first, right, that's the way this stuff rolls out.
Speaker 1: There won't be any at first. What did they do
Speaker 1: with a Title nine funding that they want to play
Speaker 1: back and forth with over the boys and the girls showers?
Speaker 1: There's no strings attached to that. At first, they put
Speaker 1: it out there, they get you addicted to it, and
Speaker 1: then the strings come. So he says, well, of course,
Speaker 1: he doesn't say, am I wrong to be? Where? Of
Speaker 1: course not? It wasn't that long ago that we had
Speaker 1: these simple fifteen days to slow the spread? Where'd that
Speaker 1: come from? That came from the Trump administration? Right? And
Speaker 1: then that turned into the largest government overreach in a
Speaker 1: set of tyrannical orders that the US has ever seen.
Speaker 1: No matter how tasty the dangling carrot, it always comes
Speaker 1: at a price. And he doesn't even mention the fact that,
Speaker 1: of course the fifteen days to slow the spread and
Speaker 1: flatten the cave all the rest of this stuff. And
Speaker 1: then it was the money from Trump that was the
Speaker 1: carrot for everybody. That was the carrot for the governors.
Speaker 1: Do it. As soon as the bait has been taken,
Speaker 1: the switch begins. What will best switch entail, that's anybody's guess.
Speaker 1: But the looming consideration, the requirements of standardized testing, curriculum
Speaker 1: mandates and other forms or government oversight are around the corner.
Speaker 1: Isn't too far fetched. That's right. They're trying to many
Speaker 1: jurisdictions trying to force Christian schools, private schools to teach
Speaker 1: LGBT curriculum and things like that. You know, My proposal
Speaker 1: and the LP of North Carolina went with it for
Speaker 1: this kind of stuff, was to say, let's set up
Speaker 1: private scholarships. They want to say that money is running
Speaker 1: through the government and so the government has rifle control
Speaker 1: of it.
Speaker 2: Took.
Speaker 1: Of course, the teachers' unions wanted to stop it at
Speaker 1: the very beginning. They said, well, you can't do that.
Speaker 1: You can't. The government can't give anybody any private schools
Speaker 1: or charter schools or homeschools. Can't give them any money
Speaker 1: because now you're supporting, you know, if they're teaching religion,
Speaker 1: and we can't have anybody teaching religion anywhere just you know,
Speaker 1: they've got to teach their religion anyway. I said, well,
Speaker 1: the way we get around this perhaps is maybe we
Speaker 1: could offer private scholarships. And so what we would do
Speaker 1: is say you can get X amount of dollars and
Speaker 1: credit on your taxes if you give that money to
Speaker 1: some kid who is going to use it for their education,
Speaker 1: give them a scholarship. Right, Why should it be limited
Speaker 1: to billionaires. Why can't your next door neighbor who likes
Speaker 1: your kids donate money to you to help you school
Speaker 1: your kids and get a tax deduction for it. And
Speaker 1: I said, we would have to be careful even that
Speaker 1: they could come back with some backdoor regulation maybe, But
Speaker 1: if the government never gets the money to start with,
Speaker 1: how do they say that you're giving out money for
Speaker 1: religious purposes or whatever, and we're going to attach our
Speaker 1: strings to It's not coming from them at all. You're
Speaker 1: simply saying, well, I'm going to give money to kids.
Speaker 1: It could be for education, it could be for anything. Right,
Speaker 1: just make it broad so that we did not even
Speaker 1: bring in education into it, and then you'd be able
Speaker 1: to get a tax deduction or better yet, a tax credit.
Speaker 1: And you know, determine that people can you know a
Speaker 1: couple of thousand dollars a year, maybe max it out,
Speaker 1: and then you have an industrious young kid or mom
Speaker 1: who would go around like we used to do when
Speaker 1: I was in band. We'd go door to door in
Speaker 1: our band uniform selling candy to get extra money so
Speaker 1: that we could take trips or buy more instruments or whatever,
Speaker 1: the unusual instruments that kids are not going to go
Speaker 1: out and buy for themselves, but you still need them
Speaker 1: in the band. Anyway, we would go door to door
Speaker 1: and we'd sell candy, and so I think the industrious
Speaker 1: kids would go door to door selling themselves as Hey,
Speaker 1: you know, i'd like to see if you're interested in
Speaker 1: sponsoring my education. Maybe you get one hundred dollars from
Speaker 1: that person or something and just keep going around and
Speaker 1: doing it. But you might be able to get enough
Speaker 1: that you could have a lot of money for your
Speaker 1: education for virtually a lot of different things, and it
Speaker 1: would be up to the industrious kids to go around
Speaker 1: and do it. Maybe that's set up some kind of
Speaker 1: lemonade stand, Now, help me get educated, make a donation here,
Speaker 1: that type of thing. So that was that was our plan,
Speaker 1: but we couldn't get any attention for it because we
Speaker 1: couldn't get any There was no social media even in
Speaker 1: those days, and it was really difficult to get the
Speaker 1: newspapers to cover anything because the first thing they'd ask
Speaker 1: is how much money have you got? In other words,
Speaker 1: how much how many ads are you going to be
Speaker 1: running on our newspaper? And they quickly lost interest in this.
Speaker 1: With that, homeschooling offers self reliance, allowing parents and children
Speaker 1: to tailor their education individually, rather than being limited to
Speaker 1: a one size fits all. I would say one size
Speaker 1: fits none, one size fits none. Trump is largely a
Speaker 1: media machine, says Meses dot Org. He's saying the right words,
Speaker 1: he's dangling the right carrot, and he's playing a character
Speaker 1: who checks all the right boxes for a certain base
Speaker 1: of his However, bumps Doc Trump is what they call
Speaker 1: him Donald bump or we could say Benedict Donald I
Speaker 1: don't know, or the red flags of the Red state
Speaker 1: bumps dock. Trump is either fully aware of the way
Speaker 1: he sets the stage for the intrusion of big government,
Speaker 1: or he is completely inept regarding the spaces that he
Speaker 1: leaves open, exploiting the vulnerable in the process. I think
Speaker 1: he's Benedict Donald well for many Offering government funds would
Speaker 1: allow for families who struggle as it is, to continue
Speaker 1: to teach their children. Again, if you want to do it,
Speaker 1: even without help from the government. If this is something
Speaker 1: you want to do, you'll find a life. We just
Speaker 1: need to make people aware of the fact that we
Speaker 1: need to get Admiral Akbar as our spokesperson. It's a trap.
Speaker 1: The money is a trap. It always is. If your
Speaker 1: intention of educating your kids is to honor God, God
Speaker 1: will honor you to teach your kids. Right. That tells
Speaker 1: us to teach our children many things. Most important thing
Speaker 1: is your character. So you should beg God for the
Speaker 1: ability to teach your kids. Not Trump and certainly not
Speaker 1: anybody else. And the Democratic Party's not going to give
Speaker 1: you anything. That's a non starter with them to start with.
Speaker 1: But don't beg government for this. Beg God. Tell him
Speaker 1: to give you the ability to do what he commands.
Speaker 1: So we're going to take a quick break and we
Speaker 1: will be right back.
Speaker 2: You're listening to the David Night Show.
Speaker 3: Henry Kissing, So I'm missing you call the doctor re.
Speaker 1: And though you've got I saw. Yeah, let's talk about Bilderberg.
Speaker 1: Henry Kissinger, the patron saint of Bilderberg, the older Statesman
Speaker 1: no longer with us. We're missing Henry Kissinger, but don't worry.
Speaker 1: We have people like Peter Teel and Eric Schmidt to
Speaker 1: take the place of Kissinger at Bilderberg. I've said before
Speaker 1: when we went to Virginia, we're so far away from
Speaker 1: where they were. We couldn't see anything at all, you know,
Speaker 1: they just yeah massive force between us and the hotel.
Speaker 1: So about all I could do was to get a
Speaker 1: bullhorn and play that song into the microphone. With a
Speaker 1: bullhorn focused towards them. We knew Kissinger was there because
Speaker 1: he's always there. This is from the last American vagabond.
Speaker 1: Americans are increasingly becoming aware of the fact that the
Speaker 1: secretive Builderberg group it's funding both sides of the twenty
Speaker 1: twenty four presidential election. Maybe that's why Alex doesn't cover
Speaker 1: Builderberg anymore. I find out that the Trump is there, right,
Speaker 1: and of course the Eric Schmidt and Peter Thiel and
Speaker 1: jd Vance. I guess you could call jd Vance instead
Speaker 1: of being a young Davos leader, he is a young
Speaker 1: Builderberg leader.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 1: Every category for that. No, they don't do that. They
Speaker 1: don't want you to see why they're doing. They want
Speaker 1: you to see the curated bond villain Klaus Schwab. They
Speaker 1: have him on display all the time, and yet they
Speaker 1: don't want you to see what's going on at Builderberg
Speaker 1: at all. Former Google CEO Eric Schmidt is going all
Speaker 1: in on the Democrat Party and on La La Harris
Speaker 1: Peter Thiel is investing in Trump, and both of them
Speaker 1: are on the steering committee for the Builderberg Group. Yeah,
Speaker 1: isn't that interesting? You know, you got Kissinger over the years.
Speaker 1: They're at Builderberg and it's only like a couple of
Speaker 1: degrees separation between these politicians and the big media people,
Speaker 1: you know, whether you're talking about Joe Biden or Trump,
Speaker 1: or Patchennik or Alex Jones, or just a couple of
Speaker 1: degrees of separation between Kinsinger and the mainstream media as
Speaker 1: well as a mainstream alternative media.
Speaker 5: Well.
Speaker 1: Knowledge of this illusion of choice is spreading. The connections
Speaker 1: between Teal and Schmidt, as well as other members of
Speaker 1: the Builderberg Group run deeper than the surface level relationships.
Speaker 1: Rather than the intersection between the hidden ruling class represented
Speaker 1: the Bilderberg meetings and the big tech technocrats has immense
Speaker 1: influence on the US government, US military intelligence at the
Speaker 1: highest levels, and the world in general. And so in
Speaker 1: this article, the Last American Vagabond talks about a recently
Speaker 1: created fund, the America's Frontier Fund. But this has been
Speaker 1: the case for quite some time, with a lot of
Speaker 1: different funds. I remember when Patreus went there. Of course,
Speaker 1: Betrayus said, you know, this military career goes to the
Speaker 1: CIA and so forth, and then he gets out and
Speaker 1: he goes to work for KKR. And the guy who
Speaker 1: founded KKAR was a regular at Builderberg, and then Patreus
Speaker 1: became a regular at Builderberg. And then Alex Karp, who
Speaker 1: runs Pallanteer and a Pallunteer created by Peter Thiel gave
Speaker 1: them money to it. But the person who runs it,
Speaker 1: Alex Karp, is a Democrat supporter, but he runs Pollunteer,
Speaker 1: and he's always at the Builderberg group as well, just
Speaker 1: like Betraeus. So whether you're talking about KKR or you're
Speaker 1: talking about this newer fund, same situation always. But this
Speaker 1: new fund is America's Frontier Fund. That's what Last American
Speaker 1: Vagabond is focused on describes itself as the quote first
Speaker 1: investment platform committed to ensuring the US remains the best
Speaker 1: place in the world for frontier technology. We're not talking
Speaker 1: wagon wheels here, innovation, and of course, investment returns. AFF
Speaker 1: was first announced in May of twenty twenty one. Has
Speaker 1: been described as a for profit investment fund housed within
Speaker 1: a nonprofit organization. This allows AFF to quote leverage the
Speaker 1: assets of a for profit business while also obscuring its
Speaker 1: investors because they're in a not for profit business, you
Speaker 1: can't see who's investing in it. AFF is stacked with
Speaker 1: individuals the ties to the US military, including Michelle Flournoy,
Speaker 1: former Under Secretary Defense under Obama, Secretary of Defense Ash Carter,
Speaker 1: and hr McMaster. They were under Trump. In May of
Speaker 1: twenty twenty two, a leaked draft of the announcement of
Speaker 1: the creation of AFF was obtained by a project called
Speaker 1: Tech Transparency. This draft shows that AFF originally described itself
Speaker 1: as the first public private deep tech fund. Well when
Speaker 1: ABC public private, just understand crony capitalism and corruption, that's
Speaker 1: what that means. And it's a deep tech fund, deep
Speaker 1: state tech. I don't know. Yeah, The implication was that
Speaker 1: AFF would receive tax funds from the US government as
Speaker 1: well as private money from investors. In response to the
Speaker 1: leaked document, aff said it was not approved, and we
Speaker 1: do not describe ourselves that way. We are a nonprofit
Speaker 1: deep tech fund, not a public private deep tech fund, right,
Speaker 1: deep tech fund. I don't know deep tech is, but
Speaker 1: it doesn't sound good to me. They also noted that
Speaker 1: it had responded to requests for information from the Department
Speaker 1: of Commerce about a semiconductor fund. You've seen a lot
Speaker 1: of talk about this, right, both Biden and Trump. Oh,
Speaker 1: we got to pour lots of money into the semiconductor fund.
Speaker 1: The New York Times previously reported on their effort to
Speaker 1: ramp up US manufacturing of semiconductors by having the US
Speaker 1: taxpayer pay for the increased production. Semiconductors are the basis
Speaker 1: of our tech superiority, they say, because everything has to
Speaker 1: go back to silicon. Both Peter Tiel and Eric Schmidt
Speaker 1: have donated to the non profit side of the organization,
Speaker 1: and so the board of directors says they will have
Speaker 1: no involvement in investment decisions. Isn't that convenient now they
Speaker 1: do that. It's not a far fetched idea to imagine
Speaker 1: Eric Smith or Peter Teel using their influence over AFF
Speaker 1: to direct taxpayer funds towards startup companies in which they're invested.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's the way Builderberg operates. Right.
Speaker 4: Oh, we just haveing on.
Speaker 1: It's just like a party. I don't nothing serious has
Speaker 1: gone on here. Like I said, you know the guy
Speaker 1: who's coming down the side, he's fumbling for his ID
Speaker 1: and he opens up his bag and it pours out
Speaker 1: is nothing but paperwork that was at balls by the
Speaker 1: way from the UK for example. The New York Times
Speaker 1: has previously reported that Schmidt invested millions of dollars into
Speaker 1: more than half a dozen defense startups. So he is
Speaker 1: the big guy now in the military industrial complex. And
Speaker 1: then Freethought Project talks about the INNQ Tel connection. I've
Speaker 1: talked about that a great deal. That's the venture capital
Speaker 1: firm for the CIA. Perhaps the most interesting connection between
Speaker 1: Schmidt AFF and US Intelligence is the appointment of Gilman
Speaker 1: Louie as the fund's CEO. Louie is infamous for his
Speaker 1: role as the first CEO of Incutel, the CIA's venture
Speaker 1: capital firm. He has previously told The New York Times
Speaker 1: that any concern about Eric Schmidt's influence on US politics
Speaker 1: is misplaced. He says, if anything, we need more Eric
Speaker 1: Schmitz to get involved and not to stay on the sidelines.
Speaker 1: We need more technologists to have influence. I don't need
Speaker 1: the government to give us permission to go save the country.
Speaker 1: He said, it'd be nice if they would help us. Yeah,
Speaker 1: throw some money their way, right. Well, the purpose of Inkutel,
Speaker 1: as I've said many times, was to pick the contestant,
Speaker 1: the candidates for the contest, the apprentices, if you will,
Speaker 1: who were going to be given a lot of seed
Speaker 1: money from Inkutel. The CIAS venture capital firm, and a
Speaker 1: lot of other venture capital firms that were formed that
Speaker 1: had all of these people from the intelligence community, whether
Speaker 1: it's the CIA or the NSA. They had put tons
Speaker 1: of people on these venture capital boards, and they picked
Speaker 1: the people and gave them the money and told them
Speaker 1: to go, you know, compete against each other and may
Speaker 1: the best person win. And that's how you got Google
Speaker 1: and how you got these dominant social media companies to
Speaker 1: start with. The relationship is not surprising given the close
Speaker 1: ties between Google's, Eric Schmidt's former company, and Incutel. In
Speaker 1: two thousand and four, Google acquired Keyhole Incorporated for none
Speaker 1: disclosed some and used their technology to create Google Earth.
Speaker 1: Keyhole's software was originally developed with funding from Inkutel, so
Speaker 1: they inqtel funds it, and then you know they're giving
Speaker 1: money to Facebook and to Google and everything. Google buys
Speaker 1: Keyhole software, and you know, the people who are on
Speaker 1: these boards and associated with these companies, they're making lots
Speaker 1: of money as well. You know, it used to be
Speaker 1: that the CIA would reward financially reward its people with
Speaker 1: connections into the oil industry, like they did George H. W.
Speaker 1: Bush or somebody like David Dewhurst, the long term lieutenant
Speaker 1: governor in Texas who bought his way into office. He
Speaker 1: retired from the CIA, and all of a sudden, next thing,
Speaker 1: you know, he's an oil magnate in Texas, right, And
Speaker 1: so that used to be what they would do. Now
Speaker 1: it's the tech companies, right. They can make more money
Speaker 1: in tech and they can in oil. Schmidt is an
Speaker 1: investor and a chairman of Sandbox Aq, an AI company
Speaker 1: which is also received backing from Q two. In twenty
Speaker 1: twenty two, Peter Thiel's own company, Pall and Teer got
Speaker 1: two rounds of investment from Inkutel that totaled more than
Speaker 1: two million dollars.
Speaker 5: And.
Speaker 1: Inktel's not without its own conflicts of interest. According to
Speaker 1: a twenty sixteen report in The Wall Street Journal, numerous
Speaker 1: individuals working for the ink for Inkutel had financial connections
Speaker 1: with companies that were backed by the CIA. No really
Speaker 1: yeah see, I used to always call itself the company.
Speaker 1: A twenty nineteen pro Publica report detailed how the Department
Speaker 1: Defense had become unusually differential to Schmidt under former Secretary
Speaker 1: of Defense Jim Mattis's leadership. Everybody focused on his demeanor, idea,
Speaker 1: he wanted to kill everybody in the room, that type
Speaker 1: of thing, mad dog madis. When I report on Mattis,
Speaker 1: what I thought was most interesting, and this again he
Speaker 1: was Trump's first secretary of Defense. What I thought was
Speaker 1: most interesting. There was a big contract, really big contract
Speaker 1: for kind of a unified database for the Pentagon. They
Speaker 1: called it Jedi something some like Jedi. Mattis and his
Speaker 1: female assistant made several trips to Seattle to meet with Amazon,
Speaker 1: and everybody was saying that it was a contract that
Speaker 1: was set up, looked like they had written it for Amazon,
Speaker 1: and like I said, both of them made several trips,
Speaker 1: but Mattis's female assistant made tons of trips to Amazon
Speaker 1: and Seattle, and Microsoft edged its way in because Microsoft
Speaker 1: has really good connections in Washington. I mean, Jeff Bezos
Speaker 1: is kind of a late comer and he's trying to
Speaker 1: get his foot in the door there in Washington, but
Speaker 1: every time he does, the door gets slammed in his
Speaker 1: face by Microsoft because they've been there for a long time.
Speaker 1: And Microsoft actually beat them out on this Jedi contract,
Speaker 1: and then Amazon sued. And Jim Mattis is working with
Speaker 1: Amazon and all this stuff while he was Secretary of
Speaker 1: Defense for Trump. So that's the way this stuff works.
Speaker 1: You know, the Amazon Pentagon cloud and they operate under
Speaker 1: a cloud. Really, so whoever is elected as an ex
Speaker 1: president Jeffrey Epstein is going to be the real winner,
Speaker 1: says Brian Schall Hobby of Health Impact News. The Legacy
Speaker 1: of Jeffrey Epstein. It's important to remember that national politics
Speaker 1: in the United States is closely scripted arm of the
Speaker 1: entertainment industry. It has almost no bearing on real life
Speaker 1: or the issues facing Americans every day, says Brian. The
Speaker 1: fact that more Americans don't recognize this yet, especially after
Speaker 1: the Great Coup of twenty twenty and the COVID scam,
Speaker 1: shows how powerful a demonic enchantment still holds the minds
Speaker 1: and emotions of most Americans today. You foolishly believe that
Speaker 1: they can somehow change the fate of our nation by
Speaker 1: simply voting their favorite candidate into office never ceases to
Speaker 1: amaze me. The people who want to argue with me
Speaker 1: that I must support Trump, and it's like, well, first
Speaker 1: of all, I live in Tennessee. It's probably no state
Speaker 1: in the Union that's got more solid Trump support. My
Speaker 1: vote isn't going to make any difference one way or
Speaker 1: the other, whether it's there whoever I vote for, or
Speaker 1: right or wrong that you know Trump is going to
Speaker 1: win Tennessee, that's a foregone conclusion. But they really get
Speaker 1: angry because you see, what I say to them is
Speaker 1: exactly what Brian said. You're foolishly believing that you're going
Speaker 1: to somehow change things with your single vote or even
Speaker 1: with the money that you give to this billionaire. And
Speaker 1: they don't like that challenge because that's what they place
Speaker 1: their hope in. Then that's sad place you're hoping that
Speaker 1: con game in that entertainment business. Is what I say
Speaker 1: to people, you know, vote or don't vote, Vote for
Speaker 1: whoever you want. I don't care, but don't make it
Speaker 1: an existential thing on your on your bucket list. Don't
Speaker 1: tie your future mentally, emotionally, spiritually into this thing. Keep
Speaker 1: your arm's length away from this thing. Just look at
Speaker 1: it as some tests that you you may or may
Speaker 1: not do. You know, again, vote for whoever you wish,
Speaker 1: but don't become a group bie. Don't join the cult. Please,
Speaker 1: don't try to push a civil war on us and
Speaker 1: be a useful idiot for that nonsense. So I said.
Speaker 1: They do this even while they admit that they're voting
Speaker 1: for the lesser two evils and acknowledging that the elections
Speaker 1: are rigged. But they still want to place their hope
Speaker 1: in government, and to federal government of all things, and
Speaker 1: to one office of all things. The real one will
Speaker 1: undoubtedly be Jeffrey Epstein, writes Brian, the man who built
Speaker 1: today's political system by using blackmail, primarily through child sex
Speaker 1: trafficking to control the richest people in the world who
Speaker 1: really run America. The last hope that Epstein's clients would
Speaker 1: finally be published and that many of them would be
Speaker 1: brought to justice. Died last year twenty twenty three, when
Speaker 1: the Virgin Islands versus JP Morgan lawsuit against the billionaire
Speaker 1: bankers and the Silicon Valley technocrats who were all brought
Speaker 1: to power through the Epstein financial system was settled without
Speaker 1: a single person facing judgment. And I meant, look at
Speaker 1: the people they're evolved in this. You had Trump, you
Speaker 1: had Epstein, You had alex Acosta, Trump's labor secretary who
Speaker 1: before he was labor secretary was the prosecutor of Jeffrey
Speaker 1: Epstein in Florida who let him off the hook essentially,
Speaker 1: and then Trump and then the lawyers who were defending
Speaker 1: Jeffrey Epstein, Alan Dershowitz, Ken Starr. Look at ken Starr.
Speaker 1: He was supposedly the guy who was going to come
Speaker 1: after Bill Clinton, another Epstein pal Ken starlet Bill Clinton skate.
Speaker 1: He let Jeffrey Epstein skate. He finally got thrown out
Speaker 1: by Baylor when he tried to excuse the sexual assaults
Speaker 1: of the football team. Whitney Webbs got a book that
Speaker 1: she's put out One Nation under blackmail and There's a
Speaker 1: very interesting article from her, an excerpt from it about
Speaker 1: Les Wexner the demonic. Lex Wessner, who is the mentor,
Speaker 1: was the mentor of Jeffrey Epstein. Trump was his best friend.
Speaker 1: They hung out together, they partied together, and all this
Speaker 1: kind of stuff. But it was Les Wexner he really
Speaker 1: kicked in the money for Jeffrey Epstein. This article from
Speaker 1: Whitney webs titled Leslie Wexner's Inner Demon, taken out of
Speaker 1: the book which I think has not been published, A
Speaker 1: says upcoming book, One Nation under Blackmail, Jeffrey Epstein's mentor
Speaker 1: from the nineteen eighties, a lot of disconcerting revelations. She
Speaker 1: begins by saying, nineteen eighty five was a here that
Speaker 1: Leslie Wexner became a billionaire. It was also that year
Speaker 1: that the chairman of the limited began to build up
Speaker 1: his public persona the clothing I think, of course, he
Speaker 1: also then later became the guy behind Victoria's Secret, you know,
Speaker 1: in the soft porn TV show that they would use
Speaker 1: to build that brand New York magazine profile from August
Speaker 1: of nineteen eighty five titled the Bachelor Billionaire on Pins
Speaker 1: and Needles, with Leslie Wexner. It was filled with photos
Speaker 1: of middle aged Wexner grinning and embracing friends, as well
Speaker 1: as lavish praise for his business dealings. The New York
Speaker 1: Magazine article opens as follows. On the morning Leslie Wexner
Speaker 1: became a billionaire, he woke up worried. But this is
Speaker 1: not unusual. He always wakes up worried because of his dibuck.
Speaker 1: If I'm pronouncing that correctly, it's a Hebrew word, a dibuck,
Speaker 1: we'll just say, which pokes and prods and gives him
Speaker 1: the itchiness of his soul that he calls pins in Yiddish.
Speaker 1: Sometimes he runs away from it on the roads of Columbus,
Speaker 1: or he drives away from it in one of his porsches,
Speaker 1: or he flies from it in one of his planes.
Speaker 1: But then it is back with his first coffee, his
Speaker 1: first meeting, nudging at him. Well, that's the excerpt from
Speaker 1: the New York magazine. And there's the cover of it
Speaker 1: right there, and pull that up. People can see that
Speaker 1: on pins and needles. With Leslie Wexner talking about his
Speaker 1: you know, it's Yiddish for a demon, she said that
Speaker 1: his decision to use that word dibbuk, of which he
Speaker 1: does throughout the article, is quite significant, says Whitney Web.
Speaker 1: As defined by the Encyclopedia Britannica, a dybbuk is a
Speaker 1: Jewish folklore term for a quote, a disembodied human spirit that,
Speaker 1: because of former sins, wanders restlessly until it finds a
Speaker 1: haven in the body of a living person unquote. Unlike
Speaker 1: spirits that have yet to move on but possess positive qualities,
Speaker 1: such as the maggid or the ibber, the dbuk is
Speaker 1: almost always considered to be malicious, which leads it to
Speaker 1: be translated in English as a demon. So again, if
Speaker 1: he's saying, well, I'm thinking that I'm imagining the spirit
Speaker 1: or something that's edging me on, pushing me on. There
Speaker 1: were some terms that he could use that would not
Speaker 1: have been always evil, but he chose to use the
Speaker 1: one that was always.
Speaker 4: So.
Speaker 1: This was also the case in the New York Magazine
Speaker 1: profile on him. The author of that article, Julie Bomgold,
Speaker 1: describes Les Wexner's dibbuk as quote, the demon that always
Speaker 1: wakes him up in the morning, and Wexner with Wexner
Speaker 1: and tweets and tweaks and pulls at him. Wexner could
Speaker 1: have easily chosen frame the entity as a righteous spirit,
Speaker 1: a maggot, or his righteous ancestors an ibbror that were
Speaker 1: guiding his life and his business decisions, especially for the
Speaker 1: purpose of an interview that would be read widely throughout
Speaker 1: the country. But instead he chose this particular term, which
Speaker 1: says a lot for a man who has since used
Speaker 1: as billions to shape both mainstream Jewish identity and leadership
Speaker 1: in both the US and Israel for decades. Per Wexner,
Speaker 1: the Debbuk causes him to feel quote molten quote and
Speaker 1: constantly pricked him by quote spiritual pins and needles unquote.
Speaker 1: Apparently left him at some point as a young man,
Speaker 1: only to return in nineteen seventy seven when he was
Speaker 1: forty and half frozen during an ill fated trip up
Speaker 1: a mountain near his vacation home in Vale, Colorado. This
Speaker 1: specific trip is when Wexner says he both rejoined with
Speaker 1: his childhood dibbuck and decided to quote change his life.
Speaker 1: He told The New York magazine that his debuck makes
Speaker 1: him wonder from house to house, wanting more and more
Speaker 1: and quote swallowing companies larger than his own unquote. In
Speaker 1: other words, it compels him to accumulate more money and
Speaker 1: more power with no end in sight. Wexner later describes
Speaker 1: the dbuk as quote an integral part of his genius unquote.
Speaker 1: Wexner further describes his debuk as keeping quote him out
Speaker 1: of balance, emotionally stunted, a part of him, the precious,
Speaker 1: treasured boy son part lagging behind the dibuk. This is
Speaker 1: consistent with other definitions of the term in Jewish media,
Speaker 1: including a feature piece published in The Jewish Chronicle. That
Speaker 1: article first defines the term as quote a demon that
Speaker 1: clings to a person's soul, then states that quote the
Speaker 1: Hebrew verb from which the word dybbuk is derived is
Speaker 1: also used to describe the cleaving of a pious soul
Speaker 1: to God. The two states are mere images of each
Speaker 1: other unquote. Per Wesner's word choice in his characterization of
Speaker 1: what he perceives as an entity dwelling within him, the
Speaker 1: entity the dbook is dominant, while his actual self and
Speaker 1: his soul quote lags behind and is stunted, causing him
Speaker 1: to identify more and more with the entity rather than
Speaker 1: with himself. For a man of such influence in the
Speaker 1: Jewish community. Why has there been no, essentially no questions
Speaker 1: raised as to his role in directing the affect of
Speaker 1: that community, given that he openly claimed to be guided
Speaker 1: by a Dibock. This is particularly odd when one considers
Speaker 1: that Wesner has come under increased scrutiny in recent years
Speaker 1: after his protege in closest associate for decades, Jeffrey Epstein,
Speaker 1: was outed as both a pedophile and a serial sex
Speaker 1: offender and sex trafficker. It is interesting, isn't it. You know,
Speaker 1: there's people, it is a demonic and I think that
Speaker 1: it's you know, the intelligence agencies, which are right there
Speaker 1: at the center, right. That's the other thing that's not
Speaker 1: talked about. Perhaps Whitney Web talks about that. But when
Speaker 1: we talk about their connections to these different companies and
Speaker 1: so forth, understand that the connection is also heavy, very
Speaker 1: very heavy, to the intelligence agencies, to the CIA, to
Speaker 1: the Masade and all the rest of them. They're ultimately,
Speaker 1: of course the ones that were running that. And One
Speaker 1: Nation under Blackmail talks about the union between the intelligence
Speaker 1: communities and organized crime, and there is a unity between
Speaker 1: the intelligence communities, organized crime and quite frankly that the
Speaker 1: demons as well. It's a very clear connection. That's who
Speaker 1: we are governed by. We're going to take a quick
Speaker 1: break and we'll be right back.
Speaker 2: You're listening to the David Knight Show.
Speaker 1: Let's talk a little bit about Oprah. At the DNC,
Speaker 1: she tied abortion to the American dream. Have we ever
Speaker 1: seen anything like the Dilation and Curtage Party and their
Speaker 1: convention of death. It's absolutely amazing. And of course, you
Speaker 1: know the DNC, just like any opera, it's not over
Speaker 1: till the Fat Lady sings, And so they had to
Speaker 1: bring on Oprah, I guess so they can close it
Speaker 1: out and a performance worthy of her self. Anointed status
Speaker 1: as America's spiritual guide, Oprah Winfrey took the stage of
Speaker 1: the DNC deliver what can only be described as a
Speaker 1: sermon on the sanctity of abortion with the gravitas of
Speaker 1: a high priestess delivering her divine revelation.
Speaker 2: She said, because if you do not have autonomy over.
Speaker 6: This, plenty to herself for this, If you cannot control
Speaker 6: when and how you choose to bring your children into
Speaker 6: this world and how they gesture.
Speaker 5: To herself, there is no American dream.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, there's no American dream. If you can't control
Speaker 1: your body and your family, do they want us to
Speaker 1: control our body and our family. I thought they were
Speaker 1: dead set against that for decades. They fought parents, put
Speaker 1: a mask on your kid, jab your kid. We're not
Speaker 1: gonna let you even choose how to educate your kid. Yeah, okay,
Speaker 1: you chose not to kill them, so now I'm not
Speaker 1: gonna let you educate. And we'll educate them. We'll give
Speaker 1: them the gender gas lighting, we'll give them the pedophile grooming.
Speaker 1: One might wonder if before her sermon, Oprah took a
Speaker 1: moment to meditate in the DNC's gender neutral prayer room.
Speaker 1: Perhaps her inner molok that ancient symbol of child sacrifice,
Speaker 1: or maybe she considers herself a deity in need of
Speaker 1: worship with all those sacred gender neutral whales. This is
Speaker 1: from a site called the Center Yesterday and the site
Speaker 1: they said we informed you that the DNC had set
Speaker 1: up neutral prayer rooms scattered throughout the convention Center. Space
Speaker 1: is ostensibly created to reflect their inner commitment to inclusivity.
Speaker 1: Of course, the rooms are equipped with Islamic prayer rugs,
Speaker 1: but conspicuously absent is anything remotely resembling Christianity. But you know,
Speaker 1: when it comes to money and success, which I think
Speaker 1: is really what she's dreaming of. You know, to get
Speaker 1: money and to get success, you've got to kill the
Speaker 1: kids first, right, That was the whole thing with Molok.
Speaker 1: You know, child sacrifice or prosperity, and so if you
Speaker 1: want prosperity, it's there. But you're going to have to
Speaker 1: fight race and sexism. Hey, people just can't get ahead,
Speaker 1: says the black female billionaire. It's the horror of sexism
Speaker 1: and racism here in America.
Speaker 5: I've seen racism and sexism and income inequality and division.
Speaker 7: I've not only seen it at times, I've been on
Speaker 7: the receiving end of it.
Speaker 1: Yeah yeah, good for her, poor oppressed billionaire. Oprah, the
Speaker 1: queen of New Age mysticism, has long pedaled the idea
Speaker 1: that the universe revolves around the individual's whims and desires.
Speaker 1: She now extends this philosophy to argue that the American
Speaker 1: dream hinges not on hard work, freedom, or opportunity, but
Speaker 1: on the right to kill inconvenient unborn children. It puts
Speaker 1: a quote there which really describes I think it ought
Speaker 1: to be The sub title for the DNC, all who
Speaker 1: hate me love death signed God. That's really what I
Speaker 1: from Proverbs. Right, whoever finds me finds life and obtains
Speaker 1: favor from Jehovah. But he who fails to find me
Speaker 1: injures himself. All who hate me love death. By that
Speaker 1: is the epithet for the DNC, isn't it They love death.
Speaker 1: It's a cult of death.
Speaker 2: They do love it. You could hear them screaming and
Speaker 2: cheering after she said that. They absolutely love it.
Speaker 1: They worship it. Yeah, they do have an abortion band.
Speaker 1: There have an abortion and men. You can sterilize yourself too.
Speaker 1: The DNC has become a vehicle for nihilism, says Dissenter.
Speaker 1: Their platform is twisted, is a twisted celebration of autonomy
Speaker 1: that elevates the right to destroy life, other people's life
Speaker 1: above all else. Yeah, these people are lovers of self.
Speaker 1: As we've been told, people will become the last day
Speaker 1: lovers herself. And you see that even on the right,
Speaker 1: As I point out about iron Rand, you know, it's
Speaker 1: it's just there's not that much difference between iron Rand
Speaker 1: and Oprah Winfrey. They're all just about me, me, me,
Speaker 1: and what can I get? How can I love myself?
Speaker 1: You know it's a self help through a New Age religion,
Speaker 1: and it just isn't just Oprah on the left. You know,
Speaker 1: she's sold in two thousand and seven. You remember when
Speaker 1: she's selling the Secret, this New Age occultism. She's sold
Speaker 1: over a million copies of it. The idea that you
Speaker 1: got some positive vibrations that are going to cause good
Speaker 1: thoughts and things to happen, is going to attract more
Speaker 1: positive vibrations. Maybe she's never done any physics, you know,
Speaker 1: a positive and negative attract each other, likes repel each other.
Speaker 1: But you know that was her idea. And she had
Speaker 1: this to say, just as iin Ran said that altruism
Speaker 1: is evil. Altruism is evil, and you should of course,
Speaker 1: you know, we're not going to compel anybody to do
Speaker 1: the charity. But no, no, no, if you even think
Speaker 1: that that's a good thing, you should be serving yourself.
Speaker 1: And somebody like Jesus is evil according to Iinran. And
Speaker 1: so this is what Oprah says. God is a feeling
Speaker 1: experience and not a believing experience. If your religion is
Speaker 1: a believing experience, then that's not truly God. Should we
Speaker 1: believe her. This is like these people who say there
Speaker 1: is no absolute truth. Ah, so that's your absolute absolute truth.
Speaker 1: She says. If your experience of God is a believing experience,
Speaker 1: well then that's not truly God. So I guess we
Speaker 1: should believe her or not?
Speaker 2: Is she God?
Speaker 1: It's crazy? But you know, like I said, it's not
Speaker 1: just her. We've got mainstream alternative media figures. Here's one
Speaker 1: of them describe iving his one hundred and fifty dollars course.
Speaker 1: Sounds very much like Oprah is a secret. But the
Speaker 1: interesting thing is is that even though hers is so
Speaker 1: focused on the individual, this guy, who is very famous
Speaker 1: in mainstream alternative media, is really kind of focused on
Speaker 1: the collective. And he's selling this kind of New Age
Speaker 1: mysticism as a means to fight back against the globalist
Speaker 1: This a way he has to say, I'm going to
Speaker 1: give you the hidden knowledge. I've spent twenty eight years
Speaker 1: uncovering all the secret teachings, all the hidden knowledge, all
Speaker 1: the information the elite ruling class is never intended for
Speaker 1: you to have. I mean, can't you imagine Oprah saying
Speaker 1: that the conscious force which holds the atom together is
Speaker 1: what myself and many others believe to be God lower
Speaker 1: case G. All the religions, in one way or the
Speaker 1: other said were all connected. All of us are connected
Speaker 1: through this source of energy. Our true power comes from
Speaker 1: coming together and raising our energy. You are a spiritual
Speaker 1: being connected to this conscious force of energy. The purpose
Speaker 1: of God intended for us here on earth was for
Speaker 1: us to create heaven on earth. Yeah, to create heaven
Speaker 1: on earth. That's our purpose in life. Since we're all
Speaker 1: connected through consciousness. The only way to do that is
Speaker 1: to collectively raise the group consciousness. Their goal, the people
Speaker 1: we're fighting, is to make sure that we never realize
Speaker 1: that we're all connected together through our collective consciousness, so
Speaker 1: we can overcome the globalist. Where did that come from?
Speaker 1: Came from Reset Wars And for one hundred and fifty
Speaker 1: dollars you can get the secrets from Alex Jones that
Speaker 1: I just read to you. It's his peace there. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Our purpose in life is not to overcome the globalist
Speaker 1: even it is not to have heaven on earth. Our
Speaker 1: purpose is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever. As
Speaker 1: the Biden Administration's Department of Justice targeting pro life activists,
Speaker 1: well experts say yes, the experts who are defending the
Speaker 1: people who have been targeted. You know when you had
Speaker 1: when Obama used the Espionage Act to come after whistleblowers
Speaker 1: from the NSA and other people. Many people point out
Speaker 1: that that was done in nineteen seventeen, and Obama, of
Speaker 1: eight years, completed one hundred years of the nineteen seventeen
Speaker 1: Espionage Act. And Obama came after more people using the
Speaker 1: Espionage Act than all the other presidents in the century
Speaker 1: that it combined. So from nineteen seventeen to twenty seventeen,
Speaker 1: Obama came after more people of the Espionage Act than
Speaker 1: all the other presidents combined. And now we have Biden
Speaker 1: and how he is using the Face Act. Elias Defending
Speaker 1: Freedom says, after the fall of Row, there's no question
Speaker 1: the Face Act prosecutions and investigations have ramped up exponentially.
Speaker 1: In twenty twenty two alone, there were over twenty prosecutions
Speaker 1: of pro life individuals. We see very few prosecutions of
Speaker 1: those sorts of individuals who are targeting pro life facilities.
Speaker 1: In other words, the arson and the graffiti of the
Speaker 1: crisis pregnancy centers by the pro murder abortion left, those
Speaker 1: are ignored by the FBI, those are ignored by the
Speaker 1: Biden administration. Rather, the vast majority of them is Biden
Speaker 1: targeting pro life individuals who are protesting or praying at
Speaker 1: abortion centers, who are not engaged in graffiti, who are
Speaker 1: not engaged in arson, they're engaged in free speech and protests.
Speaker 1: Van Netta said the Department of Justice is data on
Speaker 1: the FACEX violations between nineteen ninety four and twenty twenty
Speaker 1: four is jarring. There are approximately two hundred and eleven cases,
Speaker 1: and around ninety seven percent of those cases are targeted
Speaker 1: at pro life activists. Biden's Department of Justice is responsible
Speaker 1: for over one core of those. So in just four years,
Speaker 1: he did twenty five percent of all of the thirty
Speaker 1: years of prosecutions. To think about just one individual, Laaren Handy.
Speaker 1: I believe her sentence was fifty seven months, said the
Speaker 1: individual with the legal group. That's four years plus three
Speaker 1: years of supervised release. That's an awful long time for
Speaker 1: a nonviolent sort of protest. It's actually closer to five years.
Speaker 1: Kennon represents Handy and argues that she didn't even violate
Speaker 1: the Face Act. He says she went into the clinic
Speaker 1: with her nine cohorts. Two maybe three of them blocked
Speaker 1: doors very peacefully with the block doors, the other seven
Speaker 1: or eight simply sat in chairs, singing, praying, handing out
Speaker 1: some pamphlets and things. There is no decent argument to
Speaker 1: be made that this was a face violation. But again
Speaker 1: they twist this to criminalize speech and protest, and these
Speaker 1: have become the hallmarks of new Western civilization. I think
Speaker 1: we need to coin a term here. You know, we
Speaker 1: talk about neo conservatives, call them neo cons Well, I
Speaker 1: think we've got people who decide that they don't like
Speaker 1: Western civilization and they want a neo civilization, they want
Speaker 1: a new civilization. Maybe we should start calling them neo sieves, shives,
Speaker 1: maybe shills, neo shills. Trump announces that he will criminalize
Speaker 1: gender transitions without parental consent if elected. Well, before you
Speaker 1: agree with him on this, notice that what he says
Speaker 1: that without parental consent. And there's a couple of problems
Speaker 1: with this. He's first of all saying that only parents
Speaker 1: should be able to have sex with kids. Is that okay,
Speaker 1: I mean this is not sex with kids, but I mean,
Speaker 1: would it be okay if we did something we said okay, well,
Speaker 1: you know you it is rape. A child cannot consent,
Speaker 1: a minor cannot consent to sex, so it is at
Speaker 1: least statutory rape to have sex with a minor. But
Speaker 1: we'll make an exception for parents. Would you agree with that?
Speaker 1: Would you agree that it is brutal to allow miners
Speaker 1: to be sexually mutilated, but we'll let parents do that?
Speaker 1: Is that right? Why should only parents be allowed to
Speaker 1: mutilate minors? Should they be allowed to mutilate miners at all?
Speaker 1: So the problem is we got a lot of these
Speaker 1: parents who are have the Munchausen syndrome where they are
Speaker 1: doing this to attract attention to themselves. Just take a
Speaker 1: look at what Tim Walls did right and think about
Speaker 1: the fact that what Trump is announcing would not really
Speaker 1: criminalize what Walls was doing with this group of people.
Speaker 1: Look at these children here, bills.
Speaker 8: We've been welcoming our neighbors back into their communities by
Speaker 8: making sure we're restoring voting rights to folks. We're making
Speaker 8: sure that our neighbors can drive to their kids soccer games.
Speaker 8: So today I am directing my state agencies to take
Speaker 8: action to protect and support the rights of Minnesota's LGBTQIA
Speaker 8: plus community.
Speaker 9: Their child is six years old, and she was as
Speaker 9: excited to be it's a boy, not a sheep on
Speaker 9: spring break as any six year old kid could be,
Speaker 9: squirming and fidgeting her way through speech, is hardly aware
Speaker 9: her existence. As why her parents drove five hours today
Speaker 9: to speak publicly.
Speaker 1: It's one hundred percent personal. I mean the safety, the happiness.
Speaker 1: They want you to believe that this child thanks to
Speaker 1: a different gender, this child that can't communicate, Really.
Speaker 9: Asher, why are we here today for her rights to
Speaker 9: be her?
Speaker 10: As you can see from this interview, I can't force
Speaker 10: my kids to do anything here. Asher has trusted us enough,
Speaker 10: she believes in our love enough that she has invited
Speaker 10: us in to see her whole self. And if we
Speaker 10: don't love her that much, the opposite would happen, where
Speaker 10: we wouldn't get to know everything about her.
Speaker 1: See Trump's proposal would let unfit parents like that mutilate
Speaker 1: their children. That reporter that's there doesn't have any problem
Speaker 1: with the fact that Asher, No, I don't know what's
Speaker 1: going on. These parents are dressing this six year old
Speaker 1: up as a as a girl, and who knows what
Speaker 1: they're going to do to his body. And Trump doesn't
Speaker 1: address that criminalize gender transitions, to that parental consent and
Speaker 1: say that's the first problem. His goal is insufficient, it's deficient, infie.
Speaker 1: But the other part of it is is to try
Speaker 1: to make a federal case out of everything. This is
Speaker 1: not anything that ought to be done by the federal government.
Speaker 1: Federal government always gets everything wrong. This needs to be
Speaker 1: done at different state levels. And of course Tim Waltz
Speaker 1: is going in the other direction at the state level.
Speaker 1: So on Tuesday, the Trump campaign released prepared remarks that
Speaker 1: Trump was set to deliver, and yet he did not
Speaker 1: refer to that. So he said, here's his prepared speech,
Speaker 1: and he's going to talk about making it a felony
Speaker 1: for any medical professional to perform surgery on a minor
Speaker 1: without parental consent. Okay. The New York Post later reported
Speaker 1: that the speech came and went without Trump mentioning that
Speaker 1: so these people wrote this up, gave it to him.
Speaker 1: I mean, he didn't want to read it, and why
Speaker 1: would he disagree. He's always, folks, been pro trans As
Speaker 1: a matter of fact, Milania was paid two hundred and
Speaker 1: fifty thousand dollars to appear at the log Cabin fundraiser.
Speaker 1: The lgbt's had multiple fundraisers at mar Lago and twenty twenty.
Speaker 1: They bragged that he was the first president to come
Speaker 1: in supporting homosexual marriage, and on and on. You know,
Speaker 1: they's virtue signaled for all the stuff sold Rainbow merchandise
Speaker 1: in twenty twenty, all the rest of this stuff. He
Speaker 1: pushed men in his beauty contest. I think it'd be great. Yeah,
Speaker 1: we should have some men competing with the women in
Speaker 1: the beauty contest. So, as Life site News says, many
Speaker 1: people would prefer to see the extra step of banning
Speaker 1: such procedures entirely regardless of whether the parents approved. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: Why would you allow parents like I just showed you
Speaker 1: to do that kind of stuff to their kids? They
Speaker 1: just want attention. Studies find that more than eighty percent
Speaker 1: of children suffering genderness for you outgrow it on their
Speaker 1: own by adolescents, and that transition procedures so called, including
Speaker 1: full reassignment surgery, failed to resolve gender confused individuals heightened
Speaker 1: tendency to engage in self harm and suicide, and even
Speaker 1: exacerbate it very much so they outgrow it on their
Speaker 1: own by late adolescents. Maybe when they leave government school
Speaker 1: they outgrow it. Because maybe it's like the pandemic. You know,
Speaker 1: the Amish didn't suffer from the pandemic because they didn't
Speaker 1: watch TV. Maybe it's some of these people don't suffer
Speaker 1: from it because they don't abandon their kid to the
Speaker 1: state to be gasolt. Now here's one person that was
Speaker 1: driven to suicide.
Speaker 4: She was.
Speaker 1: Targeted and identified and groomed by the schools when she
Speaker 1: was thirteen years old, and then when she turned twenty one,
Speaker 1: she aged in what they call falloplasty, a female trying
Speaker 1: to surgically add a male member, and it created so
Speaker 1: much problems for her her body was falling apart from it.
Speaker 1: She refused to blame Boston's Children's Hospital, which is where
Speaker 1: they did it. And of course Boston Children's Hospital is
Speaker 1: affiliated with Harvard University. That's the same hospital that medically
Speaker 1: kidnapped Justina Peltier and then was able to get Marty
Speaker 1: Gottisfeld in its massive sentence, even had him in a
Speaker 1: communications management unit because he spoke out against Boston Children's
Speaker 1: hospitals medical kidnapping. She said, it took me a long
Speaker 1: time to come to terms with everything that happened to
Speaker 1: me in recovery acknowledging my medical trauma, I was and
Speaker 1: still am hesitant to completely blacklist a surgeon that got
Speaker 1: me and others closer to comfort with our body but now,
Speaker 1: but nobody should ever have to go through things like
Speaker 1: this again. This is my experience and can only speak
Speaker 1: for myself, but I know there are several others of
Speaker 1: us who have been hurt and traumatized by this team.
Speaker 1: I was told that eurological complications happen in forty to
Speaker 1: fifty percent of patients. I'm not aware of any patient
Speaker 1: of theirs that did not experience neurological issues or that
Speaker 1: didn't take multiple surgeries to fix. She said she had
Speaker 1: limb swelling and chest pain ignored and misdiagnosed as being
Speaker 1: normal or constipation for weeks until I had DVT in
Speaker 1: both legs, blood clots in my pelvis, and bilateral pulmonary embolism.
Speaker 1: I still have joint pain and swelling issues in my
Speaker 1: legs from DVT damage. Urology staff ignored my breathing concerns
Speaker 1: and listed my lung functions as normal in my er
Speaker 1: report the night before my ICU admission. For clots, despite
Speaker 1: struggling to breathe and my chest audibly gurgling, they discharge
Speaker 1: me without any medications, after saying I wasted my time
Speaker 1: driving down there. There was a chance that the clots
Speaker 1: could have killed me soon after if I hadn't gotten
Speaker 1: a second opinion. And so she went on social media
Speaker 1: was talking about her experiences with it, talking about her
Speaker 1: experiences with her catheter. She even called it Kathy, the
Speaker 1: catheter is back. Embarrasses me a lot carrying her around,
Speaker 1: but I'm still working on it. Three days postop from
Speaker 1: my fifth falloplasty related surgery, this time being urethal repair
Speaker 1: and on and on. So this original operation was done
Speaker 1: in twenty twenty one, when she was the age of
Speaker 1: twenty one. She died by suicide after three years of
Speaker 1: this compassionate medical treatment the age of twenty four, literally
Speaker 1: driving people to suicide. It is absolutely insane what is
Speaker 1: being done. And again, the best that we can do
Speaker 1: is to say that we'll only allow this to happen
Speaker 1: to minors. To minors, she was twenty one years old
Speaker 1: and she had been living like this for eight years.
Speaker 1: I'm only going to allow that to happen to minors
Speaker 1: if the parents consent. That's not sufficient, and it's wrong
Speaker 1: to try to solve everything at the federal level. We're
Speaker 1: going to take a quick break. We'll be right back.
Speaker 2: Making sense common again. You're listening to the David Knight Show.
Speaker 1: Let's take a look at fluoride. We now have the
Speaker 1: federal government admitting what we've all known for decades about fluoride,
Speaker 1: and they admit that it lowers IQ and kids. And
Speaker 1: we've had multiple studies, some of them done by Harvard University,
Speaker 1: significantly lowering IQ twenty points in many of these cases.
Speaker 1: And so after decades of lying about it, after decades
Speaker 1: of disinformation and name calling of conspiracy theorists. We even
Speaker 1: had remember Doctor Strangelove, the general who kicked the whole
Speaker 1: thing off, General Jack d Ripper, Remember that hang about
Speaker 1: they're trying to corrupt our bodily fluids and put fluoride
Speaker 1: in the water and all the rest of this stuff.
Speaker 1: It was a hallmark of their stereotype of conspiracy theorist. Well,
Speaker 1: it turns out there was a conspiracy, a conspiracy to
Speaker 1: cover up harm that they were doing to people. A
Speaker 1: landmark National Toxicology Program report says that fluoride is comparable
Speaker 1: to lead and its ability to lower IQ in children.
Speaker 1: And so what is a reaction from the media we
Speaker 1: got ap Associated Propaganda says that, well, it's only bad
Speaker 1: at levels that are twice the recommended limit, says the
Speaker 1: Associated Propaganda. But Information Liberation points out that the limit
Speaker 1: was very recently cut in half. I guess an anticipation
Speaker 1: of this. Interesting the way that they spend this. Hey guys,
Speaker 1: there's nothing we can do about this is going to
Speaker 1: come out. Okay, let's cut the recommended level in half.
Speaker 1: And so you know, they were recommending it at a
Speaker 1: level that would damage children's IQ. So you solve that
Speaker 1: by cutting the level before the report comes out. That's it.
Speaker 1: That's how you control it. But of course, the whole
Speaker 1: thing from the very beginning, they were dumping this particular
Speaker 1: type of fluoride, which is a rat poison in China.
Speaker 1: They were dumping it into the water supply because it
Speaker 1: was a byproduct of both the nuclear industry and the
Speaker 1: aluminum industry, and it would have cost them a great
Speaker 1: deal of money to dispose of this, or they could
Speaker 1: tell everybody that it was good for them and have
Speaker 1: the taxpayers pay them to dump their waste into our
Speaker 1: drinking water. And that's exactly what they've done. That's how
Speaker 1: outrageous this all is. And so now after this has
Speaker 1: been put out there, after eight decades of this, after
Speaker 1: everybody from Cubriic to you know, everyone else it and
Speaker 1: rolling their eyes, they now admit that it's harmful. And
Speaker 1: yet the CDC still stands by it. They still stand
Speaker 1: by this recommendation. Isn't that amazing? I guess it's not,
Speaker 1: because their response, no matter how many times you show
Speaker 1: something that they support that's harmful, their response to all
Speaker 1: that is always so what, so what keep doing it?
Speaker 1: Federal agencies have revived the COVID vaccine push, for example,
Speaker 1: and here's Associated press again selling it for them, Associated
Speaker 1: propaganda associated with the government. That's what the ap is.
Speaker 1: US regulators approved updated COVID vaccines on Thursday. They're updated. Well,
Speaker 1: you want to make sure that you've got the latest vaccine,
Speaker 1: don't you? Designed to more closely target recent virus strains
Speaker 1: and whatever variants caused trouble this winter too, Well, this
Speaker 1: winter hasn't happened. Do you know that I get dose?
Speaker 1: People travel in time or are they clairvoyant or something?
Speaker 1: This is the same game, folks they played with the
Speaker 1: flu shots for the longest time. Well, you got to
Speaker 1: get your flu shot because we're going to have new
Speaker 1: variants this year.
Speaker 5: How do you know that?
Speaker 1: And how do you know which ones are going to be?
Speaker 1: How do you know any of this stuff? Isn't it?
Speaker 1: Don't we know that they're lying to us? Well, the
Speaker 1: good news is that eighty two unvaccinated healthcare workers have
Speaker 1: now won an arbitration case against the hospitals that fired
Speaker 1: them for not getting the mandated jabs. This is coming
Speaker 1: out of Toronto. But if you all want to know
Speaker 1: just how bad the hospitals have become, here's an example.
Speaker 1: And this is coming out of People magazine. Yeah, this
Speaker 1: is like an entertainment store. The body of a California
Speaker 1: woman is found in coal storage a year after the
Speaker 1: hospital said she checked out. Is that the new euphanism
Speaker 1: for They had her under care and they told the
Speaker 1: family she checked out and she had actually died and
Speaker 1: they put her body in cold storage. A family is
Speaker 1: suing a California hospital for negligence, claiming they failed to
Speaker 1: inform them of their loved one's death for close to
Speaker 1: a year. The woman was thirty one years old. She
Speaker 1: had been diagnosed with type one diabetes since the age
Speaker 1: of ten, and was admitted to the hospital where she
Speaker 1: had previously gone to seek diabetic treatment. They put her
Speaker 1: in the hospital April of twenty twenty three due to
Speaker 1: a diabetic episode. Two days later, the thirty one year
Speaker 1: old woman called her mother and asked to be picked
Speaker 1: up from the hospital. Per the complaint, Around two hours later,
Speaker 1: she died of cardiac arrest while suffering from diabetic ketos acidosis,
Speaker 1: a lack of insulin to process blood sugar into energy,
Speaker 1: according to a death certificate that was obtained by the
Speaker 1: same San Francisco chronicle so her mother. The mother this
Speaker 1: thirty one year old alleged in the complaint that when
Speaker 1: she called the hospital again on April eleventh, she had
Speaker 1: been told that her daughter left the center against medical
Speaker 1: advice and that there is no one here by that name. Now,
Speaker 1: isn't that interesting? Against that they would say, against medical device?
Speaker 1: Was there some kind? Was she unhappy with what was
Speaker 1: being done to her? She tried to get out of there.
Speaker 1: Maybe she died. She was trying to get out because
Speaker 1: they didn't treat her properly in the first point, but
Speaker 1: that's not what they're alleging, and that's not what they're
Speaker 1: suing the hospital for The mother said, I spelled her
Speaker 1: name for them, and the men on the phone said, well,
Speaker 1: we don't have anybody here by that name. She said,
Speaker 1: She and her two daughters, other daughters, and finally missing
Speaker 1: persons report with the police searched for her until she
Speaker 1: got a call from a Sacramento County Sheriff's detective and
Speaker 1: April of twenty twenty four. A year later, April the twelfth.
Speaker 1: It was April the eleventh, twenty twenty three she disappeared.
Speaker 1: So a year and a day later they confirmed her
Speaker 1: daughter's death. The family later found out that her remains
Speaker 1: were transferred from a one medical center to another medical
Speaker 1: center's off site cold storage facilities after she died. So
Speaker 1: is there is it bad care? Is it negligent care?
Speaker 1: Is it just bad record keeping? Her death certificate was
Speaker 1: issued three hundred and sixty one days after she died. Well,
Speaker 1: if we look at what is happening with the UK,
Speaker 1: the tyranny that immediately has been rolled out by this
Speaker 1: new labor government is just unbelievable. The story at Free
Speaker 1: Thought Projects several people have covered this story from a
Speaker 1: journalist Medhurst. Richard Medhurst is a Syrian British independent journalist
Speaker 1: who defends Palestinian's rights to resist Israeli apartheid occupation. He
Speaker 1: is he talks about his family on his father's side,
Speaker 1: goes back many generations, law enforcement involvement and the other
Speaker 1: things and turns being with the police department that type
Speaker 1: of thing. But he is a journalist and I think
Speaker 1: his mother is Syrian, as I say, Syrian British journalist.
Speaker 1: He said this week that he was recently arrested at
Speaker 1: London's Heathrow Airport in Hell for nearly twenty four hours
Speaker 1: for allegedly running a foul of a highly controversial anti
Speaker 1: terrorism law. Critics age being used to silence legitimate descent.
Speaker 1: He's known for his work opposing US, British and Israeli
Speaker 1: war crimes in the Middle East, and for his advocacy
Speaker 1: for formerly imprisoned Wikileak's founder Julian Assange. He said on
Speaker 1: social media, I criticized the Terrorism Act before getting on
Speaker 1: the plane, and then I got arrested under the Terror
Speaker 1: Act when I landed and the plane landed. He says,
Speaker 1: you can't make this up, but the government can. The
Speaker 1: video is nearly nine minutes long, but I've cut this
Speaker 1: down and I wanted you to hear the description of
Speaker 1: how he was treated. It truly is astounding. And folks,
Speaker 1: if we don't stop this attack on free speech, they
Speaker 1: well disinformation, misinformation, hate speech, all the rest of these things.
Speaker 1: That this is where it ultimately leads for everyone as
Speaker 1: we look at these neo sieves who want to rewrite
Speaker 1: our civilization.
Speaker 7: My name is Richard Thomas Medhurst. I'm an internationally accredited
Speaker 7: journalist from the United Kingdom. On Thursday, as I landed
Speaker 7: in London Heathrow Airport, I was immediately escorted off the
Speaker 7: plane by six police officers who were waiting for me
Speaker 7: at the entrance of the aircraft. They arrested me, not detained.
Speaker 7: They arrested me under section twelve of the Terrorism Act
Speaker 7: of two thousand and accused me of allegedly quote expressing
Speaker 7: an opinion or belief that is supportive of a prescribed
Speaker 7: organization unquote, but wouldn't explain what this meant. One officer
Speaker 7: took my bags and when I asked why he was
Speaker 7: still back in the aircraft, I was told, look, bank,
Speaker 7: you can get Nick's right here in front of everyone
Speaker 7: or in there your choice. So I was taken to
Speaker 7: an adjacent room, pattered down, my phone confiscated. I was
Speaker 7: not allowed to inform my family despite being calm and cooperative.
Speaker 7: It was handcuffed with something that placed my shoulders in
Speaker 7: an awkward position and my wrists on top of rather
Speaker 7: than next to each other. The handcuffs were extremely tight,
Speaker 7: despite the police loosening. Then they left marks on me
Speaker 7: for two days. The police took me down onto the runway,
Speaker 7: put me in a police van, essentially a mobile cage,
Speaker 7: and informed me that everything was being recorded. The van
Speaker 7: was cramped. I had to struggle the entire time to
Speaker 7: keep my balance and trying not to fall over as
Speaker 7: we drove to the police station. Now, once inside the station,
Speaker 7: they searched me again for the second time within ten minutes.
Speaker 7: I was told to sit on a bench, remove my shoes,
Speaker 7: remove my socks. I was told to turn my socks
Speaker 7: inside out and hold them up for the officers to inspect.
Speaker 7: They also made me hold up my feet so they
Speaker 7: could check them as well. The officers took me to
Speaker 7: a room with UV lights, which they told me is
Speaker 7: used to catch burglars who were sprayed with something as
Speaker 7: I have no idea why they did this since they
Speaker 7: just removed me off of a plane. My suitcase was
Speaker 7: then opened in the lobby and ransacked. All of my
Speaker 7: journalistic equipment and devices were seized, including phones, sim cards,
Speaker 7: wireless microphones, microphones, headphones, even my shoelacers. They later took
Speaker 7: my DNA as well my fingerprints, palm prints, and photographed me.
Speaker 7: I was placed in solitary confinement in a cold cell
Speaker 7: that smelt like urine. There was barely any light, and
Speaker 7: the bed, if you can even call it a bed,
Speaker 7: was simply a small concrete ledge with a paper thin mattress.
Speaker 7: The cell had no windows, no heating, no toilet paper.
Speaker 7: I was recorded twenty four to seven with audio and video.
Speaker 7: Even when going to the toilet, I had to eat
Speaker 7: food with a piece of cardboard that you were supposed
Speaker 7: to fold into in order to scoop up the meal.
Speaker 1: The police said that I have the.
Speaker 7: Right to inform someone that I'm locked up, so I said, okay,
Speaker 7: I want to call my family, and then they'd go, well,
Speaker 7: your calls are withheld because of the nature of the
Speaker 7: alleged defense. I tried to ask, well, what's the point
Speaker 7: of a right if you can just randomly withdraw it?
Speaker 7: Why tell me that I have this right at all?
Speaker 7: And one of them said something along the lines of well,
Speaker 7: it's not an absolute right, it can be waived. Similarly,
Speaker 7: they said I had the right to know why I
Speaker 7: was being detained, so I asked again, and the police
Speaker 7: would say something like, well, we're just the arresting officers.
Speaker 7: We don't really know, or this will be explained to
Speaker 7: you during the interview, or some other generic response. Now,
Speaker 7: despite the police officer's civility and cheerfulness, I felt that
Speaker 7: the whole process was designed to humiliate, intimidate, and dehumanize me,
Speaker 7: and treat me like a criminal, Even though they must
Speaker 7: have been aware of my background and that I'm a journalist.
Speaker 7: I was under surveillance almost the entire time, from the
Speaker 7: moment I was arrested until I was released, to be
Speaker 7: in the police van in the station to sell all
Speaker 7: of it, no privacy whatsoever. Many of my requests were
Speaker 7: also delayed or outright ignored. When I was detained, I
Speaker 7: asked for water several times. The police would always say sure,
Speaker 7: but then I ended up waiting hours for a tiny
Speaker 7: cup of water. I asked if I could have my
Speaker 7: own clothes because I was in a T shirt, it
Speaker 7: was cold and I couldn't sleep. They said they give
Speaker 7: me a pullover, but never did, although one god did
Speaker 7: give me a second blanket. See, you have to nag
Speaker 7: and nag for the most basic things. And this is
Speaker 7: why I was afraid that they weren't even going to
Speaker 7: call a solicitor for me. I was able to see
Speaker 7: the nurse on one occasion, but on three other occasions
Speaker 7: when I asked to see the nurse, they say yes,
Speaker 7: and then nothing for many hours, no one.
Speaker 1: In the water, and again it goes on. It's unbelievable.
Speaker 1: And what he said is when they finally got after
Speaker 1: twenty four hours of this, when they finally got somebody
Speaker 1: to come in, it only took an hour for them
Speaker 1: to interrogate him. Why I have to stay there for
Speaker 1: twenty four hours? He says, it was to intimidate me.
Speaker 1: We've already seen this though, whether January six people we've
Speaker 1: seen people now given decades of jail time, life sentences.
Speaker 1: For some of the elderly people who simply showed up
Speaker 1: to exercise their First Amendment protected rights or God given
Speaker 1: rights protected by the First Amendment, a free speech of
Speaker 1: a right to a symbol and peacefully redress their grievances.
Speaker 1: Most of the people, nearly all of the people are
Speaker 1: there for peaceful protest. It is something that is coming
Speaker 1: everywhere all of Western civilization. That's why I call these
Speaker 1: people neosovs. They want to reset civilization. Tech giants and
Speaker 1: AC researchers and AI researchers are proposing digital ID requirements
Speaker 1: to use the Internet, and so you see what they
Speaker 1: want to do is and this is coming from MIT
Speaker 1: and Oxford and Microsoft of course and open AI. Sam Altman,
Speaker 1: you know, the guy who's obsessed with going around and
Speaker 1: scanning people's eyeballs and giving them a little bit of
Speaker 1: crypto trash for their trouble. They say they want to
Speaker 1: stop fraud. That's what they're going to how they're going
Speaker 1: to sell this stuff. Look Microsoft, as I said many
Speaker 1: times before, for creators, they want CCPA. It's not the
Speaker 1: Communist Chinese Chinese Communist Party of America. It could be, though,
Speaker 1: but it is the Coalition for Content Providence and Authentication.
Speaker 1: They want to combine with the media giants and the
Speaker 1: hardware manufacturers, the CPU manufacturers as well as software manufacturers,
Speaker 1: to identify each and every one of us if we
Speaker 1: create any content, whether it is text or a meme,
Speaker 1: or whether it is audio, or whether it is audio
Speaker 1: and video, they want to mark that from the creators
Speaker 1: and stop it. And then they want an ID for
Speaker 1: all the people even read so if they don't like
Speaker 1: what you're reading, they can come after you. And we've
Speaker 1: seen people say, yeah, I don't like anonymity on the Internet.
Speaker 1: Jordan Peterson, for example, who want to know better? He
Speaker 1: got it very upset because he had a lot of
Speaker 1: anonymous trolls. Nobody likes trolls, especially anonymous trolls. But you
Speaker 1: need to focus on what this is really was really
Speaker 1: behind all this so IDs for users to use the
Speaker 1: internet uh CCPA to track the creators and to block them.
Speaker 1: What is the purpose of it to do that kind
Speaker 1: of thing. And it's not just going to be silencing
Speaker 1: you put in a gag in your mouth. They are
Speaker 1: actually going to arrest people. We see the beginnings of
Speaker 1: this in Florida, for example, that heinous act by DeSantis
Speaker 1: and other Republicans. Shameful that they would go to Israel
Speaker 1: to a foreign country in order to, you know, to
Speaker 1: to beg for money. Why they would go there to
Speaker 1: sign it, but to sign a bill that would make
Speaker 1: hate speech a crime, any kind of speech that you hate.
Speaker 1: If you make it a crime, you have just destroyed
Speaker 1: the First Amendment for everyone, for everyone. And so it's
Speaker 1: a very dangerous situation. Before we have a general silenty
Speaker 1: joining us, I just remind everybody if you want to
Speaker 1: start trying to get out of this trap, the system
Speaker 1: that they've got us in again, you can start to
Speaker 1: accumulate gold and silver. And we're going to talk to
Speaker 1: Geral Slinty about gold. He said at the beginning of
Speaker 1: the year, he said, this is going to be the
Speaker 1: year of gold, and certainly it is because it is
Speaker 1: the year of exponentially absurd fiscal activities by both Democrats
Speaker 1: and Republicans. If you want to start to get out
Speaker 1: of this system that is designed going to be designed
Speaker 1: to track and to control you, the system that is
Speaker 1: going to be based on the declining value of the dollar,
Speaker 1: because they are going to eviscerate it with their spending
Speaker 1: and their debt and their other policies, you can start
Speaker 1: to do that gradually. You can do it from fifty
Speaker 1: dollars a month up with wolf Pack, or you can
Speaker 1: buy gold and silver whatever amount you want to with
Speaker 1: a one time per Tony will let you do that.
Speaker 1: He doesn't have a minimum purchase that people can make
Speaker 1: and so he will get the gold and silver for you.
Speaker 1: Or you can start to gradually accumulate as part of
Speaker 1: the Wolfpack and get a group by discount with that.
Speaker 1: All of that is at Davidknight dot goal that'll take
Speaker 1: you to Tony Ardman. And I just want to say
Speaker 1: before we have Gerald joining us that it is very
Speaker 1: important for us to also understand how do we maintain
Speaker 1: our independence in terms of our food supply, our natural
Speaker 1: food chain, and of course it is highly dependent on
Speaker 1: the bee. Patriotbebest dot com it is one of the
Speaker 1: best places where you can go to find information about bees.
Speaker 1: It is a digital b sanctuary for education, engagement, and
Speaker 1: real change. These people know bees and Patriot Best is
Speaker 1: laser focus on restoration and preservation of the American bee population.
Speaker 1: You can learn about how the honeybee benefits all of us,
Speaker 1: discover be friendly and other helpful resources. At the worker
Speaker 1: Bee subscription level of the buzz, you get advocacy opportunities,
Speaker 1: educational information, be friendly products, b rescue activities, and more.
Speaker 1: If you step up to the Queen Bee subscription level
Speaker 1: for Buzz, you get bonus content on patriotic topics related
Speaker 1: to restoring and reinforcing American values. Check them all out
Speaker 1: at Patriotbebest dot com. See all the cool related be
Speaker 1: products that they have there and look at the links
Speaker 1: they have one in particular video link, why is our
Speaker 1: American bee population under attack? All of that is at
Speaker 1: patriotbebst dot com. Do we have a Gerald jet Okay,
Speaker 1: let's take a quick break and we're going to be
Speaker 1: right back with Jerald Slinty. Stay with us.
Speaker 2: Defending the American dream. You're listening to the David Knight.
Speaker 1: Show, all right, welcome back and joining us now is
Speaker 1: Gerald Clinty. I just want to let everybody know we'd
Speaker 1: had a problem and Marky Market sent this to us, said,
Speaker 1: Rumble isn't allowing me to leave likes for the show.
Speaker 1: Travis said it was not working. For a while, it
Speaker 1: looked like it was a Rumble thing, but now it
Speaker 1: is working. So if you would like the stream, that
Speaker 1: really does help us, and that is now working at Rumble.
Speaker 1: But again, it's not just rumble. Wherever you catch the show,
Speaker 1: if you're getting it as recorded video or if you're
Speaker 1: getting it as a podcast audio podcast that you're downloading later,
Speaker 1: please like the show wherever you find it. We are
Speaker 1: heavily censored in shadow band, and that's one of the
Speaker 1: few ways that we can get past it. Also, remember
Speaker 1: that you can find us on Roku. Just look for
Speaker 1: the David Knight Show there at Roku, and you can
Speaker 1: watch it on your TV set as well. Go to
Speaker 1: the Davidnightshow dot com to find all the different places
Speaker 1: you can find the program. And then joining us now
Speaker 1: is Jerald Slente from Trends Research dot com trends Journal
Speaker 1: dot com. Also both of those take you the same place.
Speaker 1: You can see the Trends Journal samples there at Trendsjournal
Speaker 1: dot com three hundred pages or so each week, and
Speaker 1: it is like an online magazine, beautiful way that the
Speaker 1: information is there, but it's really the quality of information
Speaker 1: that is key and the detail of it and the
Speaker 1: we're going to talk about a lot of things that
Speaker 1: Jerald has been talking about this this whole year. This
Speaker 1: year he said was going to be the year of Gold,
Speaker 1: and it certainly had has turned out that way. So
Speaker 1: we want to get his take on what's going on
Speaker 1: with the economy, what's going on with politics, and all
Speaker 1: the rest. Again, if you want to subscribe to the
Speaker 1: journal Trends Journal, you can save ten percent with a
Speaker 1: code Night can I GHT. Thank you for joining us, Gerald,
Speaker 1: good to have you on.
Speaker 4: Thank you for having me. And again, it's only two
Speaker 4: dollars and fifty cents a week. When you go to
Speaker 4: Night and the Wall Street Journals five dollars a day.
Speaker 4: We hardly get anything from it of the big news.
Speaker 9: You know what.
Speaker 4: The big news is some very big picture, some very
Speaker 4: rich guy, a tycoon, his yacht sank. Oh my god,
Speaker 4: A rich guy's yacht sank.
Speaker 7: Oh my god, Oh my god.
Speaker 1: I have covered that this week.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I know.
Speaker 4: Hey, what the hell do like care? Does anybody care
Speaker 4: my sister just died or your mother, your father, your sister,
Speaker 4: your brother, aunts, you uncles died? The hell with them.
Speaker 4: They're only regular paper. That's a rich guy died. That's
Speaker 4: the crap they're shoving down the people's throat, And that's
Speaker 4: why the people don't have a clue what's going on
Speaker 4: in the world.
Speaker 1: That's right.
Speaker 4: All they're doing is selling this clickbait crap because their prostitutes,
Speaker 4: they're media whorees that get paid to put out by
Speaker 4: their corporate pimps and their government horn masters. This has
Speaker 4: been going on for a week a week, I know. Oh,
Speaker 4: and then some other clown guy died of some Perry
Speaker 4: what the hell his name was, some guy that was
Speaker 4: a comedian or something in youoded on twenty twenty three,
Speaker 4: and this is what happened. Right, What do I got
Speaker 4: to know this stuff for? I know?
Speaker 1: Oh, they don't care about tens of millions of people
Speaker 1: who died from the shots do They not a word
Speaker 1: about that. But it's a tragedy when it happens to
Speaker 1: Matthew Perry or when it happens to this tycoon and
Speaker 1: his yachtes thinks that I say, And it is a
Speaker 1: tragedy for them. But again, as you point out, we
Speaker 1: don't know.
Speaker 6: Do I care?
Speaker 2: I don't care.
Speaker 1: That's not news, that's right, Yeah.
Speaker 4: That's not news. What they do. These people are better
Speaker 4: than us. We are only plantation workers of slave land.
Speaker 4: You get that in your head, everybody, you're a nobody,
Speaker 4: that's right. There are the elites the celebrities or celebrities,
Speaker 4: what's a little clown that knows how to play somebody
Speaker 4: else because they can't be themselves. Yeah, celebrities.
Speaker 1: Yeah, they don't want you to know what they're injecting
Speaker 1: into your veins. They don't want you to know where
Speaker 1: they're dumping into your water with the fluoride stuff. The
Speaker 1: way they cover this, you know, because that's uh, you know,
Speaker 1: you might catch on to something by that. So keep
Speaker 1: you distracted with all the stuff about the celebrities and
Speaker 1: the billionaires and things that are happening to them. That's
Speaker 1: that's the journal business.
Speaker 4: Yeah, when you get the trends journal you're getting you're
Speaker 4: getting real news, and we tell you what in the
Speaker 4: world is going on, what it means, and what's next.
Speaker 4: We're political atheists. We don't take a sight on anything,
Speaker 4: on anything. We call it the way it is. It's
Speaker 4: not what you like, what you want, what you wish for,
Speaker 4: what's what is. Yeah, and we said one of our
Speaker 4: top trends this year was a golden year for gold.
Speaker 4: Gold prices have gone up since we've said that four
Speaker 4: hundred and seventy dollars an ounce.
Speaker 2: Wow.
Speaker 4: Wow, Yeah, that's a big it was one of our
Speaker 4: top treads.
Speaker 1: Yep.
Speaker 4: And now as we've going on the air, gold is
Speaker 4: now two thousand, five hundred and seven dollars an ounce.
Speaker 4: And you talked about the Jackson hole, a hole, the
Speaker 4: hole of the wall. Yeah, they're going to lower interest rates.
Speaker 4: Lower interest rates go down, the deeper the dollar falls.
Speaker 4: The deeper the dollar falls, the high goal prices go up.
Speaker 4: This isn't rocket science. We could see gold hitting this
Speaker 4: year easily three thousand dollars an ounce because then you
Speaker 4: have to one of my again, you know, I'm not
Speaker 4: bsing that best selling book International Trends two thousand trend
Speaker 4: tracking all better than megatrens Time Magazine. I mean at
Speaker 4: just a lot of years. One of the things we
Speaker 4: say is trend forecare is opportunity misses those who view
Speaker 4: the world through the eyes of their profession. So when
Speaker 4: you go like to CNBC, Bloomberg all of these all
Speaker 4: they talk about is economics. They rarely talk about the
Speaker 4: geopolitical elements going on that are very important with what's
Speaker 4: going to happen to the economy. And what's going to
Speaker 4: happen to the economy is the Israel War ramping up,
Speaker 4: they're egging Iran to get into it, so the United
Speaker 4: States gets involved in it. And you heard that Kamela
Speaker 4: hilarious last night saying how we have to fight against Iran.
Speaker 4: It's right they are. He went on to say that,
Speaker 4: and there we go with love blah blah bah um.
Speaker 4: Let me see here we go yep, and know this,
Speaker 4: I will never hesitate to take whatever action is necessary
Speaker 4: to defend our forces and our interests against Iran, our
Speaker 4: interests against Iran, defend our forces. What the hell we're
Speaker 4: doing over there?
Speaker 2: Yeah?
Speaker 4: Oh you're illegally in Syria. Oh we're over there, still
Speaker 4: in oil in eastern Syria. What tells the matter? What
Speaker 4: you seleny? You think we would have invaded Irock if
Speaker 4: they major expose broccoli.
Speaker 1: Mm.
Speaker 4: They're going to ramp up this war. Going back to
Speaker 4: gold oil prices at around seventy seven dollars a barrow
Speaker 4: for brinkrude. They're going to double, nearly double if they
Speaker 4: go to war with Iran. That and now they're ramping
Speaker 4: up the war against Russia. If they start attacking Russian
Speaker 4: oil pipelines and oil facilities and on and on, you're
Speaker 4: going to see oil prices go to about one hundred
Speaker 4: and thirty dollars a barrel that will crash the global
Speaker 4: economy and crash the fake equity markets. Gold is a
Speaker 4: number one safe haven asset. We do not have any
Speaker 4: ads in the trend's journal. We don't tell people what
Speaker 4: to do. We do not give financial advice where trend forecasters.
Speaker 4: And we're saying gold is the number one safe haven
Speaker 4: asset in the world. And the prices are going to
Speaker 4: keep going up as the economy keeps going down and
Speaker 4: interest rates keep going down, and this is going to
Speaker 4: be the beginning of the death of the dollar when
Speaker 4: interest rates start going down.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah, And it's when you talk about what is
Speaker 1: happening with the oil and with petro what they call
Speaker 1: it fossil fields, to just call the petrochemicals, that type
Speaker 1: of thing. We had the Wall Street Journal that you
Speaker 1: were just talking about. You know, they once you focused
Speaker 1: on the billionaire who died in a shot, but they
Speaker 1: were putting out the disinformation that there was some rogue
Speaker 1: group of people for Ukraine that blew up the pipeline,
Speaker 1: and they were doing that as a distraction. Earlier this week,
Speaker 1: and then we see the incursion into Russia that happened
Speaker 1: last week, the Curd into Kursk. They are ramping up
Speaker 1: the war, they're ramping up the lives and the propaganda.
Speaker 1: And of course we saw from the very beginning of
Speaker 1: this how it affected Germany and others as they blew
Speaker 1: up that gas pipeline, and now they wanted to have
Speaker 1: the war in the Middle East. That's also going to
Speaker 1: hit oil. It's going to be some rough times because
Speaker 1: that's going to send a shock through the system. Inflation
Speaker 1: is really coming ultimately from money creation, but they can
Speaker 1: send the shock through the system with the energy shocks,
Speaker 1: just as we saw the OPEC embargo. We all lived through.
Speaker 1: You and I are old enough to remember that.
Speaker 4: You're one hundred percent correct, Yeah, one hundred percent correct.
Speaker 4: So it's very serious what's going on. And again, if
Speaker 4: we don't have peace, it's going to be it's going
Speaker 4: to be the end of life on Earth. It's going
Speaker 4: to be the end of life on Earth. Look, you
Speaker 4: go to your trends journal, go back a year and
Speaker 4: a half ago. We said that Ukraine is going to
Speaker 4: target Russian occupied in Ukraine and in Russia nuclear power plans.
Speaker 4: We said they were going to do this and they're doing.
Speaker 4: Then you go to this week's Trends Journal and read
Speaker 4: the article about how Putin has said they have advanced
Speaker 4: their nuclear weaponry attacks, putting them in place in the
Speaker 4: event war happens, and they have the targets in Europe.
Speaker 4: They've already said that, we got the targets already lined up.
Speaker 4: If this kid keeps going up, it's going nuclear. Yeah.
Speaker 4: We are on the cusp of the end of life
Speaker 4: on Earth. Don't you better get you better get this
Speaker 4: in your head. Everybody people say, oh, you're angry. Yeah,
Speaker 4: I'm angry, and Saint Thomas Aquinas said those who are
Speaker 4: not angry when it's justifiably moral to be angry, are immoral.
Speaker 4: I'm angry. I don't I don't like my money going
Speaker 4: to kill other people, and I don't like my government
Speaker 4: killing other people. I'm a man of peace. I'm a
Speaker 4: warrior for the Prince of peace. And as I said,
Speaker 4: you know, it was the cover of the magazine, the
Speaker 4: Trends Journal, back in twenty and eleven. You see that cover, Yeah, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 4: the princip piece became violent, making a whip to drive
Speaker 4: the golden sacks. The merrill lynchmob JP Morgan, Chase City
Speaker 4: bank rolls Fargo out of the Temple. It's the same
Speaker 4: criminal group. It's the same criminal group. Nothing has changed. Yeah,
Speaker 4: and they put him up on a cross. Look what
Speaker 4: they're doing a Scott Ritter Yeah, Yeah, a man that's
Speaker 4: anti war FBI raiding his house.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I talked about that on here when it happened
Speaker 1: a couple of weeks ago. And you know, earlier this
Speaker 1: week we had Phil Donahue die and I played a
Speaker 1: clip where he was talking about the fact that he
Speaker 1: got the same treatment you did, and I mentioned the
Speaker 1: fact that you know what they did to you when
Speaker 1: you opposed the Rock War, they did the same thing
Speaker 1: to him, took him off the air because and that
Speaker 1: was it. You know, he was done because he opposed
Speaker 1: the war. That's the way these guys, I mean. And
Speaker 1: now we've seen that for you know, you pose the
Speaker 1: COVID lockdowns and the jabs and all this other kind
Speaker 1: of stuff. They've got a long list of things now
Speaker 1: that they they will ban us for. But as we
Speaker 1: look at it, let's go back to the to the
Speaker 1: Ukraine thing. She had another red line as they went
Speaker 1: into curse and they keep saying, well, you know that'd
Speaker 1: be a red line, and then they cross that red
Speaker 1: line and wait to see if Putin's going to do anything.
Speaker 1: He doesn't do anything, they go to the next line.
Speaker 1: They're incrementally trying to move us towards a nuclear war
Speaker 1: by crossing one red line after the other and daring
Speaker 1: him to do something about it. But let me ask
Speaker 1: you this. There was this week I reported how in
Speaker 1: Germany they said, all right, we're not going to give
Speaker 1: any more money to Ukraine. I don't know if that's
Speaker 1: real or not, but there's a big fight within the
Speaker 1: country because of what happened with the gas pipelines, because
Speaker 1: of what is happening with energy, and because they had
Speaker 1: to put together a ruling coalition. What is your read
Speaker 1: on that. Do you think that Germany is going to
Speaker 1: in fact pull back from this? Is it going to
Speaker 1: be an issue in terms because they've given a lot
Speaker 1: of money to Ukraine, probably not as much as we have,
Speaker 1: but they give of all the European countries, Germany that's
Speaker 1: given the most. Yeah, what do you think is going
Speaker 1: to happen with that?
Speaker 4: Well, well, it is true that the left wing they
Speaker 4: passed the resolution that passed that they want to pull
Speaker 4: back the money, but they're going to do everything they
Speaker 4: can to turn it around. Yeah, yeah, you know, that's
Speaker 4: the way it is.
Speaker 1: That's a big part of why they did this cursed invasion,
Speaker 1: to show, well, we got a chance of winning this thing.
Speaker 1: You know, what they got is a chance of starting
Speaker 1: off kicking off a nuclear wars. What they've got a
Speaker 1: chance of.
Speaker 4: You know, I am so sick and tired of his
Speaker 4: gender crap that they keep selling. And one of the
Speaker 4: best lines is if all the women were in charge. Yeah,
Speaker 4: deeps on earth. This is spewing out of the mouth
Speaker 4: of Kamala. Hilarious last night. This is her quote as
Speaker 4: commander in chief, stop right there, Commander in chief a
Speaker 4: little clown and they're all clowns. You look at the
Speaker 4: cover this week's trans Journal, Disney World, Disney World White House,
Speaker 4: Minnie Mouse versus Donald Duck. Anyway, as commander in chief,
Speaker 4: you ready, I will ensure America has America always has
Speaker 4: the strongest, you ready, most lethal fighting force in the world.
Speaker 4: Isn't that nice? Lethal? Lethal, deadly? Oh oh, if only
Speaker 4: women were in charge. And then she goes on, five
Speaker 4: days before Russia attack Ukraine, I met with President Zelenski
Speaker 4: to warn him about Russia's plan to invade. I helped
Speaker 4: mobilize a global response over fifteen countries to defend against
Speaker 4: Putin's aggression. As president, I will stand strongly with Ukraine
Speaker 4: and our NATO allies. If only women were in Sean's
Speaker 4: Oh yeah, oh, you will stand strongly. Where are you
Speaker 4: gonna go? You're gonna go over there and fight again strongly.
Speaker 4: You're just gonna steal out your more crap, steal our
Speaker 4: money to give it to them, to the military industrial
Speaker 4: complex to keep bloodying the killing fields. As our country
Speaker 4: is rotting in front of our eyes. Aren't the roads,
Speaker 4: la Velain? The roads up here in Kingston are crap
Speaker 4: from here to New York City, from it, from here
Speaker 4: up to Canada, their crap. The bridges are rotting.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 4: This is an article yesterday in the toilet paper Record,
Speaker 4: the New York Times. Where is it over here? Yeah right, yeah,
Speaker 4: look at this series of service delays exposes Amtrak's ancient equipment. Yeah,
Speaker 4: he got a third world rail system. Take a trip
Speaker 4: in New York on the subways of night in Calcutta. Yeah,
Speaker 4: high speed rail all over the world. That we got crap.
Speaker 1: That's right. Yeah, that's because the military industrial complex and
Speaker 1: the people like Peter Thiel and Eric Schmid are making
Speaker 1: so much money with their wars and their surveillance and
Speaker 1: their police state and all the rest of the stuff.
Speaker 1: You know, they were talking about the fact. Just this
Speaker 1: morning I saw that they've got seventeen naval ships that
Speaker 1: they have to keep it port because they have insufficient manpower.
Speaker 1: Man power, manpower, not woman power, yeah, man sufficient manpower.
Speaker 1: Because they've driven everybody out of the military with their
Speaker 1: DEI and their vax mandates and all the rest of
Speaker 1: this stuff. Nobody wants to be a part of that.
Speaker 1: And so but you know, so even their military aka
Speaker 1: keep it.
Speaker 4: That's only part of it. Yeah, that's only the other
Speaker 4: The other thing is they're too fat to fight. I'm
Speaker 4: going to say, I'm not making that uph's the enemy, right,
Speaker 4: I'm not making that up. The dad is there, Yeah,
Speaker 4: I know, the dad is there. They the military that
Speaker 4: these guys come in. They're you know again as well,
Speaker 4: Once upon it, once upon a time, when we were
Speaker 4: young guys, there was the Ringling Brothers in Bonham Billy circus.
Speaker 4: It went out of business. You know why, you don't
Speaker 4: have to step right up, step right up. See the
Speaker 4: fat man, see the tax lady, see the lady with
Speaker 4: the beard. They're out the street everywhere now, not the painter, seem.
Speaker 1: I've made that comment before. When I was in college,
Speaker 1: I was played in bands and stuff, and one year
Speaker 1: we were in Tampa. One year we had a New
Speaker 1: Year's Eve gig with the in Sarasota with the retired
Speaker 1: circus freaks, and I said, it's way freak here now
Speaker 1: than anything we saw there. It was that was kind
Speaker 1: of unusual, but not like you said. Just walk down
Speaker 1: the street today and it's all lot freakier than that
Speaker 1: party was.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean all the I mean tatooed to death. Yeah,
Speaker 4: it's very healthy to put all that stuff into your bloodstream.
Speaker 4: It's great for you. Yeah, he was saying about here
Speaker 4: you're talking about the military industry. First of all, this
Speaker 4: is a quote, by the way, he was not angry
Speaker 4: when there is just cause for angers and moral why
Speaker 4: because anger looks to the good of justice, and if
Speaker 4: you can live the mid injustice without anger, you are
Speaker 4: in moral as well as unjust. Saint Thomas Aquinas.
Speaker 1: And he's right about that as well, said and then.
Speaker 4: You talked about the military industrial complex. Every gun that
Speaker 4: has made, every warship launched, every rocket fire, it signifies
Speaker 4: in the final sense of theft from those who hunger
Speaker 4: and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed.
Speaker 4: The world in arms is not spending money alone. It's
Speaker 4: spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of the scientists,
Speaker 4: the hopes of the children. This is not a way
Speaker 4: of life at all, in any true sense. Under the
Speaker 4: clouds of war. It is humanity hanging on a cross
Speaker 4: of iron.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 4: Dwight D. Eisenhower, two term president, Supreme Command of the
Speaker 4: Allied Forces before that in five star general, he hated
Speaker 4: war because he saw it.
Speaker 1: Yes, yes, but you know e didn't see it. He
Speaker 1: ran away and all these other people Lindsey Graham never
Speaker 1: bothered to go laala, Harris wasn't didn't sign up. So yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean they're the armchair quarterbacks who can look at
Speaker 1: it as you know, depends on a map. Uh, and
Speaker 1: they don't see the blood.
Speaker 4: Again, I am sick and tired of this crap that
Speaker 4: if only women were in charge, that is sexist. Yeah,
Speaker 4: there would be no war. How about hit Lary Clinton
Speaker 4: when asked on the on the on the show was
Speaker 4: the CBS. How did you feel when you found out
Speaker 4: that Molmar Kadafi was killed? We came, we saw he died, right.
Speaker 4: How about Madelin all that not Madeline? Not all that bright?
Speaker 4: Mm hm, you went us Ambassador United Nations on Leslie's stall,
Speaker 4: Leslie still asked her, is the price of five hundred
Speaker 4: thousand of Rocky children under the age of five that
Speaker 4: have died because of what Bill Clinton has put on
Speaker 4: sanctions and what he's done to a rock worth the price?
Speaker 4: She said, yes, it is. I am tired of this.
Speaker 4: And by the way, it's also sexist to keep calling
Speaker 4: these drinks cocktails. We got to use the other word too,
Speaker 4: you know, we get the women into it. I guess
Speaker 4: say that I can't say that word. I won't say it.
Speaker 1: I guess we kind of had this crap. Yeah, we
Speaker 1: could have had a cocktail every time they said joy
Speaker 1: or freedom or whatever. These people don't support any freedom,
Speaker 1: and the only joy they get is in starting wars
Speaker 1: and telling us what we can't do and locking us
Speaker 1: down all the rest of stuff. They find a great
Speaker 1: deal of joying that they can hardly conceal you talk
Speaker 1: about women leaders. Look at Jabs into Arden, you know,
Speaker 1: and how cocky she was during the lockdown when people said, yeah,
Speaker 1: so you're setting up a two tier system. Here she goes, yep, yep,
Speaker 1: that's what it is, is she laughs, and I mean
Speaker 1: it's just disgusting.
Speaker 4: And then where does she go? She gets a job
Speaker 4: at hobby right, Oh, yeah, that's right. Yeah, as George
Speaker 4: Collins says, one big club and you ain't in it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 4: Wow, one big club and you ain't in it.
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 4: Here she goes on, I will make sure that we
Speaker 4: lead the world into the future on space and artificial intelligence,
Speaker 4: that America, not China, wins the competition for the twenty
Speaker 4: first century, and that we strengthen, not abdicate our global leadership.
Speaker 4: What global leadership you're talking about? How about just worrying
Speaker 4: about America and let the rest of the world solve
Speaker 4: their own problems. It's not my concern. I am an
Speaker 4: America who believes in the founding fathers like George Washington
Speaker 4: that said not to get involved in any foreign entanglements. Basically,
Speaker 4: this crap has been going on for thousands of years.
Speaker 4: That's right, and we're not going to fix it, She
Speaker 4: goes on. Trump, on the other hand, threatened to abandon NATO.
Speaker 4: He encouraged Putin to invade our allies and said Russia
Speaker 4: could do whatever the hell they want. And I agree
Speaker 4: because it's none of my business. I write a magazine.
Speaker 4: I only put facts in it. And here's the magazine.
Speaker 4: He said. How happy that guy is. This is twenty
Speaker 4: and fourteen MS, The United States Overthrow of the democratically
Speaker 4: elected government Pianikovich by the United States, written by doctor
Speaker 4: Paul Craig Roberts.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 4: Yeah, the good people are presented the perfect opportunity for
Speaker 4: Washington to advance, and said Jermonica Agenda in his speech
Speaker 4: at the National Press Club last December, which means twenty thirteen,
Speaker 4: everybody could look us up. Assistant Secretary of State Victoria
Speaker 4: Newlan boasted that Washington and invested five million dollars in
Speaker 4: non governmental organizations NGOs in Ukraine for the purpose to
Speaker 4: teach democracy. To teach Washington is driving the world to
Speaker 4: the final war. World to geminy is not a right
Speaker 4: America has earned. But people have no idea about this,
Speaker 4: don't have a clue. All they do is swallow the
Speaker 4: crap of the mainstream media.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and we keep hearing all this stuff about democracy
Speaker 1: as they shut down our speech, as they look at
Speaker 1: how they manipulated this election. It's the most ridiculous thing.
Speaker 1: This is the Party of democracy, right, and they're going
Speaker 1: to just pick one candidatstity. It's never been more obvious
Speaker 1: that they are selecting these people that they don't have
Speaker 1: any elections. What, they don't even pretend to have any
Speaker 1: elections anymore, just like they don't pretend to follow the
Speaker 1: Constitution or the rest of the stuff. The pretenses come
Speaker 1: off and they're doing it openly. Now that's the scary
Speaker 1: thing I think.
Speaker 4: Yep, oh about a bs all this freedom stuff, freedom, freedom,
Speaker 4: freedom while your political gang is robbing it from us.
Speaker 4: I mean, you know you can't. Again, this is perfect
Speaker 4: or well Ian, draconian right in front of everybody's eyes. Freedom, freedom, freedom.
Speaker 4: Oh you're going to point the misinformation zaw and you're
Speaker 4: talking about freedom? Yeah, no jab, no job freedom. What
Speaker 4: are you talking about?
Speaker 1: Yeah, my body, my choice?
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 1: They didn't say that when it came to the JAB,
Speaker 1: which really was people's body, no question about that, right,
Speaker 1: But they don't care about that. The absolute hypocrisy, and
Speaker 1: of course Republicans won't call them out on that because
Speaker 1: the Republicans were in on that tyranny as well, and
Speaker 1: so they can't do that. They can't obviously call them
Speaker 1: out and say, you're talking about people making their own
Speaker 1: medical decisions, Well, what happened in twenty twenty and twenty
Speaker 1: twenty one and twenty twenty two and so forth. They
Speaker 1: won't say that because they were a part of that
Speaker 1: as well.
Speaker 4: You're one hundred percent right now going back to what
Speaker 4: you said about the you know, not calling them out.
Speaker 4: We called Kamala Harris out in the Trends Journal in
Speaker 4: May of two thousand and twenty two midterm elections. We
Speaker 4: sent out a special trend alert to all our subscribers
Speaker 4: a month ago, a month ago in July ready Kamala
Speaker 4: Harris twenty twenty four. The Trends Journals. May twenty twenty
Speaker 4: two forecast the Trends Journal with forecast that Joe Biden
Speaker 4: would step down and Kamala Harris would run for president
Speaker 4: in twenty twenty four. And now we forecast, minus a
Speaker 4: wildcards such as stock market crash, Harris will beat Donald
Speaker 4: Trump in the race of the White House.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 4: We go on to say that she knows that her
Speaker 4: boss is an unpopular president who is seventy nine years
Speaker 4: old at the time, and she wants to be the
Speaker 4: party's standard bearer and needs to start making a name
Speaker 4: for herself, being that the Biden administration is viewed as
Speaker 4: ineffective and bringing down inflation strongly. Who's in the economy?
Speaker 4: You ready, Harris will seize upon abortion rights because there
Speaker 4: seems to be only two things she can unite her front,
Speaker 4: the Ukraine War support and pro abortion. And that's exactly
Speaker 4: what she did last night. Ye talk about pro abortion
Speaker 4: was the longest of anything she talked about. We go
Speaker 4: on to say that the Republicans will not do well
Speaker 4: in the midterm elections because of their anti abortion stance.
Speaker 5: M h.
Speaker 4: And that's exactly what happened.
Speaker 1: You certainly called it, absolutely true, Absolutely true. Yeah. Now,
Speaker 1: if you know, if there's a stock market crash, oh,
Speaker 1: I guess it'd be interesting to see if there's a
Speaker 1: stock market crash, if it would help her for them,
Speaker 1: now roll No, I'm saying for to help mitigate it,
Speaker 1: to pull out Biden and to put her in as president.
Speaker 1: You know, that might be something that they could pull
Speaker 1: that that might help to distract people, you know, because
Speaker 1: people they can't focus. They've got an intention span of
Speaker 1: about twenty seconds, you know, and so it's a that'd
Speaker 1: be I think there's going to be a lot of
Speaker 1: things that are going to happen in the next couple
Speaker 1: of months between now and the election.
Speaker 4: Frankly, oh anything, oh oh again, if the economy many
Speaker 4: crashes again, going back to Jackson Hall, they're going to
Speaker 4: lower interest rates. They're going to do everything they can
Speaker 4: to pump up economy. We talked before we went on
Speaker 4: the air. We're talking about the phony job numbers, right, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 4: Look how they promoted with almost a million jobs. Almost
Speaker 4: a million jobs were lost that they didn't that they
Speaker 4: lied about.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 4: But as they're lying and saying a great jobs report,
Speaker 4: the markets kept going up. A great jobs report, the
Speaker 4: markets kept going up. Great jobs report, the markets kept
Speaker 4: going They're doing this for a year. This is the
Speaker 4: worst downturn, not a downturn, A readmission of how bad
Speaker 4: the numbers are that since two thousand and nine. They
Speaker 4: lied about it back then because the Great Recession was
Speaker 4: going on, right exactly, and they lied about it then.
Speaker 1: Which is kind of an admission, isn't it about the
Speaker 1: recession that we're in right now? And you know that's
Speaker 1: the sort of thing and I've talked about that, the
Speaker 1: fact that they will always give you inflated numbers for
Speaker 1: right now, and then they will revise the previous quarters
Speaker 1: to make it look even better. Oh, look at the trend,
Speaker 1: it's always getting better, right, But this is you pointed
Speaker 1: out the worst lie that they have told except in
Speaker 1: the middle of the Great Recession. Yeah, the only one,
Speaker 1: and that was only slightly bigger. Yeah, yeah, yeah, amazing.
Speaker 4: So what's going on? We are in the worst geopolitical
Speaker 4: and socioeconomic crisis. Again, I'm at this for forty four years,
Speaker 4: and I'll put my track record up against anybody. Show
Speaker 4: me your book, show you a magazine, and then we
Speaker 4: can start talking. We are in the worst crisis in
Speaker 4: We are going to have the worst financial crisis in
Speaker 4: the history of the world. Part one and part two,
Speaker 4: and again. If we don't stop these wars from going on,
Speaker 4: it's going to be the end of life on Earth.
Speaker 4: World War two is not ancient history.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's right, absolutely right. So what is the what
Speaker 1: is the best as we look at these trends. What
Speaker 1: is the best we can do, assuming that there's not
Speaker 1: a war, assuming that it's just going to go down
Speaker 1: these economic scenarios, Gold is something that is the best
Speaker 1: safe haven. Is there anything else that you would recommend?
Speaker 4: Yeah, if you want to gamble, it's a gamble. I
Speaker 4: gamble on the bitcoin thing. I started buying it at
Speaker 4: seventeen thousand. It's a gamble.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 4: And if there wasn't a bitcoin, you'd see gold probably
Speaker 4: double the price it is now. And they're going to
Speaker 4: keep that going until they go digital currencies, which is
Speaker 4: going to happen because then they know every penny's spent,
Speaker 4: where you spent it, what you spent it on. So
Speaker 4: the Sung politicians could get the money for tax purposes
Speaker 4: because they never work a day in their life. Look
Speaker 4: at Biden. How many years he's sucking off the public?
Speaker 4: Tit what sixty years? And again this is important too,
Speaker 4: David Trump, Trump, Trump, Biden, Greenberg, Iceberg. What's the difference anyway,
Speaker 4: Trump Biden Biden made. You might wake up one day
Speaker 4: and said, and here we have very bad news. President
Speaker 4: Joe Biden has come down with a series of very
Speaker 4: illnesses or something like that.
Speaker 11: Got monkey parks, the monkey pox, monkey brain, and he
Speaker 11: is turning all these He's resigning as president, and Kamala Harris.
Speaker 4: Will become president of the United States. Now that even
Speaker 4: brings her up the hire she's going to get again,
Speaker 4: you go by then numbers. That's all we do. We
Speaker 4: go by the numbers. She's going to get the women vote,
Speaker 4: she's going to get the Black vote, she's going to
Speaker 4: get most of the Hispanic vote and the Asian vote.
Speaker 4: The numbers are there. Again, it's not what you want,
Speaker 4: what you like, what you wish for. What's what is again?
Speaker 4: The data this is from This was twenty twenty three.
Speaker 4: NBC News noted that the Public Policy Research Is th
Speaker 4: ran a national poll in February that found sixty four
Speaker 4: percent of Americans think abortion should be legal. The poll
Speaker 4: was broken down by political affiliation eighty seven percent of Democrats,
Speaker 4: sixty five percent of independence. This is no brainer. And again,
Speaker 4: what's very important, it's it's a reality show. We own
Speaker 4: a trademark presidential reality show. If you watch that clown
Speaker 4: show to put on that convention course, tens of millions
Speaker 4: of dollars, well one hundred thousand balloons falling or something.
Speaker 4: It's a show. The kids come out dancing. It's a show.
Speaker 4: It's a show. It's a it's a scripted reality show.
Speaker 4: That's all you're watching. It's another chapter, another day, another week.
Speaker 4: This thing is all scripted out. And you saw Oprah Winfrey.
Speaker 4: You go back to the trans Journal. Two thousand was
Speaker 4: a two thousand and eight when Obama ran, there was
Speaker 4: two thousand and eight, twenty ten. I forget anyway. We
Speaker 4: said that when that was the first time, and I
Speaker 4: was on Oprah twice. I have a mugs roof. You
Speaker 4: can look it up, the and I and Nobody and
Speaker 4: I used to be on Everybody as you know as
Speaker 4: CNN in USA today uh uh, the Today's Show, Good
Speaker 4: Wing and Marry Everybody, Everybody, Everybody, Everybody, Fox, Nobody put
Speaker 4: on a show like Oprah. She was the top of
Speaker 4: the top. What a what a what a cruise she had,
Speaker 4: what a sensational We wrote that when she took Obama
Speaker 4: under her wing, he became a different person, a whole
Speaker 4: different actor.
Speaker 2: Mm hmm.
Speaker 4: She's an act. This is an act.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 4: Kamela Harris has been groomed by the Disney Gang by
Speaker 4: her husband was an entertainment lawyer, and she's Oprah is
Speaker 4: teaching her how to play the game. She's an actress.
Speaker 4: That's all this is. It's an act Yeah, and they're
Speaker 4: at the top.
Speaker 1: And she's not controlled. I mean, she's not going to
Speaker 1: go out and do some interview or press conference with
Speaker 1: somebody because she'd have to add lib. But it's very controlled.
Speaker 4: Yep.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, you know it's not over till the Fat
Speaker 1: Lady sings. And so I guess you know when Oprah
Speaker 1: what Oprah is saying it was, that was it?
Speaker 4: You know, Yes, so that's it. She's gonna she's gonna
Speaker 4: blow him out.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 4: And again, the other vote are the people. If Biden ran,
Speaker 4: the I hate Trumpers would not have gone out. They're
Speaker 4: going to go out too. They'll go out to vote.
Speaker 4: She's going to get the women vote, the young vote,
Speaker 4: the black vote, Hispanic vote, in the Asian vote.
Speaker 1: Now, what's your take on a RFK Junior, Because you
Speaker 1: know a lot of people say, oh, that's it now
Speaker 1: if he endorses Trumps all over. I don't see it
Speaker 1: that way because I think, you know, I've watched what happens,
Speaker 1: because I've been involved in third party politics. I've watched
Speaker 1: what happens with independence and third parties. People will go there.
Speaker 1: Most of them are dissatisfied with the two party system,
Speaker 1: but at the very end, most of them will go
Speaker 1: with a lesser of two evils type of thing. I
Speaker 1: think that's going to happen again this what do you
Speaker 1: think what's going to happen with you?
Speaker 4: You're a hundred percent right, Yeah, And what a term
Speaker 4: that people actually use. A lesser of two evils. That's
Speaker 4: like saying almost pregnant. There's no such thing as a
Speaker 4: lesser of two evils.
Speaker 1: Evil is evil, that's right, that's right.
Speaker 4: And all these you know, as I said, you know,
Speaker 4: it's not what you like, what you want, what you
Speaker 4: wish for. But the hypocrisy of these so called anti
Speaker 4: abortion evangelical Christians like this clown boy that's the Democratic
Speaker 4: guy that runs the show in the house, Mike Johnson. Yeah, yeah, oh,
Speaker 4: an anti abortion. But kill anybody anywhere, kill all those
Speaker 4: gods and in those Palestinians, weapons to keep bloodying the
Speaker 4: killing feels over there and Ukraine, but don't kill the unborn,
Speaker 4: only kill the living.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 4: Hypocrisy these people, it is awful.
Speaker 1: It is awful and it is indefensible as well. And
Speaker 1: everybody sees it, you know, everybody sees it. They think
Speaker 1: that nobody sees that, but everybody does see it.
Speaker 5: You know.
Speaker 1: It's an interesting article on Reason. They said Trump and
Speaker 1: Harris's economic plans are depressingly similar. And of course the
Speaker 1: similarity is it is that they believe that government can
Speaker 1: and should solve all the problems centrally there. And and
Speaker 1: why is it this way? Reason doesn't answer it, but
Speaker 1: I think it is because both of you know, both
Speaker 1: the people who are supporting them as hardcore those both
Speaker 1: those groups see government as savior, government as solution, and
Speaker 1: they're demanding that they come up with solutions to these problems.
Speaker 1: Now they see the problems slightly differently, and they've got
Speaker 1: slightly different solutions and so forth. But the fundamental thing
Speaker 1: that is the same with all of them is that
Speaker 1: they think that the federal government needs to solve every problem.
Speaker 1: Then that it can solve every problem if they only
Speaker 1: get the right person there. And that's what's really tearing
Speaker 1: our country apart, and it's what's making us so susceptible
Speaker 1: to this massive corruption. I mean, just look at the
Speaker 1: money that's there. She made half a billion dollars and
Speaker 1: contributions in the first month. That's what she got.
Speaker 4: I don't that's great again Again we write about this
Speaker 4: week after week after week. The billionaires one of the
Speaker 4: count got no money, You got no you got no
Speaker 4: chance to return for office. And you said it earlier.
Speaker 4: We got two damn parties running the whole country for
Speaker 4: they called this a democracy, bringing freedom of democracy to
Speaker 4: other countries, and we will don't have it over here.
Speaker 4: You got to choice these two clowns shows, which bunch
Speaker 4: of jerks do you like the best? Like I like
Speaker 4: Lindsey Graham. Oh, I like Chucky Schuma. You know, may
Speaker 4: look at a little clown show.
Speaker 1: That's right. Yeah, And you got Menendez. So he's out
Speaker 1: there stashing up gold bars. So by the way, you know,
Speaker 1: he's got a goal, got up to two twenty five
Speaker 1: hundred dollars an ounce. That means that one bar of
Speaker 1: goal like that like Menendez had, is worth a million bucks.
Speaker 1: So he's got these, he's got these gold bars there.
Speaker 1: At least he was smart about that. He wasn't smart
Speaker 1: about the crimes that he committed, but he's smart about
Speaker 1: where he went, how he wanted to be paid, but
Speaker 1: as he's had this isn't his first rodeo, and then
Speaker 1: the first one he was able to get off because
Speaker 1: Lindsay Graham comes in as a character witness. That's the
Speaker 1: most laughable thing about his first trial is that anybody
Speaker 1: would think if Lindsey Graham is your character witness, that
Speaker 1: you wouldn't be de facto guilty.
Speaker 4: You know, the character the perfect name for Lindsey Graham,
Speaker 4: a character.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, that's right.
Speaker 4: And they keep quoting a slow they keep quoting him.
Speaker 4: You know where I am up in my office here
Speaker 4: right back in the day. I used to be on
Speaker 4: fuck And they should send a truck up here, the
Speaker 4: satellite things back in the day.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, yeah, So they come up here.
Speaker 4: They're doing an interview this like during you know, when
Speaker 4: the whole the Panic of eight was going on. I
Speaker 4: took that domain name out the Panic of eight in
Speaker 4: two thousand and seven. I'm doing a live show on Fox.
Speaker 4: They got the truck up here and everything. Missus clenty,
Speaker 4: we have to take a break. Senator Graham is coming
Speaker 4: on to talk about I swear to god, they keep
Speaker 4: quoting this jirk. He's a nobody. Yeah, he's an arrogant nobody.
Speaker 1: It's amazing. And then you know, you talk about these
Speaker 1: chicken warhawks, right, Tim Walls, he's kind of another line
Speaker 1: that's just come out, you know, besides the fact that
Speaker 1: he took a powder when his unit was going to
Speaker 1: go to the Iraq war, right, and then he continues
Speaker 1: to inflate his rank. And now the new thing on
Speaker 1: him is that he's been claiming that he re upped
Speaker 1: because of nine to eleven and it turns out that
Speaker 1: the dates don't match up for any of this stuff. Right,
Speaker 1: But this guy is making himself into this fake war hero.
Speaker 1: He's probably even worse than Lindsay Graham because they all
Speaker 1: want war. But you know, Lindsey Graham is not patted
Speaker 1: his resume that much. And he's another one of the people.
Speaker 1: It's been a National Guard for a long time and
Speaker 1: he's never done anything. But Tim wall suggests, it's amazing
Speaker 1: to me. But again, I think you're right. I think
Speaker 1: that's not going to be the main issues. Yeah, people
Speaker 1: about that, What about the so talk about this RFK
Speaker 1: Junior thing. Give us your take on that's.
Speaker 4: Not going anywhere again. You know what happened RFK Junior
Speaker 4: had a great shot. I had my again. We're having
Speaker 4: a peace and freedom rally here on September twenty eighth,
Speaker 4: and you were here at one of them. On We're
Speaker 4: going to have Max Blumenthal, Anya power Pool, Scott Ritter,
Speaker 4: Judge Napolitano and others on September twenty eighth. Go to
Speaker 4: occupy peace occupy peace dot com and please donate. We
Speaker 4: can't do the billionaires gave us money for peace. We
Speaker 4: got peace tomorrow anyway, and Judge Napolitano he wants and
Speaker 4: we're we got to get a million people, we got
Speaker 4: to close down the throughway, we got to make the
Speaker 4: news that we want peace. So anyway, going back, what
Speaker 4: was your question, I'm sorry I lost the RFK oh Okay.
Speaker 4: So at one of the rallies, not this May, but
Speaker 4: last May, we had Dennis Cascinach that was RFK Junior's
Speaker 4: campaign manager, was one of the speakers here. I was
Speaker 4: on the phone with RFK Junior twice. I donated the
Speaker 4: most amount of money that an individual could donate to
Speaker 4: rfkse campaign, six thousand, six hundred dollars. Cascinage quit as
Speaker 4: the campaign manager, and I got my money back when
Speaker 4: rfk Jr. Said to the effect that there's no more
Speaker 4: spoiled people on earth in the Palestinians, and his pro
Speaker 4: Israel genocide statements over and over again. That was the
Speaker 4: beginning of the end of his campaign. He had a
Speaker 4: great opportunity. He lost all the support from the people
Speaker 4: that want to see a new system and believed in
Speaker 4: him because he was so anti Ukraine war but so
Speaker 4: pro Israel war. That was the end of rfk junion.
Speaker 4: He's going nowhere fast supporting Trump, big deal, no deal.
Speaker 1: I agree. I thought that he was untrustworthy from the
Speaker 1: very beginning because of the fact that he would not
Speaker 1: come clean about what he said about locking up people
Speaker 1: who had oppose radical climate issues, and nobody asked him
Speaker 1: about that for the longest time. Finally, when somebody did,
Speaker 1: he lied about it and he said, no, I wasn't
Speaker 1: talking about the Koch brothers. I was talking about their companies. No,
Speaker 1: he's talking about three hots in a cot. You don't
Speaker 1: do that to a corporation. So you know, he didn't
Speaker 1: come clean on that. I had tried to contact him.
Speaker 1: I actually had an interview that was set up with him.
Speaker 1: When he put out the Fauci book, and I thought
Speaker 1: it was a good book. I liked chapter twelve, especially
Speaker 1: years was about the Germ Games and things like that.
Speaker 1: And I had interviewed the head of Children's Health Defense
Speaker 1: in California. She's an heiress of the Oscar Meyer fortune,
Speaker 1: and we had a good rapport when I did the
Speaker 1: interview with her, and I said, can you get can
Speaker 1: you get him on? I'd like to talk to him.
Speaker 1: We had it all set up, and just before the
Speaker 1: program began, he canceled out and they would not reschedule.
Speaker 1: And that was before he was running for office. I mean,
Speaker 1: it was going to be a friendly interview. There wasn't
Speaker 1: really anything that, you know, I was going to criticize
Speaker 1: him for. I wasn't, you know. It wasn't any point
Speaker 1: of going back and talking about his climate radicalism until
Speaker 1: he ran for president, and then I didn't trust that,
Speaker 1: you know, he did. If he's going to call for
Speaker 1: locking up opponents, that's a big issue for free speech,
Speaker 1: and if he's going to run as a free speech candidate,
Speaker 1: he needs to address that right up front. I don't
Speaker 1: support that anymore because I've learned better. That'd be fine,
Speaker 1: but he wouldn't do that, and so I really didn't
Speaker 1: trust him.
Speaker 4: Yeah, well I could tell you one evening, Judge Napolitano,
Speaker 4: Scott rid of myself. We're out for dinner one night,
Speaker 4: and this is when Kennedy started becoming pro Israeli genocide
Speaker 4: and Judge let me text him and he said, you know,
Speaker 4: I'm here with Gerald and Scott and you know we're
Speaker 4: we don't support your position on Israel. And I like,
Speaker 4: she just tell us why you're doing this and he
Speaker 4: wrote back, texted back something very nasty and you know
Speaker 4: it wouldn't talk about it or anything else.
Speaker 1: And that was the end of it. Interesting.
Speaker 4: And again I do podcasts with Judge Napolitano every Wednesday,
Speaker 4: so you can see them on the Gerald Gerald's Solente
Speaker 4: channel or the Trends Journal channel. And I'm telling you
Speaker 4: that you got to see this Judging Freedom, a judges show.
Speaker 4: The people that he has on there are spectacular and
Speaker 4: Phil Giraldi, Colonel McGregor, and they're really calling it out man,
Speaker 4: and it's a good show for everybody to consider. Looking
Speaker 4: at Judging Freedom.
Speaker 1: Boy should get Colonel McGregor on. I'm sure he tried
Speaker 1: to get him. It'd be great if you could for
Speaker 1: the occupy piece thing.
Speaker 4: Yeah. Yeah, I've been on you know, we know each
Speaker 4: other and we correspond back and forth, and he's considering it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, he's spot on. He's been one hundred percent right
Speaker 1: on all this stuff. Absolutely. Yeah, it's too bad we
Speaker 1: can't get people like him. This country doesn't deserve leaders
Speaker 1: as good as Colonel McGregor, does it.
Speaker 4: Look at it, it's a clown show.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 4: Again, it's a reality show. This whole thing is scripted out.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 4: We wrote that again. We wrote back in twenty twenty
Speaker 4: three that they were going to get rid of Biden.
Speaker 4: People knew he was out of his mind twenty twenty two.
Speaker 4: Excuse me that he was out of his mind. This
Speaker 4: is all set up. They never, never, ever before did
Speaker 4: they have a debate in June.
Speaker 1: That's right.
Speaker 4: They did the debate with Biden and Trump in June
Speaker 4: to show that Biden was out of his mind so
Speaker 4: they could pull him out.
Speaker 1: Oh, I absolutely agree. I said that myself. I said,
Speaker 1: look at the how ridiculous this is. Usually, you know,
Speaker 1: the first debate is a month or more after, sometimes
Speaker 1: two months. Usually they had the last Conventions of the
Speaker 1: beginning of August and they would have the first debate
Speaker 1: the end of September and then have another one in
Speaker 1: the middle of October, and then the end of October
Speaker 1: sort of put it a couple of months before their convention.
Speaker 1: To move their convention later and to move the debate
Speaker 1: that much earlier, it was obvious. But I think they
Speaker 1: also had planned out that they wanted to run against Trump.
Speaker 1: And I think that, you know, when you look at
Speaker 1: all of the petty law fair against Trump, which was absurd,
Speaker 1: and it made him into a martyr, and it meant
Speaker 1: that nobody had a chance to run against him. He
Speaker 1: didn't debate anybody. I mean, he skipped the whole process
Speaker 1: as well. And so they with their actions, they guaranteed
Speaker 1: that he was going to get the nomination. And Nikki Haley,
Speaker 1: who I absolutely despise. She is one of the worst
Speaker 1: examples of stuff, but she's savvy when it comes to politics.
Speaker 1: And she said, you know, back in January February, she said,
Speaker 1: whoever replaces whichever party replaces Trump or Biden, is going
Speaker 1: to win. So she says, it's going to be me
Speaker 1: or it's going to be La La. And she was
Speaker 1: right about that. I really think she was. You know
Speaker 1: it was they engineered the fact that they made sure
Speaker 1: that Trump was not going to get replaced, and then
Speaker 1: they engineered it to replace Biden. I think it was
Speaker 1: the plan all along. Yeah. By the way, I showed
Speaker 1: something earlier this week which I just thought was a whot.
Speaker 1: You got to look it up, Gerald, maybe you put
Speaker 1: it in trends General. One of the reasons I think
Speaker 1: they are so fixated on nobody calling her Kamala is
Speaker 1: there was a Kamala Harris professional wrestler back in the
Speaker 1: nineteen eighties, a big, heavy black guy who wore like
Speaker 1: a war paint and everything. I guess they don't want
Speaker 1: any association with her and professional wrestling because this whole
Speaker 1: thing is about professional wrestling, isn't it.
Speaker 4: It is It's a show. Yeah, this is her opening
Speaker 4: statement to Joe Biden, mister President. When I think about
Speaker 4: the path we have traveled together, I am filled with
Speaker 4: grap attitude. You ready, your record is extraordinary and he
Speaker 4: will show as history will show extraordinary.
Speaker 1: Well, I didn't say it was exordinarily good.
Speaker 4: I mean, you know, and your character is inspiring. Yeah,
Speaker 4: he's a character, right, Doug, And I love you and
Speaker 4: Jill and I am forever thankful to you both.
Speaker 1: I think character was expiring.
Speaker 4: Uh yeah, and then then you're ready for us noll
Speaker 4: all Americans. This election is not only the most important
Speaker 4: of our lives. You're ready, it is one of the
Speaker 4: most important in the life of our nation.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's crazy.
Speaker 4: Wow, it's crazy.
Speaker 1: It certainly is a reality TV show, but yep, it is.
Speaker 1: It is very important to understand the trends. And of
Speaker 1: course you saw all this stuff coming. We just had
Speaker 1: uh you know, even more talk this last week. I
Speaker 1: think it was I forget which city was in some
Speaker 1: commercial reial state was auctioned off at twenty five percent
Speaker 1: less than they expected, which was probably a gift that
Speaker 1: could even sell it at any price. You know, all
Speaker 1: of that is coming, as you pointed out, the snowball
Speaker 1: for the banking system that is going to build, onto
Speaker 1: the commercial real estate collapse and all the rest of
Speaker 1: this stuff. It's we're up for some difficult times. It's
Speaker 1: a good thing to understand and to be able to
Speaker 1: see where the trends are going. As you point out,
Speaker 1: if you use the code night you can get Trends
Speaker 1: Journal for just two fifty a week and a massive
Speaker 1: amount of content that's there, a wide variety of topics
Speaker 1: and articles and at each week and again use the
Speaker 1: code night go to Trends Journal and you need to
Speaker 1: have all the information that you can get, and there's
Speaker 1: a lot of information there. Thank you so much, Jerald
Speaker 1: for coming on. I really do appreciate it.
Speaker 4: Thank you, thank you for all that you do. I
Speaker 4: really appreciate it.
Speaker 1: Thank you. I want to remind everybody again the occupy
Speaker 1: piece thing coming up September twenty eighth, Is that correct
Speaker 1: in Kingston?
Speaker 4: That's right? Okay, we occupypeace dot com occupy piece with
Speaker 4: the information good good.
Speaker 1: Yeah. People need to turn out for that if they can.
Speaker 1: It's very important that we show that we want peace.
Speaker 1: Maybe they would pay some attention to it. Who knows
Speaker 1: as always worth a try. Thank you so much, Cheryl,
Speaker 1: appreciate it, thank you.
Speaker 4: Thank you. And again not a peep about piece from
Speaker 4: either Trump or Harris. Not a peep about peace.
Speaker 1: That's right, that's right.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Well, you know we know who's running the country, don't we.
Speaker 1: The military industrial complex is. I'm absolutely doing it well, folks.
Speaker 1: Before before we end, I just want to let all
Speaker 1: of you know how much we appreciate your support, and
Speaker 1: we certainly could use your support. Go to the Davidnightshow
Speaker 1: dot com. You can see where the gas gauge is
Speaker 1: and you can see how much we need your support,
Speaker 1: So we really would appreciate that. And we're going to
Speaker 1: be back next week and for Labor Day. I am
Speaker 1: going to take a day off next Friday, so we'll
Speaker 1: see what happens through the week. But we are right there,
Speaker 1: right about the midpoint with our gas gags, so we
Speaker 1: could certainly use your support. If you want to know
Speaker 1: where you can find a show, and if you'd like
Speaker 1: to know how you can support us, you can see
Speaker 1: it there at the Davidnightshow dot com. Well as we
Speaker 1: hold our breath and wait to see what is going
Speaker 1: to happen with RFK Junior and with Jerome Powell, just
Speaker 1: understand that your life is not held hostage to these
Speaker 1: people anymore than your life matters. That it matters to
Speaker 1: your life what is happening to these famous people and
Speaker 1: these tragedies that happen to them personally, they don't care
Speaker 1: about the tragedies that happen to you. And so focus
Speaker 1: your efforts on how you can raise your family, the
Speaker 1: things that you can do for your family that are
Speaker 1: going to take you out of this control system that
Speaker 1: they have set up for all of us. When we
Speaker 1: look at what is happening at the the DNC, I said,
Speaker 1: Reason magazine said Trump and Harris's economic plans are depressingly similar.
Speaker 1: There are variations on the theme of big, fiscally irresponsible,
Speaker 1: hyperinterervisionist government, government as your savior, government as the solution
Speaker 1: to the problems that you have in life for the
Speaker 1: people who really don't care about the problems that you
Speaker 1: have in life, no matter how many times they try
Speaker 1: to assure you that they So both candidates have a
Speaker 1: penchant for industrial policy, that both candidates are going to
Speaker 1: pick the winning and the losing industries. And so they
Speaker 1: hit La La Harris for trying to subsidize the green agenda,
Speaker 1: for both parties wanting to subsidize the semiconductor industry. But look,
Speaker 1: let's understand that both of these parties, as Gerald said,
Speaker 1: neither of them talk about peace. Will neither of them
Speaker 1: talk about getting rid of the Paris Climate Accord, for example,
Speaker 1: that is a fundamental root problem that is dragging our
Speaker 1: society down. And neither one of them are are going
Speaker 1: to call the bluff that essentially is to say that
Speaker 1: we've got to shut down our industry, shut down our
Speaker 1: life because of some imaginary problem. And it's an imaginary treaty.
Speaker 1: And Trump would not call it out on that. He
Speaker 1: abided by the lines of the treaty that we're going
Speaker 1: to officially get out of it, but it's going to
Speaker 1: take me four years to do it. Well, why do
Speaker 1: you think they set it up that way so that
Speaker 1: no president would have the ability to get out, Or
Speaker 1: they could say that they're going to get out exactly
Speaker 1: what Trump did and not get out. Both candidates spend recklessly.
Speaker 1: Neither of them are talking about the debt or the
Speaker 1: deficit either. These are the fundamental problems. And of course
Speaker 1: none of them are talking about reducing even the size
Speaker 1: of the irs. Instead, they're going to stand along with
Speaker 1: Mike Johnson to increase it by a factor of seven.
Speaker 1: Why are they doing that? It is to rob you blind,
Speaker 1: to make sure that you own well. Have a good weekend.
Speaker 1: We'll talk to you on Monday.
Speaker 5: The David Night Show is a critical thinking super spreader.
Speaker 5: If you've been exposed to logic by listening to The
Speaker 5: David Night Show.
Speaker 1: Please do your part and try not to spread it.
Speaker 5: Financial support or simply tell the others about the show
Speaker 5: causes this dangerous information to spread.
Speaker 2: Father.
Speaker 5: People have to trust.
Speaker 1: Me, I mean trust the science.
Speaker 5: Wear your mask, take your vaccine, don't ask questions
Speaker 2: Using free speech to free minds, It's The David Knight Show.