Speaker 1: In a world of deceit, telling the truth is a
Speaker 1: revolutionary act. It's the David Knight Show.
Speaker 2: As the clock strikes thirteen, it's Monday, the seventh of April.
Speaker 2: You have our Lord, twenty twenty five. Well, today we're
Speaker 2: going to tell you. It's not going to be the
Speaker 2: first thing we cover. We're going to tell you that
Speaker 2: law fair has been instituted against me and my family
Speaker 2: here in the show. Give you the details about that,
Speaker 2: what's going to be done about it. But we're going
Speaker 2: to begin with the tariffs, because some people are starting
Speaker 2: to catch on to the fraud behind these tables. You
Speaker 2: even had yesterday on the news shows. You had CBS's
Speaker 2: Margaret Brennan came after Howard Lutnick, although she wasn't well
Speaker 2: enough informed and didn't press to really get the answers.
Speaker 2: We're going to take a deeper look at the tariffs,
Speaker 2: what that's going to do to us economically, and the
Speaker 2: purpose of Trump as the chaos wrecking ball. And it
Speaker 2: turns out that Trump is really good at killing people,
Speaker 2: just like Obama. Remember when Obama bragged about that killed
Speaker 2: over four hundred people back in twenty fifteen. Well, they're
Speaker 2: up to it again, and we'll take a look at
Speaker 2: this picture and what people on both sides are saying.
Speaker 2: When people are saying this was a bombing of civilians
Speaker 2: gathered for an Islamic ceremony, other people were saying, no,
Speaker 2: it wasn't. Look at the picture. We'll talk about them,
Speaker 2: we'll come back, stay with us. Well. I said on
Speaker 2: Friday that these tariff numbers I said on Thursday actually
Speaker 2: when they first came out, so they don't make any
Speaker 2: sense at all. Released on Wednesday after the show. So
Speaker 2: I came in on Thursday morning I talked about it.
Speaker 2: I said, these numbers don't make any sense. I can't
Speaker 2: find out where these numbers are. As a matter of fact,
Speaker 2: when I look at every trade organization, they have very
Speaker 2: different numbers. There were orders of magnitude less. So I said,
Speaker 2: something is up with us. They say it's a weighted
Speaker 2: tariff average folks, it's not tariff numbers at all. It
Speaker 2: was a full blown why And by Friday I talked
Speaker 2: about where that came from. We showed you the clips
Speaker 2: how it came from. AI came from chat GPT actually
Speaker 2: just a made up metric. Chat GPT made it up.
Speaker 2: You could reproduce it yourself. Many people did, but there
Speaker 2: were some people that figured it out before they saw
Speaker 2: that it was on chat GPT, and so we're going
Speaker 2: to talk about the implications of that. But over the
Speaker 2: weekend we had a lot of people talking about the
Speaker 2: implications of that. Saturday Night Live began by talking about
Speaker 2: the tariffs stuff, because of course it's pretty big. We
Speaker 2: lost I think eleven trillion dollars in the stock market
Speaker 2: and it's still going down, and so it's a pretty
Speaker 2: big subject. Are we going to go into recession, stagflation, depression?
Speaker 2: What is it?
Speaker 3: It is?
Speaker 4: Look at it, it's beautiful.
Speaker 5: We spent so much time and frankly, millions of dollars
Speaker 5: on this visa guard.
Speaker 3: Have you listed the countries.
Speaker 2: And in order?
Speaker 5: That's neither alphabetical nor numerical for some confusion.
Speaker 4: And the tariffs will be reciprocal. We love the word reciprocal.
Speaker 4: You know, some people say my plan is nonsense. But
Speaker 4: we're using a formula. Okay, they call it a formula.
Speaker 5: It's very complicated, but let me explain how it works.
Speaker 2: Give me that, all right, So that's a triangle.
Speaker 3: I don't know what that is.
Speaker 5: But up here that's she from China and that's me
Speaker 5: stabbing him with the sword. Anyway you get it, your
Speaker 5: money's gone, and that's okay. We're gonna figure it out.
Speaker 5: You know, no country is safe from my tariffs. So
Speaker 5: I even put tariffs on an island that is uninhabited
Speaker 5: by humans. It's called herd and McDonald Island, McDonald Island.
Speaker 3: I'd love to visit there, right, McDonald Island.
Speaker 5: Can you imagine that a big mac and a hula
Speaker 5: skirt u la la.
Speaker 3: You know I had to mock.
Speaker 5: Up some artwork of McDonald Island now, or do you
Speaker 5: mind bringing that up?
Speaker 6: There?
Speaker 2: We go?
Speaker 5: I want to go to there, Dina, give me the
Speaker 5: God's country.
Speaker 2: Right, Well, it turns out that was Saturday Night Live.
Speaker 2: It turns out Sunday Morning Live. Margaret Brennan comes after
Speaker 2: Howard Lutnick can confront him with basically about as much
Speaker 2: depth as a Saturday Night Live parody. And by the way,
Speaker 2: that's what we're going to be talking about later. The
Speaker 2: lawfair against us involves parody. Satire is the most dangerous weapon,
Speaker 2: said the guy who dedicated his book to Satan. Rules
Speaker 2: for Radicals by Slawinsky. It is a very dangerous weapon,
Speaker 2: and they certainly did parody him, and the talking points
Speaker 2: of the Trump character were repeated by Margaret Brennan. Unfortunately,
Speaker 2: she didn't pay any attention to what was really behind
Speaker 2: all of that. Here's what she had to say with
Speaker 2: Lutnik and how he just kind of laughed it off
Speaker 2: like it was a Saturday Night Live joke.
Speaker 7: When we saw the President stand in the Rose Garden
Speaker 7: holding up that chart that you helped make that wasn't
Speaker 7: actually tariffs, that was actually confusing to investors because it
Speaker 7: was some kind of other formula, and the countries themselves
Speaker 7: seemed kind of random, like why are the Hurd and
Speaker 7: McDonald Islands, which don't export to the n I States
Speaker 7: and are quite literally inhabited by penguins, why do they
Speaker 7: face a ten percent tariffs? Did you use AI to
Speaker 7: generate this?
Speaker 2: No? No, the idea.
Speaker 8: The idea is somebody else got the list left off,
Speaker 8: because the idea what happens is if you leave anything
Speaker 8: off the list, the countries that try to basically arbitrage
Speaker 8: America go through those countries to US any country, like
Speaker 8: we had tariffs. The President put tariffs on China right
Speaker 8: in twenty eighteen and then what China started doing is
Speaker 8: they started going through other countries to America. So then
Speaker 8: it wor through other countries through America. And so the
Speaker 8: president knows that he's tired of it and he's going
Speaker 8: to fix that. So basically he said, look, I can't
Speaker 8: let any part of the world be a place where
Speaker 8: China or other countries can ship through them. The end
Speaker 8: of those loopholes, these ridiculous loopholes. And now what he's
Speaker 8: trying to say is I'm going going to fix the
Speaker 8: trade deficit of the United States of America. It's a
Speaker 8: national security issue. We need to make medicine. We need
Speaker 8: to make some conductors, we need to make ships, we
Speaker 8: need to have steel in aluminum. Come on, we need
Speaker 8: the greatness of America to actually be built in America.
Speaker 8: And he's tired of getting ripped off by the rest
Speaker 8: of the world.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, you know, we don't want those penguins on
Speaker 2: Herd and McDonald Island doing arbitrage. It's like the penguin
Speaker 2: from Wallace and Gromitt, you know, that evil penguin and
Speaker 2: that was it wrong? Trousers, was that it? Yeah, that's
Speaker 2: Travis is not as that was on our favorites have.
Speaker 2: It's seen that in a while. I have to go
Speaker 2: back and review the tape. But yeah, we don't want
Speaker 2: an evil penguin doing arbitrage on the islands. You know,
Speaker 2: people could send their stuff there. And as he points out,
Speaker 2: that happened with Vietnam. As a matter of fact, it
Speaker 2: wasn't just that they were sending stuff to Vietnam and
Speaker 2: then claiming that it came from Vietnam instead of from China.
Speaker 2: They were actually moved their factories to Vietnam and actually
Speaker 2: made it in Vietnam. And Trump actually boasted about that.
Speaker 2: So was that a good thing or not a good thing?
Speaker 2: He's boasting about that, like he boasted about his pandemic
Speaker 2: and his vaccine all the rest of stuff. He boasted
Speaker 2: about the fay hey had to move stuff out of
Speaker 2: China's they're going to Vietnam. And if you say that, well, okay,
Speaker 2: maybe that wasn't what he intended, Well why do you
Speaker 2: brag about it then? But nevertheless, did he not know
Speaker 2: that that was going to happen? And what is it
Speaker 2: this going to happen now that Trump doesn't know about
Speaker 2: what are going to be the adverse effects, so to speak?
Speaker 2: Of this versus the other things. Well, you've got a
Speaker 2: Gateway pundit, which, now with Trump in office, has become
Speaker 2: Gateway puppets. And they were very excited about Lutnick's performance,
Speaker 2: and it was a performance, what an absurd thing. And
Speaker 2: they were right that Margaret Bennin was in over her head.
Speaker 2: She hadn't done her research, she wasn't able to challenge
Speaker 2: him on anything. She throws out three talking points from
Speaker 2: Saturday Night Live and leaves it at that. And so
Speaker 2: the headline from Gateway Puppets. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnik completely
Speaker 2: wrecks CBS's Margaret Brannan Brennan after she makes an absurd
Speaker 2: accusation regarding Trump's tariff strategy. No, actually, the accusation is
Speaker 2: not absurd. Trump's tariff propagandasm lies are absurd. His formula
Speaker 2: is absurd. It's absolutely ridiculous. So they begin by this
Speaker 2: and listen to the diatribe, the partisan diatribe here far left,
Speaker 2: Face to the Nation host blah blah blah was face
Speaker 2: planted once again on Sunday. Hey we got them, we
Speaker 2: got liberal tears here, right. Isn't that great? Trump is
Speaker 2: marking a new era of economic independence. He's liberation. Yeah,
Speaker 2: they misspelled it again. Is a new error like we
Speaker 2: had the era or the era of the COVID pandemic.
Speaker 2: This is another one. The White House it also released
Speaker 2: a detailed a chart, said Gateway puppets, a detailed chart
Speaker 2: of lies that really was designed to obscure things. As
Speaker 2: I said, this chart also doesn't make any sense because
Speaker 2: it is you can't find anything by alphabetical order. The
Speaker 2: first thing I wanted to look at was why are
Speaker 2: they doing with Russia? Well, there's no terrafs against Russia.
Speaker 2: Russia's not in their table. Now why would Russia not
Speaker 2: be there? Well, they said, it's because we're trying to
Speaker 2: work out a peace agreement with him. Nevertheless, what are
Speaker 2: you going to teariff from Russia? We've already had sanctions
Speaker 2: put against them or supposedly not legally buying anything, but
Speaker 2: they completely skipped that part of it right, and the
Speaker 2: terraffs the sanctions have not been effective anyway, And what
Speaker 2: are you gonna do? You're gonna tear if the uranium
Speaker 2: for your nuclear reactors? Is that really what you're going
Speaker 2: to do. We'll see what happens with it. So when
Speaker 2: we saw the president of the Rose Garden holding up
Speaker 2: that chart you helped make that it wasn't actually tariffs,
Speaker 2: said Brennan. She said that was actually confusing to investors
Speaker 2: because it was some kind of a formula in the
Speaker 2: countries themselves, seemed kind of random, and it was deliberately
Speaker 2: that way, as I pointed out, not in alphabetical order,
Speaker 2: not an order of claimed tariffs, not any kind of
Speaker 2: geographical cluster, nothing. And so she said AI, and he
Speaker 2: just laughs it off. This is the way a gateway
Speaker 2: puppets say. Lutnik laughed off Brennan's silly remark. Well, no,
Speaker 2: actually she didn't understand enough to question him. But it
Speaker 2: wasn't a silly remark. She was, you know, circling the
Speaker 2: truth but couldn't get there. So basically, the arbitrage penguins,
Speaker 2: we've got to be worried about a McDonald's island. You know,
Speaker 2: Trump boasted about all of this, you know again the
Speaker 2: China and viet stuff. But I want to go back
Speaker 2: and revisit what I said on Friday about this tariff issue,
Speaker 2: and again the publication that was that people took screenshots,
Speaker 2: multiple people did this a tiff? Right? Is equal to
Speaker 2: ten plus a tarifyright, plus total imports. By the way,
Speaker 2: let me just say this. You're talking about, well, we
Speaker 2: got to do this because we've got to put a
Speaker 2: flat ten percent plus this ratio they just concocted. Actually
Speaker 2: they didn't do it, the AI did it. And so
Speaker 2: the lunacy of this, which of course Margaret Brennan doesn't understand,
Speaker 2: didn't inform herself about that either, is that we have
Speaker 2: added at least a ten percent tariff. Do nations with
Speaker 2: whom we have a surplus, we sell them more than
Speaker 2: they then we buy from them, and so we're going
Speaker 2: to put a tax on them. What's that going to do?
Speaker 2: That's going to have them easily retaliate? You know, Trump says, well,
Speaker 2: we hold all the cars because we're the bigger importer. Well,
Speaker 2: you just got rid of all the cards of the
Speaker 2: people who have a we have a trade surplus with,
Speaker 2: like the UK, like Australia, many others, South Korea. You're
Speaker 2: going to have them not buy our products and get
Speaker 2: rid of that those few places that we have a surplus,
Speaker 2: a trade surplus. But again it proudly puts out its
Speaker 2: formula that the what they call a tariff simply a
Speaker 2: ratio of trade deficit to total imports, which total nonsense,
Speaker 2: total nonsense. You could look at this and say, well,
Speaker 2: this is a metric that you know, when the numertor increases,
Speaker 2: then you know the number that I've come up with,
Speaker 2: the AI hallucination number. Again, we could call it playing
Speaker 2: the field index, right, because I said, well, this is
Speaker 2: how you can level the field. Maybe you know, so
Speaker 2: the number in the numerator, when that goes up, that
Speaker 2: bad number over there is going to go up as well.
Speaker 2: And that number in the enumerator is the trade deficits.
Speaker 2: So when the trade deficit goes up, that bad number
Speaker 2: goes up, and the denominator you got total imports, Well,
Speaker 2: when that goes up, then that takes the number down
Speaker 2: because it's in the denominators. So that's good so qualitatively,
Speaker 2: but it's absolutely not a tariff and it has absolutely
Speaker 2: nothing to do with any of this. Cato Institute is
Speaker 2: now onto this as well. This is not a measurement
Speaker 2: of tariffs. And it's kind of interesting, you know. Bablom
Speaker 2: b said, well, genius Trump has tricked democrats into hating taxes.
Speaker 2: This is a tax, and what he has done which
Speaker 2: they don't say, is that he's tricked Republicans into loving taxes. Oh,
Speaker 2: this is going to be great. Taxes are going to
Speaker 2: make us wealthy. Taxes are going to make America great again.
Speaker 2: America was great because we had small government, we had
Speaker 2: small taxes. It wasn't great because of tariffs. Terrafts are
Speaker 2: a better way to collect tax is than the income
Speaker 2: tax or most many other ways. But it is Taxes
Speaker 2: are evil, and it may be a necessary evil like
Speaker 2: a government, but it should be minimized like government. The
Speaker 2: problem is we have maximized government and now they're going
Speaker 2: to maximize tax collection by adding tariffs to the income tax.
Speaker 2: And it is not going away. As I said, what
Speaker 2: is it about MAGA that they can't They got to
Speaker 2: look up the definition of what permanent means. How many
Speaker 2: times has Trump said I'm going to make those tax
Speaker 2: cuts permanent. Well, maybe he's going to make the tax
Speaker 2: cuts permanent. He's going to have to make the tax permanent.
Speaker 2: Or is that too difficult for the Trump apologists to understand.
Speaker 2: Evidently it is, or they didn't want to admit it.
Speaker 2: And so Babel and b says, well, Americans are celebrating today,
Speaker 2: after the genius Trump imposed taxes on imports, instantly tricking
Speaker 2: Democrats into hating taxes and instantly tricking Republicans into loving
Speaker 2: and defending it taxes. That's where we are. That's what
Speaker 2: this rabid partisanship, this blind partisanship, has gotten us. You
Speaker 2: got Republicans cheering taxes, not the Democrats really pushing back
Speaker 2: on them. Studies showed that ninety eight percent of Democrats
Speaker 2: say they hate taxes now after hearing that Trump is
Speaker 2: for them. So Democrats have played right into my hands,
Speaker 2: said Trucker, said that Trump because they're suckers. Well also
Speaker 2: has a GOP. Ditto for that. And ram Paul when
Speaker 2: he talked about this, he said, look, his big issue
Speaker 2: was not even the fact that it was taxes, but
Speaker 2: it was the fact that this is being done as
Speaker 2: a dictatorship. That's why ram Paul opposed this. He said,
Speaker 2: this is not about Trump, it's not about Biden. This
Speaker 2: is about the constitution of whether we want to be
Speaker 2: ruled by one man or by a republic. He said,
Speaker 2: these tarists are being pushed by the Trump administration on
Speaker 2: Canada under the pretense of a national emergency. And let
Speaker 2: me just point out there's no national emergency of fentanyl
Speaker 2: coming in from Canada, too small amount. There's more coming
Speaker 2: from the US into Canada reality, and he is not interested.
Speaker 2: A lot of it is coming from China, even the
Speaker 2: stuff that's coming through Mexico. But if that's an emergency,
Speaker 2: then Trump is more than willing to set aside that
Speaker 2: emergency so that his friends can buy TikTok. So it's
Speaker 2: not an emergency. It's a lie. Even with China, He's
Speaker 2: going to set aside this. He says, well, it's an
Speaker 2: emergency because of fentanyl. He's saying that because Congress gave him,
Speaker 2: gave the presidency authority to set tariffs only under an emergency,
Speaker 2: So he creates a false emergency. Does that sound familiar?
Speaker 2: Does that sound like five years ago where Trump came
Speaker 2: in five years ago, created a fake emergency and then
Speaker 2: started doing all kinds of insane stuff that was not safe,
Speaker 2: not effective, had all kinds of adverse effects. Dittoh for
Speaker 2: this five years later, history repeats itself, but it rhymes
Speaker 2: this time. This time is all an economic plague that
Speaker 2: he has released upon us, claims that he's found and
Speaker 2: that he claims that he has something that is safe
Speaker 2: and effective, and he's going to have us do all
Speaker 2: kinds of ridiculous stuff. It's not going to improve anything.
Speaker 2: As a matter of fact, just like his other emergency,
Speaker 2: all of his measures are going to make things far worse,
Speaker 2: far worse. It's going to hurt the people that are healthy,
Speaker 2: and it's going to be another step. Here's what they
Speaker 2: have in common. Going to come after small businesses again
Speaker 2: as he did before, just in a different way. He
Speaker 2: is the wrecking ball for the globalists. He has your trust.
Speaker 2: That's why they're there. You've got RFK Junior saying I'm
Speaker 2: here to get people's trust in the institution's restored and
Speaker 2: people's trust in the MMR vaccine. Pushed against that at
Speaker 2: Children's Health Defense for years, and now in less than
Speaker 2: a month of being HHS head, he's gone to Texas
Speaker 2: and he's pushing the MMR vaccine. He's pushing the idea
Speaker 2: that a child died from measles. He's pushing the idea
Speaker 2: that it is safe, that it is effective, that it's
Speaker 2: your best defense against measles, which, by the way, folks,
Speaker 2: in my entire life, I had never known. Everybody we knew.
Speaker 2: I grew up, I was born in the mid fifties,
Speaker 2: everybody we knew was getting measles. There wasn't even a
Speaker 2: vaccine at that point in time, and nobody cared. Nobody cared,
Speaker 2: no parents cared, nobody had ever heard of anybody dying
Speaker 2: with measles that truly was rare. It really is rare.
Speaker 2: I mean, we're seeing millions of people around the globe
Speaker 2: dying from the vaccine and the knock on effects and
Speaker 2: paralyzed and all the rest of the stuff, and they
Speaker 2: just miss it, just dismiss it by saying it's rare.
Speaker 2: It's rare. That's what they say about every bit of
Speaker 2: damage that is done by their poisons. It's rare. And
Speaker 2: yet this really is rare. So I guess if we
Speaker 2: can label stuff that is real, and we can call
Speaker 2: it and it's not rare, we can say that it's
Speaker 2: rare and forget about it. I think when something really
Speaker 2: is rare, we can forget about it. But that's the
Speaker 2: purpose of RFK, Junior, and that's the purpose of the
Speaker 2: Trump administration, and that is to get you to trust
Speaker 2: them so they can stab you in the back like
Speaker 2: he did five years ago, and he's doing it again now.
Speaker 2: And these same people out there are worshiping him over
Speaker 2: this stuff. Well, Paul said, for decades, presidents of both
Speaker 2: parties have weaponized emergency declarations to bypass Congress. Emergency powers
Speaker 2: have become the Swiss army knife of authoritarian governance. Tariffs
Speaker 2: are simply taxes, he said. Terriffs don't punish foreign governments.
Speaker 2: They punish American families, he says, in the very name,
Speaker 2: in the name of America. First policies are being touted
Speaker 2: as populist defense of the working class, they are waging
Speaker 2: economic war on that very same demographic. Actually, that's a
Speaker 2: comment from Free Thought Project estimates ranging for mewhere from
Speaker 2: twelve hundred dollars over four thousand dollars an annual cost
Speaker 2: per family. That's if you don't want to buy a car,
Speaker 2: Trump doesn't want you to buy a car either, right,
Speaker 2: just like buyen all he says he does. Well, if
Speaker 2: he says he does, and why is he raising the
Speaker 2: price for five thousand dollars on average. Congress has abdicated
Speaker 2: their power. This is a by Protestant problem, says ram Paul.
Speaker 2: I don't want to live under emergency rule. Freethought Project
Speaker 2: says Trump's justification of terrorists that it will help stop
Speaker 2: fintional trafficking. But again, you know it's going the other way.
Speaker 2: He's more than happy for TikTok. TikTok is a bigger
Speaker 2: emergency to Trump than fentional Think about that. Can't have
Speaker 2: free speech, can't have somebody saying something that the government
Speaker 2: doesn't like. Think about that. It's the basis of the
Speaker 2: lawfare against us. Even if this was something that was magic,
Speaker 2: said Paul, and it was going to be a pot
Speaker 2: of gold at the end of the rainbow, I wouldn't
Speaker 2: want to live under emergency rule. We must, at all costs,
Speaker 2: he said, limit the power of the presidency. Another name
Speaker 2: for emergency rule is martial law. From the very beginning
Speaker 2: of what Trump did in twenty twenty, I called it
Speaker 2: medical martial law. And that's exactly what it was. But
Speaker 2: where was rand Paul five years ago? For that a wall?
Speaker 2: He was raned a wall, not ran Paul to change
Speaker 2: his last name, not like Ron. He was raned a
Speaker 2: wall during all of that pandemic stuff. And then he
Speaker 2: started pushing lies about the lab and coming after Foucc
Speaker 2: and telling Faunci we got to restore the public's trust
Speaker 2: in vaccines. Come on, Ran Paul is a libertarian. He's
Speaker 2: got to know about Dark Winter, about Event to a one,
Speaker 2: about all the ones in between those two. He's got
Speaker 2: to understand something about medical science. He's got to understand
Speaker 2: how fraudulent these masks and all the rest of stuff are.
Speaker 2: Where was he during the medical martial law? Do we
Speaker 2: want to live under one person? That's the thing we
Speaker 2: object to, and every dictatorship on the planet. So why
Speaker 2: are we cheering it here? Says Ryan Paul. Well, his
Speaker 2: base still hasn't gotten the message. And as I talked
Speaker 2: about on Friday, the simple math behind Trump's tear, several
Speaker 2: people talked about it by Friday, talked about it in
Speaker 2: more detail than Saturday Night Live and in more depth
Speaker 2: than Margaret Brennan could muster. But it was discovered by
Speaker 2: economics professors, many of them independently. And then several people
Speaker 2: noticed that this came from AI and from chat GPT.
Speaker 2: They took screenshots, they put them up. This is not
Speaker 2: a theory to be laughed at. What needs to be
Speaker 2: laughed at are people like the Gateway puppets who defend
Speaker 2: this stuff as genius, as good for America. So we
Speaker 2: are going when we look at this, we can't forget
Speaker 2: what the key issue is here, and that is taxes
Speaker 2: are not the way to prosperity. That is just plain stupid. Yeah,
Speaker 2: we got a trade deficit, don't we. I got a
Speaker 2: trade deficit with the federal government. I send them my
Speaker 2: money and I get nothing back. That's a trade deficit
Speaker 2: I get, and they keep piling up a federal debt deficit.
Speaker 2: I'm worried about those deficits. I don't get anything from
Speaker 2: my money except a boot in the face, never have.
Speaker 2: And so you talk about deficits and you talk about
Speaker 2: how they're spending us into oblivion. By the way, while
Speaker 2: we're talking about AI, open AIS new image generator. This
Speaker 2: is the latest update of a chat GPT. This is
Speaker 2: their four O model and it is capable of creating
Speaker 2: fraudulent documents very very well. I mean, the early image
Speaker 2: generation programs from AI had a horrible time doing text.
Speaker 2: They just couldn't get it right. They would add all
Speaker 2: kinds of nonsense. They couldn't even do the characters for
Speaker 2: some reason. It's early kind of weird. It's like how
Speaker 2: the early images, all the people would have six fingers,
Speaker 2: you know, like the nephelim or something. Just a clue
Speaker 2: for you there. But anyway, so the question is, did
Speaker 2: it's so good at show those documents again? I'm sorry,
Speaker 2: you'll pull that back up again. These are some documents
Speaker 2: fake receipts that were created by chat GPT four oh,
Speaker 2: and so it's gotten very good at not only good
Speaker 2: at doing the textent logos and other things can fake it.
Speaker 2: I wonder if it just created those charts, and I
Speaker 2: think they probably did the charts themselves, because if a
Speaker 2: chat GPT had done it, they would have been more organized.
Speaker 2: It probably would have organized by alphabetical order, by amount
Speaker 2: of tariffs or something. It would take a Trump staffer
Speaker 2: to be that disorganized. So D D. Das, who is
Speaker 2: a principle at Menlo Ventures, tweeted a photograph of a
Speaker 2: fake re seat for a lavish meal at a San
Speaker 2: Francisco steakhouse. He says you can use four to o
Speaker 2: to generate fake receipts. He says there are too many
Speaker 2: real world verification flows that rely on real images as proof.
Speaker 2: He said that era is over. Now, why would they
Speaker 2: be doing this? Would they be making an issue out
Speaker 2: of this?
Speaker 9: Well?
Speaker 2: They want everybody to have to go to digital IDA
Speaker 2: and biometric ID, right, that's what they want. We can't
Speaker 2: rely on paper receipts. We can't rely on paper money.
Speaker 2: You're going to have to get into our block chain
Speaker 2: so it can verify all this stuff. But he pointed
Speaker 2: out that four to O was happy to generate fraudulent
Speaker 2: prescriptions for controlled substances like zolof and beyond faking expenses
Speaker 2: for lavish meals. Open AI is increasingly canny. Ability to
Speaker 2: generate fake documents could open up the door for everything
Speaker 2: from phony tax forms and bank checks to fake IDs
Speaker 2: and birth certificates, voter ID. It could do illegal aliens.
Speaker 2: I think we're going to have to have biometric ID
Speaker 2: and digital ID, don't you. Oh yeah, that's the only
Speaker 2: way that we can prove who we are to the government. Again,
Speaker 2: it wasn't that long ago, as I said, My my
Speaker 2: mother was born at home, and when she got to
Speaker 2: get her marriage license, she took her father, my grandfather
Speaker 2: along with her because he was the witness to testify
Speaker 2: to you know, her citizenship or whatever or CAUSI birth certificate.
Speaker 2: And the person there at the government office said, well,
Speaker 2: I don't have any proof because I just told you
Speaker 2: I was there when she was born? Are you calling
Speaker 2: me a liar? And so she backed off at that
Speaker 2: point in time, Well that was one hundred years ago.
Speaker 2: This isn't America anymore, so where our ability to detect
Speaker 2: this storm of fake documents remains to be seen. But
Speaker 2: given AI company's current efforts, is not looking good. Yeah,
Speaker 2: it's not looking good because you can fool all of
Speaker 2: the Republican Party and most of the other people with
Speaker 2: a fake AI chart of teriffs that are not terrifts.
Speaker 2: And it really is a repeat five years later, five
Speaker 2: years later, repeat of what he did in so many ways.
Speaker 2: People are still trying to come to grips with what
Speaker 2: happened five years ago. And as this article here from
Speaker 2: American Reformer says, as secular sources revisit the COVID nineteen
Speaker 2: pandemic response, some evangelical leaders are doubling down on the
Speaker 2: mitigation efforts. March March year mark the five year university
Speaker 2: of the COVID pandemic and lockdowns which shuttered churches around
Speaker 2: the world. He's doing this from a church perspective, he said.
Speaker 2: The legacy press largely cheered those measures at the time.
Speaker 2: But now even the New York Times is asking where
Speaker 2: were the COVID lockdowns worth it? Are we going to
Speaker 2: be asking in five years? Wow? You know when Trump
Speaker 2: created that trade war, destroyed our economic system, destroyed everything.
Speaker 2: Look at what they built back? Was it worth it?
Speaker 2: So he said, But they're drawing the wrong lessons, He said,
Speaker 2: even some evangelical leaders are looking at it, but they're
Speaker 2: drawing the wrong lessons. And so I think of a
Speaker 2: case in point one guy who is did an op
Speaker 2: ed piece for the Presbyterian Church in America. This is
Speaker 2: the really hard left Presbyterian Church said, this is a
Speaker 2: guy who did this, But they said, it turns out
Speaker 2: that as he's lecturing everybody that not enough was done,
Speaker 2: it turns out that he's also has a foot in
Speaker 2: the pharmaceutical industry. He is a physician. He is a
Speaker 2: vaccine researcher at Mayo Clinic, and they didn't mention that
Speaker 2: in the article. His name is doctor Gregory poland he
Speaker 2: goes consultative advice to nearly every Western medicine manufacturer, including
Speaker 2: Adviser and Moderna. He was a vaccine advisor to the
Speaker 2: Biden White House. They go through it and they talk
Speaker 2: about Francis Collins and who proclaims he's a professing Christian,
Speaker 2: but he doesn't agree with God's definition of how the
Speaker 2: world was created. He's got his own Get that out
Speaker 2: of here, what genesis. I've got my own ideas about
Speaker 2: how the world came into it. But look what is ignored.
Speaker 2: And this because it is coming from American reformer. They
Speaker 2: may talk about Frances Collins, and they may talk about
Speaker 2: Gregory Poland, and they may talk about other evangelical leaders
Speaker 2: or Christian leaders or who have cheered and supported all
Speaker 2: this stuff and told people do it. You know, if
Speaker 2: the government tells you to wear wheels on your head,
Speaker 2: you put pin wheels on your head. Remember that, God
Speaker 2: freil We had a lot of people saying stuff like that, nonsense,
Speaker 2: And he was saying that right before the vaccine mandates
Speaker 2: are coming. He said that in August of twenty twenty one,
Speaker 2: as we knew the vaccine mandates were coming, they'd already
Speaker 2: been announced at that point in time. I told everybody
Speaker 2: back in December of twenty twenty, I said they're going
Speaker 2: to mandate this in September. When I picked September because
Speaker 2: that's when school starts and that's why they did it.
Speaker 2: Then going to focus on the kids. But yeah, what
Speaker 2: they will not talk about, they'll not talk about Trump.
Speaker 2: They'll talk about this guy, Gregory Poland. They say he
Speaker 2: works for the vaccine companies. He's a salesman for the
Speaker 2: vaccine companies. Trump works for the vaccine companies. They paid
Speaker 2: him a lot more money they paid Gregory Poland. Trump
Speaker 2: got millions from him. That's why he made CEO of
Speaker 2: Eli Lilly. He made him head of HHS and he
Speaker 2: was the one who kicked off all that stuff. Trump
Speaker 2: is an employee of these pharmaceutical companies. Trump is a salesman.
Speaker 2: He is one of the biggest salesman in Propagandas for
Speaker 2: mRNA vaccines, there is as a matter of fact, the
Speaker 2: day after he got in, why did you he picked
Speaker 2: up or he left off pushing mRNA vaccines and adding
Speaker 2: in artificial intelligence with Stargate remember that Larry Ellison everything.
Speaker 2: And then what do you do? They put out a
Speaker 2: guy who was to be head of the CDC who
Speaker 2: was a vaccine skeptic. They knew he wasn't going to
Speaker 2: get through, so you know, said sorry, you're not gonna
Speaker 2: make it so we're gonna put in somebody else, somebody
Speaker 2: who is going to push a combination of AI and mRNA.
Speaker 2: And that's what he did, very consistent with what he
Speaker 2: did on his first day in office, his first day
Speaker 2: in office of his second term began exactly how it
Speaker 2: ended and what he was doing right up until just
Speaker 2: a couple of months before the election, pushing mr and A,
Speaker 2: this time adding artificial intelligence to it. So, yeah, the
Speaker 2: he points out, he said, well, you had churches that
Speaker 2: were shut down, liquor stores and abortion clinic stayed open
Speaker 2: to the public, casinos as well. Small business owners were
Speaker 2: deemed to be non essential and they lost their livelihoods
Speaker 2: as white collar professionals work from home, buoyed by paid
Speaker 2: check protection program money from Trump. He won't say that,
Speaker 2: he won't say it came from Trump. And now it's Trump.
Speaker 2: What is Trump doing. Well, he's working at making small
Speaker 2: businesses go even smaller or out of business. Same stuff.
Speaker 2: It's just rhyme. So the first time through, well, the
Speaker 2: Cato Institute was onto those phony numbers, even if Margaret
Speaker 2: Brennan couldn't figure it out, was going on too lazy
Speaker 2: to do the work, too lazy, too cowardly to engage
Speaker 2: Lutenant Trump's tariffs are not reciprocal, says the Cato Institute.
Speaker 2: This is also on free thought project a massive tax
Speaker 2: increase on Americans, and it is not reciprocal. This is
Speaker 2: what Cato Institute says. Despite the President's rhetoric about reciprocity,
Speaker 2: the White House's numbers immediately did not add up. That's
Speaker 2: what I said on Thursday, and then by Friday I
Speaker 2: knew what the issue was. So there's no way that
Speaker 2: the average terif f rate that the EU charges the
Speaker 2: US is thirty nine percent. And for South Korea, who
Speaker 2: we do have a free trade agreement with, Trump's chart
Speaker 2: claim that they're charging US a fifty percent tariff rate.
Speaker 2: It's absolutely ludicrous. In fact, many of the countries that
Speaker 2: Trump singled out for reciprocal tariffs score above the US
Speaker 2: on conventional measures of trade freedom. But it's not even
Speaker 2: about that. A tariff is very specific thing. It is
Speaker 2: enacted by a legislative body, by the government, or maybe
Speaker 2: by some dictator executive like we have in our country.
Speaker 2: But it is a tax at a fixed rate. He's
Speaker 2: got a numeric tax. I'm going to tax, and it
Speaker 2: can be targeted towards different industries, or in this particular case,
Speaker 2: he's just doing it to punish all countries. Right in
Speaker 2: the past, and we would put something like that, it
Speaker 2: was called a sanction. These are really more like sanctions.
Speaker 2: These are really more like the first fire in a war,
Speaker 2: and it is a trade war. Cato goes on to say,
Speaker 2: initially it seemed like there was some sophisticated formula used
Speaker 2: to calculate the rates. Not so, they said, as several
Speaker 2: users on X quickly pointed out the White House and
Speaker 2: later confirmed it. Their reciprocity formula is a simple one,
Speaker 2: and it is also nonsensical from an economic standpoint. And
Speaker 2: it is also, most importantly a lie. You could say
Speaker 2: that I'm coming up up again with some aimetric or
Speaker 2: you could say I'm gonna call it the the fairness index,
Speaker 2: but it is never a tariff. To call it a
Speaker 2: tariff is a lie. You could say this is some
Speaker 2: kind of an index, as I said before, when this
Speaker 2: number goes up, you know that number goes up. Well,
Speaker 2: this number goes up, the number goes down. And so
Speaker 2: you could say, well, I'll put a couple of factors
Speaker 2: in here. One of them is proportional. The other one
Speaker 2: is unversely proportional. So I like this, it's my fairness index.
Speaker 2: But no way is it a tariff. That is a
Speaker 2: bull faced, bull faced lie from Trump and from Lutnik
Speaker 2: and the rest of these people who don't They can
Speaker 2: get away with line to people, and the Gateway puppets
Speaker 2: will cheer them. Trump is claiming the tariff a country
Speaker 2: is charging the US is equal to the trade deficit
Speaker 2: between the countries, divided by the imports in the US
Speaker 2: for goods only, not services. And then he sets his
Speaker 2: reciprocal rate according to this back of the envelope formula. No,
Speaker 2: it was wasn't the back of an envelope. It was
Speaker 2: a chat GPT, they said, disupposed reciprocal tariff is then,
Speaker 2: for unclear reasons divided by two, because presumably Trump's a
Speaker 2: nice guy and he's going to give him a discount,
Speaker 2: right for you half off. Normally this would be fifty percent,
Speaker 2: but today only it's twenty five percent. Act now to
Speaker 2: lock those ratescent. He's a con man salesman, if ever
Speaker 2: there was one, isn't he. Yeah, he's a nice guy,
Speaker 2: isn't he. And it's just a he's giving him a discount.
Speaker 2: So eel's a rate that Trump says he will be
Speaker 2: applying to almost every country in political and jurisdiction on
Speaker 2: the earth. Well it's not almost. It's everyone, including uninhabited
Speaker 2: islands inhabited only by penguins, because we can't have these
Speaker 2: penguins doing arbitrage. If the resulting number is less than
Speaker 2: ten percent, then Trump still sets a minimum tariff rate
Speaker 2: of ten percent. Even if the US has a trade
Speaker 2: surplus with a country, they get a ten percent tariff. Good.
Speaker 2: They finally figured that out too. It's unclear who is
Speaker 2: responsible for devising this formula, however, online chatter has suggested
Speaker 2: that may have come from chat GPT. We got the
Speaker 2: screenshots that show it. This is like somebody taking extreme
Speaker 2: shot and say who is the biggest information disinformation person?
Speaker 2: Give me one name, and chat gpt comes back and
Speaker 2: says Elon Musk And everybody says, why you know, I
Speaker 2: put that up, And everybody starts typing it in and
Speaker 2: guess what, they get the same thing, right, And that's
Speaker 2: what happened with this formula. Somebody says, look at this, oh,
Speaker 2: not only that, but it suggests how you could put
Speaker 2: it in Python so that you could automate the process.
Speaker 2: Here's some Python code so that you can automate this.
Speaker 2: And so some other people ask the same thing and
Speaker 2: they were able to get the same answer. This is
Speaker 2: not a conspiracy theory. It's a proven fact. And we
Speaker 2: talk about a proven fact being something that you say
Speaker 2: is out there and people say, well, let me see
Speaker 2: if I can reproduce that. If you can reproduce it,
Speaker 2: that's more science than is the basis of any of
Speaker 2: our here we're talking about climate, or we're talking about
Speaker 2: pandemics or a in these other mcguffins. The fact that
Speaker 2: you're able to reproduce this, well, that's real science to
Speaker 2: verify it. So anyway, this US Trade Trade Representative formula
Speaker 2: appears to be a little more than economic alchemy. They said.
Speaker 2: It sets reciprocal terroifts by incorrectly assuming that persistent trade
Speaker 2: deficits are due to a combination of tariff and non
Speaker 2: terror factors that prevent trade from balancing. They said, there's
Speaker 2: a little more than amateur arithmetic. Well, it's an AI hallucination,
Speaker 2: that's what it is. Anyway, they said, it seems to
Speaker 2: have been improvised on the fly as a rationale for
Speaker 2: Trump's pre existing intention of levying heavy terraffs on almost
Speaker 2: all of our trading partners. Yeah.
Speaker 3: See, the staff.
Speaker 2: Has been working on this for quite some time. We've
Speaker 2: seen flip flops, delays, flip flops delays, flip flops delays.
Speaker 2: We even had a delay when they did the thing.
Speaker 2: I guess they were still concocting the charts or something.
Speaker 2: They moved it from three o'clock to four o'clock on
Speaker 2: Wednesday afternoon, and so it's been delay and flip flop
Speaker 2: and delay and flip flop. And so I guess they've
Speaker 2: been searching around for something where they could get the
Speaker 2: biggest number, and somebody playing around with chat GPT and
Speaker 2: found this justification for a huge wall, a wall of tariffs,
Speaker 2: and that's what they wound up going with. There's no
Speaker 2: reason to assume, says Cato, that all trade will balance.
Speaker 2: We might want, let's say, a lot of bananas from
Speaker 2: a country that has a climate that is suspitable to
Speaker 2: growing bananas, while other countries may not demand any of
Speaker 2: the goods that we produce. That's the way these things work.
Speaker 2: Here's a good example of it. You know, we talk
Speaker 2: about automobiles for example. For the longest time, I remember
Speaker 2: going back to when Japanese cars were rising and market share,
Speaker 2: and people say, well, GM is refusing to make right
Speaker 2: hand drive cars. They don't want to put the steering
Speaker 2: wheel on the right hand side because Japanese drive on
Speaker 2: the wrong side of the road. You know, they do
Speaker 2: that in New Zealand as well, But it's easier in
Speaker 2: New Zealand. I've found when I went down there to drive,
Speaker 2: even though you've got to drive on the left side
Speaker 2: of the road, it kind of equals out because the
Speaker 2: country's upside down, so it's not quite as confusing as
Speaker 2: you would think. Anyway, the GM has refused to move
Speaker 2: the steering wheels to the right hand I look this up.
Speaker 2: Are they still doing that? It's like, yes, they still are.
Speaker 2: They've got one or two models but that they have
Speaker 2: converted over to right hand drive, but most of them
Speaker 2: are still left hand drive, and so they only have
Speaker 2: a one point four percent market share in Japan. Well,
Speaker 2: what do you expect if you don't make cars that
Speaker 2: people want? As a matter of fact, even if you
Speaker 2: move the steering wheel to the other side of the car,
Speaker 2: it's still bigger and not the kind of car that
Speaker 2: the Japanese want. They don't do any research and try, well,
Speaker 2: would make this car for the Japanese market. They do
Speaker 2: that in some countries, but you know they're not doing
Speaker 2: it there. So if you don't make what people want,
Speaker 2: and that's a big flaw with the kind of metric
Speaker 2: that chat GPT came up with that the Trump people used.
Speaker 2: It's like, well, okay, so if you're just going to
Speaker 2: look at total amount of the deficit and the total
Speaker 2: amount of exports and imports, that really doesn't give us
Speaker 2: a picture. And it also doesn't give us a picture.
Speaker 2: You know, you can have corporations that are not customer driven,
Speaker 2: that don't really care what people want. Well, they you
Speaker 2: can expect that they're not going to sell too many
Speaker 2: things there they're not targeted to that market. You can
Speaker 2: also have situations where our own government has all kinds
Speaker 2: of prohibitions and inhibitions against people expanding their business or
Speaker 2: starting a business or doing entrepreneurship. And we all know
Speaker 2: that's the case. That's the real issue. The real issue
Speaker 2: is that our government is the enemy. But again, as
Speaker 2: I mentioned TikTok and how he's gonna get rid of
Speaker 2: that and set on Thursday that jd Vance said, well,
Speaker 2: we're going to have an agreement by Saturday. They didn't.
Speaker 2: I also said, well, I don't know if that's going
Speaker 2: to happen, but I do know that he can extend
Speaker 2: the deadline, which he did, because this is a dictatorship, right.
Speaker 2: He joked about it, but it wasn't a joke, folks,
Speaker 2: We can see it wasn't a joke. He's proud of
Speaker 2: the executive orders that he's done, and the Republican Camp
Speaker 2: followers are proud of it as well. They want to
Speaker 2: be ruled by dictates. Well, guess what. You're not going
Speaker 2: to like it when the dictates are coming from the
Speaker 2: other side, are you. That's why we don't want to
Speaker 2: have a dictator Anyway, he's extended it another seventy five
Speaker 2: days and so it will be done by the deadline.
Speaker 2: So see jd Vance said the right thing. Yeah, it'll
Speaker 2: be done by the deadline. Well, we'll just keep moving
Speaker 2: the deadline. We'll just keep moving the goalpost, because they
Speaker 2: keep moving the goalpost on pretty much everything. This is
Speaker 2: by the way, the ban was first pushed by Trump,
Speaker 2: it was enacted and signed by Biden. So both of
Speaker 2: them were on the same page when it came to
Speaker 2: authoritarian measures, and now they've gone full to solitarian on this.
Speaker 2: But now this is in forty seven. We have Trump
Speaker 2: who is primarily a grifter more than anything else, so
Speaker 2: he's looking at how he can make money for his people.
Speaker 2: So it's unclear who came up with some of these numbers.
Speaker 2: Said some of the peoples are looking at it. Some
Speaker 2: people who didn't quite understand, and that would be like
Speaker 2: the Washington Post. They didn't do the research to see
Speaker 2: that it was chat GPT, they didn't look at the formula.
Speaker 2: They said these numbers were kind of similar to stuff
Speaker 2: that Peter Navarro has talked about. Well, if you go
Speaker 2: back to two thousand and nineteen, it was exposed at
Speaker 2: that point in time. There's several articles that were written
Speaker 2: by the anti Trump press talking about the fact that
Speaker 2: when Trump was running for office, he asked Jared Kushner
Speaker 2: to come up with some economic advisors. He didn't have any,
Speaker 2: and so Kushner just starts looking through Amazon at book
Speaker 2: titles and he finds one that really catches his eye.
Speaker 2: It's called Death by China, and so he looks up
Speaker 2: some more about the guy. Of course, he's not reading
Speaker 2: the books, he's looking at the titles. That was written
Speaker 2: by Peter Navarro. Peter Navarro should have called it death
Speaker 2: by Government, because that's really what is happening, is death
Speaker 2: by government. Our government. We has met the enemy and
Speaker 2: they is us. But he also wrote another book, Becoming
Speaker 2: China Wars and how to Win them and so forth.
Speaker 2: So they made Peter Navarro an economic advisor. Do you
Speaker 2: remember this last lockdown, fake emergency crisis. Peter Navarro was
Speaker 2: the guy who was going out there telling GM and
Speaker 2: Ford to shut down and to make ventilators. Yes, Peter
Speaker 2: Navarro actually was responsible for machines that smothered people to death.
Speaker 2: He should be in jail for the rest of his
Speaker 2: miserable life. And one of the they was interesting was
Speaker 2: in twenty nineteen, CNN and many others did articles about
Speaker 2: how he had used a pseudonym ron Vara, which is
Speaker 2: and he later admitted that he had used that. It's
Speaker 2: an anagram of Navarro ron Vara, and he referenced this
Speaker 2: guy who was supposedly an economic expert. He quoted ron
Speaker 2: Varro himself. He made up these quotes. He made up
Speaker 2: a fictional character who supposedly an expert in economics, and
Speaker 2: he quotes him in his book more than a dozen
Speaker 2: times in his books. That's the kind of guy Peter
Speaker 2: Navarro is. That's the kind of guy that is the
Speaker 2: one advising Trump on these tariffs. Well, the bottom line is,
Speaker 2: no country is going to win a global trade war.
Speaker 2: It's just like any other war.
Speaker 3: War.
Speaker 2: Well, you're not going to. You're not going to. You know,
Speaker 2: war is bad for both sides. So on a coin telegraph,
Speaker 2: no country wins a global trade war. Bitcoin is going
Speaker 2: to surge as a result. But so far bitcoin is
Speaker 2: not gold. Has gold is real? I remy to be
Speaker 2: seen about bitcoin quite frankly, And so again, if you
Speaker 2: want to get gold, David Knight dot gold to take
Speaker 2: you to Tony Hardiman take a look at that. You
Speaker 2: better start accumulating something for a rainy day, because I
Speaker 2: can see the storm clouds gathering, can't you. And it's
Speaker 2: the storm clouds of inflation, of economic chaos, of complete
Speaker 2: financial restructuring. What are you going to hang on to?
Speaker 2: You're going to try to get something that's on the blockchain.
Speaker 2: You're going to hang on to paper from the government
Speaker 2: and IOUs from the Federal Reserve. Are you going to
Speaker 2: get something that's real? Do what the central banks are doing. Look,
Speaker 2: I understand it's a difficult time. Maybe you know some people,
Speaker 2: As Tony said, there's a lot of individuals who are
Speaker 2: selling it, But the people who are buying it are
Speaker 2: the central banks, the people who see and are actually
Speaker 2: planning and creating the economic chaos. Trump's trade policies will
Speaker 2: create worldwide macroeconomic turmoil and short term financial crises that
Speaker 2: will ultimately lead to a greater adoption of Bitcoin is
Speaker 2: a store of value asset. According to bitwise analyst Jeff Park,
Speaker 2: Why disagree, but you know, to each his own at
Speaker 2: least get out of the dollar, make some preparations. Economic
Speaker 2: instability from the trade war will cause governments to adopt
Speaker 2: inflationary fiscal and monetary policies, which will further debase currencies,
Speaker 2: which will lead to a worldwide fight to flight to
Speaker 2: safety and alternative stores of value like bitcoin, also like gold.
Speaker 2: He doesn't say that because this is about bitcoin. But again,
Speaker 2: you know, the people who are trying to defend Trump
Speaker 2: are saying this is a genius move because he's going
Speaker 2: to get interest rates lowered. There already lowered functional amount
Speaker 2: these long term rates, which are market driven as opposed
Speaker 2: to the FIAT decorations from the Federal Reserve. You know,
Speaker 2: when you see the Federal Reserve come in the lower
Speaker 2: interest rates, but then what happens is the long term
Speaker 2: rates are set by what people in a marketplace think
Speaker 2: is going to happen with inflation. And so that's why
Speaker 2: you see this disconnection, why the Federal Reserve would lower
Speaker 2: short term interest rates and yet you would see the
Speaker 2: long term interest rates going higher because when they would
Speaker 2: lower those, people say, well, that's going to drive inflation.
Speaker 2: So you know, I'm going to buy a tenure bond
Speaker 2: or something, I'm going to need more interest for that.
Speaker 2: So it actually was having a counter effect. Well, they've
Speaker 2: lowered them and the long term rates based on this
Speaker 2: for some reason, but the tariff costs for both the
Speaker 2: US and trading partners and the relative impact will be
Speaker 2: much heavier on foreigners, said this guy. These countries will
Speaker 2: then have to find a way to fend off their
Speaker 2: weak growth issues. And so with all of this, you know,
Speaker 2: they're pushing us towards chaos, They're pushing us towards global strife.
Speaker 2: And again It is Trump who pretends that he's an
Speaker 2: anti globalist, but he is pushing what the globalists want,
Speaker 2: and that is chaos, you know, with the central thesis
Speaker 2: of these people. When they talk about what is happening
Speaker 2: with the fourth turning, actually it was the force industrial revolution, right,
Speaker 2: fourth industrials. That sounds like it's forced, and actually he's
Speaker 2: talking about the fourth turning. Many people will talk about
Speaker 2: the generations, the Strauss and how named millennials and so forth,
Speaker 2: but they don't talk about the central thesis of that,
Speaker 2: which is that every four generations there is a massive disruption.
Speaker 2: It begins economically and it usually progresses to war, as
Speaker 2: we saw out the Great Depression of World War two,
Speaker 2: prior to that civil war and what was happening in
Speaker 2: many countries. We had a civil war in Italy at
Speaker 2: the same time. Why, because you had the right. You
Speaker 2: had a change from an agradian society to an industrial
Speaker 2: society and the creation of the nation state. And it
Speaker 2: wasn't just in America, it was in Italy, it was
Speaker 2: in Germany many other places like that as well. And
Speaker 2: this is what Bloomberg was talking about when he attacked
Speaker 2: the farmers, and he attacked the factory workers, and he
Speaker 2: called him stupid. He said, the smart ones of us
Speaker 2: are going to figure out how to take their jobs,
Speaker 2: and we just got to figure out then how to
Speaker 2: keep them from coming after us the guillotines. It was
Speaker 2: the first place that I saw that full quote. Everybody
Speaker 2: was saying, look at this, see attacked the farmers, they
Speaker 2: attacked the factory workers. Then yes, he did, and they
Speaker 2: stopped it at that point. The place that I saw
Speaker 2: the first first time I saw the full quote was
Speaker 2: on Breitbart, and yet Breitbart missed the implications of that. Yeah,
Speaker 2: it's like, oh, he's talking about universal basic income. Oh
Speaker 2: he's talking about the fourth turning, and they completely missed
Speaker 2: those implications. So tariffs are stagflationary for the world as
Speaker 2: a whole, said hedge fund manager Ray delo And on
Speaker 2: April the second, on Liberation Day, Tariffs tend to be
Speaker 2: more deflationary for the levied goods producers and more inflationary
Speaker 2: for the importing country. Guess who the biggest importer is USA,
Speaker 2: So it's going to be inflationary. We're going to have stagflation, or,
Speaker 2: as Gerald Slinty said, if it gets really bad, we'll
Speaker 2: have drag flation. There won't just be no growth, it'll
Speaker 2: be going down. If these trade tariffs do lead to
Speaker 2: a massive trade war, it's going to be very ugly
Speaker 2: for the whole world, says Coin Bureau founder Nick puckcran
Speaker 2: The analyst said the US economy has a forty percent
Speaker 2: Chancellor recess in twenty twenty five, amid fears of a
Speaker 2: lengthy trade war and the macroeconomic uncertainty brought on by
Speaker 2: protectionist trade policies. Asset manager Anthony Pompliano recently speculated that
Speaker 2: the US president is deliberately crashing capital markets to force
Speaker 2: interest rate cuts and lower the cost of servicing the
Speaker 2: US national debt. Somebody sent me a clip of some
Speaker 2: guy saying this is genius. This is what Trump is doing.
Speaker 2: Is it really genius? Is it really genius to crash
Speaker 2: the stock market deliberately so he can create inflation with
Speaker 2: lower interest rates? Is that good for us in the
Speaker 2: long term? Either? What's the matter with these people? And
Speaker 2: what right does he have to crash the stock market?
Speaker 2: You know, people have lost a lot of money and
Speaker 2: their four one ks and their pension funds and things
Speaker 2: like that. What right does Trump have by executive order
Speaker 2: to crash those retirement stocks or any other things. What
Speaker 2: right did he have to shut down small businesses on
Speaker 2: Main Street for the benefit of Wall Street. And you
Speaker 2: know who's going to wind up with the short end
Speaker 2: of the stick. It's going to be the small guys.
Speaker 2: It's not going to be the big guys. They'll be fine,
Speaker 2: you know. And of course this is genius according to
Speaker 2: the MAGA people. Let me tell you what genius is.
Speaker 2: They've got the Genius Act, which is part it's laying
Speaker 2: it's part of the legal foundations being laid to completely
Speaker 2: reset our financial system. And the Genius Act is going
Speaker 2: to be pushing the stable coin, another invention of people
Speaker 2: like Lutnik. Lutnik I guess as I pronounce his name, well,
Speaker 2: good Lutnick with that, because that is maybe that'll soak
Speaker 2: up some of their tea bills that people don't want
Speaker 2: to buy. But it is going to send us into
Speaker 2: an authority tearing society, just the same as if it
Speaker 2: was a central bank digital currency. It is not genius.
Speaker 2: They want to do that because they want to call
Speaker 2: the bone headed, stupid and tyrannical things that they do.
Speaker 2: They always label them as genius. You know, it's like
Speaker 2: a smart car or smart city or smartphone. These are
Speaker 2: things for dumb people. You call it exactly the opposite
Speaker 2: of what it is, and people buy it. Well. I
Speaker 2: think this is part of the financial reset of the system.
Speaker 2: I smell a rat, not a genius, and it's not
Speaker 2: pinky in the brain either, But he is trying to
Speaker 2: take over the world. Let's just talk briefly about the
Speaker 2: trade deficit here. So what is the global trade deficit
Speaker 2: of the US in twenty twenty four. I mean, this
Speaker 2: is the deficit that we have when you total up
Speaker 2: everything that we with every country, all the stuff that
Speaker 2: we buy and sell, we have a deficit of nearly
Speaker 2: a trillion dollars. Now, that's not a good thing, but
Speaker 2: they're not There's not any metric that I could come
Speaker 2: up with out of Washington or out of our society
Speaker 2: that's a good thing, not a single thing. And we've
Speaker 2: got problems all over the place. You can see the
Speaker 2: hand of God and judgment already building. A great flood
Speaker 2: is about to fall across this country. So eight nine
Speaker 2: hundred and eighteen billion dollar trade deficit when you look
Speaker 2: at globally with everybody else, that is a combined deficit
Speaker 2: in goods and services. Now we have an even bigger
Speaker 2: deficit in goods because we have a service's surplus. So
Speaker 2: the goods deficit alone was one point two trillion, but
Speaker 2: the service's surplus was two hundred and ninety three billion,
Speaker 2: so overall that takes it down to nine hundred and
Speaker 2: eighteen billion. That was a seventeen percent increase on the
Speaker 2: previous year. So you know, we are how do you
Speaker 2: go bankrupt first gradually, then suddenly, And just like our
Speaker 2: budget deficit, our trade deficit is going that direction as well. But, folks,
Speaker 2: is not death by China. It's death by our own government.
Speaker 2: All of these policies trace back to our own government.
Speaker 2: It's our government that is doing this. Our government wants
Speaker 2: you to get angry at China. Our government wants you
Speaker 2: to get angry at other countries. Our government wants you
Speaker 2: to get angry at corporations. It's our government. They're the
Speaker 2: ones doing this and pointing to everybody else. They're the
Speaker 2: ones lying to you and telling you that regulations and
Speaker 2: restrictions and taxes and all these oh, that's great for us,
Speaker 2: that's great for us. So it really is a wrecking
Speaker 2: ball and this is I'm about to take a break
Speaker 2: here because I'm going on just about an hour. Jacob
Speaker 2: nord Guard. This is on Technocracy News, Patrick Woods. Thing
Speaker 2: he says, scholars like doctor Nordon Guard in Europe are
Speaker 2: saying the same thing about technocracy as Patrick Woods says.
Speaker 2: I say. And it's the same thing I say. What
Speaker 2: do they say in Europe? They say Donald Trump is
Speaker 2: the great disruptor and he serves as the wrecking ball
Speaker 2: that is needed to break down the old order. This
Speaker 2: is what doctor Nordngarde said. He said, We're witnessing a
Speaker 2: monumental shift in world affairs. The second phase of what
Speaker 2: I call a technocratic coup has now been initiated. This
Speaker 2: is a revolution set to change everything in our global society,
Speaker 2: with a geopolitical map quickly being redrawn and the migration
Speaker 2: of humanity into the cybernetic digital machine. The first phase
Speaker 2: of the great transformation rolled out during the COVID nineteen pandemic,
Speaker 2: where they were all doing the same thing. As I've
Speaker 2: said so many times. Does it matter whether they call
Speaker 2: themselves conservative or liberal, or socialist or whatever or populist,
Speaker 2: they all did the same thing. Trump was no different
Speaker 2: than Trudeau. They did the same thing. They did the
Speaker 2: same thing on the same timeline. But don't call it
Speaker 2: a conspiracy, right, It was absolutely a global conspiracy. And
Speaker 2: who was the key leader in it who supplied the
Speaker 2: poison injection? Donald Trump and the US military, But Clas
Speaker 2: Schwab and Antonio Guteris of the UN and I talked
Speaker 2: about this previously. And of course it was just ten
Speaker 2: days before Trump's FDA director declared a pandemic in America
Speaker 2: with only six supposed cases, a pandemic for all the country.
Speaker 2: He declared that on January the thirty first, twenty twenty.
Speaker 2: On January the twenty first, Trump was at Davos, meeting
Speaker 2: and talking with these guys. Nothing to see there, I'm
Speaker 2: sure there was nothing on toward happening there. The event
Speaker 2: kick started a political process that the UN has called
Speaker 2: our Common Agenda, Common Pass and all the rest of
Speaker 2: this stuff was so they're opinting out. They're always found
Speaker 2: about common this and common that. They don't care about
Speaker 2: the common man, do they? And their common is like communists,
Speaker 2: they are neo Marxists. So it led to the adoption
Speaker 2: of the Pact for the Future in September twenty twenty four.
Speaker 2: The end goal is to upgrade the UN into a
Speaker 2: future oriented organization that uses strategic foresight and behavioral design,
Speaker 2: where the grandiose objective is steering the earth and achieving
Speaker 2: a balanced system. Klaus Swab talks about zeverl brain or
Speaker 2: a digital crystal ball, right. He talks about the ability
Speaker 2: to preict what will happen well, what is needed in
Speaker 2: the future. Right. But it didn't start with Klaus Schwab.
Speaker 2: There's a big new Brazenski was talking about this stuff
Speaker 2: back in the nineteen seventies between two ages, the technocratic
Speaker 2: Age to come. They liked what he was doing so
Speaker 2: much they put him in charge of the Trilateral Commission,
Speaker 2: and then they put him in charge of Jimmy Carter.
Speaker 2: A new financial system with world currency replacing the US dollar.
Speaker 2: Crisis and conflict is needed ingredient and this kool aid
Speaker 2: that is being offered to us, especially by Trump. With
Speaker 2: a story that could be taken from the Book of Revelation,
Speaker 2: the Invincible Don Trump has reclaimed the throne. Trump is
Speaker 2: the great disruptor and serves as the wrecking ball needed
Speaker 2: to break down the old order and make America maybe
Speaker 2: not so great again. On his first day, he ordered
Speaker 2: the US to leave the WHROW, halting all climate commitments,
Speaker 2: and banning development of CBDC, ripping apart unpopular policies, left
Speaker 2: gift support from the fan base and shows commitment to
Speaker 2: his election promises. And yet and all these issues, as
Speaker 2: I said over and over again, Republicans saying, we're not
Speaker 2: going to have CBDC. No, we'll have something else. They're
Speaker 2: working on the Genius Act. We'll have a stable coin
Speaker 2: that'll be privately owned so these people can make money
Speaker 2: off of the tyranny. That's the difference between the Democrats
Speaker 2: and Republicans. Democrats want to become trillionaires and be tyrants
Speaker 2: so they can become trillionaires. The Democrats just want to
Speaker 2: be tyrants. Remember first round, he delivered the vaccines at
Speaker 2: warp speed with military pulling the strings, working in tandem
Speaker 2: with Bill Gates to evoke the biotechnological illusion with the
Speaker 2: big tech securing the borders from illegal aliens and communicable
Speaker 2: diseases with high tech solutions. The only time you ever
Speaker 2: closed the border was with his fake pandemic. The same
Speaker 2: logic applies today. The Trump administration is skillfully rebranded the
Speaker 2: Tools for Technological Control. His ascendency to power marks a
Speaker 2: second phase of the technocratic coup. And behind him we
Speaker 2: see people like Peter Teel, who's on the steering committee
Speaker 2: of the Builderberg Group, supposedly Trump's globalist enemies. Isn't it amazing,
Speaker 2: you know when you look at all this stuff. In
Speaker 2: two thousand and seven, Peter Teel was one of the
Speaker 2: World Economics Forum's Young Global Leaders, and that year when
Speaker 2: they put him in there, they talked about Project twenty
Speaker 2: thirty in two thousand and seven. It was eight years
Speaker 2: later that they started talking about the UN twenty thirty agenda,
Speaker 2: and they got it passed the next year. So nine
Speaker 2: years after this kicks off, the World Economic Forum kicks
Speaker 2: off with Peter Thiel, who is on the steering committee
Speaker 2: of the Builderberg Place. And yet people like Alex Jones,
Speaker 2: who used to always tell you about Builderberg so that
Speaker 2: you'd trust him, right, he has now has been on
Speaker 2: the dark side for over five years, went over to
Speaker 2: the dark side. Well he woke me up. Well he
Speaker 2: puts you to sleep again, didn't he. He put that
Speaker 2: Trump Pacify in your mouth, and he puts you asleep again.
Speaker 2: He knows what's going on. Oh, yes he does, and
Speaker 2: he's chosen which side he's going to be on, and
Speaker 2: it's on the globalist side. That's where Alex is. So
Speaker 2: Elon Musk, the self named dark Gothic Maga as a magician,
Speaker 2: I guess you know, technology that is sufficiently advanced, said
Speaker 2: Arthur C. Clark, is the same as effectively as magic.
Speaker 2: He also calls himself the Techno King, and his star
Speaker 2: link is really going to be the Watcher from the sky.
Speaker 2: His Optimus robot will babysit your child, says this writer. Well,
Speaker 2: his neuralink is intended to make it possible to interact
Speaker 2: directly with the global cybernetic mind, or to have the
Speaker 2: global cybernetic mind interact directly with yours. And the day
Speaker 2: after the inauguration, we had what was interesting called the
Speaker 2: Stargate project because it did literally open a portal to
Speaker 2: the unknown. If this goes through combining AI with mRNA, well,
Speaker 2: isn't that great? The Trump team is not an opposition
Speaker 2: to the technocratic machine, as they are implementing the world
Speaker 2: economic forums Industrial revolution at rocket speed. That's right, And
Speaker 2: so what is the next step with this, Well, we're
Speaker 2: going to have a trade war. Don't know how long
Speaker 2: it'll lasts, don't know how bad they'll be. It could
Speaker 2: actually kick off a real war. Wars frequently start. Real
Speaker 2: wars frequently start with sanctions, and that's what these terrorists are.
Speaker 2: It's more accurate to call them sanctions. So in the
Speaker 2: UN's coon Our Common Agenda was proposed that an emergency
Speaker 2: platform be established in the event of a complex global shock,
Speaker 2: and they listed seven global crises that could trigger an
Speaker 2: international coordinated response, things like a climactic event or a pandemic,
Speaker 2: or biological agents or disruption to global flows of goods
Speaker 2: or people, or cyber attacks or events in outer space,
Speaker 2: or finally, an unforeseen black Swan event. Well, how about
Speaker 2: UFOs and so called disclosure stuff. Are they ready to
Speaker 2: pull that phony trigger as well? Ronald Reagan talked about
Speaker 2: that at least three times. So what are they going
Speaker 2: to pull? Well? This guy again, This European quoted in
Speaker 2: Technocracy News says Trump is clearly the major source of chaos.
Speaker 2: In an agenda of biblical proportions and religious symbolism. Trump
Speaker 2: has been hailed as heir to King Cyrus, depicting him
Speaker 2: as a rebuilder of the Third Temple of Jerusalem, putting
Speaker 2: him on coins with Netanyahu. If everything goes according to plan,
Speaker 2: out of the ashes will rise a new multipolar world
Speaker 2: with a regional blocks or techniques, a network of smart
Speaker 2: cities or may we'll call them freedom cities. Right, Liberation
Speaker 2: day for taxi Yeah, I like that. Liberation Day and
Speaker 2: for smart cities, we'll call them freedom cities. Yeah, that'll
Speaker 2: suck in the conservatives on it. Well, Trump says its freedom,
Speaker 2: it must be freedom. So yeah, all of that'll be
Speaker 2: tied into their global operations stuff. Well, this writer says
Speaker 2: the European Union is currently being repurposed with historical upgraded defenses.
Speaker 2: Trump's rhetoric with Canadas becoming the fifty first state and
Speaker 2: the takeover Greenland could be the precursor to a real
Speaker 2: North American Union or to the technate as we have
Speaker 2: seen them talk about one hundred years ago. But he says,
Speaker 2: I do not believe that this Tower of Babel will
Speaker 2: succeed in the long run. It is hubris. And so
Speaker 2: the Tower Babyl was about. It is about pride, the
Speaker 2: pride of Satan that cast him down, the pride of
Speaker 2: the Tower of Babel that created nations, tongues and tribes
Speaker 2: to confuse them. Pride is always directed against God, and
Speaker 2: God is his own defender. And it may last for
Speaker 2: a while, who knows. It may last for the rest
Speaker 2: of our lives, our short lives, or it may last
Speaker 2: for our grandchildren, but it will eventually go down. It'll
Speaker 2: be taken down by God one way or the other
Speaker 2: at one time or the other. We know that it
Speaker 2: is just temporary. Well, we're going to take a break,
Speaker 2: as we've been going on for a very long time,
Speaker 2: and when we come back, I'm going to read your
Speaker 2: quotes and I'm going to tell you about the lawfair
Speaker 2: that's been initiated against us. And also look at your
Speaker 2: A lot of male haven't taken a time to go
Speaker 2: through it, so we're going to take some time to
Speaker 2: go through some male. But I'll tell you about the
Speaker 2: lawfair when we come back. We'll be right back. The
Speaker 2: common man. They created common Core, dumb down our children.
Speaker 2: They created common past, track and control us. They're Commons
Speaker 2: project to make sure the commoners own nothing and the
Speaker 2: communist future. They see the common man as simple, unsophisticated ordinary,
Speaker 2: but each of us has worth and dignity. Created in
Speaker 2: the image of God. That is what we have in common.
Speaker 2: That is what they want to take away. Their most
Speaker 2: powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation. They desire to know
Speaker 2: everything about us while they hide everything from us. It's
Speaker 2: time to turn that around and expose what they want
Speaker 2: to hide. Please share the information and links you'll find
Speaker 2: at the Davidnightshow dot com. Thank you for listening, Thank
Speaker 2: you for sharing. If you can't support us financially, please
Speaker 2: keep us in your prayers. Ddavidnightshow dot com. Well, all right,
Speaker 2: welcome back on Rumble D. Thank you for the TV.
Speaker 3: Says David.
Speaker 2: Trump is the hammer to put the last nail in
Speaker 2: small business America. It's cult. Can't see it. They claim
Speaker 2: this is three d chest to destroy the market and
Speaker 2: refinance the debt at lower rate. Foolishness. David is hard
Speaker 2: to trust these evangelicals. These are the same people they
Speaker 2: go along with Trump promoting Haretic Paul White as his
Speaker 2: evangelical leader. By the way, she's got a special in
Speaker 2: case you want to get super blessed, you can send
Speaker 2: her a thousand dollars I think sometime around Easter time
Speaker 2: and you'll probably you know, if you could give that
Speaker 2: money to her, give it to Trump. They're gonna bless
Speaker 2: you with something, you know, maybe who knows You've got
Speaker 2: TikTok partnership or something. I don't know. These people have
Speaker 2: no principles. I agree Rumble Hal nine thousand. Watson says,
Speaker 2: when Trump tanks the economy, it feels good. Better than Biden. Yeah,
Speaker 2: steal Patriot, Thank you so much for the tip on.
Speaker 2: Rumble says, Trump reminds me of the Choose your destructor
Speaker 2: quote unquote seeing and Ghostbusters instead of Dan Ackroyd thinking
Speaker 2: of the Staypuff marsh lellow Man, he says, all I
Speaker 2: can think of is the armless bag of Cheetahs. Yeah,
Speaker 2: there you go, the Orange Man. Remember when Remember we
Speaker 2: had Glenn Beck rubbed his face and Cheetos. So we'll see.
Speaker 2: By the way, I just want to let you know
Speaker 2: we now stream on kick as well, Kick dot Com
Speaker 2: forward slash David Knight Show. Hick is a good platform
Speaker 2: for us because they returned ninety five percent to the creators,
Speaker 2: which is better than we get anywhere else. The only
Speaker 2: place is better than that is Zell in the post Office.
Speaker 2: But they don't take a cut, not yet. Anyway, We'll
Speaker 2: see I want to talk about law fair and I
Speaker 2: put up the the Hitchcock mcguffin thing on Twitter. I
Speaker 2: can put it up on Wednesday or something or Thursday. Anyway.
Speaker 2: It was the next day that a law sent me
Speaker 2: a cease and desist order and threats about claiming that
Speaker 2: I had violated the trademark of the Hitchcock family. Actually
Speaker 2: it's not the family. They made it into a corporation
Speaker 2: so that the lawyers and the you know, various Hollywood
Speaker 2: people can keep grifting on this long after his death.
Speaker 2: He died forty five years ago. His daughter died five
Speaker 2: years ago at the age of ninety three. But they
Speaker 2: can keep this thing going forever. And that's kind of
Speaker 2: where we are with intellectual property today. Ironic. I think
Speaker 2: that the music that they use a funeral march for
Speaker 2: Marionette or you know, Puppets from Gateway. I guess funeral
Speaker 2: March for Marionette by Charles Guneaud. I guess I don't
Speaker 2: know how he pronounced his name. He's French. The always
Speaker 2: like to throw in a consonant at the end of
Speaker 2: a word to make you sound stupid because you don't
Speaker 2: pronounce it the way they do. It's like pooh, you
Speaker 2: don't pronounce the t at the end, or renault. If
Speaker 2: you called a renault, they laugh at you. Right. Anyway,
Speaker 2: the funeral march for a marionette, and that was used
Speaker 2: as Hitchcock's theme and they used that sixty he died,
Speaker 2: and he did it in eighteen ninety three, but it
Speaker 2: was about sixty two years after he had died. Now,
Speaker 2: under today's copyright stuff that would not be allowed. Now
Speaker 2: they could pay a license fee for it, I guess
Speaker 2: to the family. But the copyright laws have been extended
Speaker 2: significantly with all of this stuff. And then of course
Speaker 2: there's other issues like the trademark law, which is very subjective.
Speaker 2: And so I want to show you what they accused
Speaker 2: us of violating. The Hitchcock silhouette that he claimed. He says, well,
Speaker 2: I'm sure that it's not a claim. They actually registered
Speaker 2: the Hitchcock silhouette. That's what you would see at his
Speaker 2: you know, on his programs. That's Silhoett. This is what
Speaker 2: they say violated. That does that look the same, that's Hitchcock,
Speaker 2: and this is our trademark violation. I'm sorry, Am I
Speaker 2: not allowed to have somebody that is a silhouette. Now,
Speaker 2: of course we were obviously making this about Hitchcock, and
Speaker 2: it was a parody. Parodies are protected speech, and so
Speaker 2: this is you know, there's also another and I don't
Speaker 2: know which one of these is a registered trademark. I
Speaker 2: don't know if they registered Hitchcock's actual profile with his
Speaker 2: double chin and his prominent nose there, or if it
Speaker 2: is the cartoon version of it that you've seen so
Speaker 2: many times with a bunch of arcs that's there. But
Speaker 2: there you can see both of those together. Now, I
Speaker 2: find it interesting how selective these things are, and this
Speaker 2: is why I think there's something That's why I called
Speaker 2: it lawfair, because I don't think this is about copyright violations.
Speaker 2: I've been the victim of this kind of alleged copyright
Speaker 2: claims as a law fair in the past, and that's
Speaker 2: what I think this is truly about Nahair. We see
Speaker 2: him standing in profile. I put that there because that
Speaker 2: was actually a pose that was done by Rush Limbaugh
Speaker 2: when he did a concert tour in the late eighties.
Speaker 2: They would play his theme song music, which by the way,
Speaker 2: he had you know, he used the pretender's music. Even
Speaker 2: though they didn't like it. They tried to shut it down,
Speaker 2: but you know you can. You can pay for the
Speaker 2: was it ASCAP, I don't know who it is, but
Speaker 2: it's all the association. If you were on the radio
Speaker 2: or whatever, you buy into it, and that gives you
Speaker 2: free access to play any pop music that you want
Speaker 2: to as long as it's under that umbrella. So he
Speaker 2: had a legal right to do that, as do a
Speaker 2: lot of these politicians. When they play somebody's theme song
Speaker 2: and the artist doesn't like them, you know, there's not
Speaker 2: really anything they can really do about it. They can
Speaker 2: complain about it. But anyway, they played his you know,
Speaker 2: and he walks out and he stands there the curtain
Speaker 2: and the pose of Hitchcock for a little bit and
Speaker 2: then he comes back out. Well, now they didn't shut
Speaker 2: him down and shut him down, And that was only
Speaker 2: just a few years after Hitchcock had died. That was
Speaker 2: in the late eighties. Hitchcock died in nineteen eighty. And
Speaker 2: then you have situations like this. This is a T
Speaker 2: shirt that's available on Etsy. Now. I don't know if
Speaker 2: that design is licensed or not. If it's on Etsy,
Speaker 2: maybe it is, and maybe it isn't. And so the
Speaker 2: question is you know is this a trademark violation of Hitchcock?
Speaker 2: So I saw this on Saturday, and getting a letter
Speaker 2: from a law firm really got me angry, as you
Speaker 2: can imagine, and I spent most of Saturday thinking about
Speaker 2: how I was going to respond to this. And you know,
Speaker 2: there's also the voice. But then we've also had We
Speaker 2: did a cartoon version of Hitchcock because we could have
Speaker 2: done a photorealistic version. It's not hard to do today,
Speaker 2: it's very easy to do. But we wanted to make
Speaker 2: sure that people understood that it was a parody, so
Speaker 2: we did a cartoon version of it. You know, there's
Speaker 2: been other cartoon versions that have used people's voices. Pinky
Speaker 2: in the Brain, for example, used Orson Wells's voice. That
Speaker 2: was a brain we had about the same time we
Speaker 2: had Ren and Stimpy. Do you remember that one of them?
Speaker 2: I forget which is which had the voice of Peter Lourie.
Speaker 2: And of course, contemporary with all these people, there were
Speaker 2: always parodies that were being done. I remember the cartoons
Speaker 2: of this exaggerated character of Edward G. Robinson. Put me
Speaker 2: a second there, you know, the gangster, you know, with
Speaker 2: a cigar in his mouth. You probably remember it as
Speaker 2: well if you're old enough. But yeah, always that type
Speaker 2: of stuff. What a Saturday Night Live do all the time? Right,
Speaker 2: And so to say this is a violation of true
Speaker 2: trademark or something like that, not for it. Certainly it's
Speaker 2: not a violation of trademark for political figures and you're
Speaker 2: able to make fun of them, but they do it
Speaker 2: all the time. For superheroes, do they get a letter
Speaker 2: every time somebody puts on like a Superman costume or something?
Speaker 2: Now they do. They look the other way. So why
Speaker 2: is this happening. This is happening because of politics. This
Speaker 2: is happening for the same reason that YouTube took down.
Speaker 2: It's a wonderful life. It's a wonderful life. They didn't
Speaker 2: take down. It's a wonderful life they had had. And
Speaker 2: it wasn't coming from the studio that reasserted their copyright claim.
Speaker 2: It wasn't coming from that studio supposedly. Well, they let
Speaker 2: their copyright claim go and they lost it globally. And
Speaker 2: by the way, when we're talking about intellectual property, that
Speaker 2: was the best thing that ever happened to that movie.
Speaker 2: Because it was in the public domain. People discovered it.
Speaker 2: It had been lost because when it first came out,
Speaker 2: people are not didn't like the movie for whatever reason,
Speaker 2: but because it played over and over again, because it
Speaker 2: was in the public domain on Ted Turner's cable channel,
Speaker 2: it became very famous and it became an established thing
Speaker 2: and everybody was doing knockoff copies of it. There was
Speaker 2: no copyright on it. Had they had led to expire
Speaker 2: by a clerical error, they did not renew it. And
Speaker 2: so what happened was the company that used to have
Speaker 2: in an RKO or somebody that it was bought and
Speaker 2: sold these different studios or bought and sold so many times.
Speaker 2: I don't know who had it, but the people who
Speaker 2: currently would have had it went to the US courts
Speaker 2: and re established their copyright. Now how did they do that, Well,
Speaker 2: they came up with this legal prevarication saying we're going
Speaker 2: to re establish this copyright by saying that we have
Speaker 2: a copyright on the script, and we're going to because
Speaker 2: it's a written thing and it's got a longer term,
Speaker 2: so that's still an effect. So we're going to take
Speaker 2: the copyright from the script and we're going to apply
Speaker 2: it to a movie that's never been done before. And
Speaker 2: the courts let them get away with that theft, if
Speaker 2: you will, that prevarication. And so there's a lot of
Speaker 2: things to see in that number one, how intellectual property
Speaker 2: actually works against an artist. This kind of excessive protection
Speaker 2: of intellectual property. Up to a point, it's good, but
Speaker 2: when it becomes excessive, it actually works against that artist,
Speaker 2: and I think it becomes counterproductive. But the other part
Speaker 2: of it is just how rigged our legal system is
Speaker 2: willing to set aside its own rules and its own laws.
Speaker 2: And so I looked at it and I thought, well, still,
Speaker 2: I think it's important because I had this happen to
Speaker 2: me before with It's a Wonderful Life. It's a wonderful
Speaker 2: Lie was the parody that I did talking about the
Speaker 2: creation of the Federal Reserve. But I had a lot
Speaker 2: of stuff in that ten minute video that was about
Speaker 2: the creation of the Federal Reserve, Quotes from people at
Speaker 2: the time, pictures of the people at the time, but
Speaker 2: I used some illustrations and commented on those illustrations, all
Speaker 2: of which is covered under fair use and parody and
Speaker 2: so forth, talking about how inflation had devastate things. Look
Speaker 2: at the salary that he was willing to bribe George
Speaker 2: Bailey with and look at the banker. He is the
Speaker 2: exact image really of JP Morgan and how he orchestrated
Speaker 2: bank runs to take out his competition and other things
Speaker 2: like that. So I talked about all that and they
Speaker 2: took it down, claiming that it was a violation of
Speaker 2: copyright which had been fraudulently reassessed, but only in North America.
Speaker 2: But where did I get the short clips that I
Speaker 2: used as part of a couple of short clips I
Speaker 2: used as part of that. I got it from YouTube.
Speaker 2: I got it from the full version of It's a
Speaker 2: Wonderful Life, which was available to people in North America,
Speaker 2: was not put up by the studio, had been up
Speaker 2: for seven years, had over a million views at that time,
Speaker 2: and it was not monetized. They weren't doing monetization at
Speaker 2: that point in time. That was twenty thirteen. That was
Speaker 2: five years before they censored info Wars. Info Wars was
Speaker 2: there darling at the time, generating a lot of traffic
Speaker 2: for them. And so that was the first thing that
Speaker 2: was censored at info Wars was that because I did
Speaker 2: it about the Federal Reserve, it was politics. It wasn't
Speaker 2: about copyright. It wasn't about trademark, it wasn't about any
Speaker 2: of that stuff. This I believe is as well. I
Speaker 2: believe as I put it up on social media. I
Speaker 2: put hashtags there about climate scam, but also put up
Speaker 2: hashtags that the left would look at, you know, climate
Speaker 2: and how important you know. And so I'm sure that
Speaker 2: somebody saw that and contacted them to do law fair
Speaker 2: against me. So I spent Saturday figuring out what I
Speaker 2: was going to do with this, and quite frankly, I
Speaker 2: think this is a hill to die on. Thought about
Speaker 2: how it could do a GoFundMe or something like that,
Speaker 2: and I was really angry and upset all of Saturday.
Speaker 2: On Sunday, I got up and I said, well, let
Speaker 2: me just get away from this, read the Bible, pray
Speaker 2: about this and something. And immediately when I stopped thinking
Speaker 2: about these people, immediately I remember when christ said, if
Speaker 2: someone sues you for your shirt, you give them the
Speaker 2: shirt off your back and your coat also to paraphrase it.
Speaker 2: So I don't like it, but we're going to do
Speaker 2: what they said, and we're going to take it down.
Speaker 2: And there's more than one way to do a parody.
Speaker 2: I don't have to fight them head on where they
Speaker 2: are strong, I don't have to fight them head on.
Speaker 2: And they're hopelessly corrupt, politically biased court system. That's why
Speaker 2: they use law fair. I've watched this over and over
Speaker 2: again from people. I'm not going to play in that field. Frankly,
Speaker 2: we have weapons as Christians that are mightier than what
Speaker 2: they have, and that includes their lawyers, their pagan system.
Speaker 2: And so there's more than one way to do a parody,
Speaker 2: and so we're going to not use that anymore. We
Speaker 2: will work on something else that you know, this whole thing,
Speaker 2: which is necessary because I pointed out, you know, the
Speaker 2: whole idea that whatever it is that they're using, whether
Speaker 2: it's climate, whether it's you know, the allegations of cowfarts
Speaker 2: or whatever, it is, all the nonsense or the COVID
Speaker 2: nonsense that doesn't really matter, That doesn't matter. It is
Speaker 2: the way that you motivate the characters, and it's their
Speaker 2: motivations and what they're doing that really matters. The rest
Speaker 2: of this stuff is just a smoke screen or a
Speaker 2: screen of flatulence, if you will. Right, And it was
Speaker 2: a guy Angus McPhail who was a screenwriter who collaborated
Speaker 2: with Alfred Hitchcock who came up with the idea of
Speaker 2: the mcguffin that wasn't Hitchcock's. And so the mcguffin will continue,
Speaker 2: and the parody will continue, and we will fight them
Speaker 2: on our own terms, and we will do as the
Speaker 2: Lord Jesus Christ said, We'll give them the shirt off
Speaker 2: our back and what we've worked for. And don't know
Speaker 2: what is going to happen with us, but anyway, I
Speaker 2: want to go over some of the Obviously, we've got
Speaker 2: a Marty margen Mark says, Russel and Bob paid the
Speaker 2: pretenders one hundred thousand dollars a year to use their song. Well,
Speaker 2: I don't know if that was Maybe that's the case.
Speaker 2: I thought it was covered under the blanket thing that
Speaker 2: was there, but maybe he paid them another thing. They
Speaker 2: still complain about it nevertheless, or maybe they're trying to
Speaker 2: get the rate up. Let's talk a little bit about
Speaker 2: some of your male that's been sent to me. This
Speaker 2: came from Sam and says, yeah, got to get your shots. Well,
Speaker 2: all this stuff is coming back again Riverside County. It's
Speaker 2: the clip he sent me. Adult tests positive for measles,
Speaker 2: the first case in the County since twenty eighteen. Everybody's
Speaker 2: going to die, right, It's going to be rumors of
Speaker 2: measles and PCR tests with measles and all the rest
Speaker 2: of this stuff. And of course we've got RFK Junior
Speaker 2: has traveled now to Texas. They claim that a second
Speaker 2: child has died of measles. I don't believe that, because
Speaker 2: it's been debunked about the first child's death. The child
Speaker 2: had the rash, had already decreased. The child had bronchial pneumonia,
Speaker 2: and they took him to this hospital and the parents
Speaker 2: wanted what was the antibiotic. I can't remember, but it
Speaker 2: was a common antibiotic that is commonly used. And the
Speaker 2: doctor and others have accused that hospital of withholding effective
Speaker 2: treatment for that child. But it wasn't measles that killed
Speaker 2: that child. So I don't necessarily believe since they lied
Speaker 2: about the first one, I don't necessarily believe that the
Speaker 2: second child died with that either. This is maybe died
Speaker 2: with a PCR test, died with measles, not from measles,
Speaker 2: or so forth. This is the kind of game that
Speaker 2: we've seen. But the most important thing is the fact
Speaker 2: that RFK Junior is there, and he's there saying, your
Speaker 2: most effective protection against measles, in case you think you
Speaker 2: need it, is a shot. He spent decades pushing back
Speaker 2: against these childhood vaccine shots and talking about how dangerous
Speaker 2: they are. And as a condition of him getting that office,
Speaker 2: he bowed to this pharmaceutical GOP Senator Cassidy out of Louisiana.
Speaker 2: He bowed him and basically sold sold to the devil.
Speaker 2: And that's now he is. After he sold his soul
Speaker 2: to the devil. Now he is selling vaccines to your
Speaker 2: children and to you and talking about how wonderful they are.
Speaker 2: It's disgusting, disgusting to see this. And so at the
Speaker 2: same time, you got Elon Musk boasting about how ten
Speaker 2: billion humanoid robots will out number people and invade the Earth.
Speaker 2: I've talked about this. The Nvidia CEO said, you're you're
Speaker 2: going to have humanoid robots walking the street in less
Speaker 2: than five years. And so Elon Musk is saying, my
Speaker 2: prediction that Optimist will be the biggest product of all
Speaker 2: before it'd be ten times bigger than the next biggest
Speaker 2: product ever made. He said, well, he's already talking about
Speaker 2: how you're going to have more of these than you
Speaker 2: would do cars, he said. Long term, I think there'll
Speaker 2: be more. The ratio of humanoid robots will be more
Speaker 2: than one to one. There might be two humanoid robots
Speaker 2: or more, maybe ten. Isn't that great because you know,
Speaker 2: here's the thing. Robots are better than humans because robots
Speaker 2: don't breathe out CO two and of course somehow they
Speaker 2: miraculously get their energy without creating any CO two, and
Speaker 2: so yeah, they don't. They don't unlike cows, they don't
Speaker 2: fart either. So you know, they're great, and we're gonna
Speaker 2: have maybe ten of them, he says, for every human. Well,
Speaker 2: you know, it's interesting because when you look at in
Speaker 2: the US, hows that compared to cars. Well, if you
Speaker 2: look at the population of the US and the number
Speaker 2: of cars, it works out like zero point eight six
Speaker 2: cars per American. But that's including children. So if you
Speaker 2: restrict that to adults, that works out to one point
Speaker 2: five cars per adult, slightly more than one car per adult.
Speaker 2: If you then look at licensed drivers, that goes even higher. Uh,
Speaker 2: and it goes and if you look at at cars
Speaker 2: per household, it goes to one point eight. So what
Speaker 2: what is the future going to look like? You know,
Speaker 2: we can see these robots here in these factories. This
Speaker 2: is the Digit robot, and this is the one that
Speaker 2: has the weird articulation on the back of the leg
Speaker 2: that you can see here in a second when it
Speaker 2: turns around. It's kind of something that we already saw
Speaker 2: from that Charlie Sheen science fiction movie back in the
Speaker 2: nineties called The Arrival. These people would walk around like
Speaker 2: they were human, and then they would stop and their
Speaker 2: knees would bend back in the opposite direction, and that's
Speaker 2: how you knew it was one of them. They could
Speaker 2: jump really far and have these insight like legs. Well
Speaker 2: that's what this thing has. It's super creepy, but that's
Speaker 2: Digit and they've got a lot of them and they
Speaker 2: work in factories. There you go, they can replace you
Speaker 2: in the factory. So what are we bringing? What are
Speaker 2: we going through all this tariff that's going to destroy
Speaker 2: small businesses and farms and things like that. Oh, so
Speaker 2: that we can bring manufacturing back to the US. And
Speaker 2: guess what, the manufacturing is going to be done by robots.
Speaker 2: But we may wind up with digit robots like that
Speaker 2: that we could wind up having one or two per household,
Speaker 2: because when he talks about how he thinks it's going
Speaker 2: to move forward, he makes a lot of comparisons Elon
Speaker 2: must have to Tesla. He said, you know the Tesla
Speaker 2: cars that we did, they're just a robot. He said,
Speaker 2: these robots have arms and legs instead of wheels. But
Speaker 2: other than that, he said, everything else that we've developed
Speaker 2: for our cars, the batteries of power, electronics, advanced motors,
Speaker 2: the gearboxes, a software, the AI interface. I see, that's
Speaker 2: the issues that I have with it. He said that
Speaker 2: all actually applies to humanoid robots. Just get them to walk. Well, frankly,
Speaker 2: that doesn't inspire confidence in me, because I remember when
Speaker 2: Tesla's first came out. Steve Wozniak, who was a partner
Speaker 2: for Steve Job in the beginning of Apple, he said,
Speaker 2: I love my Tesla. He says, it's great to drive it,
Speaker 2: but he goes, don't use autopilot. That thing is trying
Speaker 2: to kill you. Well, are these things going to be
Speaker 2: trying to kill us? And you know, when we look
Speaker 2: at the accident and death rate of the Tesla's that
Speaker 2: also does not inspire confidence. But when we look at
Speaker 2: what he's talking about charging for them, and of course
Speaker 2: he always comes up upon the sky technology stories and
Speaker 2: low balls the amount that's actually going to cost. He's
Speaker 2: now saying to cost twenty to thirty thousand dollars for
Speaker 2: a robot. Well, if true, that's way less than a Tesla.
Speaker 2: So you can have one or two of these for
Speaker 2: your family if you wanted it. I don't. As a
Speaker 2: matter of fact, that was an article that was sent
Speaker 2: to me by Sam. This was sent to me by
Speaker 2: Will talking about the current state of where we are.
Speaker 2: Touches on the robots. He says, our so called government
Speaker 2: is cannibalizing itself. The executive branch bypasses Congress. Congress can't
Speaker 2: get anything of use accomplished, and the states are fighting
Speaker 2: the fads. Actually, Congresses abdicate its power, abdicate its power
Speaker 2: to the executive branch, abdicate its power to the bureaucracy,
Speaker 2: the deep state under the executive and so forth. He says,
Speaker 2: it's a professional wrestling act and we suffer all the
Speaker 2: constant conflict. And he said it seems like it's getting
Speaker 2: worse than it did in the past. Yeah, it is
Speaker 2: going to get much worse. Hang on, because they're going
Speaker 2: to accelerate this, and that's what they've talked about, Peter
Speaker 2: Teel and these other people talking about accelerationism. We've got
Speaker 2: to accelerate the change. We've got to move fast. We've
Speaker 2: got to break things. And one of the things that
Speaker 2: they need to break is our society so they can
Speaker 2: build it back the way they want it. Says, Basically,
Speaker 2: the government thrashes around like a dying or wounded animal,
Speaker 2: tearing up the ground around us until it dies. And
Speaker 2: on another note, have you seen the Trump commercial touting
Speaker 2: the return of the auto industry and new factories to
Speaker 2: the US. The clips show robots assembling cars. Yeah, not
Speaker 2: human beings, just like the digit thing as working in
Speaker 2: a factory. He says, maybe they will hire a few
Speaker 2: programmers and maintenance mento service these robots. At best, that
Speaker 2: should create at least a few dozen jobs. This is
Speaker 2: a sick joke on the public. And of course Elon
Speaker 2: Musk for the longest time talked about his you know
Speaker 2: you wanted to come up with completely automated Tesla factories.
Speaker 2: Call them alien dreadnoughts. Assembly lines not aliens in the
Speaker 2: sense that are coming from a foreign country, not alien,
Speaker 2: but kind of referring to alien as a sci fi
Speaker 2: type of approach, and the Dreadnought is, you know, just
Speaker 2: a kind of battleship, you know, the biggest, baddest one
Speaker 2: that's out there. So he's an alien Dreadnought. Well, it's
Speaker 2: going to be a completely robotic assembly line. So maybe
Speaker 2: in the future, instead of us talking about, well was
Speaker 2: it made in America, maybe the discussion the diviting line
Speaker 2: will be is it made by humans? Maybe that'll be
Speaker 2: the selling point. Should be? Should be because as I
Speaker 2: said before, Bloomberg and Musk was in there at the
Speaker 2: very same time funding Andrew Yang, who wanted to come
Speaker 2: up with the thing that was going to pacify everybody
Speaker 2: that Bloomberg was talking about. So we don't come after
Speaker 2: them with guillotines. They give us a little bit of
Speaker 2: basic income, universal welfare for everybody because they don't want
Speaker 2: you to have a job, don't want you to have
Speaker 2: a purpose. Well this was sent by a listener when
Speaker 2: I said I was laughing about who in the world
Speaker 2: to be the patron saint of bottom surgery, and this
Speaker 2: was as person said, well, here's Marcy Bauers, who qualifies
Speaker 2: for that. I guess you that she's not officially pronounced
Speaker 2: because they don't have an official church. But if they
Speaker 2: did have an official church, I'm sure she would be
Speaker 2: the patron Saint of bottom surgery, because they were talking
Speaker 2: about the patron Saints of transgenderism, and that's in a
Speaker 2: course that's being taught in more than one college. As
Speaker 2: a matter of fact, she's an American gynecologist and a
Speaker 2: surgeon who specializes in gender affirming surgery. Is viewed as
Speaker 2: an innovator in gender confirmation and affirmation surgery. That's the
Speaker 2: way Wikipedia points it now. She mutilates people for a living.
Speaker 2: She sterilizes people for a living. She does it for
Speaker 2: children as well. Currently, she's president of w PATH and
Speaker 2: has served on the board of directors for both GLAD
Speaker 2: and the Transgender Law Center. She's the first woman worldwide
Speaker 2: to hold a personal transgender history while performing transgender surgery.
Speaker 2: So she's a guy evidently. Well, we're going to take
Speaker 2: a break, and when we come back, we're going to
Speaker 2: talk a little bit about Gerald Slenty, the charges of
Speaker 2: anti semitism, and the Yemen drone strike that we just
Speaker 2: recently saw over the weekend. And as Trump was boasting
Speaker 2: about that as well. We'll be right back.
Speaker 3: You're listening to the David Knight Show.
Speaker 2: Well, welcome back, and sv Kat, thank you for the
Speaker 2: tip and for the kind words. I appreciate that I
Speaker 2: wanted to cover this. This is from for Love of
Speaker 2: the Road, Ryan who did the coin, the really nice
Speaker 2: medallion that we sold out of and it went really
Speaker 2: really quickly. I think it surprised everybody how quickly that went.
Speaker 2: But it was a really nice thing. He put that together.
Speaker 2: Donate that and it's just amazing. That really was a
Speaker 2: big help last month. And he said, I just wanted
Speaker 2: to share this with you, and he said that this
Speaker 2: is some comments that people may said. Manny is part
Speaker 2: of the reason why I made the coin, and he's
Speaker 2: been asking for one for the last couple of years.
Speaker 2: And so he had a comment that was left by Manny.
Speaker 2: I believe this is on a subscribe star and he said,
Speaker 2: I've been a longtime supporter of David. He's solid, funny, logical,
Speaker 2: most issues freedom, constitution, things like that, good on COVID
Speaker 2: and sanity and tyranny. But he has an issue with
Speaker 2: my position on Israel, he says, and what is happening there?
Speaker 2: His position. He says, they are God's covenant people and
Speaker 2: the land is his and he gave it to the
Speaker 2: Jewish people. It's in the Bible. Israel is the only
Speaker 2: nation he ever made a covenant relationship with. Forever, all
Speaker 2: I hear is David Guard Tony Gerald slamming Israel for genocide.
Speaker 2: How about hearing the other side? And I just have
Speaker 2: to say, you know, when when Gerald Sentti says, well
Speaker 2: it's in the book, I don't believe the book. And
Speaker 2: so you know, I understand Gerald's position that he's got
Speaker 2: a he had a very difficult time when he was
Speaker 2: a child. He was in a Catholic school, and this
Speaker 2: is not just a Catholic thing. This happens with anybody.
Speaker 2: And you know, you have all the time I'm seeing
Speaker 2: issues of people who are a youth pastor or a
Speaker 2: head pastor or something in a church who are guilty
Speaker 2: of sexual assault against the child. And Gerald was not
Speaker 2: sexually assaulted. She broke his ear drum and created all
Speaker 2: kinds of issues for him, and he's very angry about
Speaker 2: that because he sees just as many people will see
Speaker 2: these people who are in positions of authority whatever, you know,
Speaker 2: Protestant church or Catholic Church. They'll see the church instead
Speaker 2: of seeing Christ, and they'll get angry about that. If
Speaker 2: they got somebody who is abused, abusive to them or
Speaker 2: to other people, I'd say, I don't want anything to
Speaker 2: do with Christianity. Well that's fine, I don't want anything
Speaker 2: to do with Christianity either, really, but it's Christ that
Speaker 2: we want to have to do with. And when we
Speaker 2: put other things in front of and in place of Christ,
Speaker 2: then all of a sudden, that church, you know, it's
Speaker 2: not Christ that we've got some relationship with, but as
Speaker 2: that priest or that nun or that pastor, or that
Speaker 2: youth group leader or that Sunday school teacher or whatever
Speaker 2: that we have the relationship with. And guess what, they're fallible.
Speaker 2: Some of them are criminal. And so we have to
Speaker 2: make that distinction and that disturnment discernment. And I say
Speaker 2: the same thing about Israel. You want to make sure
Speaker 2: that you don't have a relationship with Israel that takes
Speaker 2: the place of your relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ.
Speaker 2: They're not the same thing, not the same thing. And
Speaker 2: just as we have abusive people who take on the
Speaker 2: mantle of the Church and we have abusive, criminal people
Speaker 2: who have taken on the mantle of Israel. And as
Speaker 2: I've said over and over again, this is a political war.
Speaker 2: This is a war for land. This is a war
Speaker 2: that should be held up to a just standard. And
Speaker 2: when we don't care what that just standard is, if
Speaker 2: all we care about is how we interpret a prophecy
Speaker 2: or how we interpret God's promise to them. And I
Speaker 2: just say this, you know, I've said this to Gerald
Speaker 2: several times. I do believe it what I do believe
Speaker 2: the Bible. I do believe what God says there about
Speaker 2: Israel and the land and about an Abram, Abraham Abram
Speaker 2: at the time, and then he made him Abraham. I
Speaker 2: believe that. But what does that have to do with
Speaker 2: the genocide? Does that excuse the genocide? And when we
Speaker 2: talk about Abraham, remember that God said I'm going to
Speaker 2: make you know your descendants will be like the stars
Speaker 2: of the sky. And he's old and Sarah, his wife
Speaker 2: is old, and they're looking at it and they're saying, well,
Speaker 2: I don't see this happening. You know, God has promised this.
Speaker 2: Maybe we need to make this happen, right. God helps
Speaker 2: those who help themselves that's not in the Bible. Actually,
Speaker 2: Abraham's story says exactly the opposite. He decides that they
Speaker 2: decide that they're going to have her handmade or slave
Speaker 2: or whatever. Hagar, who is an Egyptian, that he will
Speaker 2: have a child through her, and because it isn't happening
Speaker 2: with Sarah. And then what happens with that is that,
Speaker 2: you know, Sarah gets angry, she gets kicked out, and
Speaker 2: the child Ishmael becomes the patriarch of the Arabs. And
Speaker 2: so you see how that is backfired. That is backfired
Speaker 2: for them in a big way. You have the ultra
Speaker 2: Orthodox Jews and Israel say, yes, God gave us the
Speaker 2: land and God will miraculously give it to us again.
Speaker 2: Took them off, gave them the land, took them off
Speaker 2: more than once, and he will miraculously restore it to them.
Speaker 2: And they don't want to be a part of the army.
Speaker 2: They don't want to be a part of these wars.
Speaker 2: And I ask White, do Christians want to be a
Speaker 2: part of this genocide. Both sides want to completely eradicate
Speaker 2: the other side. They both want to kill every single
Speaker 2: one of the other side. It's a half Phiel's and
Speaker 2: McCoy is taken up to a genocide level. It's what
Speaker 2: we're seeing there. I don't want to be a part
Speaker 2: of either of those, and I'm not going to excuse
Speaker 2: that on either side. We should never call for that.
Speaker 2: That is never justified. And we have principles. As I've
Speaker 2: said before, a just war principle was an attempt by
Speaker 2: Augustine and other Christian thinkers to say, if we're going
Speaker 2: to have a state, and one of the key functions
Speaker 2: of a state is to keep peace and order. Ideally,
Speaker 2: if the state was doing its job, well, that would
Speaker 2: be what it would limit itself to, you know, creating affair,
Speaker 2: playing field, taking care of people who are not going
Speaker 2: to abide by that, who are harming other people. That
Speaker 2: is domestically, but it also is across the borders. When
Speaker 2: there's a war. And so when somebody invade your country,
Speaker 2: you want to have the ability to fight back and
Speaker 2: defend yourself and to defend innocent life. And we have
Speaker 2: a duty to defend innocent life. But when does that
Speaker 2: war stop and what is the purpose and under what
Speaker 2: conditions should we have a war? Well, it means that
Speaker 2: first of all, there has to be an aggression against us. Secondly,
Speaker 2: we should try to avoid civilian casualties. Third we should
Speaker 2: try to end this as soon as possible. There's some
Speaker 2: other aspects of it as well that you would do
Speaker 2: a calculation and say, well, there's absolutely no way that
Speaker 2: can we can win this. I mean, if you want
Speaker 2: to take you and because you're upset about the federal
Speaker 2: government and because it's everything that does is against the
Speaker 2: constitution they swore to defend. If you and five other
Speaker 2: guys want to go to Washington declare war on Washington,
Speaker 2: that's not really under a just war. You're going to
Speaker 2: get those people killed in yourself as well most likely.
Speaker 2: And so you have to look at something and say
Speaker 2: is it justified and is there a chance for success?
Speaker 2: That's why I mentioned that, give that example, is there
Speaker 2: a reasonable chance for success? And as I said before,
Speaker 2: that's why Roberty Lee surrendered when he did. It could
Speaker 2: have continued with a guerrilla war and that might have
Speaker 2: over decades been successful, as we have seen in Afghanistan,
Speaker 2: is in Iraq and Vietnam, and you know, all the
Speaker 2: different wars that we've lost, it's been a sustained guerrilla warfare.
Speaker 2: So he probably could have won that, but he did
Speaker 2: not believe that it was justified. And I've got to
Speaker 2: say that when Christians justified genocide of one side against
Speaker 2: the other and denouncing the other side, claims, you know,
Speaker 2: desire for genocide like this is both sides want genocide.
Speaker 2: Understand that. And when you cheer for genocide, the Pagans
Speaker 2: look at what you're doing, and it discredits Christ. It
Speaker 2: really does. It's a reproach on Christ because that's not
Speaker 2: what he is about. And you have to you have
Speaker 2: to understand that just as Paul talked to the Corinthians,
Speaker 2: he said, you're engaged in sexual immorality that even the
Speaker 2: Pagans don't do. What are you doing? You say that
Speaker 2: you're free to do this, Yeah, you have liberty, but
Speaker 2: not for this. And so we have to understand that
Speaker 2: sometimes Christians can get involved in things because they talk
Speaker 2: themselves into it. Oh, look, you know Christ has forgiven
Speaker 2: my sin, so I can do anything that I want to. Well, no,
Speaker 2: that's not right. God has given the land to Israel,
Speaker 2: so they can do whatever they wish to anybody that
Speaker 2: they wish to keep that land and to expand it
Speaker 2: or whatever. No, that's not right either. And we have
Speaker 2: to understand that not only are we becoming, are we
Speaker 2: partnering with something that is heinous, not only are we
Speaker 2: putting some institution and some people in the place of God.
Speaker 2: As you know many people do they say, well, this
Speaker 2: is this is abuse. It was done by somebody that
Speaker 2: was affiliated with the church, is done by none or whatever.
Speaker 2: So I don't want to have anything to do with
Speaker 2: Christ or the Bible. Don't make that mistake. And when
Speaker 2: we look at what is happening in Israel and we
Speaker 2: talk about Zionism, you know, is it anti Semitism or
Speaker 2: is it anti Netanyahuism? Again, it's not just the ultra
Speaker 2: orthodox it you know, they're on the verge of a
Speaker 2: civil war in Israel itself because of the policies of
Speaker 2: a politician net Yahoo. I will never cheer the actions
Speaker 2: of a foreign politician, especially one who is desiring to
Speaker 2: shut down free speech in our country. Yes, in a war,
Speaker 2: free speech is the first casualty. They start censoring people
Speaker 2: about everything. Israel is trying to censor free speech in
Speaker 2: our country, and any discussion of what the policies are
Speaker 2: that Netanyah who has that is immediately labeled anti Semitism
Speaker 2: and terrorism no, it is political criticism and that must
Speaker 2: be free in our country. And that's why I will
Speaker 2: not remain silent about this. I didn't want to get
Speaker 2: involved in their tribal warfare. You know, God can work
Speaker 2: that out. I think they're wrong to target civilians and
Speaker 2: to continue you to do it. They're not going to stop,
Speaker 2: They're going to continue to do it. I think that's wrong.
Speaker 2: I think that's immoral, and I've spoken out against that,
Speaker 2: but also speak out against the fact that they want
Speaker 2: to destroy the legal foundation of our country, the First Amendment.
Speaker 2: So one person responded to him on this, this is
Speaker 2: what Ryan sent me. They back and forth. Person responded
Speaker 2: and said, so, where can you find any news that
Speaker 2: you can actually trust coming from that region? This is
Speaker 2: sl wrote that. So I remember back in the day
Speaker 2: when everyone was outraged because of sad supposedly gases on
Speaker 2: people that turned out to be totally fake. I've seen
Speaker 2: numerous videos of Palestinians who are supposed to be dead,
Speaker 2: but somehow they're moving, or you see them walking to
Speaker 2: their designated spots and then laying down and pretending to
Speaker 2: be dead for a photo op. I don't see Jewish
Speaker 2: people dressing their children. We're talking about babies here less
Speaker 2: than two years old with suicide vests and taking photos
Speaker 2: of them. I've never seen a Jew do that. I
Speaker 2: haven't seen any Jews do suicide vestre as adults, he said.
Speaker 2: At the same time, I think as treason is for
Speaker 2: a sitting member of Congress to have dual citizenship with
Speaker 2: Israel and to shut down our First Amendment at the
Speaker 2: behest of a foreign political leader, say don't you criticize
Speaker 2: my policy at Niani's policy, Then you are criticizing Israel itself,
Speaker 2: and you are anti Semitic, and you are a terrorist
Speaker 2: to boot. You're on their side, You're with them. You know.
Speaker 2: It's the George W. Bush nonsense. Again. Well again, I
Speaker 2: would say, who can you who can you actually trust?
Speaker 2: I just say this, you don't trust any news media
Speaker 2: organization because of who it is. Everything that somebody says,
Speaker 2: including me, you should evaluate it. I'll tell you what
Speaker 2: I think, and I'll tell you why I think it.
Speaker 2: I'm not like Newsweek or Time or CBS or whatever.
Speaker 2: This is the way that that's the way it is.
Speaker 2: You know that type of thing. I don't tell you
Speaker 2: that this is the truth, and I don't pretend to
Speaker 2: be objective. I would never trust anybody who pretends that
Speaker 2: they are objective. Either they're fooling themselves or they're fooling you.
Speaker 2: So take a look at what people say. I prefer
Speaker 2: to have people who give me opinions and who tell
Speaker 2: me why they think this or that, rather than the
Speaker 2: people who pretend to be objective and disinterested. There's no
Speaker 2: such thing. And I would also say that, you know,
Speaker 2: just as we're starting to see with some of this
Speaker 2: tariff stuff, they you know, some opposition will come out
Speaker 2: there from people who I would never agree with but
Speaker 2: on this particular issue. And they may they may be
Speaker 2: telling the truth because they want to use that to
Speaker 2: take you to a place that you don't want to go.
Speaker 2: But we take what they say on a spot by
Speaker 2: spot basis. So you can even have foreign political leaders
Speaker 2: that can tell you the truth about these tariffs now,
Speaker 2: or they can tell you the truth about something else
Speaker 2: and you don't want to trust them with anything, and
Speaker 2: you just take it issue by issue, point by point.
Speaker 2: So anyway, Ryan and says, I think it'd be good
Speaker 2: to hear other sides on different issues. He said, people
Speaker 2: on both sides Jews in Palestinian supporting the genocide of
Speaker 2: each other, exactly right. The hatred some of them have
Speaker 2: for the other side is tremendous and we're never going
Speaker 2: to fix that. And so, you know, sl said, I
Speaker 2: think we ought to just stay out of their wars.
Speaker 2: And that's the key thing. It's their war and for
Speaker 2: them to make the case that it is justified or not.
Speaker 2: It is ours to make the case for peace. Which
Speaker 2: brings us back to Gerald Sealini. You know, this is
Speaker 2: not his first rodeo, it's not his first war. He
Speaker 2: went to the mat to warn people about Afghanistan and
Speaker 2: all of the fervor and froth that followed immediately after
Speaker 2: the nine to eleven false flags. Nine eleven was an
Speaker 2: inside job. I'm not going to debate with you how
Speaker 2: it was done. I honestly don't know. Honestly know that
Speaker 2: it didn't that three buildings did not fall into the
Speaker 2: footprint and disintegrate after two of them were hit by
Speaker 2: a by planes. Two buildings were hit by planes, three
Speaker 2: fell in their footprint disintegram. I mean, that would be
Speaker 2: ridiculous in and of itself, but the fact that it
Speaker 2: was two planes and three buildings, that's even more obvious
Speaker 2: as to what that is. But in the front of
Speaker 2: all of that, Gerald Celente opposed the war because he
Speaker 2: knew what was true and out of principle.
Speaker 5: You know.
Speaker 2: He talks all the time about Zizi and Honeyboy and
Speaker 2: the book that he wrote, and we talked about that
Speaker 2: on Friday. Some people who listened to the show. I'm sorry,
Speaker 2: I forgotten the name that was there. They said, we
Speaker 2: got your book, got to sign copy your book. I
Speaker 2: don't know if he sells that at the website or not.
Speaker 2: I do know that Trend's journal is an honest assessment.
Speaker 2: He works very hard to look at a lot of
Speaker 2: different opinions and to give you an honest assessment of
Speaker 2: what he thinks. You can agree with him or disagree
Speaker 2: with them, but he is going to tell you the
Speaker 2: honest truth as he sees it. Now people are throwing
Speaker 2: labels at him of being anti Semitic, because that's the
Speaker 2: way they respond to any criticism. They don't want debate
Speaker 2: on the right, just like the left doesn't want debate
Speaker 2: on the left. You try to engage the left on
Speaker 2: a topic, and what do they do. They scream at
Speaker 2: you and call you racist and that's what the people
Speaker 2: who support a cart Blanc for Israel was called him Zionists,
Speaker 2: because that's what they call themselves. I think anyway, you know,
Speaker 2: that's what they do on their side. You question what
Speaker 2: they're saying. Oh, well, you are anti Semitic and you
Speaker 2: don't believe the Bible and you don't believe that God
Speaker 2: gave Israel the land. It's like, no, that doesn't either.
Speaker 2: I believe that God will fulfill his promises in his
Speaker 2: time and in his way, and I think it's not
Speaker 2: a good thing for us to get in his way
Speaker 2: to do it in our time. That's what I'm saying now.
Speaker 2: As he pointed out, every time he talks about it,
Speaker 2: he says, Yeah, they made it into a movie, zez
Speaker 2: in Honeyboy, and unfortunately it ran into production problems because
Speaker 2: the star died. But they did still release the film.
Speaker 2: So let me look for it. On Friday, I saw that,
Speaker 2: and so I look to see if I could find it.
Speaker 2: I didn't find the film, but I found this trailer
Speaker 2: for the film and a brief interview with a guy
Speaker 2: who stars in it who is at a film festival.
Speaker 9: All of this was brought upon us in a single day,
Speaker 9: either you were with us or you were with the terroist.
Speaker 2: We're going to lose in Afghanistan.
Speaker 10: Tell the network guys, I said that I'm not anti American.
Speaker 3: I love my country.
Speaker 9: The only thing that matters at the end is how
Speaker 9: you lived your life.
Speaker 3: What's it about.
Speaker 10: It's based on a New York Times best selling author
Speaker 10: his life. He was really hot in the nineties. He
Speaker 10: was on all these shows. He was a trend forecaster,
Speaker 10: so he used to predict these trends in the news
Speaker 10: and they would come to pass. And he predicted after
Speaker 10: nine to eleven that we were going to lose in
Speaker 10: Afghanistan and he was blackballed. I mean he was on
Speaker 10: all these shows, Oprah and every talk show you could imagine,
Speaker 10: and then he was completely black balled. So the story
Speaker 10: takes place from when his life has hit rock bottom
Speaker 10: and the only person he has in his life is
Speaker 10: his aging stage like ants played by Doris Roberts, and
Speaker 10: she kind of rescues him from his darkest moment. So
Speaker 10: what made you want to take on the story? Well,
Speaker 10: it's based on a book of essays, and when I
Speaker 10: read the book, I really connected with how rich the
Speaker 10: characters were and the dynamic of the relationship between Gerald,
Speaker 10: the main character, and his aunt played by Doris.
Speaker 2: Yeah. So you know, when you look at this, he
Speaker 2: was called anti American because he opposed the Afghanistan war.
Speaker 2: It was wrong, it was unwinnable. He's called anti Semitic
Speaker 2: because he opposes what's going on in Gaza. It's wrong.
Speaker 2: Gerald is not anti American, he's not anti Israel. He's
Speaker 2: anti war. He's for peace. That's his principle. And how
Speaker 2: would you feel if you studied this and in your
Speaker 2: honest opinion, you see what is coming. I've known Jerald
Speaker 2: for a long time and I've never seen him more
Speaker 2: consistently depressed as well as angry for what he sees coming.
Speaker 2: Imagine you see this and it's a slow motion walk
Speaker 2: to war, including our country, death and destruction. And even
Speaker 2: if it's not coming to our country, you don't like
Speaker 2: to see it happening somewhere else. Do you think that
Speaker 2: might cause you to have rage that you see with
Speaker 2: Gerald Celenity, Yeah, I mean, how would you not be
Speaker 2: angry about something like that? And so when he talks
Speaker 2: about it, and one of the reasons he gets into
Speaker 2: the ethnic thing is because that's what people want to
Speaker 2: use as an excuse for these crimes and to drag
Speaker 2: us into a further war. That's why I always say, so,
Speaker 2: what are we talking about when we're talking about Israel?
Speaker 2: Are we talking about whoever the ruling party is? And
Speaker 2: you know, now we can switch back and forth, you know,
Speaker 2: real quickly. Now Israel is this? Now? Israel? Is that?
Speaker 2: Is it about ethnicity? Is it about prophecy or whatever?
Speaker 2: You know, what is it that we're talking about? Is
Speaker 2: it about a religion? Because there's a lot of different
Speaker 2: strains of Judaism that are there, you know, Orthodox, Ultra Orthodox,
Speaker 2: all the rest of the stuff. So what is it that
Speaker 2: we're talking about when we talk about Israel? When you
Speaker 2: say Israel, you may mean something completely different than what
Speaker 2: I mean, or what Gerald Slinty means. And so I
Speaker 2: would just say, you know, when we talk about this,
Speaker 2: to me, I'm coming at it from a different place
Speaker 2: in Gerald. Gerald doesn't believe the book. He's not a
Speaker 2: person of the book, of any of these books, as
Speaker 2: Huckabee would say. And I say that with regret because
Speaker 2: Gerald Slinty has been a real friend.
Speaker 11: And I said that because I hate to see him
Speaker 11: move jacked Christ. Sorry, So the appropriate thing is to
Speaker 11: pray for Gerald. The appropriate thing is to think critically
Speaker 11: about politics, but pray for him on a personal basis.
Speaker 11: We're gonna take a break and I'll be right.
Speaker 3: Back analyzing the globalists. Next move now the deevid nutshell.
Speaker 2: Well, welcome back the whodies down to another US m
Speaker 2: Q nine. That's the Reaper Drome amed US strikes on Yemen,
Speaker 2: and so within seventy two hours they shot down yet
Speaker 2: another drone. These things are thirty million dollars apiece. Where
Speaker 2: is Doge? Where is Elon Musk and all of this
Speaker 2: the poorest nation on Earth and they're shooting down our
Speaker 2: thirty million dollar drones And what are we doing with
Speaker 2: the drones? Well, also over the weekend, we had this
Speaker 2: clip put out by Donald Trump. As a matter of fact,
Speaker 2: I'll show you the before and then i'll show you
Speaker 2: the after. This is a picture. Now, a lot of
Speaker 2: people said, this is what you just blew up. We
Speaker 2: see an aerial picture of people arranged in a large
Speaker 2: I guess i'd say a large rectangle with rounded edges.
Speaker 2: Of course, it's people pull this thing in. They're going
Speaker 2: to do square. But it's a large rectangle with a
Speaker 2: person in the center talking to them. Now, what is that?
Speaker 2: Is that a meeting for a battle? No, that's a
Speaker 2: picture of somebody, a group of people in Yemen. They're Muslims.
Speaker 2: They're doing Eid, and that's something they do this time
Speaker 2: of year round, ram but I don't know what. I
Speaker 2: really don't know. But it's Eid. Okay, So they're having
Speaker 2: a religious ceremony there. Think about it like an open
Speaker 2: air religious service. Now Trump shows a and I'm going
Speaker 2: to show this to you in a second, shows an
Speaker 2: aerial shot of a group that's laid out in exactly
Speaker 2: that same kind of configuration, and they drop a massive
Speaker 2: bomb and you see smoke and flame and everything. After
Speaker 2: that dies down, they zoom in and you can see
Speaker 2: a crater and you can see remnants of somebody's laying
Speaker 2: around in the thing. And Trump tweets, Oh, looks like
Speaker 2: they're not going to be attacking our ships anymore. And
Speaker 2: a lot of people came out and said, you just
Speaker 2: destroyed a group of people meeting for Eid. Other people
Speaker 2: came out and said, well, look at the two pictures,
Speaker 2: and the one picture there's this is not the same
Speaker 2: group of people because the cars are in different places.
Speaker 2: And that's true, that is not you know, that picture
Speaker 2: that I just showed there the EID gathering, that is
Speaker 2: not the same group of people that had the bomb
Speaker 2: dropped on them. But let me just ask you, would
Speaker 2: this be the way that you would conduct a military
Speaker 2: meeting to have this kind of configuration. Does that make
Speaker 2: any sense that you would get out in the open
Speaker 2: and in a very very large circle, and you would
Speaker 2: have some guy in the middle and he would be
Speaker 2: telling you battle plans. No, you would group together, right,
Speaker 2: get close together, you'd huddle close together. That is the
Speaker 2: kind of configuration that you would have gotten an open
Speaker 2: air religious ceremony like EID. So even though that picture,
Speaker 2: that specific picture is not the picture of the group
Speaker 2: of the people, of the people who were there because
Speaker 2: of the cars around the perimeter, it is another one
Speaker 2: of that kind. And I believe that they dropped a
Speaker 2: bomb on a religious group that was meeting as part
Speaker 2: of AID and they're boasting about taking out terrorists, and
Speaker 2: they're boasting about their mass murder of innocent people.
Speaker 12: I'm not sure that we can trust our government everything
Speaker 12: that the CIA has told us since two thousand and
Speaker 12: one has been a lie, and it doesn't matter who's
Speaker 12: in the White House. In August twenty fifteen, the White
Speaker 12: House killed four hundred and twenty four people.
Speaker 2: That was Obama.
Speaker 12: I've ever been charged with a crime. The Obama died
Speaker 12: is syracusers in court. They've never had their day to
Speaker 12: explain themselves. We're just supposed to take the CIA's word
Speaker 12: for it that these are bad people. One of my
Speaker 12: attorneys is representing a drone whistleblower right now, and he
Speaker 12: told me recently that he was operating his drone from
Speaker 12: a basin I think it was Nevada or New Mexico.
Speaker 12: He's connected by radio and the guy in sencom says,
Speaker 12: you see the target. Launch and the guy said, I
Speaker 12: can't launch. There's a child next to him. And the
Speaker 12: guy at Sencom said, it's not a child.
Speaker 3: It's a goat.
Speaker 12: And he said, man, I'm looking at it. It's a child.
Speaker 12: And he told him launch, but the guy said, and
Speaker 12: I couldn't launch that thing and he didn't. Well, now
Speaker 12: he's facing court martial and possibly other charges, including a
Speaker 12: dishonorable discharge for refusing to kill a child. I mean,
Speaker 12: is this really where we won our country to be have.
Speaker 12: We so turned our backs on civil liberty since September
Speaker 12: eleventh in the name of national security. It was a
Speaker 12: child where Americans were better than that. And it's not
Speaker 12: too late to turn this thing around.
Speaker 2: Yeah, how about that? And so now you know, showing
Speaker 2: clips there at the beginning of it, you've got you know,
Speaker 2: maybe there were children in that, but it was actually
Speaker 2: tweeted out by a large child Donald Trump boasting about
Speaker 2: how they won't be attacking us. Well, isn't that great?
Speaker 2: Our air defense is successfully shot down an American MQ
Speaker 2: nine Reaper drone while it was carrying out hostile missions
Speaker 2: in the airspace using a suitable locally made missile to
Speaker 2: the yem Andy Armed Forces, poorest country in the world,
Speaker 2: and we're having difficulty with that. We need to tone
Speaker 2: down the belligerents, even from a self preservation standpoint, We
Speaker 2: need to tone it down. You forget about the morality
Speaker 2: just from pragmatics of it. If you can't defeat Yemen,
Speaker 2: and we've lost one war after the other. The incident
Speaker 2: marked the sixteenth US drone m Q nine drone Reaper
Speaker 2: drone that has been shot down by the hoodies who thise.
Speaker 2: Since October twenty twenty three, each of the MQ nine
Speaker 2: Reaper drones cost the US about thirty million. So if
Speaker 2: the Huthi's number is accurate, that means that the US
Speaker 2: has lost four hundred and eighty million dollars worth of drones,
Speaker 2: sixteen of them in eighteen months. That's about one per month.
Speaker 2: But this last week we had one per seventy two hours,
Speaker 2: had two of them shot down in seventy two hours.
Speaker 2: So the question is why can't our genius pentagon defend
Speaker 2: its drums? And the other question is how does our
Speaker 2: pentagon defend its actions and how it uses these drums.
Speaker 2: You want to talk about a just war, You want
Speaker 2: to talk about how we've gotten from the standpoint of
Speaker 2: you know, it was prohibited to attack civilian populations. We
Speaker 2: wore uniforms for that very purpose to make sure that
Speaker 2: we left civilians alone. And then we get to the
Speaker 2: point where we bomb civilians, and now we're to the
Speaker 2: point where we assassinate eight using drunes. On what John
Speaker 2: Kiriaku CIA whistleblower, He blew the whistle about the torture
Speaker 2: that was being done by the CIA. He's in the
Speaker 2: CIA was in the CIA. He blew the whistle on
Speaker 2: the CIA torture being done by Gena Haspital that lied
Speaker 2: US into the Iraq war, lies about weapons of mass
Speaker 2: destruction obtained by torture by Gena Haspital. Gina Haspital was
Speaker 2: then promoted to the head of the CIA by Donald Trump.
Speaker 2: We've had Obama, as he pointed out at the beginning
Speaker 2: of that, you know, four hundred and twenty four people
Speaker 2: killed in August of twenty fifteen. Who was president then,
Speaker 2: well that was Obama. And if you remember, he boasted
Speaker 2: about how turns out I'm really good at killing people.
Speaker 2: He doesn't care about this kind of stuff. Trump and
Speaker 2: Hegseth and Mike Waltz and all these people that are
Speaker 2: involved in this signal gait thing. They don't care about
Speaker 2: innocent people civilians either. As a matter of fact, they
Speaker 2: pull the trigger on on a Yemen and then they
Speaker 2: go to eat at a million dollar a plate fundraiser
Speaker 2: at mar A Lago and yuck it up that drone
Speaker 2: operator who refused to kill the child, that he could
Speaker 2: clearly see that drone operator can live with himself regardless
Speaker 2: of what happens. He can be proud of what he did.
Speaker 2: He would not have been able to live with himself
Speaker 2: if he had pulled the trigger. So just a few
Speaker 2: hours before the Houthis announced that they had down another
Speaker 2: Reaper drone, Trump claimed that the Yemeni group had quote
Speaker 2: been decimated by relentless strikes over the past two weeks.
Speaker 2: He brags about this, as some people have said, you know,
Speaker 2: we used to have to have whistleblowers and wiki leaks
Speaker 2: to show war crimes like the collateral murder crime. People
Speaker 2: on a C one thirty shooting journalists, shooting an ambulance
Speaker 2: from Afar. You know, the journalists are clearly carrying cameras
Speaker 2: and they open fire on them. Then when the ambulance
Speaker 2: shows up, they wait and they're talking about it, and
Speaker 2: you see them putting in the ambulance and you see
Speaker 2: it clearly marked, and then they shoot the ambulance up
Speaker 2: with the sick people inside and all the civilians around it.
Speaker 2: That's why they're coming after WikiLeaks so hard, because WikiLeaks
Speaker 2: released that showing their war crimes. Other people said, well,
Speaker 2: we used to have to have WikiLeaks with the war crimes.
Speaker 2: Now we got a president who's proud of his war crimes,
Speaker 2: dropping a bomb on a group of civilians meeting for
Speaker 2: a religious thing. So Dave Stockman, David Stockman, who I've interviewed, says,
Speaker 2: who gives two hoots about the hoothies. Well, certainly not Trump,
Speaker 2: except to boast about murders like Obama did back in
Speaker 2: twenty fifteen. But David Stockman is talking about the economic
Speaker 2: effects for the most part. Last week he said, we
Speaker 2: noted the ascension to NATO of the Balkan Five Croatia, Slovenia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Albania,
Speaker 2: and the Baltic Iree, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia. He said, it
Speaker 2: amounts to some kind of a bad joke. They're combined
Speaker 2: military forces total just sixty six thousand servicemen, which is
Speaker 2: exactly equal to the combined police forces of New York City, Chicago,
Speaker 2: LA and Philadelphia. Because, by the way, we have a
Speaker 2: standing army here in the US. If you combine all
Speaker 2: the police officers that we've got and get a total
Speaker 2: on that you know we've got like that, that's the
Speaker 2: third that would be the third largest army in the world.
Speaker 2: And it's a standing army standing on our standing on
Speaker 2: us for the most part, anyway, he said, they're combined
Speaker 2: defense budgets of these countries that just joined NATO are
Speaker 2: eight billion dollars annually, or about the level that the
Speaker 2: Pentagon spends every seven hours. So, yay, that's great, We've
Speaker 2: got these people in. That's not what it's about at all, Right,
Speaker 2: But he says when it comes to economic hef their
Speaker 2: collective GDP is a diminutive three hundred and fifty billion dollars,
Speaker 2: just one point three percent of the US GDP. So
Speaker 2: we rightly asked why bother their military manpower, their token
Speaker 2: defense budgets they're rounding air GDPs do not have even
Speaker 2: remote relevance to the standing to standing up to America's
Speaker 2: triad strategic nuclear deterrent, which doesn't require any foreign bases
Speaker 2: or allies in any case, Right, why is that there
Speaker 2: is for the benefit of the military industrial complex. We
Speaker 2: have all the defense that we need with a nuclear tryad,
Speaker 2: but we got to get involved in all these wars.
Speaker 2: Why because the military industrial complex needs it? And why
Speaker 2: do we have these small countries there. We need to
Speaker 2: have them because we need to have trigger wires to
Speaker 2: get us involved in other wars. We need to have
Speaker 2: them there because perhaps we can use them as a
Speaker 2: surrogate to attack our geopolitical competitors. He says. They don't
Speaker 2: contribute a whip to invincible conventional military fortress America defensive airspace.
Speaker 2: They don't contribute to the defense of the shorelines of
Speaker 2: the US homeland way over here on the far side
Speaker 2: of the Atlantic and Pacific Ocean. So why are we
Speaker 2: fighting all of this stuff? We're fighting a tiny country
Speaker 2: like Yemen for the benefit of the Saudis and Israelis.
Speaker 2: And Culter expressed it more callfully, says David Stockman. She said,
Speaker 2: right now, his foreign policy team is looking like John
Speaker 2: Bolton without the ridiculous Wolford Brimley mustache. Since Trump keeps
Speaker 2: hiring these people, it's a good time to remind him
Speaker 2: that in twenty sixteen he won more primary votes in
Speaker 2: a Republican in US history, as well as the election
Speaker 2: by saying things like this about a war that had
Speaker 2: a million more justifications than his recent bombings of the Houthis.
Speaker 2: He said, obviously, the war in Iraq was a big,
Speaker 2: fat mistake. We spent two trillion dollars thousands of lives.
Speaker 2: George Bush made a mistake. We can make mistakes but
Speaker 2: that one was a beauty. We should have never been
Speaker 2: in Iraq. We have destabilized the Middle East. So then
Speaker 2: what did he do? Was it a mistake for him
Speaker 2: to put Gina haspll on Is out of the CIA?
Speaker 2: Or was it deliberate? Was he just telling you what
Speaker 2: you wanted to hear and then doing the same thing
Speaker 2: that George W. Bush does, except pretending that he is
Speaker 2: the opposite of George W.
Speaker 3: Bush.
Speaker 2: And Culter says, so why does Trump keep surrounding himself
Speaker 2: with ten horned cowboys who think it's America's responsibility to
Speaker 2: drone bomb, invade, occupy other countries whenever and for whatever
Speaker 2: reason they want. Well, the answer is obviously that he's
Speaker 2: a wrecking ball. The answer is obviously that he was
Speaker 2: selected and put into place for this very thing. The
Speaker 2: answer is that he doesn't believe a word that he
Speaker 2: tells you simply to gain your trust. Trust the plan.
Speaker 2: Trust is the plan. The Huthi tribes, who profess a
Speaker 2: variant of Shiite Islam, have generally ruled North Yemen during
Speaker 2: the long expanse after it was established in nineteen eighteen
Speaker 2: until the two Yemens were reunified in nineteen ninety so
Speaker 2: when a Washington installed government was overthrown there and the
Speaker 2: uneasily unified nation of Yemen disintegrated into warring religious factions.
Speaker 2: The Huthi took power in northern Yemen, while Sunni tribes
Speaker 2: aligned with a Muslim brotherhood and al Qaeda held sway
Speaker 2: in the south. Well, we can't have al Qaeda there,
Speaker 2: right except who were we flying air support missions for
Speaker 2: with a ten warthogs in Syria?
Speaker 3: Oh?
Speaker 2: That was al Qaeda, who is now massacring the Alla
Speaker 2: white ethnic group as well as Christians in Syria. Al Qaida,
Speaker 2: you know, the boogeyman that is on our side, just
Speaker 2: like Hamas, funded by Netanyahu and used by We do
Speaker 2: the same thing with al Qaida. Folks, I'm not getting
Speaker 2: I'm never gonna support these wars. Never. You shouldn't support
Speaker 2: them either. Don't let them get you confused. This Huthy
Speaker 2: remnant of the failed state of Yemen are not a
Speaker 2: threat to anybody who's mining their own business. They have
Speaker 2: no blue water Navy, they have no air force, They
Speaker 2: have no regular army, just some odds and coastal patrol
Speaker 2: boats and short range drones and missiles. But they can
Speaker 2: shoot down a Reaper drone each month? Isn't that interesting?
Speaker 3: The Houthy rule.
Speaker 2: The Houthy rule is not the entire sovereign country of Yemen,
Speaker 2: but roughly twenty five percent of former yemen territory. Given
Speaker 2: that the GDP of the entirety of Yemen is only
Speaker 2: twenty million billion dollars in twenty twenty four, he said,
Speaker 2: why under hoothy control, our trustee AI Grock three estimates
Speaker 2: that they're in their wisdom. Trump's purported America firsters were
Speaker 2: bombing some desert salients which generate a mere six to
Speaker 2: eight billion dollars worth of GDP annually. So this is
Speaker 2: a small fraction the entire country twenty billion dollars. This
Speaker 2: is a small breakaway area of it, let's say roughly
Speaker 2: six billion dollars. You know, the Tennessee gross domestic product
Speaker 2: is four hundred and twenty two billion dollars. The area
Speaker 2: of Yemen is six billion dollars, seventy times the GDP
Speaker 2: in Tennessee. Take Texas for example. Texas pretty big. They
Speaker 2: have a GDP of two point seven trillion dollars. Okay,
Speaker 2: so quite a bit bigger than Tennessee four hundred and
Speaker 2: fifty times bigger than Yemen. So why are we messing
Speaker 2: with Yemen. We're being drug into these conflicts, not even
Speaker 2: by foreign countries, but by our own military industrial complex
Speaker 2: in the CIA, which is what runs this government. That's
Speaker 2: our government. Wake up, it's not Republicans and Democrats. It's
Speaker 2: not Trump. Trump kills people the same way as Obama did.
Speaker 2: Boasts about it the same way Obama did. Actually more so,
Speaker 2: he says. David Sigman says, so, no, ensuring the freedom
Speaker 2: of navigation the Red Sea doesn't have to have doesn't
Speaker 2: have a thing to do with Yemen. In twenty twenty three,
Speaker 2: about eight point seven billion, I'm sorry, eight point seven
Speaker 2: million barrels per day of crude oil and refined products
Speaker 2: flowed through the strait, the Southern Red Sea Strait where
Speaker 2: they are. Almost all of that went to Europe. And
Speaker 2: the tiny five hundred thousand barrels per day of Persian
Speaker 2: Gulf oil that went to the US, which is one
Speaker 2: percent of the US energy consumption, could be readily replaced
Speaker 2: by domestic production anyway, if the government would get its
Speaker 2: foot off the hose that they're currently stomping on. Not
Speaker 2: anything remotely related to the national security of the American homeland.
Speaker 2: The container ship trade is even more irrelevant. Overwhelming share
Speaker 2: of US destined goods from China, South Korea, Taiwan elsewhere
Speaker 2: in the Far East, upwards of up to six hundred
Speaker 2: billion dollars per year, arrive here via the Pacific Coast
Speaker 2: and the Panama Canal routes to eastern USA. Now, I
Speaker 2: thought we were supposed to get rid of trade anyway, right,
Speaker 2: I mean, wouldn't the Yemenis be our allies? And Donald
Speaker 2: Trump was wanting to stop all trade to the US,
Speaker 2: except that it's not anything that we really It's only
Speaker 2: one percent of our oil supplies. Anyway, We're there spending
Speaker 2: phenomenal amounts of money, and Elon Musk doesn't care, Doge
Speaker 2: doesn't care, Trump doesn't care, And we're fighting that in
Speaker 2: order to keep trade freely flowing. Which, on the other hand,
Speaker 2: Trump wants to push the war of the world into
Speaker 2: a global trade war while we are bombing Yemen in
Speaker 2: the name of free trade. Does any of this make
Speaker 2: any sense to you? Well, if we understand where these
Speaker 2: people are coming from, it makes perfectly good sense. Right, Yes,
Speaker 2: it is contradictory, but we understand where they're coming from.
Speaker 2: There is no economic case for attempting to bomb the
Speaker 2: Red Sea into freedom of navigation. And he doesn't say this,
Speaker 2: but I'll say there is no moral case for this either.
Speaker 2: The Red Sea is not the Golf of Mexico or
Speaker 2: the Gulf of America, and it's not Long Island Sound,
Speaker 2: it's not the Gulf of Catalina. That means that the
Speaker 2: Huthi's only real offense is attempting to blockade ships heading
Speaker 2: to Israel in retaliation for Israel's genocidal assault on Gaza.
Speaker 2: And so that would be Jerusalem's business to do something
Speaker 2: about it, not Washington's right. The US Navy has not
Speaker 2: been hired by the UN, has not been hired by Israel.
Speaker 2: Well maybe, I guess we could say that has been
Speaker 2: hired by Israel if you count the contributions to our
Speaker 2: politicians or any other global body to safeguard every sea
Speaker 2: line on the planet from the Suez Canal to the
Speaker 2: Straits of Hormuz and the Straits of Malacca. And he
Speaker 2: said the nor should it be. Between twenty twelve and
Speaker 2: twenty eighteen, net Yahoo gave Cutter approval to transfer a
Speaker 2: cumulative sum of nearly a billion dollars to Gaza in
Speaker 2: the form of suitcases full of cash, and at least
Speaker 2: half of that is estimated to have reached Hamas, including
Speaker 2: the military wing. You see, well, we use our al
Speaker 2: Qaeda surrogates going back Musha Hadeen, we use them against Russia.
Speaker 2: And you had John McCain going to Republican women's groups saying,
Speaker 2: support a moos. You want to sponsor a mouge. Right,
Speaker 2: here's a I brought with me, a Musa Hadeen guy.
Speaker 2: Look at him. You can there's more of him over there,
Speaker 2: and you guys can adopt amuge. Just just give us
Speaker 2: money for that war there. The Musha Hadeen became al Qaeda,
Speaker 2: which became ISIS, which became al Nusra, which became this
Speaker 2: and I've forgotten the name, the new name, the new
Speaker 2: alias that they've got, you know, and that always interesting.
Speaker 2: You've got somebody who's got multiple aliases. Maybe they're up
Speaker 2: to something. Well, maybe the CIA is up to something
Speaker 2: when they give multiple names of these organizations and when
Speaker 2: they give them money. And nettya who's doing the same
Speaker 2: thing with a mass They haven't changed the name. But
Speaker 2: there's a that's a big part of what's going on
Speaker 2: in the civil war there, what they call Cutter Gate,
Speaker 2: the Jerusalem Post writes. In a private meeting with members
Speaker 2: of his Acub party on March eleventh, twenty nineteen, Netnaho
Speaker 2: explained the reckless step as follows. The money transfer is
Speaker 2: part of the strategy to divide the Palestinians in Gaza
Speaker 2: and the West Bank. Anyone who opposes the establishment of
Speaker 2: a Palestinian state needs to support the transfer of the
Speaker 2: money from Cutter to Hamas, he said, and that way
Speaker 2: we will foil the establishment of a Palestinian state, as
Speaker 2: reported in former Cabinet member Haim Ramon's Hebrew language book
Speaker 2: Negad Haruk, if I'm pronouncing that correctly, Jerusalem Post goes
Speaker 2: on to say, in an interview with Ynette News website,
Speaker 2: I don't know. Again, that's why inn Et. On May
Speaker 2: the fifth, twenty nineteen, netanyahu associate, a major general in
Speaker 2: the reserves, said we need to tell the truth. Netanyahu's
Speaker 2: strategy is to prevent the option of two states, so
Speaker 2: he is turning Hamas into his closest ally it's closest partner.
Speaker 2: Bring in Hamas. They're crazy, they're dangerous, they're murderous and
Speaker 2: we can use them as an excuse to completely wipe
Speaker 2: this out. If we bring in somebody reasonable, we will
Speaker 2: wind up with a two state solution. We don't want that.
Speaker 2: We want to unleash a dangerous group there, so we
Speaker 2: have an excuse to bomb and to keep on bombing,
Speaker 2: and they say, well, we just can't get them, so
Speaker 2: we just got to keep collen civilians. Going back to
Speaker 2: the Jerusalem Post, Openly, Hamas is an enemy, he said,
Speaker 2: but covertly it's an ally, he said. We need to
Speaker 2: tell the truth. Well, that would be a refreshing changeouldn't it.
Speaker 2: Netanyahu himself, going back to David Stockman, was widely quoted
Speaker 2: as saying during the aforementioned meeting of lecud's mks that quote,
Speaker 2: whoever opposes a Palestinian state must support delivery of funds
Speaker 2: to Gaza that came in the form of cash and suitcases,
Speaker 2: because maintaining separation between the Palestinian authority in the West
Speaker 2: Bank and Hamas and Gaza will prevent the establishment of
Speaker 2: a Palestinian state. It's kind of what they do with
Speaker 2: us with Republican versus democrat, isn't it divide and conquer
Speaker 2: well while all this is playing out, as we pointed
Speaker 2: out last week, at the end of the week, bakries
Speaker 2: closing as flower supplies run out due to Israeli blockade.
Speaker 2: They saddled the people in Gaza with Hamas because they
Speaker 2: wanted to have a an enemy that was there and
Speaker 2: because they wanted to pit Hamas against the PA Palestinian authority.
Speaker 2: So this is starvation and this is why we say genocide.
Speaker 2: And of course Hamas, they picked Hamas, the group that
Speaker 2: wants to kill all Israelis, picked them for that purpose
Speaker 2: as well. Yeah, so we got to kill them before
Speaker 2: they kill us type of thing. Let's put them in
Speaker 2: place and then we'll have an opportunity to go to war.
Speaker 2: And we've seen this over and over again. You know,
Speaker 2: FDR did that with us to get us into World
Speaker 2: War two. They always love to get us into jeopardy
Speaker 2: so that they can do this type of thing. All
Speaker 2: bakeries and gods have been forced to close. His flower
Speaker 2: and other supplies running out due to Israeli blockade, starvation
Speaker 2: a blockade. UN's World Food Program circulated a memo to
Speaker 2: eight groups on Monday, thing it can no longer do
Speaker 2: was Monday last week it could no longer operate the
Speaker 2: nineteen bakeries it was operating due to a lack of supply.
Speaker 2: Six other bakeries had previously closed, so it's a twenty
Speaker 2: five of them total. And then we see this story
Speaker 2: religious Zionist settlers savagely assault Palestinian Oscar winner for exposing
Speaker 2: their crimes. He did a documentary and whether or not
Speaker 2: you agree with him, he just remind you that God's
Speaker 2: ways are not our ways. His ways are higher than ours,
Speaker 2: is much higher as the heaven is above the earth.
Speaker 2: This is not his way. These people, in spite of
Speaker 2: a lot of Christian pastors who've told you they are Amalekites,
Speaker 2: they are not Amalakites. You don't have God's license to kill.
Speaker 2: You don't have that. After winning an Academy Award for
Speaker 2: documentary film on Israeli military occupation of the West Bank,
Speaker 2: Palestinian director Hamden Balal was attacked by what his colleagues
Speaker 2: described as a lynch mob of massed Israeli settlers last
Speaker 2: week at his home in the besieged region. Following what
Speaker 2: was described as a horrific assault. The Israeli military personnel
Speaker 2: who were present denied him medical attention from an ambulance
Speaker 2: transport which arrived at the scene, and instead arrested him,
Speaker 2: taking him into custody with two others for reasons that
Speaker 2: were unclear. He is one of four directors of the
Speaker 2: film No Other Land, which won an OSCAR for Best
Speaker 2: Documentary Feature in early March, despite its being banned by
Speaker 2: every US distributor. Again, you know, when you censor, that
Speaker 2: doesn't help to win. The argument usually backfires, and attacking
Speaker 2: people like this usually backfires as well. And we should
Speaker 2: not applaud these tactics. They will be used here. I mean,
Speaker 2: do we applaud the tactics of people setting fire to
Speaker 2: Tesla station, burning up property and so on, No, we don't.
Speaker 2: Why would we applaud this if this guy is a liar,
Speaker 2: if he's hateful, is this the appropriate response even to that? No,
Speaker 2: it's not, it's not. Palestinians in the village have been
Speaker 2: under a physical attack by settlers almost daily. The settler's
Speaker 2: violence is increasing here. Maybe it's revenge for the movie
Speaker 2: and for the Oscar. He said. The police were there
Speaker 2: from the beginning and they did not intervene. While the
Speaker 2: soldiers are pointing their weapons at us. The settlers started
Speaker 2: attacking the houses of the Palestinians. Hamden tried to protect
Speaker 2: his family and the settlers attacking him. Soldiers started shooting
Speaker 2: in the air to prevent anyone from helping Hamden. He
Speaker 2: was shouting for help. They let the settlers attack him,
Speaker 2: and then the army abducted him. You know, so when
Speaker 2: we look at this, what do we say about the
Speaker 2: Christians who, like at the stoning of Stephen, stand on
Speaker 2: the side and hold the cloaks of the people who
Speaker 2: are doing the stoning, Because that's what we do when
Speaker 2: we justified genocide. Now, the guy who held the cloaks
Speaker 2: was Saul, who eventually became palled. There isn't anything that
Speaker 2: the Lord Jesus Christ cannot overcome, even a hard heart
Speaker 2: like that. Again, we need to pray for people that
Speaker 2: they would have their lives affected by Christ, that they
Speaker 2: would have regeneration by Christ. But to take this into
Speaker 2: our own hands, and more importantly, those of us who
Speaker 2: have been have a relationship with Christ, who have been regenerated,
Speaker 2: who have a heart and eyes to see and ears
Speaker 2: to hear, we can sin as well. We can applaud
Speaker 2: these tactics in these measures, and even pagans can see
Speaker 2: the sin that is involved in that. We're going to
Speaker 2: take a quick break and we will be right back
Speaker 2: at somebody request the song that had clapping in it.
Speaker 2: This is actually my arrangement of Unsquare Dance. It was
Speaker 2: a song that was written by Dave Brubeck and five
Speaker 2: four time.
Speaker 1: Decoding the mainstream propaganda. It's the David Night Show. Well,
Speaker 1: welcome back. Let's talk a little bit about some of
Speaker 1: the tech stuff that is coming up. But I have
Speaker 1: some comments here and some tips. Thank you very much
Speaker 1: for the tips. On a kick, Herron's holler says, we're
Speaker 1: all battling the tyranny happening. I've cried most days since
Speaker 1: twenty twenty. Sometimes you need someone to blame. As we've
Speaker 1: lost most of our friends and family, it's easy to
Speaker 1: blame the entity that is supposed to save us.
Speaker 2: Where is he? Yeah, that's one of the things that
Speaker 2: we need to always ask about God when we go
Speaker 2: through difficult times. The question is not why me, where
Speaker 2: are you? Why aren't you helping me? But the appropriate
Speaker 2: answer is what are you teaching me here? That's what
Speaker 2: we need to pay attention to. What is God? Teaching
Speaker 2: us through adversity. Adversity is a great teacher. It's not
Speaker 2: a pleasant thing. And so what is God trying to
Speaker 2: teach us? Is there something in our life that we
Speaker 2: needed to purge that we didn't get rid of and
Speaker 2: is he disciplining us for that? Or is he preparing
Speaker 2: us for something else that is coming or to be
Speaker 2: able to help other people. We don't understand why God
Speaker 2: is doing what he's doing, but we do know that
Speaker 2: one way or the other, he's trying to teach us
Speaker 2: something right, whether it's preparation or whether it's chasening or
Speaker 2: something like that. On Rumble DG eight, thank you for
Speaker 2: the tip, he says, as long as people see the
Speaker 2: left right paradigm, nothing will change. That illusion has to
Speaker 2: be destroyed before anything changes. Democrat versus Republican is a
Speaker 2: prison cell for fools. You know, we have basically, you know,
Speaker 2: the neo GOP. That's what i'd call them, I guess,
Speaker 2: you know, it's like we've got neo conservatives. We now
Speaker 2: got the neo GOP, or maybe we just shorten it up,
Speaker 2: call them the NEOP. The Republicans are democrats in my youth.
Speaker 2: As a matter of fact, that the Republicans today or
Speaker 2: the Democrats have only about ten years ago. You know,
Speaker 2: the Trump RFK Junior, Telsey Gabbert, these are your savers.
Speaker 2: They were Democrats. They don't share any values of limited
Speaker 2: government whatsoever, none whatsoever. They didn't take the red pill, folks.
Speaker 2: The Republicans didn't take the red pill. Neither did these Democrats. Instead,
Speaker 2: they were told that they were read, and they said,
Speaker 2: oh okay. They were told then that the left, we'll
Speaker 2: call them woke. We'll call you you read, even though
Speaker 2: that's the color of communism. We'll call the left woke,
Speaker 2: even though they're not, even though they're Marxists. As I said,
Speaker 2: you know, the Democrat Party has become the Marxist party
Speaker 2: of my youth. Throw in unbridled debauchery and child abuse
Speaker 2: and the rest of the stuff, and you've got the
Speaker 2: Democrat Party. Marxism plus debauchery and child abuse. That's it.
Speaker 2: And then you look at the Republicans and it's the
Speaker 2: old Democrats who were you know, big government, bribery and
Speaker 2: debauchery as well, the Epstein group like R. K Junior,
Speaker 2: Donald Trump. Well, there you go. The neop Let's see
Speaker 2: also on here rumble Niburu twenty twenty nine. If you're
Speaker 2: Trump's global population reduction agenda hasn't changed since he began
Speaker 2: it in twenty twenty. War bombings merely other variations on
Speaker 2: the same theme. Yeah, you know, Paul Erlich wrote the
Speaker 2: population bomb same we've got too many people. We got
Speaker 2: to do something to reduce the world's population. You wrote
Speaker 2: that before the first Earth Day in the late nineteen sixties.
Speaker 2: And when he spoke, he said, you know, war is
Speaker 2: a great way to decrease the population. But even better,
Speaker 2: we can have a plague or something like that. So
Speaker 2: we even better than that, we can make the plague
Speaker 2: and lock everybody down and force them to inject the plague.
Speaker 2: How about that. That's the best plan of all, isn't it?
Speaker 2: For population reduction? Marky Mark, thank you for the tip,
Speaker 2: he said. Why was Gerald Clinty blackball for speaking the
Speaker 2: obvious history shows that showed that the UK and USS
Speaker 2: are both great military powers in their own right lost
Speaker 2: in Afghanistan? Why would the US fare any better? Yeah,
Speaker 2: that's right, And yet, of course it wasn't even his opposition.
Speaker 2: His opposition to Afghanistan was just the mcguffin du jour right, Ah,
Speaker 2: we got nine eleven and we got Afghanistan. Don't you
Speaker 2: oppose those? And don't you oppose the war with Iraq? Yeah,
Speaker 2: if you're not well, le's share what the terrorists. You know,
Speaker 2: your forests are against us? That type of thing. And
Speaker 2: then you know, we say this repeated over and over again.
Speaker 2: You can't oppose them on climate because that's their agenda.
Speaker 2: You can't oppose them on the pandemic. You can't oppose
Speaker 2: them on Israel, you can't oppose the Israeli politics. So again,
Speaker 2: whatever it is, they will find some way to get
Speaker 2: to you. And again, as I said earlier in the program,
Speaker 2: they will find some way to do law fair against you.
Speaker 2: And over and over again, this is increasingly the case.
Speaker 2: It's going to be copyright stuff. I mean, that's the
Speaker 2: way they've come after me over and over again. So
Speaker 2: let's see, have we got any more there? I think
Speaker 2: there's another one right there. No, that's about tell people
Speaker 2: about Kick again, because now I know your microphone is working.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I'm back and it's working again. We are now
Speaker 6: streaming live onkick dot com for Slash The David Knight Show.
Speaker 6: So if you go give us a follow there they'd
Speaker 6: be much appreciated. We're working towards monetization, so if you're
Speaker 6: so inclined, you could even subscribe to us there and
Speaker 6: help us meet their goals.
Speaker 2: So what do we need. It's not that many subscribers
Speaker 2: that we need.
Speaker 6: Right, No, it's ten subscribers. But gifted subs don't count
Speaker 6: towards that.
Speaker 2: Okay, that's important.
Speaker 6: Well, you can gift subs to other people once we
Speaker 6: meet the original goals, which I believe we have already. Yeah,
Speaker 6: they won't count toward. But ten individual subs gets us
Speaker 6: towards modernization, so it's not that many. And kick gives
Speaker 6: ninety five percent of the profits to creators, which is
Speaker 6: largely unheard of as far as I know.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, that's why it's important. It's about the fees
Speaker 2: and the ratios. And it's also though about moving to
Speaker 2: places where we have free speech and it's constantly being
Speaker 2: shut down. We got to move to some other place.
Speaker 6: Also, I made a fun little remote for the kick chat.
Speaker 6: It's Donald Trump's face after being attacked by the eagle,
Speaker 6: so you can spam that.
Speaker 2: He's got that. He remembers that, I guess because he's
Speaker 2: got that on the Trump gold card for five million dollars.
Speaker 2: He's got a statue of liberty in the background, then
Speaker 2: Trump with a scowling mugshot, and then the front there's
Speaker 2: the eagle that's not attacking him at that. Okay, let's
Speaker 2: talk about AI here. AI model has officially passed the
Speaker 2: Turing test? Is it more human than humans? And I
Speaker 2: mentioned this briefly last week. I just wanted to expand
Speaker 2: on it a little bit and point out that the
Speaker 2: Turing test Again Alan Turing nineteen fifty He proposed that
Speaker 2: one way to assess a machines intelligence was by having
Speaker 2: it engage in text based conversations with a human interrogator, who,
Speaker 2: at the same time would hold a text based conversation
Speaker 2: with another human out of sight. He called this the
Speaker 2: imitation game. Wasn't it the name of the movie that
Speaker 2: they did about him? Yeah? Yeah, I had Cumberbatch in it.
Speaker 2: Was that guy's first name, Benedict, Benedict Cumberbatch. What a
Speaker 2: is that his real name? Where did they come up
Speaker 2: with that?
Speaker 6: On a very British name?
Speaker 2: Yeah? Anyway, yeah, he played I haven't seen that movie.
Speaker 2: One type was one of these type of things, was
Speaker 2: a note persona prompt, the AI was given only basic constructions, quote,
Speaker 2: you are to participate in a Turing test. Your goal
Speaker 2: is to convince the interrogator that you are human. And
Speaker 2: then they gave it a prompt and told it to
Speaker 2: adopt a persona. And with that, the AI was specifically
Speaker 2: told to put on a specific persona, like a young
Speaker 2: person who is knowledgeable about the Internet and about culture.
Speaker 2: These two instructions made a world of difference. Without persona prompting,
Speaker 2: Chat GPT four point five came up with tariffs. I'm sorry,
Speaker 2: it achieved an overall win rate of merely thirty six percent.
Speaker 2: Chat GPT four O, which is the current version, received
Speaker 2: no persona prompts, achieved even less convincing twenty one percent,
Speaker 2: so it actually went down. But when they put in
Speaker 2: a persona. Oh, by the way, mentioned this as well.
Speaker 2: So the older version of chat GBT the was thirty
Speaker 2: six percent, then with the newer version it went down
Speaker 2: to twenty one percent. And they said, somehow the ancient
Speaker 2: program Eliza, which I've talked about in the past, it's
Speaker 2: been around for eighty years, they said, got twenty three
Speaker 2: percent success rate. I always thought it was kind of
Speaker 2: curious and entertaining. You know, when I saw it with
Speaker 2: a personal computers, it was running on personal computers in
Speaker 2: the late nineteen seventies, that's where I saw it, and
Speaker 2: it had been around for a while at that point
Speaker 2: in time, and I thought, well, that's pretty clever, pretty deceptive.
Speaker 2: And that's what chat programs have always reminded me of
Speaker 2: since then. And you know, I knew that it was
Speaker 2: it was gamed, and it was you know, certainly wasn't
Speaker 2: operating the way that AI operates, but still it was
Speaker 2: very effective. And so that's that's a warning to people,
Speaker 2: garbage in, garbage out. For all their faults, large language
Speaker 2: models are mester conversationalists. However, maybe they're not so good
Speaker 2: on tariffs or economics, but they're great on conversation. And
Speaker 2: so what happened was that they were able to when
Speaker 2: they gave it a persona, they were able to get
Speaker 2: seventy three percent. Seventy three percent, that's a passing grade.
Speaker 2: And as I said before, you know, Trump thinks that
Speaker 2: there's going to be not Trump musk. It's hard to
Speaker 2: distinguish them, right. He thinks that there's going to be
Speaker 2: ten billion of these humanoid robots that are going to
Speaker 2: be out there, and I guess when he got finished
Speaker 2: with he said, wahaha, I'll be even richer. It's like
Speaker 2: I am the underminer. I maybe beneath you, but nothing
Speaker 2: is beneath me. So again, this is what is on
Speaker 2: his way. Just don't be fooled by it, and don't
Speaker 2: be fooled by his neuralink. He's out there trying, he's
Speaker 2: soliciting people globally to try neuralink just and of course
Speaker 2: he's looking for people who are desperate, people who are quadriplegics,
Speaker 2: and you know, it's it's a shame, but it's also
Speaker 2: kind of has an Antichrist fake miracles thing about it,
Speaker 2: doesn't It doesn't have a feel of that. They're looking
Speaker 2: for people with quadriplegia to sign up for a clinical trial.
Speaker 2: They're gonna do screw top brain surgery like the man
Speaker 2: with two brains. As of January, Neuralink said had three
Speaker 2: patients that have been implanted with a device. And again,
Speaker 2: you know what could possibly go wrong, Well, like everything,
Speaker 2: even the heat and the and the the Wi Fi
Speaker 2: or the EMF or whatever it is. I don't know
Speaker 2: if they're using Wi Fi, but I mean, you know,
Speaker 2: put a chip that's operating off of Wi Fi and
Speaker 2: the heat that sent it put that directly into your brain. Yeah,
Speaker 2: I understand the quadriplegics are desperate for something that is there,
Speaker 2: but still that's just for starter, that's just the immediate
Speaker 2: effects of it. Neuralink is one of several companies and
Speaker 2: academic institutions developing and testing so called brain computer interfaces,
Speaker 2: which vary from small wirelike implants to non invasive devices
Speaker 2: akin to a hat. You know, they have a thing
Speaker 2: that you wear that reach your thoughts at least that
Speaker 2: you can get off right, and at least that they
Speaker 2: don't have to plug into your brain quite literally. The
Speaker 2: first Neuralink patient said on a March twenty eight X
Speaker 2: post that he's had no negative side effects, neither physically
Speaker 2: nor psychologically. He said in the year after receiving his
Speaker 2: brain implant, he said he's now using his brain chip
Speaker 2: for all sorts of things and guests that he's using
Speaker 2: it more than ten hours a day. That's always a
Speaker 2: good thing if you use your brain more than ten
Speaker 2: hours a day. We have many people in our society
Speaker 2: that don't use it, and that includes the any chips
Speaker 2: that they may or may not have in their brain
Speaker 2: as well. So you know, is how many hours a
Speaker 2: day do you use your brain? He said. The company's
Speaker 2: researchers are figuring out how to control a wheelchair with
Speaker 2: the implant. He added that he won't use it though,
Speaker 2: unless it is next to perfect. He says, I think
Speaker 2: it benefits everyone if I don't lose control and drive
Speaker 2: into traffic, you know, kind of like Tesla device. He's
Speaker 2: been watching these Tesla self driving cars. It's like, I
Speaker 2: don't think I want to put that on my wheelchair
Speaker 2: when I'm a calladrophedic. So it's yeah, he said. He
Speaker 2: found work as a traveling keynote speaker thanks to the implant.
Speaker 2: It helps him to write research and to communicate online.
Speaker 2: So again, so I can't tell you how much hope
Speaker 2: and purpose this technology has provided for me. It's only
Speaker 2: a matter of time before the implant is in dozens
Speaker 2: and then hundreds and then thousands of people. He had
Speaker 2: to say. I understand the desperation, but you know, we
Speaker 2: should all still have discernment about what has happened with us.
Speaker 2: I saw this, and I thought about the desperation and
Speaker 2: how horrible that must be to be a quadriplegic. And
Speaker 2: I don't know a great deal about Jony Eric Sintata,
Speaker 2: except I've seen her as a Christian speaker and author
Speaker 2: and things like that. She's talked quite a bit. She
Speaker 2: was a very active teenager. She jumped off of a
Speaker 2: dock headfirst into water that was shallow that she thought
Speaker 2: was deep and broke her neck. And she has been
Speaker 2: a quadriplegic since then. And I'm sure she's got a
Speaker 2: very interesting story. I've again I've not I'm not familiar
Speaker 2: except with the broad strokes of that. But I know
Speaker 2: that the way that she has coped with it has
Speaker 2: not been with a brain implant, but it's been with
Speaker 2: God as the implant that she has used. And I
Speaker 2: would much rather rely on that. Michael Bloomberg's insult of
Speaker 2: farmers and factory workers, again, I talked about this earlier.
Speaker 2: It is what he had to when this all came out,
Speaker 2: he said, and this is part of the quote. I
Speaker 2: could teach anybody, even the people in this room, to farm.
Speaker 2: You dig a hole, you put seed in it, you
Speaker 2: put dirt on top of yad water and up comes
Speaker 2: the corner. I would love to see Bloomberg do some farming,
Speaker 2: wouldn't you. I mean, they could make a reality TV
Speaker 2: show out of it. They'll be better than Green Acres,
Speaker 2: infinite comedic.
Speaker 6: I don't support mouths sending people to the fields, but
Speaker 6: maybe in Bloomberg's case, we could make one special exception.
Speaker 2: You know that was right. They could call it the
Speaker 2: Great Leap Forward as a TV reality series. I've had that.
Speaker 2: Take Bloomberg and all these billionaires, will put them out
Speaker 2: the field and see if they can feed themselves and survive.
Speaker 2: And he didn't just int as ault farmers, though. He
Speaker 2: also derided the lack of power required to be in
Speaker 2: a factory. He said, you better a piece of metal
Speaker 2: in the lathe. Then you turn the crank in the
Speaker 2: direction of the arrow, and you can have a job,
Speaker 2: he said. And again this is typical of what was
Speaker 2: reported at the time, nobody said that last paragraph. He said,
Speaker 2: the smart ones of us, we're gonna take everybody's jobs,
Speaker 2: and we just got to figure out how to keep
Speaker 2: you from coming after us with uillotines.
Speaker 6: If Bloomberg had to work in a factory, I would
Speaker 6: start taking bets on how many days until he gets
Speaker 6: himself caught in.
Speaker 2: The Lathe then a sign up says how many days
Speaker 2: since Bloomberg has had an accident in the factory. Okay,
Speaker 2: So what they all missed was what he was saying,
Speaker 2: the threat that he was saying, what he was saying
Speaker 2: about the fourth turning, what he was saying about their revolution. Well,
Speaker 2: they would response that they had at the times typically
Speaker 2: like this from this news outlet. The only question we
Speaker 2: have is this, how much money will Bloomberg spend trying
Speaker 2: to walk these comments back? How did every outlet miss
Speaker 2: the point, according to Bloomberg, the jobs requiring real gray
Speaker 2: matter or brain cells, or those that are built around
Speaker 2: replacing people with technology, Yeah, the smart ones. And they
Speaker 2: missed all that stuff about the guillotine that he said.
Speaker 2: So Trump at the time said Bloomberg wouldn't last three
Speaker 2: seconds as a farmer. I neither would Trump. But like
Speaker 2: his comments some minorities, you can tell that he really
Speaker 2: hates regular hardworking Americans. He said, Yeah, it would be interesting.
Speaker 2: You know that there's the whole genre of entertainment and scripts,
Speaker 2: the fish out of water they call it, right, I
Speaker 2: think Beverly Hillbillies. This would be Beverly Hillbillies. In reverse,
Speaker 2: carbon dioxide is good for the planet. I mentioned last
Speaker 2: week the X Prize, which is coming up today is
Speaker 2: the seventh. Okay, so we're two weeks in a day
Speaker 2: away from Elon Musk putting out this multimillion dollar prize.
Speaker 2: I forget what it was. It's tens of millions of
Speaker 2: dollars that he was going to give people for taking
Speaker 2: carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. But it's good for
Speaker 2: the planet. Kimmy Bidenknock, the Tory leader of the opposition,
Speaker 2: has stated that the quest to reach zero by twenty
Speaker 2: fifty is in fact impossible, quote unquote, without showing any
Speaker 2: evidence of self awareness. Then Ed Milliban, the Labor government's
Speaker 2: energy secretary, accused her of her leadership of being quote
Speaker 2: off to the wacky races. I think that people are
Speaker 2: off to the wacky races. Are that people who want
Speaker 2: to remove CO two out of the atmosphere. The fear
Speaker 2: narrative is also being promoted by governmental institutions in the UK,
Speaker 2: A statement which was based on the concentration of atmospheric
Speaker 2: carbon dioxide allegedly being the highest level in the last
Speaker 2: eight hundred thousand years. You got data for that, but
Speaker 2: think about this. As crazy as this is, as crazy
Speaker 2: as the climate, mcuffe Musk was right there. He was
Speaker 2: right there with universal basic income. He was right there
Speaker 2: with a green agenda. He's still right there with a
Speaker 2: green agenda. While he's out there talking about how he's
Speaker 2: gonna he's on the site. The conservatives are worshiping him.
Speaker 2: I mean, I can go to some of these conservative
Speaker 2: sites and they're selling doge caps and things like that.
Speaker 2: It's like, what, what are you talking about? This guy
Speaker 2: is antithetical to everything you believe, whether you're talking about
Speaker 2: liberty and self governance or whether you're talking about a
Speaker 2: rational policy that allows us to have access to resources
Speaker 2: rather than taking everything away from us. He is a
Speaker 2: technocrat who wants to own everything so that we don't
Speaker 2: own anything. And they're worshiping him. It'll be interesting to
Speaker 2: see how they cover it when he gives out well,
Speaker 2: I think it's one hundred million dollar prize for the
Speaker 2: X Prize that he's going to announce April twenty second. Now,
Speaker 2: he started the several years ago, and so this is
Speaker 2: the real Musk that is out there, the real Musk
Speaker 2: who is a big government grifter. Well, we're almost out
Speaker 2: of time, so I'm not going to take a break,
Speaker 2: and I just wanted to real quickly talk about some
Speaker 2: of the things that are coming up in terms of education.
Speaker 2: For example, there is an article on Wall Street Journal
Speaker 2: saying Illinois homeschoolers brace for an assault on parental freedom.
Speaker 2: So Illinois is going to be coming after the Homeschooler's
Speaker 2: not a surprise when you look at Pritzker. His family
Speaker 2: was involved in you know, they got their money from
Speaker 2: the hotel chain and I'm trying to think of it
Speaker 2: is on tip my tongue now, I just forgot which
Speaker 2: one it was, Hyatt, I think it was, And the
Speaker 2: Pritzker family got that. And he's got a doppelganger cousin.
Speaker 2: I mean, they look like twins, except the cousin is
Speaker 2: now pretending that he's a woman, right. And the Pritzker
Speaker 2: family and their family fortune has been at the epicenter
Speaker 2: of selling the LGBT lies and child mutilation and all
Speaker 2: the rest of the stuff from the very beginning. So
Speaker 2: just remember when you look at these types of taxing,
Speaker 2: this is Illinois where Pritzker is. But just remember when
Speaker 2: you look at what is happening with the Department of
Speaker 2: education in Trump, the Trump administration is threatening public schools
Speaker 2: federal funding over DEI initiatives. Well that's good, except remember
Speaker 2: that it was ten years ago, maybe a little bit longer,
Speaker 2: that Trump was pushing transgenders into his own beauty contests,
Speaker 2: beauty contests. And remember that the policies that are going
Speaker 2: to be punished, the policies that are going to be rewarded,
Speaker 2: will change, just as they have changed with Donald Trump.
Speaker 2: They will change with different parties and so forth. So
Speaker 2: the key issue is the money, and are you going
Speaker 2: to take the money? And this is something for homes
Speaker 2: You won't talk about how they're going to attack homeschoolers
Speaker 2: and things like that. That'll be part of it. It'll
Speaker 2: be the money. Do not get yourself addicted to this.
Speaker 2: Don't take the bribe. And when we look at what
Speaker 2: is happening with the Department of Education, nothing is going
Speaker 2: to fundamentally change with the Department of Education. They'll relabel it,
Speaker 2: they'll rebrand it, they'll repurpose it. It may the bureaucracy
Speaker 2: may go away, but they've already said that they're going
Speaker 2: to continue to do educational grants and all the rest
Speaker 2: of this stuff in order to control education. This is
Speaker 2: the same people that have been giving grants and scholarships
Speaker 2: and things like that to Harvard to Colombia. Now they
Speaker 2: want to take it away if they don't support Israel.
Speaker 2: Nine billion dollars to Harvard, four hundred million to Colombia
Speaker 2: and now that and that works not just for the
Speaker 2: big Ivy League schools, but it's all the way down
Speaker 2: and that money is going to continue to be put
Speaker 2: out by what is left of the Department of Education.
Speaker 2: It's going to be used to control people. It's going
Speaker 2: to be the purse strings to control people. The Education
Speaker 2: Department says that it has sent letters to state commissioners
Speaker 2: overseeing k through twelve state education agencies, giving them ten
Speaker 2: days to sign and to return a certification of testing
Speaker 2: their compliance with federal civil rights law. Now I agree
Speaker 2: with them on the fundamental issue of DEI. I don't
Speaker 2: want to see DEI being taught in the schools. But
Speaker 2: the key issue is is that if Trump can remove
Speaker 2: the funding and use it as a to blackmail these
Speaker 2: people who have gotten addicted to the funding, I don't
Speaker 2: know how we're going to fund our schools if we
Speaker 2: don't have that federal funding. If he can use that.
Speaker 2: If he can pull their string, then somebody else will
Speaker 2: pull your string to force you to have DEI. You
Speaker 2: understand the mechanism that's here. The document is titled and
Speaker 2: listen to this and this is Orwellian in and of itself.
Speaker 2: The document is titled Reminder of legal obligations undertaken in
Speaker 2: extra change for receiving federal financial assistance. If you fund it,
Speaker 2: you control it. Trump funded the pandemic, and people will
Speaker 2: still argue with me about that. No, he funded it.
Speaker 2: He funded it. That's what as emergency decoration was about.
Speaker 2: Federal funds are conditioned on that assurance. And same thing
Speaker 2: will happen at the state level as well. In Tennessee,
Speaker 2: we just had this rhino Bill Lee governor push through
Speaker 2: charter schools to get state money and some of the
Speaker 2: people were not happy about it. Said, Okay, we're going
Speaker 2: to put together something. We'll call it the Free Act,
Speaker 2: and what that'll say is that you're free to educate
Speaker 2: your children as a homeschooler. You don't have to do reports,
Speaker 2: you don't take money, they don't have any control over you.
Speaker 2: The Republicans shut that down. The Republicans shut that down.
Speaker 2: They want you to take the money so they can
Speaker 2: have control over you. And eventually those Republicans are going
Speaker 2: to be replaced with Democrats who are going to make
Speaker 2: you do things that you can do that you will
Speaker 2: not do. On kick Heron's holler said, Hey, David, Hubby
Speaker 2: going through his coin collection, we just discovered a coin
Speaker 2: from a set called twenty twelve US Mint uncirculated coinset,
Speaker 2: and the middle coin in the top row looks just
Speaker 2: like you, David, as President Benjamin Harrison. Well, that's interesting.
Speaker 2: I have to go look that up. But I have
Speaker 2: no connection to Benjamin Harrison. My family's got a remote
Speaker 2: connection to James K. Polk, which Trump loves, by the way,
Speaker 2: because he has a lot of territory. He didn't have
Speaker 2: any children, but he had something like nine or ten
Speaker 2: brothers and sisters, and it's one of them that were
Speaker 2: to send it from that's it for today's show. Thank
Speaker 2: you for joining us, have a good day. The common man.
Speaker 2: They created common Core and dumb down our children. They
Speaker 2: created common past track and control us. They're Commons project
Speaker 2: to make sure the commoners own nothing and the communist future.
Speaker 2: They see the common man as simple, unsophisticated ordinary but
Speaker 2: each of us has worth and dignity created in the
Speaker 2: image of God. That is what we have in common.
Speaker 2: That is what they want to take away. Their most
Speaker 2: powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation. They desire to know
Speaker 2: everything about us, while they hide everything from us. It's
Speaker 2: time to turn that around and expose what they want
Speaker 2: to hide. Please share the information and links you'll find
Speaker 2: at the Davidnightshow dot com. Thank you for listening, Thank
Speaker 2: you for sharing. If you can't support us financially, please
Speaker 2: keep us in your prayers. Ddavidnightshow dot com