Speaker 1: In a world of deceit, telling the truth is a
Speaker 1: revolutionary act. It's the David Knightshow. It's Monday, the sixth
Speaker 1: of January. You're of our Lord, twenty twenty five, five
Speaker 1: years after what happened, and we're going to take a
Speaker 1: look at that today. But today we're going to begin
Speaker 1: by taking a look at the.
Speaker 2: Motives of the New Year's Eve as well as the
Speaker 2: New Year's Day attacks, and we're going to take a
Speaker 2: look at the government's motives and the information that has
Speaker 2: come out. Now on Friday, we had a fascinating narrative
Speaker 2: looking at the motive of the Green Beret cyber truck attack.
Speaker 2: Is it real? Does it show where the government wants
Speaker 2: this all to go? And it has a really strange
Speaker 2: I guess we could say echo of January the sixth
Speaker 2: and stop the steal. But we got some great news
Speaker 2: on the food freedom front, even as the Democrats are
Speaker 2: rolling out congestion pricing. We know where this all leads,
Speaker 2: so we know what the purpose of it is as well.
Speaker 3: We'll be right back stay with us.
Speaker 2: Well, we're seeing that. And I saw this from the
Speaker 2: very beginning, immediately this came out. But now we've got
Speaker 2: Chris McDonald. I'm sorry, Lawrence O'Donnell. Lawrence o'donald, I don't
Speaker 2: watch this guy. The only thing I've ever seen from
Speaker 2: this guy is that clip where he says, stop the hammering,
Speaker 2: so let to speak right. He loses it because it
Speaker 2: is difficult when you're doing a live show. But anyway,
Speaker 2: MSNBC Lawrence O'Donnell saying what was clearly implied from the
Speaker 2: very beginning that the the problem that we have are veterans.
Speaker 2: Veterans are the problem. By the way, you know the
Speaker 2: cyber truck saved us, so Musk is your savior. Veterans
Speaker 2: are the problem, and it's not the people coming across
Speaker 2: the border. We don't have to worry about it at all.
Speaker 2: Not illegal immigrants. As a matter of fact. What he said,
Speaker 2: the simple fact is this country has suffered more deadly
Speaker 2: terrorism at the hands of American born citizens who are
Speaker 2: veterans of the US military than people who have crossed
Speaker 2: into this country at the southern border. That's what we
Speaker 2: should do. We should replace everybody in America when people
Speaker 2: come across the southern border, because they never do anything wrong.
Speaker 2: Not according to MSNBC and Lawrence o'donald. He says very
Speaker 2: clear from the evidence that you if you want to
Speaker 2: worry about terrorism in this country, the US Army has
Speaker 2: much bigger problem than the southern border. Now, the big
Speaker 2: problem is the US's CIA. That's the problem. If you
Speaker 2: want to know about terrorism here or abroad, take a
Speaker 2: look at the CIA. They run al Qaida. They did
Speaker 2: nine to eleven along with some help, but they are
Speaker 2: the problem. Look, Trump and Biden have paid doctors and
Speaker 2: hospitals to commit an active terror five years ago, didn't
Speaker 2: they The two of them were paying. They're surrogates. The
Speaker 2: doctors had to kill people with ventilators, with jabs, you
Speaker 2: name it, because they had a political goal. Isn't that
Speaker 2: the definition of terrorism, violence and murder, fear to create
Speaker 2: a political purpose for a political agenda. Isn't that the
Speaker 2: very definition of terrorism. Doesn't the American government terrorize people
Speaker 2: all the time. They don't need army veterans. As a
Speaker 2: matter of fact, probably the for the most part, they're
Speaker 2: going to be our best hope of putting this back.
Speaker 2: But Lars O'Donnell goes into all of the very pat
Speaker 2: narratives from the government talking about Timothy McVeigh, in the
Speaker 2: Oklahoma City bombing wall. You talk about a simple minded
Speaker 2: person if he truly believes this stuff, You really believe that,
Speaker 2: I'll never forget New American back in the day had
Speaker 2: had a wonder you want to talk about military veterans.
Speaker 2: There is a retired general. I forget whether his brigadier general,
Speaker 2: what is exact rank, but his specialty was demolition, and
Speaker 2: he did a very long story about how you know,
Speaker 2: we're supposed to believe that it was a point source
Speaker 2: of a bomb, right, it's one bomb that took off
Speaker 2: all the way across the front of that building. He said, no,
Speaker 2: that would have to be a series of bombs. It
Speaker 2: doesn't work that way. And so, but this guy, Timothy
Speaker 2: mcveigh's hatred of the American government was not tamed in
Speaker 2: any way by his service in the American military, says Lawrence.
Speaker 2: What's this guy's name again, O'Donnell, I'm supposed to be
Speaker 2: impressed that he's ONSNBC. Yeah, this clown America's latest terrorist
Speaker 2: attack in New Orleans on New Year's Eve with an
Speaker 2: American military veteran driving a pickup truck through a crowd
Speaker 2: to murder fourteen people. And so, yeah, that's the big problem.
Speaker 2: And it's article from zero Hedge, somebody on Twitter and
Speaker 2: Jeanette Monos, So thanks for sharing what your overlord's told
Speaker 2: you to tell us. David Adams says, I don't remember
Speaker 2: the nine eleven attacks being perpetrated by military veterans unless
Speaker 2: they went to work for the CIA, because it's government terror, folks,
Speaker 2: it's government tear everywhere, and we're seeing what the government
Speaker 2: wants to use this for as well. Look, regardless of
Speaker 2: what happens, and regardless, you know, it is interesting this
Speaker 2: narrative that came up on I guess it was, was
Speaker 2: it Friday or something? I put it up and it said,
Speaker 2: you know, we knew that from the very beginning that
Speaker 2: this story in Vegas didn't make any sense. Now we
Speaker 2: got a motive. Is it the motive of the guy
Speaker 2: the Green Beret or is it a government motive? That's
Speaker 2: the question right running this operation and how are they
Speaker 2: going to use what happened, whether it is real or not.
Speaker 2: You know, you have you have shootings that are done
Speaker 2: by the government. You have shootings that were done by
Speaker 2: individuals that are organic. So regardless of whether the event
Speaker 2: is organic, real, or whether it is a false flag.
Speaker 2: The question is how is the government going to use it?
Speaker 2: And that's what's important about this because now we're starting
Speaker 2: to see the contours of their motivations and how they
Speaker 2: want to use this as they're warning us that more
Speaker 2: is to come this year. So we have calls from
Speaker 2: mass surveillance after the New Orleans terrorist attacking. These calls
Speaker 2: are coming from the New Orleans District Attorney that's part
Speaker 2: of that parish, the Orleans Parish. He drew parallels to
Speaker 2: the sweeping changes implemented in the aftermath of nine to eleven.
Speaker 2: This is why they want to pull on us, he hinted,
Speaker 2: as a push for heightened monitoring measures across the city
Speaker 2: and beyond, citing European surveillance systems as a model. Well,
Speaker 2: how about this, New Orleans. How about you just put
Speaker 2: up some ballards. You can't do that. Oh, but you're
Speaker 2: going to spend a lot of money on surveillance cameras
Speaker 2: and artificial intelligence to look at us. You know, I
Speaker 2: don't know that if it's that much of a coincidence
Speaker 2: that AI has a double meaning. You know, for the
Speaker 2: longest time, you know, there was a talk in the
Speaker 2: computer community of artificial intelligence that AI. But the people
Speaker 2: who want to surveil everything that we do, they came
Speaker 2: up with another AI, anticipatory intelligence part of geospatial intelligence,
Speaker 2: that organization that nobody wants to talk about right now.
Speaker 2: I've been talking about this for I don't know, going
Speaker 2: back to twenty thirteen when the Snowden documents dropped in
Speaker 2: James Clapper and I pointed out James Clapper's background was
Speaker 2: in geospatial intelligence, the fastest growing part of the intelligence community,
Speaker 2: and what it was used for and all the rest
Speaker 2: of this stuff. Palaeer is all about geospatial intelligence, and
Speaker 2: Palaentteer is all about AI anticipatory intelligence. And that's the
Speaker 2: way they're going to use artificial intelligence is to anticipate you. Right.
Speaker 2: This has always been a part of their aspirations. If
Speaker 2: you go back to the nineteen seventies and look at
Speaker 2: the Big New Brazinski's book Between Two Ages. He said
Speaker 2: in the Coming Technocratic that's what he called it, the
Speaker 2: Coming Technocratic Age. We will know what you're going to
Speaker 2: do before you know what you're going to do, and
Speaker 2: we'll be able to stop people from doing things. That
Speaker 2: was his objective. By the way, all of the fawning
Speaker 2: over Jimmy Carter gives me a break. He was a
Speaker 2: stooge for his the big new bergiin, just like Nixon
Speaker 2: was for Henry Kissinger. They were the ones who were
Speaker 2: running the administrations on the important aspects of it. But
Speaker 2: getting back to this, you know, if you've just done
Speaker 2: your job, if you just put up some simple barriers,
Speaker 2: then this wouldn't have happened. And as I pointed out
Speaker 2: last week, couldn't have happened. There'd been a big attack
Speaker 2: in twenty sixteen in Europe. Then there was another one
Speaker 2: that happened in New Orleans in twenty and seventeen. It
Speaker 2: was a drunk driver going down Bourbon Street. Who would
Speaker 2: think that would happen, Right, let's have a bourbon and
Speaker 2: go driving down the Bourbon Street. But in the aftermath
Speaker 2: of that, they put up these ballards, and they said,
Speaker 2: well they don't you know, they don't deploy too well,
Speaker 2: or maybe they went up and down or something they
Speaker 2: got jammed up with Marty Gras beads and everything says, oh,
Speaker 2: we need a different one. Well, what they took this
Speaker 2: thing down, They're going to have it down for four months.
Speaker 2: Put it back up before the Super Bowl. But the
Speaker 2: new model of Ballard will not stop a car that's
Speaker 2: going faster than ten miles an hour. That's pointless. The
Speaker 2: whole point of this was to stop a deliberate attack
Speaker 2: or somebody. Drunk drivers don't limit the speed to ten
Speaker 2: miles an hour. So there was nothing that was ever
Speaker 2: going to stop this, even planned by these But now
Speaker 2: they're going to use it to move the surveillance and
Speaker 2: the police state forward. So this district attorney praised the
Speaker 2: widespread use of CCTV cameras and countries like the UK
Speaker 2: where they've got them everywhere all the time, And how
Speaker 2: do they use them, how do they use all this
Speaker 2: surveillance of social media and people. Well, they're using it
Speaker 2: in a political way to shut down critics of the government,
Speaker 2: to shut down critics of their agenda. He described it
Speaker 2: as proactive tools for identifying threats. But he doesn't say
Speaker 2: what kind of threats you mean, threats to the lives
Speaker 2: of citizens and civilians, No, threats to the government and
Speaker 2: its agendas. He So it's a pushback against some of that.
Speaker 2: It'll be done with pre crime. It's wine pressnews dot
Speaker 2: COM's got the story. Zero Hedge also covers it reclaimed
Speaker 2: the net because this guy is His name is Jason Williams,
Speaker 2: the New Orleans District Attorney. While authorities continue to investigate
Speaker 2: the incident, Williams took to the airwaves to outline what
Speaker 2: he believes is necessary response, and that is more pervasive surveillance.
Speaker 2: He had one thing to do, New Orleans government. He
Speaker 2: had one job. You couldn't do that Ballard's Ballards was
Speaker 2: in the UK. It's a bullocks. But the New Orleans
Speaker 2: attacker visited city, the city twice in recent months where
Speaker 2: he wore meta glasses to record the scene in advance.
Speaker 2: Wait a minute, I guess we should ban those meta glasses. No, no, no, no,
Speaker 2: don't want to do that because they're going to use that.
Speaker 2: They're going to use the meta stuff as part of
Speaker 2: their surveillance stuff. So nobody's going to say a thing
Speaker 2: bad about the fact that he used meta glasses to
Speaker 2: surveil the scene. It'll never be blamed because it is
Speaker 2: part of the agenda. The mass killing has raised questions
Speaker 2: as to how the city secured Bourbon Street. They didn't
Speaker 2: how a heavy duty truck was able to drive on
Speaker 2: one of the most pedestrian heavy roads in the US,
Speaker 2: but the government will misdirect from their incompetence, from their failure.
Speaker 2: The mayor is calling for a review of the city
Speaker 2: security plan. New Ornlands has been installing new removable stainless
Speaker 2: steel ballards along several streets, but those are not expected
Speaker 2: to be ready until the Super Bowl next month. And
Speaker 2: here's Reuters, they said. And according to a Reuters report
Speaker 2: citing a city contracted analysis in April as part of
Speaker 2: the bidding, they knew this when they took down the
Speaker 2: other ones, and when they contracted to put up these
Speaker 2: new ones, they knew that it would only stop people
Speaker 2: who were going ten miles per hour. I wonder how
Speaker 2: many tens of millions of dollars they're putting up for
Speaker 2: what are effectively decorations. The potential threat of ramming attack
Speaker 2: has been well known since at least the mass ramming
Speaker 2: attack in Nice, France on Bastille Day twenty sixteen. Again,
Speaker 2: as I said before, happened in New Orleans on Bourbon Street.
Speaker 2: I think it was in twenty seventeen, which is why
Speaker 2: they put the other ones up in the first place.
Speaker 2: A drunk driver pleae Superintendent Anne Kirkpatrick said, we did
Speaker 2: indeed have a plan, but the terrorists defeated it. You
Speaker 2: had a plan, What was the plan? Please tell us
Speaker 2: what the plan was. You got you're going to The
Speaker 2: plan was to have ballards that could stop a light
Speaker 2: car going ten miles. Now, what about a pickup truck
Speaker 2: that is electric. It's very very heavy. We've seen these things. Uh,
Speaker 2: you know, take down a covered bridge. It's been for centuries,
Speaker 2: right because they're so heavy. So did the Green Beret
Speaker 2: have a plan? That's the issue? You know, he was
Speaker 2: a bit of a celebrity actually, uh, And turns out
Speaker 2: that he was a while back, had been doing something
Speaker 2: with Tim Kennedy. At that point in time, he was
Speaker 2: going by the name Matt Berg. He just cut off
Speaker 2: the Lowell part at the very front of the name.
Speaker 2: And here's a clip from a competition that the two
Speaker 2: of them competed against soldiers from other countries.
Speaker 4: It's a reality show that his teams of elite soldiers
Speaker 4: from around the world against each other.
Speaker 5: Matt and Tim from the US Army Special Forces better
Speaker 5: known as the Green Braves.
Speaker 4: Matthew Libvelsberger and his partner Tim Kennedy, both Green Berets
Speaker 4: appeared on The Ultimate Soldier Challenge twelve years ago on
Speaker 4: the History channels.
Speaker 5: While the other guys are still setting up, the Americans
Speaker 5: take their first shot at the sniper on the top
Speaker 5: of the tower.
Speaker 4: They not only won, it wasn't even close.
Speaker 6: You know, for television they always try to make it
Speaker 6: a little bit more competitive, but we swept the whole
Speaker 6: entire show.
Speaker 4: When he appeared on the show, Libvelsberger used a shortened
Speaker 4: version of his name, Matt Berg, So it took Tim
Speaker 4: Kennedy a while to put two and two together.
Speaker 6: It took about twelve hours of me seeing some photos
Speaker 6: as more photos started coming out of.
Speaker 7: You know who he was, and then.
Speaker 6: I saw Matt Perg with a older photo of him,
Speaker 6: and I was like, oh, no, dude, I know that guy.
Speaker 6: And then it just like tore my heart out because
Speaker 6: he was a really great Green Beret and what was
Speaker 6: he like. He was charming, he was talented, he was personable,
Speaker 6: he was kind, he was all the things that you
Speaker 6: would expect from a Green Beret.
Speaker 4: At one point during the show, Libbelsberger had to stop
Speaker 4: taping in the ninety plus degree heat. He was suffering
Speaker 4: from heat exhaustion.
Speaker 1: I'm about to throw them.
Speaker 8: I hate his horse man.
Speaker 9: How did you take the off?
Speaker 7: Right now?
Speaker 4: Tim Kennedy says he hadn't heard from Libbelsburger for a
Speaker 4: few years.
Speaker 6: It just categorically does not make sense from everything that
Speaker 6: I have heard. He was universally valued by his team,
Speaker 6: by his peers. I don't understand. It doesn't make sense,
Speaker 6: and it is just horrifically heartbreaking.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, the question is what is really going on
Speaker 2: with that? Jason Barker says. They said the guy was
Speaker 2: identified by tattoos because the body, but his body was
Speaker 2: burned beyond recognition. Yeah. I say, it's like his passport too.
Speaker 2: They recognized him by his past somehow. The rest of
Speaker 2: his body was burned beyond recognition, Jason, but not the tattoos.
Speaker 2: He survived, like his credit card and his cell phone
Speaker 2: and his ID only partially burned. Yeah, there's a lot
Speaker 2: of questions about that as well. He says, both Vegas
Speaker 2: and New Orleans are flock cities. Oh that's well, most
Speaker 2: cities are now, quite frankly flock folks. Is the system
Speaker 2: cameras I've talked about before. I mean, even around here,
Speaker 2: the small little towns of you know, ten twenty thirty
Speaker 2: thousand people. The police departments are putting flock stuff in,
Speaker 2: and it's kind of interesting that you mentioned that. It's
Speaker 2: very interesting because people are saying, well, we're going to
Speaker 2: get some video footage from the charging stations, and we're
Speaker 2: going to get video footage from Elon Musk. He's going
Speaker 2: to save us. Nobody wants to talk about the flock systems.
Speaker 2: I've not seen that mentioned anywhere. I'd forgotten about that,
Speaker 2: so thanks for reminding me. Jason Barker Nights the Storm.
Speaker 2: They should have tons of high resolution video that can
Speaker 2: visually identify the drivers. That's right, they can see who
Speaker 2: is actually driving the car. And we also hearing this
Speaker 2: narrative about the Tesla cyber truck thing, and Elon Musk
Speaker 2: has come out and said, well, you can't. You have
Speaker 2: to have a driver there has to see his face
Speaker 2: and all the rest of stuff, and might ask him
Speaker 2: to do something with their hands or something in the
Speaker 2: self driving road. That's also horse manure. How many times
Speaker 2: have we seen videos of people who have done something
Speaker 2: rigged it up a little bit. You don't think that
Speaker 2: a Green Beret or somebody else could rig this. That's
Speaker 2: pretty well known. Some devices that they can use to
Speaker 2: bypass that kind of check as a matter of fact,
Speaker 2: and you know, the idea Tesla even says the fact
Speaker 2: that it's not going to look at somebody's eyes because
Speaker 2: sometimes people wearing sunglasses and so it doesn't necessarily have
Speaker 2: to see your eyes open up either. And we have
Speaker 2: also seen many, many times videos that have surfaced. You
Speaker 2: remember the videos that somebody had slumped over asleep. They've
Speaker 2: all asleep at the wheel with the self driving stuff.
Speaker 2: A self driving car did not wake them up. Well,
Speaker 2: maybe they've changed that, maybe not. I don't know. I mean,
Speaker 2: the third possibility that occurred to me was that if
Speaker 2: he had gone there and I don't know what you
Speaker 2: do to have the recall to have the Tesla come
Speaker 2: to you, but you know, it navigates on its own
Speaker 2: without anybody in the car. If you at a slow speed,
Speaker 2: that's all you would need to tell it to come
Speaker 2: back to me. Right, you automatically retrieve it in a
Speaker 2: parking lot, and so you just summon it, say hey,
Speaker 2: come here, come pick me up, and just drive very
Speaker 2: slowly there. There's a lot of different ways that that
Speaker 2: could have happened. But the question is, you know, did
Speaker 2: he have a did he have a plan with all
Speaker 2: this stuff? Yeah, it is a very fascinating narrative that
Speaker 2: has evolved. But before we leave the other topic of
Speaker 2: Lawrence O'Donnell, his named Lawrence O'Donnell selling the idea of
Speaker 2: Timothy McVeigh three little birds that I knew the mcveigh's family.
Speaker 2: I jumped on their trampoline as a teenager with his
Speaker 2: sister and friends. Timothy would have had to have been
Speaker 2: m k aultrede to do what he was accused of. Well,
Speaker 2: you know, that is a thing that was supposed to
Speaker 2: be a conspiracy theory. You know, I like to keep
Speaker 2: putting out conspiracy theory as a pejorative. Well fine, I
Speaker 2: don't care. I don't run from that label. I think, though,
Speaker 2: that's a different ct, not conspiracy theory, but critical thinking.
Speaker 2: Critical thinking is what they label as a conspiracy theory.
Speaker 2: Well look at this and say, wait a minute, does
Speaker 2: that make any sense. That's critical thinking. It's not a
Speaker 2: conspiracy theory. I mean, nobody's even you know when you
Speaker 2: look at this, this could be one individual, for example,
Speaker 2: and if it was an one individual, not a group,
Speaker 2: of individuals involved. The question is would this still have
Speaker 2: happened the way that they say that it did if
Speaker 2: it was one individual. And so you've got a video
Speaker 2: that broke over the weekend, and it is kind of
Speaker 2: interesting because he documented his trip. There wasn't just pictures
Speaker 2: that the cyber truck was taking of him or pictures
Speaker 2: of the charging area. He documented this and he's he
Speaker 2: re establishes contact with an ex girlfriend on this trip
Speaker 2: and sends her pictures, talks about his life and all
Speaker 2: the rest of stuff. Now, the story that they have
Speaker 2: created is that his partner, who he had a baby
Speaker 2: with six months ago, that they had had an argument,
Speaker 2: accusations of infidelity, for infidelity, and so he left and
Speaker 2: took this trip on the spur of the moment. Well,
Speaker 2: that also doesn't seem to line up with the information
Speaker 2: that was released to a couple of guys who are
Speaker 2: former CIA. A guy who has a very big podcast
Speaker 2: and again Sean Ryan, I had not seen him before,
Speaker 2: but as I started looking at what this guy is
Speaker 2: involved with. Look, CIA is a secret society, folks. Most
Speaker 2: of government is. If you look at most government today,
Speaker 2: most of them will not tell you anything. I remember
Speaker 2: asking about new models. I went to the airport to
Speaker 2: do a report on new models of things TSA was
Speaker 2: going to have, and I wasn't asking how they work.
Speaker 2: Could I see the plans and put them on TV
Speaker 2: or whatever? You know, I wasn't doing any that kind
Speaker 2: of stuff. But they don't want to talk to you.
Speaker 2: Anybody in government. It's all secret and everything must be
Speaker 2: kept from you. They will not tell you anything about
Speaker 2: what they do. They're afraid. But they also have their
Speaker 2: own plans that they're doing. So look, all of government
Speaker 2: is secret society, but there's a hierarchy to these secret societies,
Speaker 2: and the secret societies that are at the very top
Speaker 2: of the intelligence community. I just call it the CIA,
Speaker 2: but yeah, there's a whole bunch of them. There's military,
Speaker 2: a whole bunch of military intelligence agencies as well as
Speaker 2: the CIA, and these secret societies, folks, are a lot
Speaker 2: more dangerous than the ones that a lot of people
Speaker 2: like to focus on. The Illuminati or the Freemasons or
Speaker 2: this or that. They are just as dark, just as satanic,
Speaker 2: and they got more money than the rost Les, do
Speaker 2: you know, they just printed up And so you want
Speaker 2: to know if you had a situation where you had
Speaker 2: the Rothschilds or the Illuminati podcast and they came out
Speaker 2: they said, well, we got some information here. This guy
Speaker 2: contacted us and he told us everything that's going on
Speaker 2: and here would you trust any of that? Would you
Speaker 2: trust this if it's coming from former CIA people. As
Speaker 2: I said before, it's like the mafia. In my opinion,
Speaker 2: you never get out of it. The only way that
Speaker 2: you get out of it is feet first.
Speaker 8: You don't ever.
Speaker 2: Leave this thing. So, uh, yeah, it's it's John Pasiglan
Speaker 2: said they had three hundred cops there. All they had
Speaker 2: to do was block the Bourbon Street with a couple
Speaker 2: of police cars. Well they did have one police car
Speaker 2: that was parked there, but you know, not enough to block.
Speaker 2: He went around it. You remember the video that we had.
Speaker 2: Some people said, oh this is suspicious. Here's the camera
Speaker 2: following that guy where they tipped off ahead of time.
Speaker 2: Do they know that that was something was going to happen,
Speaker 2: because look, the camera is following that white forward lightning
Speaker 2: truck and you know it's stop and go traffic. He
Speaker 2: gets to the corner and he steps on the gas
Speaker 2: or the battery. I guess he stepped on the battery.
Speaker 2: That thing goes like lightning, So he floors it and
Speaker 2: he goes around the cop car. That's part because he
Speaker 2: goes up on the sidewalk. Yeah, they didn't use They
Speaker 2: used the cop car to block the street, but that
Speaker 2: was just to stop drivers from going down it. It
Speaker 2: wasn't to stop a terror attack. So again, everything they
Speaker 2: did was insufficient. But he's documenting this picture and his
Speaker 2: trip with pictures and all the rest of this stuff,
Speaker 2: and so that's the narrative that they pushed there. But
Speaker 2: it's all very suspicious whether this guy is involved in
Speaker 2: it and setting up bread crumbs and all the rest
Speaker 2: of this stuff, or whether he was legitimately being followed
Speaker 2: by the FBI. That's part of his story. You're going
Speaker 2: to hear this in just a second. I'm going to
Speaker 2: play clip for you, so about five minutes long about
Speaker 2: these two CIA guys with their podcasts talking about what
Speaker 2: they think is involved in all this. It's a very
Speaker 2: interesting narrative. And if you just take the narrative at
Speaker 2: face value and believe that it's true, you could say, well,
Speaker 2: maybe he was being followed by the FBI and all
Speaker 2: the rest of the stuff because he had damaging information
Speaker 2: that they didn't want to get out about the drones.
Speaker 2: They bring that into it. And so maybe what he
Speaker 2: did because he's worried that they're going to come after him.
Speaker 2: That's what he conveys in this message. Maybe the fight
Speaker 2: with his with his partner is made up. Well then
Speaker 2: they come out and you know he's just trying to
Speaker 2: give her cover, and so you know this is this
Speaker 2: is going to be the story. You don't know me,
Speaker 2: I'm going to disappear. We've done all this stuff, right,
Speaker 2: then they come up with it. I said, well, we
Speaker 2: did a DNA test and the DNA does not match
Speaker 2: his child. I think it's a girl six months old. Well,
Speaker 2: the interesting thing to me is they didn't see anybody
Speaker 2: say that they had a positive DNA on the body
Speaker 2: by matching it to his mother or father or any
Speaker 2: relatives that were alive. Right, they do have established blood relatives.
Speaker 2: They didn't say anything about that. All they did was
Speaker 2: to talk about the DNA doesn't match the child. That's
Speaker 2: what you would do. I mean, I would think that
Speaker 2: you would first go to the mother or father, you'd
Speaker 2: go to an adult before you'd bother a six month
Speaker 2: old baby to get a DNA match I don't know
Speaker 2: what's involved in that. Maybe, you know, just a piece
Speaker 2: of hair or something. I don't know, but I thought
Speaker 2: that was strange that they didn't say, well, we've got
Speaker 2: a positive DNA match on Matt, but it doesn't match
Speaker 2: the baby. Instead, all they did was they said, well,
Speaker 2: the DNA doesn't match the baby, so the baby's not legitimate.
Speaker 2: They don't talk about the fact, well, then maybe the
Speaker 2: DNA isn't Matt. Okay, that would be another possible conclusion
Speaker 2: of this. But you know, when you they just take
Speaker 2: it through that. So I want to take a look
Speaker 2: at this. Sean Ryan is the guy Austin sent me
Speaker 2: an email. He said, I share your opinion that this
Speaker 2: is a government operation to allow major attack, to elicit
Speaker 2: support to trigger World War four. I guess is already
Speaker 2: in a three that's been going on for a while.
Speaker 2: Sean Ryan is someone I didn't know, but he's been
Speaker 2: on Joe Rogan multiple times. He's got a pretty big
Speaker 2: YouTube channel. He's a former CIA guy. As a matter
Speaker 2: of fact, you remember last week in the aftermath of
Speaker 2: this New Orleans attack, where the guy we're told he's
Speaker 2: a radical Islamicist, And maybe that's true. I don't know
Speaker 2: one way or the other. But Sarah Adams goes on.
Speaker 2: It was on Sean Ryan's program that Sarah Adams, who's
Speaker 2: former CIA a targeting agent who looks at targets in
Speaker 2: terms of offensively and defensively, what is vulnerable, what do
Speaker 2: we need to do to protect this or to attack
Speaker 2: this or whatever. She came on she said, we got
Speaker 2: a thousand Al Qaeda in the country. It was like,
Speaker 2: you know that, do you to me? That sounds like
Speaker 2: they're laying a narrative of fear, But it seems to
Speaker 2: me like they're also laying a narrative that you're going
Speaker 2: to have a lot of these types of attacks. Now,
Speaker 2: it could be true with a wide open border. We've
Speaker 2: talked about this in the past when we talk about
Speaker 2: Civil Defense Manual. By the way, Jack Lawson, the manual
Speaker 2: was sold out. He's still trying to get that reprinted.
Speaker 2: So we'll let you know as soon as that is
Speaker 2: available again. But I should always have that is always
Speaker 2: a possibility. We have very vulnerable infrastructure. But of course
Speaker 2: it can also be used by these people if it
Speaker 2: was genuine and if you really do have a thousand
Speaker 2: Al Qaeda, what was left unsaid by Sean Ryan and
Speaker 2: Sarah Adams is the fact that we fund al Qaeda
Speaker 2: and we opened the borders. And so if you fund
Speaker 2: these radical terrorists and they hate America and they come
Speaker 2: in here and they do it on their own, it
Speaker 2: still is something of a false flag attack, isn't it?
Speaker 2: Since we created them, since we funded them going back
Speaker 2: to the muja Hadeen in Afghanistan, using them against Russia.
Speaker 2: Then they became al Qaeda and isis al Nusra all
Speaker 2: these other things. I mean, if we created and funded
Speaker 2: these guys, isn't it still something of a false flag attack?
Speaker 2: And then we give them the opportunity, right like unleashing
Speaker 2: a bunch of cobras into somebody's house, if that is
Speaker 2: in fact true. But that is the narrative that they're
Speaker 2: pushing out here. They're trying to prepare the public for
Speaker 2: violence so they can prepare the public for lockdown. And
Speaker 2: I think that's what's coming. You know, Trump is their guy,
Speaker 2: he's mister lockdown. Maga is begging for authoritarian solutions to
Speaker 2: the border and other things. And so to tell them
Speaker 2: that there's a fifth column inside, Oh, they're ready, They're ready,
Speaker 2: and they're going to be cheering all kinds of measures
Speaker 2: at the border, not just the physical wall, but of
Speaker 2: course the electronic and biometric surveillance and drones and this
Speaker 2: and that. Andrewill the company that is focusing on that,
Speaker 2: another Peter tele company, but that one's got Lucky Palmer
Speaker 2: is the head of that one. But you know, venture
Speaker 2: capitaling from venture capital from Peter Teel. But this is
Speaker 2: a fascinating backstory, and again I would take it with
Speaker 2: a grain of salt considering who these guys are. And
Speaker 2: I'll give you more information on who they are as
Speaker 2: we talk about what they have to say. But here
Speaker 2: is the story about gravitic propulsion and all the rest
Speaker 2: of this stuff and the drones. And this is supposedly
Speaker 2: the manifesto of Matt Livelsburger.
Speaker 8: Do you want to read the email?
Speaker 2: Yep.
Speaker 10: So this email came in on December thirty first, at ten.
Speaker 8: Am, that is Tuesday.
Speaker 10: He said, In case I do not make it to
Speaker 10: my decision point or onto the Mexico border, I am
Speaker 10: sending this now. Please do not release this until one January.
Speaker 10: My identity private until then. First off, I am not
Speaker 10: under duress or hostile influence or control. My first car
Speaker 10: was a two thousand and six black Ford Mustang V six.
Speaker 10: For verification what we have been seeing with drones, he
Speaker 10: puts that in quotes. He says, drones is the operational
Speaker 10: use of gravitic propulsion systems powered aircraft by most recently
Speaker 10: China in the East Coast, but throughout history of the US,
Speaker 10: only we in China have this capability. Our OPSIN that's
Speaker 10: operation center, our OPSEN location for this activity, and it
Speaker 10: is in the box below. China has been launching them
Speaker 10: from the Atlantic from submarines for years, but this activity
Speaker 10: recently is picked up.
Speaker 8: As of now.
Speaker 10: It is just a show of force and they are
Speaker 10: using it similar to how they use the balloon for
Speaker 10: SIG and ISR, which are also part of the integrated
Speaker 10: comm system. There are dozens of those balloons in the
Speaker 10: air at any given time.
Speaker 8: The so what is because of the speed and stealth.
Speaker 10: Of these unmanned aircraft, they are the most dangerous threat
Speaker 10: to national security that has ever existed. They basically have
Speaker 10: an unlimited payload capacity and can park it over the
Speaker 10: White House if they wanted.
Speaker 8: It's checkmate.
Speaker 10: US government needs to give the history of this, how
Speaker 10: we are employing it and weaponizing it. How China is
Speaker 10: employing them and what they and what the way forward is.
Speaker 10: China is poised to attack anywhere in the East Coast.
Speaker 10: I've been followed for over a week now from likely
Speaker 10: Homeland or FBI, and they are looking to move on
Speaker 10: me and are unlikely going to let me cross into Mexico,
Speaker 10: but won't because they know I am armed and I
Speaker 10: have a massive VBID. We pause right there for a second,
Speaker 10: so he says, a massive vbid. When I was talking
Speaker 10: to the FBI yesterday, they didn't know what a v
Speaker 10: BID was. I had to explain what that acronym met
Speaker 10: you fucking s that's serious. I said it twice, and
Speaker 10: he goes, you said that word vbid. Can you tell
Speaker 10: me what that is for your audience? A v bid
Speaker 10: for your audience who has not been in the GUA
Speaker 10: for the last twenty years. A v BID is a
Speaker 10: vehicle born improvised explosive device in Layman's terms, a car
Speaker 10: bomb what we saw at Trump Tower. So backing up,
Speaker 10: he says, I am armed and have a massive VBID.
Speaker 10: I've been trying to maintain a very visible profile and
Speaker 10: have kept my phone and they are definitely digitally tracking me.
Speaker 10: Here's where he gets into the other stuff, and this
Speaker 10: is where we had to redact the names.
Speaker 8: Well, your producer redacted the names.
Speaker 10: I have knowledge of this program and also war crimes
Speaker 10: that were covered up during air strikes and nimerous Province
Speaker 10: Afghanistan in twenty nineteen by the Admin, DoD, DEA and CIA.
Speaker 10: I conducted targeting for these strikes. Of over one hundred
Speaker 10: and twenty five buildings, sixty five were struck because of
Speaker 10: civcast that's civilian casualties that killed hundreds of civilians in
Speaker 10: a single day. US Foura continued strikes after spotting civilians
Speaker 10: on initial ISR. It was supposed to take six minutes
Speaker 10: and scramble all aircraft in syncome. The UN basically called
Speaker 10: these war crimes, but the administration made them disappear.
Speaker 8: I was part of that cover up with US.
Speaker 10: Four an agent redacted of the DEA, So I don't
Speaker 10: know if my abduction attempt is related to either. I
Speaker 10: worked with redacted. Iowe staff on this as well as
Speaker 10: the response to Bala Murgab redacted commander at the time
Speaker 10: redacted can validate this. You need to elevate this to
Speaker 10: the media, so we avoid a world war because this
Speaker 10: is a mutually assured destruction situation.
Speaker 8: And he says, for.
Speaker 10: Vetting, my LinkedIn is Matt Berg or Matthew Livelsberger, an
Speaker 10: active duty eighteen ZULU out of one to ten, that's
Speaker 10: first Battalion, ten.
Speaker 8: Special Forces Group. My profile is public.
Speaker 10: I have an active TSSCI with UAP USAP access.
Speaker 8: What is USAP, I know what that is.
Speaker 10: I don't know what that is, but I checked his
Speaker 10: credentials on LinkedIn, So that was the first thing I did.
Speaker 8: I went to his LinkedIn page.
Speaker 10: First thing I noticed was all of his BONA feeds
Speaker 10: were in place. He has all the UAS training from
Speaker 10: USASAC and everything else. And so I said, okay, at
Speaker 10: least the guy knows what he's talking about with drones.
Speaker 10: That was a very rough dig into the guy. Issue
Speaker 10: was I couldn't validate or verify any of this information,
Speaker 10: and I told him that, And how I responded to
Speaker 10: him was in a subsequent email I said, I said,
Speaker 10: this is obviously a very big deal, but I don't
Speaker 10: have anything to verify this information with. Talking about gravitic
Speaker 10: propulsion systems without evidence just makes me another UFO talking
Speaker 10: head like, I'm not going to go on my social
Speaker 10: media page and start talking about UFOs and anti gravity
Speaker 10: systems and I don't know what you're talking about. I
Speaker 10: can't And he said, can I get on Fox News
Speaker 10: Contact on Signal as well as Sean's show.
Speaker 8: Heg Seth would be good too. That was his last
Speaker 8: message to me.
Speaker 10: Wow, you know the thing is, what is a gravitic
Speaker 10: propulsion system?
Speaker 2: To be honest, Yeah, to be honest, we don't know
Speaker 2: what is it. You know, you look that up, that
Speaker 2: word up and actually grivitic means a pregnant woman. Uh,
Speaker 2: but it's actually with a D instead of a T.
Speaker 2: They're talking about gravity, of course, and we'll talk about
Speaker 2: the gravity of the situation when we return. I'll give
Speaker 2: you a little bit of time to let some of
Speaker 2: that stuff sink in, and then I'll tell you what
Speaker 2: I think when we come back after this short break.
Speaker 9: Liberty, it's your move And now the David Knight Show.
Speaker 2: Yeah, gravinity, gravitic, a pregnant woman, and this story is
Speaker 2: pregnant with possibilities and a very interesting narrative. But I
Speaker 2: agree with Jason says this whole thing was a BS
Speaker 2: to sell an invisible enemy. I think so too, and
Speaker 2: I'll tell you why. But you know, it is interesting
Speaker 2: when I looked it up, how that's anybody else used
Speaker 2: that term anywhere? Uh, gravitic with a T and no, no,
Speaker 2: not that I could find. That's when it directed me
Speaker 2: to that phrase for pregnant women, which I've never seen before,
Speaker 2: and it said, gravitic is somebody you know how many
Speaker 2: times a physician looks at how many times has a
Speaker 2: woman been pregnant? That's their gravitic number, and then their
Speaker 2: parody number is how many times has she had children?
Speaker 2: Maybe the pregnancy didn't go all the way through, and
Speaker 2: so there's two different numbers. How many times you have pregnant?
Speaker 2: Have been pregnant? How many times have you had children? Well,
Speaker 2: this whole thing may be a para D with a
Speaker 2: D look at it and not parody here. So what
Speaker 2: is the supposed motive of this screen beerer? I'm guessing
Speaker 2: as I look at it. You know, he seems to
Speaker 2: be stricken and remorseful about innocent lives that were lost
Speaker 2: in some kind of Afghanistan attack where hundreds of civilians
Speaker 2: were lost, and they said the UN declared that it
Speaker 2: was a war crime and that type of thing. He said,
Speaker 2: I was involved in that his conscience was bothering him.
Speaker 2: And yet when we look at this, did he kill
Speaker 2: somebody and put him in the or the people that
Speaker 2: were running this thing or whatever? I mean, we're supposed
Speaker 2: to believe because these guys the conclusion that they come
Speaker 2: to when they look at it, Yeah, they know, as
Speaker 2: everybody has said, this is just a fireworks display, and
Speaker 2: he could have done something very effective if he wanted to.
Speaker 2: And so they believe that he's still alive. So if
Speaker 2: they believe that he's still alive, none of this stuff
Speaker 2: would make any sense to them, would it. He's remorseful
Speaker 2: about the lives that he's taken, he said, and the
Speaker 2: comrades that he's lost, but he's going to use somebody
Speaker 2: else's and he's going to kill somebody else and put
Speaker 2: him in the truck and blow that up. So there's
Speaker 2: a couple of big issues with the story. Right away,
Speaker 2: some people looked at it and he said, well, here's
Speaker 2: my vehicle identification, and a lot of people looked it
Speaker 2: up and said why, I can't find any record that
Speaker 2: he owned a car like that, And so he thought, well,
Speaker 2: maybe he said it was his first car. Well, so
Speaker 2: maybe it was a registered in his parents' name, so
Speaker 2: they looked that up. They didn't find it there either.
Speaker 2: Other people said looking at his background, his assignments would
Speaker 2: not have covered any of this stuff with drones and
Speaker 2: things like that. So who knows. I mean, when I
Speaker 2: first saw it, I thought, well, if this guy was
Speaker 2: being set up, maybe it was because he had seen
Speaker 2: it had been in Ukraine. Maybe he saw some really
Speaker 2: corrupt stuff there. They need to have a Hillary suicide
Speaker 2: with this guy or something. But who knows what is
Speaker 2: going on with this? We still don't know, and I
Speaker 2: still don't believe what these people are saying. So what
Speaker 2: is their motive? Well, again, notice that China is the enemy.
Speaker 2: China is an existential threat. China has an anti gravity machine,
Speaker 2: which we also have. How did we get that? I
Speaker 2: don't know, because we don't have any hypersonic missiles. I mean,
Speaker 2: you know, we're falling behind the Chinese and the Russians,
Speaker 2: and the Russians are left out of this thing. Interesting,
Speaker 2: isn't that? I Mean, wouldn't you think that if the
Speaker 2: Chinese have got it and America's got it? When you
Speaker 2: think Russia would have it as well, because Russia and
Speaker 2: China have got hypersonic missiles and we don't have hypersonic missiles. Nevertheless,
Speaker 2: you know, the Russians fell behind in this, but we're ahead.
Speaker 2: But he says, because it's an anti gravity machine, it's
Speaker 2: unlimited payload, and so you can park these things over
Speaker 2: the White House if you want as much stuff as
Speaker 2: you want, you can park it right over that. And
Speaker 2: so we're supposed to believe then that part of this
Speaker 2: motive was for a Matt Lovelburger to try to stop
Speaker 2: this war with China. Or was Matt Lovelburger an actor
Speaker 2: who was laying the groundwork for this, whereas he being
Speaker 2: used as a patsy. Maybe they killed him. I'm still
Speaker 2: not convinced that that's him in the in the truck,
Speaker 2: especially when we look at the whole fifty cow desert
Speaker 2: storm pistol. You know, we've got video of the truck
Speaker 2: exploding and there is no video showing and you can
Speaker 2: clearly see an explosion inside the cab as well as
Speaker 2: in the back, and you can see someone setting up
Speaker 2: in the cab. And as people have said, well if
Speaker 2: he'd shot his head, you know, shot himself in the
Speaker 2: head prior to setting that off, then he wouldn't be
Speaker 2: setting up. And as a matter of fact, you had
Speaker 2: a lot of people who were close by. Nobody saw anything,
Speaker 2: nobody heard anything. They've got surveillance footage of the cab.
Speaker 2: And if they'd had a preliminary explosion and he had
Speaker 2: this thing on a timer or something, then you would
Speaker 2: have seen an explosion inside the cab, probably blown out
Speaker 2: the window because the cyber truck windows are not bulletproof.
Speaker 2: Remember Elon must said that was true, but it's not.
Speaker 2: You know, he demonstrated that in the demo, and then
Speaker 2: other people tested them as well. Perhaps the doors will
Speaker 2: stop a bullet, but not the windows, and so you
Speaker 2: would have seen that explosion inside the cab. So obviously
Speaker 2: he did not shoot himself in the head. Maybe he
Speaker 2: shot himself in the head after he blew himself up
Speaker 2: and burned beyond recognition, the kind of thing that they
Speaker 2: would sell us for the Clinton's benefit. But again, you know,
Speaker 2: what do we know about this guy? Well, we know
Speaker 2: what do we know about Trump? Right? We know that
Speaker 2: Trump is the lockdown king. I called the lockdowns from
Speaker 2: the very beginning. I called them medical martial law. Wouldn't
Speaker 2: Trump be the very guy that the establishment would select
Speaker 2: to take over the reins again from Biden, so that
Speaker 2: he could push through a police state and martial law.
Speaker 2: And as you put Biden in, and he creates all
Speaker 2: of this deliberate chaos at the border to get everybody
Speaker 2: so upset, you've got MAGA begging for id begging for
Speaker 2: more surveillance, begging for locking thing down. So what I
Speaker 2: think this is about a couple of things domestically as
Speaker 2: well as foreign. Domestically, again, the obvious thing is the border,
Speaker 2: but also it's not just the wall. It's now the
Speaker 2: big tech surveillance of biometric surveillance and monitoring systems. It's Andrewill,
Speaker 2: Lucky Palmer, Peter Thiel, these other people. MAGA wants this,
Speaker 2: and of course Trump and his authoritarian lockdown instincts will
Speaker 2: be key. Remember Tucker Carlson, he said, Oh, Daddy's coming back,
Speaker 2: and Daddy's really mad. Right, that's what they've set up
Speaker 2: with this stuff. Trump's gonna save America by turning it
Speaker 2: into a lockdown police state. Number two, more surveillance, to
Speaker 2: shred any remnant of the Fourth Amendment that still survives
Speaker 2: in America. Also again as I said, digital biometric ID
Speaker 2: and also pre crime anticipatory intelligence. This is why they
Speaker 2: are rolling out these AI centers everywhere. They are going
Speaker 2: to give them first priority on energy. The rest of
Speaker 2: us will get whatever we can scrape off of the
Speaker 2: grid with solar power and with windmill power that is
Speaker 2: going to be intermittent, but they will get power, even
Speaker 2: if they've got to build fossil fuel plants, and that's
Speaker 2: what they're talking about. Well, we're going to put up
Speaker 2: some natural gas plants. Like I don't have a problem
Speaker 2: with fossil fuel, But they just throw that lie right
Speaker 2: out the window when it comes to something that they're
Speaker 2: really serious about. You know, we're all going to die
Speaker 2: from Mammy climate change. Except the elites can go whoever
Speaker 2: they want in their private jets. Except the military can
Speaker 2: continue to have as many and as large awards as
Speaker 2: they wish with rockets and tanks and planes and explosions
Speaker 2: and bombs. That's not going to to release any gases
Speaker 2: that are going to cause global warming. No, and artificial
Speaker 2: intelligence centers can grow as fast as they want and
Speaker 2: use more energy than small cities, and that's not a problem.
Speaker 2: And we don't even have to wait for nuclear power plants.
Speaker 2: We'll do it with natural gas, maybe even coal if
Speaker 2: they need to. Because the key thing is that they've
Speaker 2: got to monitor us anticipatory intelligence, and of course you
Speaker 2: probably might have some things like gun control and car
Speaker 2: control come into this. Elon Musk is adamant that we're
Speaker 2: not going to be able to control our cars. They
Speaker 2: will control our cars, cars that you drive yourself. That's
Speaker 2: what automobile used to mean. Now these are going to
Speaker 2: all be remote controlled and controlled by Musk. So all
Speaker 2: of these things are part of their agenda that could
Speaker 2: come in and just be aware of that, and don't
Speaker 2: you know, we need to push back on this narrative
Speaker 2: because this is a narrative that is building fear so
Speaker 2: they can sell whatever the next mcguffin is, it's going
Speaker 2: to be the thing that is going to be, you
Speaker 2: know that they have to do because of what they
Speaker 2: have told you that you're got to be afraid of.
Speaker 2: And then when we look foreign, okay, we look foreign.
Speaker 2: The one situation the guy who has been radicalized by Islam,
Speaker 2: who went to Egypt, and I think that's a real
Speaker 2: thing that is out there. And of course they have
Speaker 2: deliberately escalated that and country after country, you look at
Speaker 2: what is happening throughout Europe, and maybe this is just
Speaker 2: the beginning of that type of thing. So that's going
Speaker 2: to be used by Trump perhaps to escalate more wars
Speaker 2: in the Middle East, even as we are the ones
Speaker 2: who are providing the A ten coverage for these people
Speaker 2: taking over Syria. That was obviously our war. They were
Speaker 2: our surrogates. We gave them air cover. I don't I
Speaker 2: don't think that we trained any Al Qaeda pilots on
Speaker 2: A ten and given it to them, but yeah, they
Speaker 2: were using it in Syria. And then of course the
Speaker 2: war with China, which will be at the very least
Speaker 2: a cold war, and we hope that it is limited
Speaker 2: to that. And so you have in terms of the
Speaker 2: questions about his car, I've only seen one person claim
Speaker 2: that they have verified that that really was his car,
Speaker 2: and that was Laura Lumer. I'm sorry, Laura, if you've
Speaker 2: been taken in by Donald Trump, you don't have any
Speaker 2: credibility with me whatsoever. She says. I can confirm that
Speaker 2: the cyber truck bombers claim and his manifesto about having
Speaker 2: a Ford Mustang, which he shipped from Germany last year.
Speaker 2: I've obtained a copy of the port shipment from a source.
Speaker 2: Matthew had the car shipped from Germany to Galveston, Texas. Now,
Speaker 2: he said in his manifesto that he says, my first
Speaker 2: car was a two thousand and six black Ford Mustang
Speaker 2: V six for verification. Okay, so we're supposed to believe
Speaker 2: that he's had he still got his very first car
Speaker 2: that he got twenty years ago. And sorry, I'm not
Speaker 2: buying it. I'm really not buying it. The Las Vegas
Speaker 2: bomber left a manifesto about these coast terms. Here. There's
Speaker 2: another problem with this story, the manifesto. Consider this, and
Speaker 2: I've talked about how the FBI fought the release of
Speaker 2: the Tranny Killers manifesto in the Nashville Christian School shooting.
Speaker 2: Remember that, Well, they fought that tooth and nail, And
Speaker 2: yet when they want you to see, the manifesto just
Speaker 2: immmediately appears. And he said, well, yeah, but he sent
Speaker 2: this stuff to the guy before the attack even occurred.
Speaker 2: He sent that out to him. Well, as part of
Speaker 2: their story they talk about it. You've got Sean, the
Speaker 2: other guy that was doing the talking, who got the email.
Speaker 2: His name is Sam Shoemate and he was also an
Speaker 2: intelligence officer. And then Sean Ryan is the former Navy
Speaker 2: seal and CIA CIA and so as Sean Ryan, the
Speaker 2: guy who has the podcast and is the former CIA
Speaker 2: guy and who also hosted Sarah Adams. He said, I
Speaker 2: got a call from a guy who used to be
Speaker 2: my producer and he hasn't been my producer for years,
Speaker 2: and he was contacted by the FBI and they told
Speaker 2: him that they did not want some names put out,
Speaker 2: they wanted some names redacted. Now think about that. First
Speaker 2: of all, the FBI is following this so closely that
Speaker 2: they know he's got it. And that's the other guy too.
Speaker 2: Sam Schuemate said, well, I've been getting stuff from them
Speaker 2: as well. You know, now they're following us and all
Speaker 2: the rest of stuff. So they're following them. They're aware
Speaker 2: of this email, they're aware of the manifest manifesto, and
Speaker 2: they're fine with it going out, even though the core
Speaker 2: of what he's supposedly warning us about anti gravity drones
Speaker 2: from China and World War three and mutually assured destruction
Speaker 2: and all the rest of the core of that which
Speaker 2: is supposed to be so secret the whole purpose of
Speaker 2: this fireworks display in front of the Trump Tower. That's okay,
Speaker 2: just don't put a coup of these names out. And
Speaker 2: you heard him as he read that, so and so redacted,
Speaker 2: so and so redacted. And I find that to be suspicious,
Speaker 2: don't you. The FBI was fine with this out there.
Speaker 2: Las Vegas bomber left a manifesto about the East Coast drones,
Speaker 2: and the FBI believes that it's real. That's the headline
Speaker 2: from W and D they and I think it's also
Speaker 2: the headline from Gateway Pundit. So they're buying into this,
Speaker 2: I guess. But if they believe that it's real, and
Speaker 2: they believe that all of this information about the US
Speaker 2: having anti gravity drones and China's got anti gravity drones
Speaker 2: and all this stuff that everybody is seeing in New
Speaker 2: Jersey is all the Chinese and their anti gravity drones,
Speaker 2: and the Pentagon and the White House and all of
Speaker 2: government where you're talking about the FAA and all the rest,
Speaker 2: that they're all conspiring together to lie to you about
Speaker 2: what that really is. But then the FBI thinks it's real.
Speaker 2: The FBI was lying to us as well. Then, because
Speaker 2: the FBI would also know this is Chinese anti gravity stuff.
Speaker 2: So every from the FBI, the FAA, the White House, Pentagon,
Speaker 2: all of them, and all the state officials, they're all
Speaker 2: lying to us, and yet the FBI is fine with that,
Speaker 2: just redact a couple of names. Sam Shuemate said, I
Speaker 2: knew taking this public would insert me into the glory
Speaker 2: boy conspiracy cycle, especially since I'm an intelligence officer. You bet, Sam,
Speaker 2: I don't trust you at all. I don't trust anybody
Speaker 2: that comes up with uh. Look, and of course he
Speaker 2: walks it back too. This is another thing. As I said,
Speaker 2: you know this has echoes of January the sixth and
Speaker 2: stop the Steel right there. You know this whole thing
Speaker 2: is January the six and Stop the Steel. How did
Speaker 2: that get kicked off by a former intelligence guy, Steve
Speaker 2: pa Chennik, who goes on with Alex Jones and actually
Speaker 2: with Owen who bought it hook line and Sinker, And
Speaker 2: then later Alex has him on over and over and
Speaker 2: over again. And I also go, oh, I don't know,
Speaker 2: it just seems really crazy, really strange, ha huh. But
Speaker 2: he puts it out there. These guys are doing the
Speaker 2: Alex Jones bit. Okay, it's like a tag team thing.
Speaker 2: If you look at this, so he and what is
Speaker 2: he talking about with a gloe boy? I had to
Speaker 2: look that up. That is from video games. Apparently, that term,
Speaker 2: which is part of the Urban dictionary, that comes from
Speaker 2: a couple of games called call of Duty in Fortnite
Speaker 2: two big games. Of course, call of Duty is about
Speaker 2: military stuff. So I imagine he's familiar with all this stuff.
Speaker 2: But a gloy boy is well in those games, if
Speaker 2: there are boxes that have loot in them, they're gluing
Speaker 2: and different colors and intensity and stuff like that to
Speaker 2: give you some idea the loot that's in it that
Speaker 2: you can get as a reward as you're playing the game.
Speaker 2: And so what he says, it's going to make me
Speaker 2: a gloy boy to the conspiracy cycle. In other words,
Speaker 2: people like me are going to criticize him or this nonsense.
Speaker 2: It's absolute nonsense, especially because you're an intelligence officer and
Speaker 2: everything is about secrets and lies, and I don't trust
Speaker 2: any of you guys, and nobody should trust anything that
Speaker 2: these intel officers tell people. Nobody. They're all lying to
Speaker 2: you all the time. Everything they do is secret, and
Speaker 2: everything they do is for their benefit. And to sell
Speaker 2: government agendas. It's just that simple, he said. I had
Speaker 2: no choice. The dude dumped it in my inbox, and
Speaker 2: when I saw the name of the news, I had
Speaker 2: little choice but to hand it over to the FEDS.
Speaker 2: I knew the FBI wouldn't release it, or at least
Speaker 2: without an agenda attached. So I took it to Sean
Speaker 2: Ryan because he has the platform to handle the magnitude
Speaker 2: of this information and will do so as objectively as possible.
Speaker 2: Wait a minute, the FBI contacted. The FBI is not
Speaker 2: going to release this stuff, but the FBI knows that
Speaker 2: had exist without him content. They were kind of spooked
Speaker 2: about that. These two spooks were spooked. They said, wait
Speaker 2: a minute, the FBI knows, and the FBI is out
Speaker 2: there contacting my former producer even and telling them we've
Speaker 2: got to redact some names. That's all they were concerned about. Well,
Speaker 2: that's all they were concerned about. Why wouldn't the FBI
Speaker 2: release it? None of this holds up, None of it
Speaker 2: holds up. Just details like that. Folks. Look, we can't
Speaker 2: verify or deny that there's Andy gravity stuff out there.
Speaker 2: Who knows what they've got. We always underestimate how evil
Speaker 2: these people are, and we always underestimate how how much
Speaker 2: technology they've got. But here's the thing, this story just
Speaker 2: doesn't add up that the FBI would you know, be treating,
Speaker 2: you know, intimidating these guys, following these guys, but let
Speaker 2: it be put out, they wouldn't let that happen. Even
Speaker 2: after in Nashville, for example, you had a police officer
Speaker 2: who leaked the manifesto of the t Any Killer to
Speaker 2: the Nashville Star, a conservative independent paper that does real journalism,
Speaker 2: and they'd been involved in a lawsuit to get that released,
Speaker 2: and there was a stonewalling coming from the FBI and
Speaker 2: from the local police department, and so somebody supposedly in
Speaker 2: the local police department gave that to the Nashville Star
Speaker 2: and they published it. Because again it's very much like
Speaker 2: the Pentagon papers, you know, the Pentagon papers. What the
Speaker 2: Supreme Court found was that a Washington Post in New
Speaker 2: York Times were not liable for publishing those classified documents. Supposedly,
Speaker 2: who knows if they wanted us to have that information
Speaker 2: or if it really was stolen by Daniel Elsberg. I mean,
Speaker 2: that's another whole story there. But regardless, the finding by
Speaker 2: the Supreme Court was that if these reporters did not
Speaker 2: participate in the theft of those documents, then only Daniel
Speaker 2: Ellsberg was responsible before that, and they found a way
Speaker 2: to get him off on a technicality, which casts questions
Speaker 2: about whether they wanted that information released or not. But
Speaker 2: the bottom line is that in the case with Nashville,
Speaker 2: if a police officer leaked that, then they would have
Speaker 2: charges that they could bring, presumably against the police officer,
Speaker 2: but they couldn't do anything to the paper for publishing
Speaker 2: what was handed to them. According to Shoemate, the guy
Speaker 2: who said he got the email, he said he informed
Speaker 2: the FBI and the release said I told them I
Speaker 2: was taking it to the show. I'm a private citizen.
Speaker 2: They immediately contacted Army CID, who took it up the chain.
Speaker 2: Big Army contacted Sean Ryan last night along with a
Speaker 2: bunch of other folks requesting names to be redacted. He
Speaker 2: had no idea how they knew until I told him
Speaker 2: this morning that I told the FBI was going on
Speaker 2: his show. It's all addressed in the show and the
Speaker 2: releases when it releases, he says. So again, they could
Speaker 2: have stopped this stuff if they wanted to, but they
Speaker 2: wanted that stuff out. The email contained ominous statements about
Speaker 2: imminent danger, references to advanced military technology, allegations of government
Speaker 2: cover ups related to war crimes, you see. And there
Speaker 2: was again that allegation about the war crimes. That was
Speaker 2: something that was public knowledge and so it could be
Speaker 2: verified by people. Look, they will always add truth to
Speaker 2: a con job, because you've got to have that in
Speaker 2: order to get people's confidence, you've got to have some
Speaker 2: truth in there. So the gravitic propulsion system refers to
Speaker 2: the hypothetical propulsion technology they would use the force of
Speaker 2: gravity to propel a spacecraft or vehicle, essentially manipulating gravitational
Speaker 2: feels to achieve movement without the need of traditional propellant. Again,
Speaker 2: we don't know if any of this stuff exists. Maybe
Speaker 2: he linked to them some kind of a warp speed
Speaker 2: engine or a hyperspace engine too. I mean, it could
Speaker 2: be anything, right, what don't call it those, you know,
Speaker 2: because then people would know you're pulling their leg just
Speaker 2: like you don't want to talk about UFOs anymore. You
Speaker 2: want to talk about UAPs now, So we wouldn't call
Speaker 2: this a hyperspace engine or a warp speed engine. We
Speaker 2: would just call it a gravidic engine, he said. I
Speaker 2: went to his LinkedIn pace. First thing I noticed, with
Speaker 2: all of his bony feet DA's were in place. I said, Okay,
Speaker 2: at least the guy who knows what he's talking about. Well,
Speaker 2: some other people have question whether or not his background
Speaker 2: would have gotten him involved with drums. But of course
Speaker 2: even if it didn't, theoretically somebody could have given him
Speaker 2: this information. But here's the part that I thought was
Speaker 2: really interesting. The way they put this stuff out. As
Speaker 2: I said before, it kind of sounds a like what
Speaker 2: Steve Pachennick and Alex Jones are doing. He says, my
Speaker 2: issue was that I couldn't validate or verify any of
Speaker 2: this information. But this is obviously a very big deal,
Speaker 2: so I don't have anything to verify this information with.
Speaker 2: But I don't have anything to verify the information with. See,
Speaker 2: that was the same thing that happened with Steve Achennick.
Speaker 2: Steve p Chennick goes on two days after the election.
Speaker 2: Then he says, we've got blockchain watermark ballots here, and
Speaker 2: we know that they cheated, and we now know because
Speaker 2: we watermarked these ballots. Somehow, even though the ballots are
Speaker 2: printed up by individual states, he was claiming that they
Speaker 2: were printed up by the White House, by SISSA. That's
Speaker 2: what he said, even though it didn't take long for
Speaker 2: the director of SISSA to come out and pour cold
Speaker 2: water on Trump's claims and all the rest of the stuff,
Speaker 2: showing that he was not on Trump's side. But he said,
Speaker 2: we got these blockchain water. It's just a whole string
Speaker 2: of meaningless and unproven allegations and jargon just like this, right,
Speaker 2: just like this. And he's furthermore said, we got twenty
Speaker 2: thousand National Guard out there right now and they're arresting people.
Speaker 2: That's what kicked off folks to stop the steal stuff,
Speaker 2: which eventually led to January the sixth, And that was
Speaker 2: five years ago, and it was the same type of thing. Well,
Speaker 2: I don't know, I can't verify this up, but come
Speaker 2: on again, come on again, and let's do this again,
Speaker 2: and we'll keep pushing it and pushing it each time.
Speaker 2: Talking about gravitic propulsion systems with evidence just makes me
Speaker 2: another UFO talking head. So he distances himself from this,
Speaker 2: just like aj you know, just like Alex shows to do.
Speaker 2: He'd say, well, I don't know. That sounds pretty crazy, Steve,
Speaker 2: but you know, hey, you know, laugh about it and
Speaker 2: come on, if this is all true, I'll give you
Speaker 2: David Night's old job. That type of thay. You actually
Speaker 2: said that you can have my job, Steve, I don't
Speaker 2: want it. If I wanted it, I would allied to keep.
Speaker 2: I didn't want it to lie to keep anyway. So
Speaker 2: he's wanting to get on Fox News and Sean Hendy.
Speaker 2: You know, it's a great story. Sehan Handy probably could
Speaker 2: put it on, and he could stay at arm's length,
Speaker 2: just like Alex Jones did and milk this thing for
Speaker 2: an audience. You'd get a big audience with that. Who knows.
Speaker 2: I haven't seen that happen yet. One particularly alarming detail
Speaker 2: in the email was Lowell's Burger. Lowells Burger's statement that
Speaker 2: he's being monitored by the FBI and by Homeland Security,
Speaker 2: but claimed that he was armed with a massive vbad
Speaker 2: I had no intention of surrendering quietly. Well, again, you
Speaker 2: take all of that stuff at face value. Part of
Speaker 2: what he said in the manifesto war crimes that were
Speaker 2: covered up during airstrikes and nimru's province Afghanistan in twenty
Speaker 2: nineteen by the administration, that'd be Trump. Wait a minute,
Speaker 2: it's covered up by the Trump administration. But you are
Speaker 2: a big Trump supporter here. Covered up by the administration,
Speaker 2: by the DoD, by the DEA, by thee CIA. Look, folks,
Speaker 2: those are all organizations that were under the president and
Speaker 2: who was the president in twenty nineteen. The UN basically
Speaker 2: called these war crimes with the administration, the Trump administration
Speaker 2: made them disappear. But this guy's not anti Trump, he's
Speaker 2: pro Trump. He's MAGA all the way. I was part
Speaker 2: of that cover up, he said with US Forum and
Speaker 2: agent redacted of the DEA. So I don't know if
Speaker 2: my abduction attempt is related to either. Now, one thing
Speaker 2: that's true there. We know DEA very heavily involved in
Speaker 2: Afghanistan because that's where they are manufacturing the drugs distribute
Speaker 2: the CIA, the DEA. You know, when we went in
Speaker 2: Afghanistan and the Taliban had nearly killed the opium trade there,
Speaker 2: and then after America went in as we had the
Speaker 2: soldiers guarding the poppy feels for them. Heraldo Rivero reported
Speaker 2: that and everything. But we had them guarding the poppy
Speaker 2: feels and they kept setting new records, and they went
Speaker 2: from like ten percent of the world's opium supplies raw
Speaker 2: materials to over ninety percent new records every year. And
Speaker 2: so that was the dea, that was the CIA that
Speaker 2: was operating there. Following the interview Sean Ryan, again the
Speaker 2: guy whose podcasts was who used to work for the CIA, said,
Speaker 2: my family and I are disappearing for a few days.
Speaker 2: My account will be active, but it will not be
Speaker 2: me behind the wheel. What we're about to release is
Speaker 2: mind boggling or raise a lot of questions, and all
Speaker 2: media requests need to go to my producer. I'm exposing
Speaker 2: a lot for the interest of the public, and it
Speaker 2: comes with the price, and I'll take all the prayers
Speaker 2: I can get, he said. And remember that when he's
Speaker 2: talking about this, he says, you know, I don't have
Speaker 2: any way that I can verify all this stuff, but
Speaker 2: I've just got to get this stuff out. Very much
Speaker 2: like what Steve Pritinnak was saying. You know what I
Speaker 2: talked to these people. They gave me permission, you know,
Speaker 2: but I don't work for them anymore, but they gave
Speaker 2: me permission. This guy's basically doing the same thing I
Speaker 2: don't work for these people. But you know this is
Speaker 2: vetted by the Army c I D, which is like
Speaker 2: their FBI equivalent. I was vetted by them, and they
Speaker 2: said I could go ahead and release it, but you
Speaker 2: know I don't work for that. The same stuff, same stuff.
Speaker 2: This episode takes a deep dive into the manifesto, an
Speaker 2: email sent to this other guy there by Matt himself. Again,
Speaker 2: they're okay with everything that goes on there, all the
Speaker 2: key stuff. They also wrote that found some more stuff
Speaker 2: the FBI released immediately, again not holding any of this
Speaker 2: stuff back. Are they not afraid that this manifesto is
Speaker 2: going to radicalize other Green berets or Army veterans or
Speaker 2: something like that. I mean, wasn't that supposed to be
Speaker 2: the excuse for keeping the Tranny Killer's manifesto quiet. Well,
Speaker 2: we don't want other people to get any ideas. But
Speaker 2: they put this guy's stuff out. And so the other
Speaker 2: thing that they're putting out is, remember we said that
Speaker 2: his you saw the picture of his partially burned ID,
Speaker 2: even though the body's burned beyond recognition, and evidently there's
Speaker 2: got to be basically no head left if somebody is
Speaker 2: holding a fifty cow desert storm pistol right next to
Speaker 2: their head and blowing it all. But the body's burned
Speaker 2: beyond recognition. But his ID, his cell phone, and his
Speaker 2: credit card are there, and so they now are getting
Speaker 2: notes off of the cell phone, Notes that he was
Speaker 2: leaving about all of this stuff, Notes that he left
Speaker 2: on his cell phone that didn't burn, that he needed
Speaker 2: to quote cleanse his mind of the brothers I've lost,
Speaker 2: and relieve myself with the burdens and the lives that
Speaker 2: I've taken again. This is as as crazy as it gets, says.
Speaker 2: This is not a terrorist attack. He says on his
Speaker 2: cell phone, which survived the fire. It was a wake
Speaker 2: up call. What better way to get my point across
Speaker 2: than a stunt with fireworks and explosives, Except somehow it
Speaker 2: all went bad with Green Bray. You know, he winds
Speaker 2: up burning himself up and committing suicide. He said in
Speaker 2: one letter that the US was termally ill and headed
Speaker 2: toward collapse. Well that's why we need Daddy to come back.
Speaker 2: You know, Big Daddy's got to come back, and he's
Speaker 2: got to give us a spanking like he did five
Speaker 2: years ago. Tesla engineers and whole help to extract data
Speaker 2: from the cyber truck. We still have a large volume
Speaker 2: of data to go through. There are thousands, if not
Speaker 2: millions of videos and photos and documents and web history
Speaker 2: and all of those things that need to be analyzed.
Speaker 2: Think about the massive amount of data the Tesla is
Speaker 2: keeping on you if you have one of these things.
Speaker 2: This guy had the thing for three days, four days,
Speaker 2: three or four days, and they've got thousands or millions
Speaker 2: of videos and photos, web history documents just in those
Speaker 2: three or four days that he had it. Yeah, probably do.
Speaker 2: And again this is another part of the They should
Speaker 2: be able to have pictures of whether that was him
Speaker 2: in the car. Don't you think Elon must said all
Speaker 2: telemetry was normal, There wasn't anything going on with the
Speaker 2: battery or any of that kind of stuff. Elemetry was normal.
Speaker 2: So you must have pictures of who was setting behind
Speaker 2: the wheel, wouldn't you think? Not just what is happening
Speaker 2: at the charging stations. Anyway, I think that, as I
Speaker 2: said before, I think that this is all going to
Speaker 2: be used to push part of Elon Musk's agenda to
Speaker 2: make sure that we are not able are allowed to
Speaker 2: drive our cars. So again more questions raised than answered.
Speaker 2: Although this incident is more public and more sensational than usual,
Speaker 2: said the FBI Special Agent in charge. He said, it
Speaker 2: ultimately appears to be a tragic case of suicide involving
Speaker 2: a heavily decorated combat veteran who was struggling with PTSD
Speaker 2: and other issues, and from all indications, the only indication
Speaker 2: that he was suffering from PTSD was the notes that
Speaker 2: were done in the last day. So to his ex girlfriend,
Speaker 2: saying that he was having difficulty sleeping. He opened up
Speaker 2: to her. Her name is Eric, she's thirty nine. He
Speaker 2: was dating her in twenty eighteen, so six years later
Speaker 2: he contacts her after he supposedly he's had a fight
Speaker 2: with his wife, who supposedly had a child out of woodlock. Well,
Speaker 2: I would have had a child out of the lock
Speaker 2: anyway because they weren't married, but with somebody else. But again,
Speaker 2: he was our girlfriend back in twenty eighteen. He complained
Speaker 2: about exhaustion and pain that kept him up at night,
Speaker 2: and of reliving violence from his deployment in Afghanistan. She
Speaker 2: said he told her, my life has been a personal
Speaker 2: health for the last year, and so now that is
Speaker 2: the story. That they're putting together here. So that is
Speaker 2: something that just happened in the last couple of days,
Speaker 2: and nobody around him, all the Green Berets that were
Speaker 2: around him, didn't notice anything unusual and all of that stuff. Now,
Speaker 2: the Associated Press explains to us what green berets do.
Speaker 2: The Associated Press Associated Propaganda the AP says, green Berets
Speaker 2: are highly trained US Army special forces who specialize in
Speaker 2: guerrilla warfare and unconventional fighting tactics. Well, if you remember
Speaker 2: when Admiral McRaven was in charge of Special Forces a
Speaker 2: few years ago, when jade Helm was going around, one
Speaker 2: of the things that McRaven had been saying was he said,
Speaker 2: you know, when you think about special forces, you got
Speaker 2: all these movies. It shows them jumping out of planes
Speaker 2: and fighting on the ground and all these kinetic things.
Speaker 2: Is what he called it, kinetic things. And he goes,
Speaker 2: but the real purpose of the Green Berets and others
Speaker 2: from the very inception was to identify who the enemy was.
Speaker 2: It was one of syops. He said. We need to
Speaker 2: get back to that. We need to deemphasize the kinetics stuff,
Speaker 2: and we need to make sure that our mission is syops. Well,
Speaker 2: the Associated Press doesn't say that about the Green Bereves.
Speaker 2: But the guy that they reported to said that about
Speaker 2: the Green bres He said that about a decade ago,
Speaker 2: when was jade elm twenty fifteen or something. But he
Speaker 2: said that, and he said, and this, I always thought
Speaker 2: that jade Helm was a syop, because he said, we
Speaker 2: want to be able to identify who was on our
Speaker 2: side and who was against us. And that is exactly
Speaker 2: what they did. You had, as they said, we're going
Speaker 2: to be doing these kinetic exercises and all this kind
Speaker 2: of stuff around Texas, and you had some sheriffs would
Speaker 2: come out and some mayors who would come out and say,
Speaker 2: not here, you're not And he said, that's what they
Speaker 2: were doing places like Vietnam or whatever, where they were
Speaker 2: anticipating that they're going to get involved in a war.
Speaker 2: They would identify who was on their side and who
Speaker 2: wasn't on their side. If possible, they would get the
Speaker 2: right people into office. If not, they would know who
Speaker 2: they had to go after first. And so the purpose
Speaker 2: of the Green Braze was and perhaps still is psyops.
Speaker 2: But now here's Elon Musk telling us autopilot will not
Speaker 2: function unless it detects an atentive person in the driver's seat,
Speaker 2: and we've all seen that he's lying. We have seen
Speaker 2: the videos that make the line of it, as Tesla
Speaker 2: says on their sight. Like other autopilot features, full self
Speaker 2: driving requires the driver pay attention to the road they're
Speaker 2: surrounding another road users. The cabin camera does not require
Speaker 2: full visibility of the driver's eyes in order to monitor attentiveness.
Speaker 2: It'll work, for example, if the driver is wearing sun glasses.
Speaker 2: If the cabin camera does not have clear visibility of
Speaker 2: the driver's head and arm locations. Full self driving periodically
Speaker 2: displays a message reminding the driver to apply slight force
Speaker 2: to the steering wheel. So it's looking at his face,
Speaker 2: his body, his hands. Can you tell me that that's
Speaker 2: not that telemetry is not being sent back to Elon Musk,
Speaker 2: So who is in the car? Was a person dead
Speaker 2: or alive that was in the car, And again, the
Speaker 2: self driving car could have been operating without anybody alive there.
Speaker 2: They can you can call it to come back from
Speaker 2: the parking space to come pick you up at a
Speaker 2: slow speed. It's supposed to do that without anybody driving it.
Speaker 2: That's the whole point so they're not telling you the
Speaker 2: full truth here, and some of the stuff that they're
Speaker 2: telling you is not true, and they've got video of
Speaker 2: whoever was setting in there. If the driver repeatedly ignores
Speaker 2: prompts to apply slight force to the steering wheel or
Speaker 2: to pay attention full self driving, displays a series of
Speaker 2: escalated warnings, and if those warnings are ignored, disables for
Speaker 2: the rest of the drive and displays a following message.
Speaker 2: So forth. Well, the conclusion from zero Hedge is, well,
Speaker 2: what's a parent from Tesla's description of how this works
Speaker 2: is that any scenario with Livelsburger shot in the head
Speaker 2: well before the bombing would be extraordinarily hard to trick
Speaker 2: the camera. Not true at all, Not true at all.
Speaker 2: Ex Users should call on Musk to release the cockpit
Speaker 2: camera footage. However, they said, that's right, you think you will.
Speaker 2: He's the hero of all this stuff now he knows
Speaker 2: what's going on. He saved Trump Tower. Jason Barker. There
Speaker 2: are two names in there they claim are redacted, but
Speaker 2: you can see them on the screen. Watch for something
Speaker 2: to happen to them. I didn't know that those names
Speaker 2: were visible, he says. That'll give them reason to CeNSE
Speaker 2: their podcasts in my opinion, Well, and we know that
Speaker 2: that is coming. You know, one of the reasons why,
Speaker 2: you know, the only podcast place that I'm not allowed
Speaker 2: on is the biggest one, Spotify. They're fine with Joe Rogan,
Speaker 2: they're fine with this, a Sean guy, whatever his name is,
Speaker 2: the CIA guy. They're fine with those guys. They're not
Speaker 2: fine with me. And they have a proprietary system that
Speaker 2: they want to sell to everybody. But of course it
Speaker 2: could be done by any other to go through the
Speaker 2: content of podcasts and to flag it in case you
Speaker 2: say something bad about Big Pharma, Fauci thutough reserve any
Speaker 2: of that kind of stuff, right, you get flagged and
Speaker 2: you're not allowed on. And they want to do that
Speaker 2: to everybody. So they got the mechanism to do it.
Speaker 2: They've already got the technology to do They're just looking
Speaker 2: for a reason. Guard Goldsmith good to see your Guard,
Speaker 2: a Liberty conspiracy and on in the evenings Monday through
Speaker 2: Friday on Rock Finn and on Twitter. He says this
Speaker 2: letter strains credulity. Ian Carol mentioned that the document they
Speaker 2: were reading supposedly was a received email, but it has
Speaker 2: editing prompts in it that one would don't only see
Speaker 2: during the composition. That's right. I forgot to mention that
Speaker 2: squiggly lines like right there when I got copied over,
Speaker 2: the end was missing from composition. And so the end
Speaker 2: of his little red squiggly line there, and that doesn't
Speaker 2: come across when the email is actually sent. That's another
Speaker 2: key thing, and I should have mentioned that to show
Speaker 2: that this is concocted. Spencer DeLong, thank you for the tip.
Speaker 2: He says, Has anybody come up with the idea of
Speaker 2: taping passports and government IDs to the ballards? Those are indestructible?
Speaker 2: You know the Richard Gage nine to eleven truth put
Speaker 2: up And I don't know if it was in response
Speaker 2: to this guy's passport being found, but he put up
Speaker 2: a It was about the same time the stuff happens.
Speaker 2: That might have gone up before or just after. But
Speaker 2: it's a picture of somebody wearing a vest that has
Speaker 2: sports stuck all over it because they don't burn. And
Speaker 2: as we know from nine to eleven, and as we
Speaker 2: know now from the cyber Trump Tower attack, I guess
Speaker 2: we could call it angry tiger, Oh former CIA. Everything
Speaker 2: he says is gospel loll and it's kind of all
Speaker 2: this military jargon in there too. You uhould be very impressed.
Speaker 2: They weren't a lot of trouble. We have absolutely no
Speaker 2: reason to question anything that he has to say. And
Speaker 2: I just I put that. When I saw it, I
Speaker 2: thought it was fascinating. All you know, it's a fascinating narrative.
Speaker 2: The CIA has always made scenarios available to Hollywood for free,
Speaker 2: and of course that's where you get a lot of
Speaker 2: this predictive programming. A lot of it comes somebody might
Speaker 2: just innocently look at the CIA stuff. They got writer's
Speaker 2: block or something. Maybe they go there for a scenario
Speaker 2: and then they work that into something and they will
Speaker 2: work with you to help to create a story. They're
Speaker 2: mass storytellers, psychopathic liars what they do. And so I
Speaker 2: thought it was really fascinating. As soon as I saw that,
Speaker 2: I was like, wow, that's got so much stuff, and
Speaker 2: that's a great story. Not that it's true, but I
Speaker 2: put it up and I said, so now we have
Speaker 2: a motive. But the question is whose motive? Is it
Speaker 2: Matt leve Old Burger or is it the motive of
Speaker 2: the CIA, the true government that is not going to
Speaker 2: change with the Trump administration, the government that is going
Speaker 2: to be using Trump. You talking about putting a dead
Speaker 2: guy and the driver's seat. That's what these presidents are,
Speaker 2: whether it's Biden or whether it's Trump. They're not in charge.
Speaker 2: Somebody else is driving the vehicle. And if we're not lucky,
Speaker 2: they're going to blow the thing up too. D GA,
Speaker 2: thank you for the tip, he says, David. The Trump
Speaker 2: administration needed a distraction with Trump's boarding, Musk's censorship and
Speaker 2: promotion of the H one B VISA program and all
Speaker 2: the lockdown, technocratic players are in place. Well, that's true,
Speaker 2: and it also you know what if we talk about
Speaker 2: what happened the week before all of this went down,
Speaker 2: what was happening, Well, everybody was at war with Elon Musk.
Speaker 2: He lost it. He went on a temper tantrum, and
Speaker 2: he's done it again. Now he's done it now with
Speaker 2: Nigel Farage. You have one disagreement over one thing with
Speaker 2: Elon Musk, and you've got to go. You've got to
Speaker 2: go off of his platform, or you got to go
Speaker 2: off of the Reform Party. He's you know, Nigel Frog,
Speaker 2: he's got to get out of the reform. It's like, well,
Speaker 2: I think he kind of started it, you know, for
Speaker 2: the most part, but they disagreed over Tommy Robinson. And look,
Speaker 2: Tommy Robinson is being mistreated horribly, but that doesn't mean
Speaker 2: that he's right about anything. Just like you know, Donald
Speaker 2: Trump was mistreated horribly and it was weaponized against him,
Speaker 2: and we should all push back against that type of thing.
Speaker 2: But again, there's no talk about reforming the system. The
Speaker 2: talk is about, you know, we'll show them, we'll get
Speaker 2: Donald Trump in and we will do to them what
Speaker 2: they tried to do to us. Are better, you know,
Speaker 2: that type of thing. But the bottom line is that
Speaker 2: you can oppose the injustice that's there, but it doesn't
Speaker 2: mean that Nigel Farrage has to agree politically with Tommy Robinson.
Speaker 2: And because of that issue, Elon Musk goes to war
Speaker 2: with him. Elon Musk is a petulant, spoiled brat, tyrant
Speaker 2: and he is showing his colors one way after this.
Speaker 2: But now this whole thing in front of the Trump
Speaker 2: Tower is set up to make him look like a hero.
Speaker 2: Oh look now they tried to do this in the
Speaker 2: one vehicle that won't blow up. Yeah, right, unless you
Speaker 2: run over a piece of metal on the highway and
Speaker 2: it penetrates the battery. You better Trump pull over real
Speaker 2: fast because this is going to have a thermal runaway
Speaker 2: and you might wind up looking like whoever that is
Speaker 2: in the driver's seat, he says David. The most pathetic
Speaker 2: thing about this h one b visa betrayal by Trump
Speaker 2: is the MAM's media kit. MAM's media Kirk make America.
Speaker 2: Let's say, the mainstream alternative media. Okay, that's what that is. Yeah,
Speaker 2: the mainstream alternative media Kirk, Benny Johnson, Bon Gino Levin
Speaker 2: and the rest have been extremely opposed to the program
Speaker 2: until Trump. Okayd isn't it disgusting? Yeah, that is the
Speaker 2: thing that really discussed me. And you can see this now.
Speaker 2: You know, he got enough of a history with these guys,
Speaker 2: and of course we got enough. Trump was adamantly opposed
Speaker 2: to it as well. He actually did some things to
Speaker 2: push back against it in his first term. But now
Speaker 2: that Elon Musk wants it, Trump wants it as well.
Speaker 2: And if Trump wants it, all these people are going
Speaker 2: to fall in line. I've seen that with Alex and
Speaker 2: with Roger Stone and these people. While I was there.
Speaker 2: It's like, are you guys kidding me? You don't have
Speaker 2: any principles. It's like ever Trump says today, and if
Speaker 2: he says something completely different tomorrow, you'll go along with
Speaker 2: it and you'll cheer him. And yes, that's the way
Speaker 2: they operate. And it was helped to make him very successful.
Speaker 2: And that's what Mark Levin all the rest of these
Speaker 2: people did. Look go back and look at twenty sixteen
Speaker 2: when they didn't know how controlled Trump was. Evidently the
Speaker 2: stuff that he was saying they which was good stuff
Speaker 2: at that time. You know, Candidate Trump in twenty sixteen
Speaker 2: was saying a lot of the right stuff, and they
Speaker 2: hated him. Ben Shapiro, Mark Levin, all these different people
Speaker 2: they hated him. And now the mainstream alternative media and
Speaker 2: those guys, especially after they saw how popular he was
Speaker 2: and after he became president, they just beclowned themselves and
Speaker 2: then they just started becoming worshiping sycophants. And that's where
Speaker 2: we are today. Tom mcdog David, did you hear that
Speaker 2: Trudeau is set to resign at ten forty am? That's
Speaker 2: great news. I did not hear that. I didn't hear that.
Speaker 2: I can't wait to see that happen, but well, I
Speaker 2: hope that's going to be the case. Twelve June seventeen
Speaker 2: seventy six. Since Musk took over Twitter, its value has
Speaker 2: plunged by nearly three quarters from the forty four billion
Speaker 2: he originally paid for it down to around twelve and
Speaker 2: a half billion. But that's nothing. That's not what he
Speaker 2: is after, right. He didn't buy Twitter to make it profitable.
Speaker 2: He bought Twitter to influence opinion and to influence politicians.
Speaker 2: You go back and you look at Jeff Bezos, who
Speaker 2: bought the Washington Post for two hundred and fifty million dollars.
Speaker 2: That was chump change to him and way less than
Speaker 2: Twitter costs, but way less power than Twitter. Twitter has
Speaker 2: so much global reach. And now Elon Musk is getting
Speaker 2: involved not in just American politics, but as I put it out,
Speaker 2: in politics in the UK, getting involved in politics in Germany.
Speaker 2: Now he has sided with the people that I would
Speaker 2: typically agree with, the more conservative populist organizations that are
Speaker 2: opposed to many of the things that we are opposed to.
Speaker 2: But as he's shown now with Nigel Frage, she can
Speaker 2: turn on them in a heartbeat. Twitter was about him
Speaker 2: escalating himself to a global leader. Think about that. Think
Speaker 2: about this guy who parades around in his profile. Is
Speaker 2: him in an antichrist baphomet suit? And he wants to
Speaker 2: be the premier global leader already the richest man in
Speaker 2: the world. Don't tell me he hasn't sold his soul
Speaker 2: to the devil metaphorically, if not literally. And that's why
Speaker 2: he's where he is. He made a lot of money
Speaker 2: off of you and I and other taxpayers, and off
Speaker 2: of our children who will be paying the debt for
Speaker 2: the paying off the debt, for the money that he
Speaker 2: collected to become the world's richest man. I despise this guy.
Speaker 2: This is this is another big issue between me and Alex.
Speaker 2: From the very beginning I had I wanted nothing to
Speaker 2: do with this guy. He's a transhumanist, he is a technocrat.
Speaker 2: He wants to be the world's leader. Not everything about
Speaker 2: him is a red flag. Will be right back.
Speaker 9: You're listening to the David Knight Show.
Speaker 7: Hello, it's me Voladimir Zelenski.
Speaker 11: I'm so tired of wearing these same T shirts everywhere
Speaker 11: for years.
Speaker 7: You'd think with all the.
Speaker 11: Billions I've skimmed off America, I could dress better, and
Speaker 11: I could if only David Knight would send me one
Speaker 11: of his beautiful gray mcguffin hoodies or a new black
Speaker 11: T shirt with the mcguffin logo in blue. But he
Speaker 11: told me to get lost. Maybe one of you American
Speaker 11: suckers can buy me some at the David Knightshow dot com.
Speaker 11: You should be able to buy me several hundred. Those
Speaker 11: amazing sand colored microphone hoodies are so beautiful.
Speaker 7: I'd wear something other than.
Speaker 11: Green military cosplay to my various gallas and social events.
Speaker 11: If you want to save on shipping, just put it
Speaker 11: in the next package of bombs and missiles coming from
Speaker 11: the USA.
Speaker 2: All right, and welcome back. We've got some good news
Speaker 2: this is, but it's not as good as it first looked. Unfortunately,
Speaker 2: a Pennsylvania court has ruled in favor of Amish farmer
Speaker 2: Amos Miller. He can continue operations but outside of the
Speaker 2: state of Pennsylvania, despite the FDA's overreach on food and
Speaker 2: safety laws. Now, if you remember this case, it was
Speaker 2: about a year ago, January the fourth, was when this
Speaker 2: report went up by Chris Hume, local reporter there. And
Speaker 2: I've interviewed Chris about this issue and other things. But
Speaker 2: here it is about a year ago, January fourth, twenty
Speaker 2: twenty four.
Speaker 12: Again, this is chrisy and with the Lankster Patriot.
Speaker 13: I'm still outside Amos Miller's organic farm operation. Behind me
Speaker 13: is the building. They're not allowing anybody in there to film,
Speaker 13: to ask questions. Apparently they're not even allowing everything. Seul
Speaker 13: the owner of this establishment, into the building to see
Speaker 13: what they're doing.
Speaker 12: That's very concerning. We don't know what they're doing since
Speaker 12: there's no one filming it.
Speaker 13: We don't know if they're you know, could they be
Speaker 13: adding any any sort of four materials to the milk intentionally, unintentionally.
Speaker 13: We simply don't know because we are not inside there.
Speaker 13: We're not allowed to be in there.
Speaker 2: Again.
Speaker 13: They've been in here for multiple hours at this point,
Speaker 13: they're not letting people in.
Speaker 12: We can only film through.
Speaker 13: The glass, get pictures and video through the glass, can't
Speaker 13: see everything. They have multiple coolers filled up apparently with products.
Speaker 12: They've been in there for a long time.
Speaker 13: There's least six or seven peace people in there again
Speaker 13: searching Amos Miller's property, and who knows what they're doing
Speaker 13: in there, And this does not look.
Speaker 12: Good for for the state agents and what they're doing here.
Speaker 13: Uh, they've come into this property and they're searching Amos
Speaker 13: Miller's property.
Speaker 12: What wrong has he done here? Where's the victim?
Speaker 13: Where's the person that is saying, Amos Miller has made
Speaker 13: me sick?
Speaker 12: I'm a restitution. Where's the evil? Looks like the door
Speaker 12: is opening here behind me. Looks like we have people
Speaker 12: coming out.
Speaker 11: They have the numbers.
Speaker 2: They are carrying all this stuff out.
Speaker 8: We'll get your bad numbers, the bad numbers in the name.
Speaker 9: They will give us a bad number.
Speaker 2: This is your government at work. Yeah, protecting us food.
Speaker 12: In your name, hertzog hr.
Speaker 2: They should be ashamed of themselves.
Speaker 12: Pulling off coolers. You don't know what's in there. I'm
Speaker 12: not sure what they in there. I'm not sure what
Speaker 12: they brought in, what they're taking out.
Speaker 2: And yeah, well you know I had a friend of mine. Yeah,
Speaker 2: they're just doing their job. I'm not talking about this
Speaker 2: specific thing, but other things like that. I said, would
Speaker 2: you do that job? I wouldn't do that job. I'd
Speaker 2: resign on the spot before I would do that job.
Speaker 2: They should be ashamed of themselves for that. But look,
Speaker 2: nothing can be seen it's all secret. Got to stay
Speaker 2: out of here, right. Maybe what he needs is a manifesto.
Speaker 2: If he could send a manifesto to a CIA guy
Speaker 2: who's got a podcast, I'm sure they could put out.
Speaker 2: Isn't it interesting? As I said before, everything is secret
Speaker 2: until there's something that they want you to see. They
Speaker 2: want you to see it. Well again, Amos Miller, the
Speaker 2: Amish farmer, has now been authorized to continue his farming
Speaker 2: operations following a protracted legal battle with eight and federal
Speaker 2: authorities over the sale of raw milk and other unpasteurized
Speaker 2: dairy products. And again, it was a Lancaster patriot, Chris
Speaker 2: Hume that reported this a year ago. Broke the story.
Speaker 2: January fourth, several government officials stormed into billing on Amos
Speaker 2: Miller's Lancaster County organic farm conducted an illegal, hours long
Speaker 2: raid without notice, eventually leaving with multiple coolers containing the
Speaker 2: Amish farmer's property. You know, it is interesting you stop
Speaker 2: and think about this. The Amish played a big part
Speaker 2: in getting our homeschool freedom. They were adamant they weren't
Speaker 2: going to put their kids in and let other people
Speaker 2: teach their kids. Maybe you should follow that example. But
Speaker 2: they paid a big price for that, but they helped
Speaker 2: establish in a big way homeschool freedom. Maybe what we
Speaker 2: should do instead of calling this stuff like backyard chickens
Speaker 2: and stuff. You need to understand that terms are important.
Speaker 2: That's one of the reasons why the Associated press is
Speaker 2: so adamant that you will refer to people as if
Speaker 2: they're pro life. You will not refer to them as
Speaker 2: pro life. You will refer to them as anti abortion
Speaker 2: rights and things like that. Terminology is very important. And
Speaker 2: so I say that rather than talking about backyard chickens
Speaker 2: or even about raw milk, what we should do is
Speaker 2: talk about home food. Just like we talked about homeschool,
Speaker 2: we should talk about home food. Let's you know, then't
Speaker 2: have a warm and fuzzy feeling home food. It's like
Speaker 2: comfort food, right. We should talk about this as the
Speaker 2: home food movement, just like we talked about the homeschool movement.
Speaker 2: Should be home food. I think that's very important. Try
Speaker 2: to pass that along to people. I really suggest that.
Speaker 2: So the Lancaster Patriot footage showing that that was a
Speaker 2: year ago exclusive footage from Chris Hume reporting that, so
Speaker 2: what happened over the last year, Well, first of all
Speaker 2: turned out that what they were taking out of there,
Speaker 2: that did it want anybody to see thirty seven types of food,
Speaker 2: including sour cream, chocolate milk, ice cream, egg nog, all
Speaker 2: of those things made from raw milk. Okay. And then
Speaker 2: in March of twenty twenty four, a judge there in
Speaker 2: Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas issued an injunction prohibiting
Speaker 2: Amos Miller from selling any of his raw milk products
Speaker 2: to the public without a permit in October of twenty
Speaker 2: twenty four. This last October, Amos Miller's attorney is Robert Barnes.
Speaker 2: Robert Barnes argued and Commonwealth Court in Pennsylvania that the
Speaker 2: Pennsylvania Farmers should be permitted to sell raw milk to
Speaker 2: out of state customers while facing legal action from the state.
Speaker 2: Barnes contended that the Pennsylvania milk regulations are designed to
Speaker 2: safeguard in state consumers and applying these laws to out
Speaker 2: of state sales raises constitutional concerns. Well, that would be
Speaker 2: the commerce clause, right, that'd be one state interfering with
Speaker 2: the commerce of another state. That was really the purpose
Speaker 2: of the Commerce clause to begin with. It was to
Speaker 2: essentially create a free trade zone, and you would not
Speaker 2: have one state trying to shut things down to regulations.
Speaker 2: But it was just going to be a free trade zone. Instead,
Speaker 2: what they have used is they've turned like they have
Speaker 2: the rest of the Constitution, they've turned it around, they've
Speaker 2: turned it upside down, They've inverted it so that the
Speaker 2: Commerce Clause is now supposedly their excuse for during the
Speaker 2: War on drugs without getting a constitutional amendment. You know,
Speaker 2: we will use this to shut down commerce the federal level.
Speaker 2: That's exactly the opposite of what the thing says. But
Speaker 2: of course, same way they did it with the PISA Act, right,
Speaker 2: he's PAISA to establish a legal cover for them to
Speaker 2: do what FAISA was set up to stop, and that
Speaker 2: is the warrantless surveillance of Americans of mister and missus Verizon.
Speaker 2: So that's what they always do. But again he's talking
Speaker 2: about the Commerce clause. Says you can't have Pennsylvania shutting
Speaker 2: down commerce with other states, and so he says, Pennsylvania's
Speaker 2: milk regulations are designed to safeguard in state consumers and
Speaker 2: applying those laws to out of state sales raises a
Speaker 2: constitutional concern. So On Friday, Barnes announced on x that
Speaker 2: the court has allowed Miller to sell his raw milk
Speaker 2: products to out of state customers. Well, that's good news.
Speaker 2: And yet this is not about home food freedom. It's
Speaker 2: not about the freedom to have home food. This is
Speaker 2: simply a it's not about principle. This is about jurisdictional issues.
Speaker 2: So the fundamental issue has not really been addressed here.
Speaker 2: You know, it's a good temporary fix for him to
Speaker 2: some aspects, but it still doesn't get to the core thing.
Speaker 2: He can continue to make his wonderful food available to
Speaker 2: customers outside the state, said Robert Barnes on Twitter. But
Speaker 2: as we look at the Prepper life, and this is
Speaker 2: an article from World magazine, they had to one of
Speaker 2: the reporters started looking at the people who are stockpiling
Speaker 2: food because a lot of people are very concerned about
Speaker 2: the issues, as we've talked about so long on this program,
Speaker 2: the issues of supply chain disruption of many other things.
Speaker 2: But this is also a story not just about stockpiling food,
Speaker 2: because that's not going to last too long. What we
Speaker 2: really need is we really need to grow our home
Speaker 2: food freedoms. That's the ultimate thing. But they were talking
Speaker 2: about just stockpiling and hoarding. Kim Henderson became interested in
Speaker 2: the prepper movement as she watched a couple of her
Speaker 2: in her area gained success on YouTube with a channel
Speaker 2: that taught others how to get ready for disaster. So
Speaker 2: she traveled to Virginia to visit a man whose family
Speaker 2: does a big business selling supplies to preppers. And so
Speaker 2: she wrote an article about the interesting things that she
Speaker 2: found this guy whose business is prepping preppers and how
Speaker 2: many preppers can I prepper pick? What was a surprising
Speaker 2: thing you saw on the shelves of Bob snow'shouse? Well,
Speaker 2: she said it was really the variety of canned food
Speaker 2: c that he offered, from chicken karaoke with rice to
Speaker 2: chocolate marshmallows, all of them with a twenty five year
Speaker 2: shelf life. Mister Snow said emergencies are stressful enough without
Speaker 2: adding appetite fatigue. He said, oatmeal is nutritious, but if
Speaker 2: you have to eat it every day, you will despise it.
Speaker 2: We all remember the story of Mana, don't we. Thisra
Speaker 2: lights in the wilderness and God's providing them manna, and
Speaker 2: after a while there's like we can't stand this stuff.
Speaker 2: We're eating it day in and day out forty years.
Speaker 2: Stop it. But actually Jack Lawson, who I guess I
Speaker 2: mentioned before his book Civil Defense Manual, is currently out
Speaker 2: of stock. We will let you know when the printer
Speaker 2: can get more of these things to him. Those miscommunication
Speaker 2: between the people had his inventory and the printer anyway,
Speaker 2: But when I've had Jack on and we'll let you
Speaker 2: know as soon as it's back in stock, you'll be
Speaker 2: the first to know here. But Jack would always say
Speaker 2: that he says you don't have to gut him by
Speaker 2: expensive storable food. He say, you just go out and
Speaker 2: you know, pick up cans of food when they're on sale,
Speaker 2: just stick them under your bed or whatever. You know,
Speaker 2: this is something that's going to be around for a
Speaker 2: very long time. But this is also a good idea.
Speaker 2: Make sure stuff you'll like to eat, and a lot
Speaker 2: of variety in your story. They said, you know the
Speaker 2: preppers cross all demographics described the most surprising person you met.
Speaker 2: Now listen to this. This is a tale here, she said.
Speaker 2: Agapito Barriga just built a barn dominium on twenty nine
Speaker 2: acres in Oklahoma, where he and his wife are raising
Speaker 2: six sons. Agapito grew up in South America and now
Speaker 2: he is an economist for the US government. I think
Speaker 2: when you look at the US dollar closely, as a
Speaker 2: US economist is doing, it scared him to death, and
Speaker 2: that's what made him a prepper. It's just like what
Speaker 2: Tony's constantly telling us. You know that we all know
Speaker 2: when he comes on. You look closely at this and
Speaker 2: it gets you afraid of what they're doing. He told
Speaker 2: me that he is pursuing preparedness and homesteading so his
Speaker 2: kids won't be quote left adrift to the proclivities of
Speaker 2: where the dollar is going unquote, and that interesting. He's
Speaker 2: very worried about It's a US economist working for the government,
Speaker 2: he's very concerned about the dollar, and rightfully so. As
Speaker 2: a matter of fact, when we look at this is
Speaker 2: an article from the Telegraph in the UK, and they're
Speaker 2: saying that as difficult as it is for people in
Speaker 2: the UK to break into the housing market, it's even
Speaker 2: more difficult for Americans first time home buyers. Why the
Speaker 2: American dream of owning property is dying. And folks, it
Speaker 2: is a dream because, as we've mentioned many times, you
Speaker 2: will never own any property in America because of the taxes,
Speaker 2: you're simply renting it. And we've got a story here
Speaker 2: that I'll get to right after this. I want to
Speaker 2: talk first about the difference between the UK and the US,
Speaker 2: which is surprising that it is less affordable here in
Speaker 2: the United States to get home than it is in
Speaker 2: the UK and to get into the market. And then
Speaker 2: what we'll do is we'll talk about a story about
Speaker 2: how if you don't pay the rent to them, they
Speaker 2: will for a very small amount you sell your property
Speaker 2: to people and take all of your equity that is
Speaker 2: there as well. And it typically happens to elderly people helpings,
Speaker 2: to people who've got some kind of a temporary health
Speaker 2: situation something. They fall behind a little bit in their
Speaker 2: property taxes and the local government steals everything from them,
Speaker 2: including their equity. You know, we always worry about thieves
Speaker 2: that are going to break in and steal things that
Speaker 2: we have, but the worst thief can take everything from
Speaker 2: you with a pen. They don't need a gun, they
Speaker 2: don't need a crowbar. And so in this article from
Speaker 2: the Telegraph in the UK, give an example of two
Speaker 2: people twenty eight and thirty years old. They gave up
Speaker 2: buying their first home earlier this year after having fifteen
Speaker 2: offers rejected on properties in Mamouth, New Jersey. Despite having
Speaker 2: stretched their initial budget by eighty thousand dollars and making
Speaker 2: an offer for three hundred and eighty thousand dollars in
Speaker 2: the two bedroom house, it wasn't enough. The couple has
Speaker 2: resigned themselves to renting. So they said, in the UK,
Speaker 2: you have a lot of young and disillusioned people, but
Speaker 2: they said they can find comfort in the fact that
Speaker 2: Americans have it even tougher. In Britain, the average age
Speaker 2: of first time buyers has gone up from thirty two
Speaker 2: to thirty three years old, but in America it has
Speaker 2: gone from thirty five to thirty eight since just twenty
Speaker 2: twenty three, according to the National Association of Realtors. You see,
Speaker 2: the problem is is that this affects everybody, even if
Speaker 2: you have a home, because if people can't get in
Speaker 2: on home ownership, there's not going to be anybody to
Speaker 2: buy your home, even if it's not a starter home,
Speaker 2: if it's something that you've been rolling your equity over
Speaker 2: for a lifetime into a larger home or something, who's
Speaker 2: going to be the buyer they're going to have to
Speaker 2: come from another country, probably right, because this is being
Speaker 2: shut off for people who live in the country. They said.
Speaker 2: Part of this is, strangely because the US economy is
Speaker 2: better than Britain's and because people are making more money
Speaker 2: and it's bidding the price of housing up. It's also
Speaker 2: about regulations and when you look at what is available
Speaker 2: in terms of small homes or other things like that,
Speaker 2: there's all kinds of obstacles in the way of that
Speaker 2: as well. They said. The medium American house price was
Speaker 2: four hundred and twenty four hundred dollars in the third
Speaker 2: quarter of twenty twenty four, according to the Federal Reserve.
Speaker 2: That is a twenty eight percent increase since just twenty
Speaker 2: twenty in just four years. That's astounding. Well, you know,
Speaker 2: if you were still renting one thing that you can
Speaker 2: do you know, part of the thing about home ownership,
Speaker 2: even as we call it, even though you're not really
Speaker 2: owning anything, what you're getting is some leverage on the equity.
Speaker 2: You put some money down and now you're leveraging. The
Speaker 2: entire value of the house is going up, assuming that
Speaker 2: you can sell it again. And that's the big issue. Again.
Speaker 2: We saw this happen in two thousand and seven, two
Speaker 2: thousand and eight, could they easily happen again, that people's
Speaker 2: home become liquid, they owe more than they can get
Speaker 2: for it, so they can't get out of it, or
Speaker 2: have a situation where maybe they need to have money
Speaker 2: taken out and they can't get the money taken out
Speaker 2: as well. But you know, there is a way that
Speaker 2: you can still guard against inflation even if you can't
Speaker 2: get into a home. You know, you can do things
Speaker 2: like starting to put money outside of the US dollar
Speaker 2: that's inflating and is going to continue to inflate again.
Speaker 2: If you think that Trump is going to stop inflation,
Speaker 2: why was he so adamant about getting rid of the
Speaker 2: debt ceiling for two years. He doesn't believe that Doge
Speaker 2: is going to do anything, not at all. If he did,
Speaker 2: he wouldn't be so adamant about that. But you know,
Speaker 2: if you put money in gold, or if you put
Speaker 2: money in bitcoin again, bitcoin is much riskier. Potentially you
Speaker 2: could make more money in it, but again you have
Speaker 2: to look at you know what kind of risk you're
Speaker 2: willing to take. But as I said, we're all renters,
Speaker 2: and if we don't pay the rent. The government is
Speaker 2: there to take everything that we got. Here's an example
Speaker 2: of it. This is from Reason magazine. This is a
Speaker 2: guy whose name is Kevin Fair, and what happened to
Speaker 2: him was very unfair in Nebraska. It is funny how
Speaker 2: these particular names, like I was talking about the guy
Speaker 2: who became a drug addict started with marijuana. His name
Speaker 2: was David Stoner. Well, here's the guy, Kevin Fair, who
Speaker 2: has had the government tried to steal his house from
Speaker 2: him in a very unfair way. He lost the title
Speaker 2: to his home over a very small property tax debt.
Speaker 2: Now this is a good story because he eventually prevailed,
Speaker 2: but a lot of people still have lost their home equity.
Speaker 2: And it's home equity theft that's being carried out by
Speaker 2: local governments and guess what they're using it to pay
Speaker 2: for schools that are horrific and harming our children. A
Speaker 2: years long legal battle that almost saw him lose his
Speaker 2: home and all of the value in excess of what
Speaker 2: he owed the government. In twenty fourteen, he was unable
Speaker 2: to pay his five hundred and eighty eight dollars property
Speaker 2: tax bill, and it ballooned within a couple of years
Speaker 2: to five thy two hundred and sixty eight after four years.
Speaker 2: They added all kinds of fees. They added interest at
Speaker 2: a user's interest rate, because the local government sold it
Speaker 2: to a private investor and they're allowed to charge whatever
Speaker 2: they want to in terms of fees and interest. It
Speaker 2: turns out that they charged him fourteen percent interest. That's
Speaker 2: just criminal, by the way. You know, when we look
Speaker 2: at the legacy of Jimmy Carter and over the weekend,
Speaker 2: we went out and we started noticing all these flags
Speaker 2: at half mass, and what is it about. Oh, maybe
Speaker 2: it's for Jimmy Carter something of that.
Speaker 14: Wow.
Speaker 2: We thought they would have waited because they're not going
Speaker 2: to do the big laying and state thing and stuff
Speaker 2: like that until later. No, it turns out that Biden
Speaker 2: decided that he is going to mandate that flags be
Speaker 2: flown at half mass from now a few days ago
Speaker 2: for Jimmy Carter all the way through the inauguration and
Speaker 2: afterwards a little bit. He wants the flags at half
Speaker 2: mass when Trump becomes president. I mean, this is so petty.
Speaker 2: These guys absolutely hate each other with a passion, except
Speaker 2: they both work for the same guys. They're just it's
Speaker 2: like two people competing for the same job and a company, right,
Speaker 2: they both work for the same guy. They just want
Speaker 2: that desk. But yeah, they're going to keep keep the
Speaker 2: flags at half mass for thirty days. Jimmy Carter. The
Speaker 2: reason that came up was because Jimmy Carter was during
Speaker 2: the inflation that was rampant, you know, the stagflation that
Speaker 2: was happening in late seventies after Opek and is under
Speaker 2: him that they remove the interest caps. And I've seen
Speaker 2: stuff from Reason and other people say, oh, Jimmy Carter
Speaker 2: did some deregulation. It's like any of the kind of
Speaker 2: deregulation that we need. I think that if you were
Speaker 2: making getting your money at zero percent or one or
Speaker 2: two or three or four percent, and you're going to
Speaker 2: charge people fifteen twenty twenty five forty percent interest rate,
Speaker 2: I think that's criminal. That's criminal. It used to always
Speaker 2: be criminal. It used to be that was what organized
Speaker 2: crime did, right, so the mafia did. Now anybody can
Speaker 2: do that, and they should not be allowed to do that.
Speaker 2: That is fraudulent, I believe. But that's what they did
Speaker 2: to this guy. So they sell it. You know, he
Speaker 2: gets behind. Why did to get behind? He had to
Speaker 2: quit his job to care for his dying wife, Terry,
Speaker 2: who had been diagnosed with the debility in case of
Speaker 2: multiple sclerosis. The next year, the county government quietly sold
Speaker 2: that debt to a private investor, and within four years
Speaker 2: they popped up his five hundred and eighty eight dollars
Speaker 2: property tax to fifty two hundred and sixty eight. Now
Speaker 2: you know, he might have had like five or six
Speaker 2: hundred dollars a year that was accruing the actual tax,
Speaker 2: so it might have been like two thousand, but still
Speaker 2: with penalties and interest, they more than doubled it. That
Speaker 2: was business as usual in Nebraska, one of the many
Speaker 2: states engaging and legalized home equity theft. And what did
Speaker 2: they steal from him? Fifty five thousand dollars he had
Speaker 2: he had it's fifty five or maybe sixty thousand dollars.
Speaker 2: I guess he had sixty thousand because he lost the
Speaker 2: fifty five. So he's got sixty thousand dollars in equity
Speaker 2: on his on his home. He quits work to take
Speaker 2: care of his dying wife, they turn it over to
Speaker 2: these people, they jack it up, and he had then
Speaker 2: come up with the fifty two hundred dollars in ninety days,
Speaker 2: or they were going to take the house and he
Speaker 2: would lose his fifty five thousand dollars equity that he
Speaker 2: had there. Local governments were permitted to sell tax debts
Speaker 2: to investors without sending correspondence to the debtors. You don't
Speaker 2: even know that they've done it. Three years later, as
Speaker 2: in the case in the Fair's case, the investor would
Speaker 2: mail the property owner of the new bill, which of
Speaker 2: course had grown substantially with the fourteen percent interest in
Speaker 2: other fees. It is usually elderly people, people who own
Speaker 2: their homes outright, who don't even have a mortgage, and
Speaker 2: there's usually some kind of intervening situation. It's not just poverty.
Speaker 2: It's usually illness or something happens in their lives and
Speaker 2: then they don't have any notice of it, and then
Speaker 2: the home is stolen by the government. It's amazing, you know,
Speaker 2: when I look at this, and when I look at
Speaker 2: civil asset forfeiture, and that's a fancy name for just
Speaker 2: the cops stealing anything saying well, you know, I think
Speaker 2: I yeah, that said I found a marijuana butt on
Speaker 2: the floor of your car. I think I'm going to
Speaker 2: take the car. What. Yeah, Oh, I'm not going to
Speaker 2: charge you with any crime. No worry about it. I'm
Speaker 2: charging your car with a crime. Yeah, that's the ticket.
Speaker 2: The Fares sued, arguing that losing the equity in their
Speaker 2: house in excess of what they owed violated the Fifth
Speaker 2: Amendments Taking Clause, which promises that the government cannot take
Speaker 2: property quote without just just compensation. They lost multiple times
Speaker 2: in multiple state courts. They took it all the way
Speaker 2: up to the Nebraska Supreme Court, and they lost there. However,
Speaker 2: in twenty twenty three, the US Supreme Court considered the
Speaker 2: same issue in a different case. In that case, an
Speaker 2: elderly woman named Geraldine Tyler accrewed a twenty three hundred
Speaker 2: property it's twenty three hundred dollars property tax debt on
Speaker 2: her condo in Minnesota after some neighborhood incidents, including a
Speaker 2: nearby shooting, prompted her to move to a retirement community.
Speaker 2: She was unable to finance both her rent and her debt,
Speaker 2: and the total bill came to fifteen thousand dollars by
Speaker 2: the time they added penalties, interest fees. The local government
Speaker 2: seized her condo sold it for forty thousand dollars and
Speaker 2: kept a twenty five thousand dollars profit that was her
Speaker 2: equity that she lost. The US Court of Appeals for
Speaker 2: the Eighth Circuit ruled that that was a twenty five
Speaker 2: thousand dollars fine. Isn't that amazing? So you got state
Speaker 2: courts are okay with this, you got an appeals court,
Speaker 2: federal court's okay with it. But fortunately the Supreme Court's
Speaker 2: justices unanimously disagreed. They said, a taxpayer who loses her
Speaker 2: for forty thousand dollars house to the state in order
Speaker 2: to fulfill a fifteen thousand dollars tax debt has made
Speaker 2: a far greater contribution to the public fiscal than she owed.
Speaker 2: The taxpayer must render under Caesar what is Caesar's But
Speaker 2: no more, said the court. I was written by John Roberts,
Speaker 2: and it was a unanimous decision. She was ninety four
Speaker 2: years old when the decision came down. With that ruling
Speaker 2: in mind, Nebraska's top court reconsidered the previous decision and rule,
Speaker 2: but Fair would not have to sacrifice the additional equity
Speaker 2: and excess of his debt, whether or not he would
Speaker 2: be able to retain his title However, he remained unclear
Speaker 2: until late last month, when he came to an amicable
Speaker 2: agreement with the private company that had bought this from
Speaker 2: the state. Despite the Supreme Court decision, and despite the
Speaker 2: favorable ruling and the Fair case in Nebraska, some states
Speaker 2: are still trying to find creative waste get around the
Speaker 2: letter of the law. Illinois and DC are the most
Speaker 2: blatant continuing offenders. What a surprise they usually are when
Speaker 2: it comes to any issue of freedom. Both sell tax
Speaker 2: leans to private investors, like what happened to Fair, and
Speaker 2: Nebraska and five states theoretically ended home equity theft, but
Speaker 2: gave owners such a short time to claim their surplus
Speaker 2: proceeds that most will fail to recover their own money.
Speaker 2: A Michigan single mom who owed about thirty eight hundred
Speaker 2: dollars on her twenty eighteen property taxes, so the government
Speaker 2: seized her home in twenty twenty one and sold it
Speaker 2: and kept the one hundred and two thousand, six hundred
Speaker 2: and thirty six dollars profit, despite a twenty twenty Michigan
Speaker 2: Supreme Court decision that had ruled this practice was unconstitutional.
Speaker 2: So in spite of a state Supreme court in spite
Speaker 2: of the Federal Supreme Court. She's got a thirty eight
Speaker 2: hundred dollars tax bill and they kept her one hundred
Speaker 2: and two thousand dollars equity. Isn't amazing, That's all I say.
Speaker 2: Local elections are really the most important. I mean, you
Speaker 2: get some crooks in there like that, the damage that
Speaker 2: they can do because they're so close to you. And
Speaker 2: yet all we do is we look at what happens
Speaker 2: with the federal government, and of the federal government, only
Speaker 2: the presidential election is of any interest to most people.
Speaker 2: They don't pay any interest at all to what is
Speaker 2: happening at the local level. If you get lost in
Speaker 2: that labyriantine process and you miss a deadline, as she
Speaker 2: did by eight days, the government claims your surplus equity
Speaker 2: and you are out of luck. Well, we have talking
Speaker 2: about the whether or not this cyber truck was operating
Speaker 2: independently and in self driving mode or whatever. There was
Speaker 2: interesting thing that happened with a self driving Weymo, that's
Speaker 2: the Google self driving cars. It smashed into a delivery robot. Yes,
Speaker 2: this is our future problem here Weymo Robotaxi and a
Speaker 2: serve robotics delivery robot crashed in La. Somebody caught it
Speaker 2: on their dash cam. It was a very slow speed crash.
Speaker 2: But still what I thought was interesting was this little
Speaker 2: robot thing which was under remote human control. It wasn't
Speaker 2: autonomous like the wey Mo. It's going across the street
Speaker 2: in a crossing zone, right zebra crossing, and this way
Speaker 2: Mo thing comes along and it makes a right hand
Speaker 2: turn and smashes into this thing. Didn't see it, and
Speaker 2: so the people who who were there with Weymo said, well,
Speaker 2: it didn't recognize this as a person because you know,
Speaker 2: even though it was in the pedestrian crossing zone, it
Speaker 2: was about the height of a small child or something,
Speaker 2: and you know it was a box or whatever, so
Speaker 2: it was an inanimate object. A wait a minute, so
Speaker 2: way mooade doesn't avoid inanimate objects. Just that's a box.
Speaker 2: Don't worry about it, just step on it. That made
Speaker 2: absolutely no sense. And as we're looking at the H
Speaker 2: one B visa stuff. Remember I have said it, and
Speaker 2: doctor Shiva said it. He said, this is we're at
Speaker 2: stage number four, he said, stage number five out of
Speaker 2: his seven stages. He said, after we get all these
Speaker 2: people in from different areas in the various countries. The
Speaker 2: next stage is to start firing humans and replacing them
Speaker 2: with AI and replacing them with robots. Remember a few
Speaker 2: years ago when it was learned code. Well, now, if
Speaker 2: you learn to code, it's not going to do you
Speaker 2: too much good. Apparently check this out.
Speaker 15: There is a professor who says that best CS grads
Speaker 15: with four point zero GPAs coming out of Berkeley still
Speaker 15: cannot get jobs in tech. The tech job market has
Speaker 15: dried up. You have outspoken CEOs like the one from
Speaker 15: Klarna who says that AI can do all the jobs.
Speaker 15: Reporting goes further says that this is an irreversible trend
Speaker 15: and that graduates are facing a money pinch over the
Speaker 15: next four years because they cannot find an opportunity. Tech
Speaker 15: companies laid off over thirty seven thousand people since January.
Speaker 15: As a founder, I get to see in a lot
Speaker 15: of different companies, and unfortunately, I've seen staff from some
Speaker 15: of our clients be laid off and they're not hiring
Speaker 15: them back. What they're doing is actually going into their
Speaker 15: salaries and using that money hire an AI implementation partner
Speaker 15: who can do that job for them. A lot of
Speaker 15: these roles like connecting databases, you know, processing claims, reviewing
Speaker 15: different tracks, doing billing like all of these wrote repetitive
Speaker 15: tasks are being automated and there's huge displacements. Up hunting
Speaker 15: is a real problem. Or this day's college graduate, what
Speaker 15: do you think the solution is? How can we help
Speaker 15: find jobs for young people or how can they find
Speaker 15: meaningful employment?
Speaker 2: Well, it's not our job to find meaningful jobs for people.
Speaker 2: I would suggest that you get out of this system
Speaker 2: that everybody is so eager to be a part of.
Speaker 2: First of all, a name brand school and you've got
Speaker 2: a perfect gpa, got a four to zero gpa, and
Speaker 2: you can't get a job. This is already coming in.
Speaker 2: It's coming faster than we realize. You know, as I
Speaker 2: said about a decade ago, the study coming out of
Speaker 2: South Korea was saying that they be massive unemployment with
Speaker 2: self driving cars affecting people in transportation and other things
Speaker 2: like that, but that it would hit primarily with white
Speaker 2: collar jobs doctors, lawyers, but also programmers and things like that.
Speaker 2: They're talking about routine types of programming, just like they're
Speaker 2: talking about routine types of accounting and other things like
Speaker 2: that would be the replacement and that's what we're seeing
Speaker 2: happening right now with H one B visa stuff. It's
Speaker 2: not bringing in the Einsteins. It's bringing in the people
Speaker 2: who are doing kind of mundane accounting and computing skills
Speaker 2: and things, and those are the ones that are rapidly
Speaker 2: being moved over and AI. So again, focus on yourself
Speaker 2: instead of how can I serve some big company, because
Speaker 2: those big companies are going to slit your throat. They're
Speaker 2: going to have no loyalty to you whatsoever. So start
Speaker 2: developing skills that that are meaningful skills for your peers
Speaker 2: and your society, because we're either going to have a
Speaker 2: parallel society or we're going to go into slavery. I
Speaker 2: think it's just that simple. I don't see anything. All
Speaker 2: the institutions have been taken over by these people. All
Speaker 2: the political parties have been taken over by these people,
Speaker 2: and they have shut the doors. There's not going to
Speaker 2: be any room for any reform. You're going to have
Speaker 2: to go outside of that monopolistic system, and you're gonna
Speaker 2: have to get real and learn some real skills. You know,
Speaker 2: as I'm looking at the aging cars and I was
Speaker 2: thinking about it when we were driving our old car
Speaker 2: and we passed another old car about you know, fifteen
Speaker 2: to twenty year old cars and stuff out there, and
Speaker 2: I thought, you know, really, the one of the best
Speaker 2: things that you could do, not learn how to code,
Speaker 2: but learn how to repair cars. And if you want
Speaker 2: to get technical, use your technical skills to figure out
Speaker 2: how to three D print car parts. Because you may
Speaker 2: not be able to get the parts to fix the cars.
Speaker 2: You're going to have to go full Jay Leno to
Speaker 2: get this kind of stuff done. Before I take a break,
Speaker 2: got a couple of comments here, they're good retake weird,
Speaker 2: says Robert Barnes, was his lawyer at one point. Horrible ruling,
Speaker 2: since if he can't sell in the state where he lives,
Speaker 2: I don't think he can s across state lines. Well, again,
Speaker 2: like I said, it's not a This isn't anything. At
Speaker 2: first glance, it looks like it's good news, but it
Speaker 2: doesn't do anything about home food freedom. This is really
Speaker 2: just kind of a jurisdictional technicality that we're talking about here,
Speaker 2: and the principle of you being able to raise food
Speaker 2: that you can eat and that you can sell to
Speaker 2: other willing parties is out the door. When you look
Speaker 2: at the history of what is happening with recalls, we
Speaker 2: see listeria recalls. I mentioned this last week. We've seen
Speaker 2: listeria recalls on vegetables as well as on milk and
Speaker 2: milk products and other things like that. Bluebell had one
Speaker 2: a couple of years ago, a listeria outbreak on their
Speaker 2: ice cream. There were criminal charges brought against them. But
Speaker 2: you can imagine if any of the stuff had happened
Speaker 2: to some of the people who are part of the
Speaker 2: home food freedom movement, if it was somebody getting sick
Speaker 2: off of raw milk, that would be and whenever that happens,
Speaker 2: if they can claim that it happened, that will be
Speaker 2: national headlines. But you know, people drank raw milk for
Speaker 2: millennia and just basic care can take care of that.
Speaker 2: But now we can't have that anymore. Don't frag me,
Speaker 2: bro says Robert Barnes acts like a constitutional lawyer, is
Speaker 2: just another pos attorney that's willing to compromise get his
Speaker 2: paycheck and his moment in the spotlight. Well, you know,
Speaker 2: I've interviewed Robert a few times when I was at
Speaker 2: Info Wars. He and I disagreed a lot about free speech.
Speaker 2: You know, he kind of poo pooed the whole idea
Speaker 2: of the nineteen forty six Marshal versus Alabama thing, which
Speaker 2: I think still holes. And he would say, well, no,
Speaker 2: courts have ruled that you can't have free speech. You
Speaker 2: can't set up something and you know, get on a
Speaker 2: soapbox and a mall or something. It's a little malls,
Speaker 2: not public square. The mall is private property, and people
Speaker 2: they rent everywhere in the mall that you could possibly
Speaker 2: set up. Even if you've got a kiosk in the
Speaker 2: center of the mall, that is still private property, and
Speaker 2: so you're kind of trespassing in that private property. That's
Speaker 2: not the situation with the public square. And so what
Speaker 2: is happening with social media is that is not private
Speaker 2: property in the full, that is not fully private property.
Speaker 2: Because it is a private property that is a public square.
Speaker 2: And that was the point of the nineteen forty six ruling.
Speaker 2: It was a company town. They owned everything there but
Speaker 2: including the so called public square. But because it was
Speaker 2: the public square, the Supreme Court said they can't shut
Speaker 2: down the public square for speech even if they privately
Speaker 2: owned the public square. Jack Dorsey at Twitter said times
Speaker 2: and under oath that Twitter was a digital public square.
Speaker 2: That's what it is. And so even if you own
Speaker 2: the digital public square, you should not be able to
Speaker 2: shut it down. Now Elon Musk is doing that because
Speaker 2: he doesn't believe in free speech. And I said, you know,
Speaker 2: when he bought Twitter, I said, free speech is a
Speaker 2: much bigger issue than one social media platform. And the
Speaker 2: principle that is there that is being ignored, the principle
Speaker 2: that was recognized by the Supreme Court in nineteen forty six,
Speaker 2: that is still there. Constitution hasn't changed. He says, who
Speaker 2: don't care about it anymore, And we're going to allow
Speaker 2: him to assert his ownership over everything and he doesn't
Speaker 2: care if you've paid him to use the platform, he
Speaker 2: will still censor you. And that is his position. That's
Speaker 2: why he jumped in on the info Wars thing. You're
Speaker 2: not going to allow somebody to auction off Alex Jones's
Speaker 2: Twitter account because I own that. That's what Musk was
Speaker 2: saying twelve June seventeen seventy six. Humans have been drinking
Speaker 2: milk for at least ay yep ten thousand years, and
Speaker 2: I says, I wonder if Jesus pasteurized his goat sheep milk.
Speaker 2: I'm sure he didn't, and I'm sure that little babies,
Speaker 2: if the mom was having some problems nursing, were probably
Speaker 2: given raw milk because they would be they would be
Speaker 2: given milk of some sort, and it was all all
Speaker 2: raw at that point in time. We're going to take
Speaker 2: a quick break and we'll be right back.
Speaker 9: You're listening to the David Knight Show.
Speaker 16: That's right, boys and girls.
Speaker 2: There's a post election sale on silver and gold.
Speaker 16: Trump Vierporia has caused a dip in silver and gold.
Speaker 16: It's time to buy some medals with me at dollars
Speaker 16: before they come to there. Since is go to David Knight,
Speaker 16: do gold to get in touch with the wise wolf himself,
Speaker 16: Tony Harterburn, he knows where to look to find silver.
Speaker 9: And gold.
Speaker 2: At Yuck be out, Yeah and yuck Trudeau. Trudeau has
Speaker 2: resigned as he did fall through. But there's a caveat
Speaker 2: here and Jesus is light seventeen says, quoting him. I
Speaker 2: will resign as party leader and Prime minister after replacement
Speaker 2: is selected. It would be irresponsible to do that otherwise
Speaker 2: A question, I guess My question is is he now
Speaker 2: going to retire to Cuba. It's real father, Fidel Castro,
Speaker 2: who knows justin Castro finally out of Canada, and that
Speaker 2: people be breathing a sigh of relief over that the
Speaker 2: US dollar is starting out twenty twenty five on a
Speaker 2: high note. But the momentum won't last and gold will shine,
Speaker 2: says one analyst. And I think that is the case.
Speaker 2: Is I pointed that commercial Trump euphoria has got people
Speaker 2: very excited, but nothing has fundamentally changed in any of this.
Speaker 2: As a matter of fact, there was an interesting article
Speaker 2: that was actually even put up on the Drudge Report
Speaker 2: from Unheard Soaring gold prices are a bad omen for
Speaker 2: the dollar, and they point out that the dollar went
Speaker 2: up twenty eight percent over the last year for contact
Speaker 2: in that same picture. Of the same period, the S
Speaker 2: and P five hundred index only saw total returns of
Speaker 2: about twenty five percent. Even in a good year for
Speaker 2: the stock market. Those who parked their money in gold
Speaker 2: found themselves laughing all the way to the bank. They said,
Speaker 2: a higher gold than twenty twenty five is nothing short
Speaker 2: of a consensus trade. JP Morgan City Bank, Goldman Sachs
Speaker 2: all have a target price of three thousand dollars, with
Speaker 2: commodity analysts citing lower interest rates, momentum, central bank buying,
Speaker 2: geopolitical turmoil. All of these things work to the advantage
Speaker 2: of gold, and the good thing about it is it's
Speaker 2: something that is not as volatile, so it's again if
Speaker 2: you look at potential returns, risk reward monitors, they said,
Speaker 2: it followed financial circles. It's tipping gold to reach ten
Speaker 2: thousand dollars announced by the end of the decade. While
Speaker 2: investment banks are looking at annual trends in gold demand,
Speaker 2: deeper analysts are looking at potentially major changes in the
Speaker 2: global trading system in the coming years. That's why when
Speaker 2: you're looking at a complete redesign of the financial and
Speaker 2: having something to me, having something in a digital asset
Speaker 2: is just very concerning. I'm at the point in my
Speaker 2: life where I've made some high return investments and I've
Speaker 2: seen that they didn't work out, and so I'm looking
Speaker 2: at capital preservation. Imagine if you were younger and you
Speaker 2: were thinking about capital preservation, how that would work out
Speaker 2: for you. On his face, the argument from this publication
Speaker 2: Asia Times, they said, is simple enough. Since the seizure
Speaker 2: of Russian assets February twenty twenty two. Countries around the
Speaker 2: world are moving away from using the US dollar as
Speaker 2: a reserve currency. But we're seeing this happening on so
Speaker 2: many different levels, and this is the same story. It's
Speaker 2: interesting to see how this article tracks what Tony Ardeman
Speaker 2: has been saying, what I've been saying for last year,
Speaker 2: because Tony is telling you the truth and we can
Speaker 2: see clearly what is happening with all this as they
Speaker 2: point out, you know, and they don't even go into
Speaker 2: the details. Well, they do get into the deficit. They said,
Speaker 2: for the past seven or eight years, US has been
Speaker 2: financing its trade deficit by selling tech stocks to the
Speaker 2: rest of the world. But what happens if the tech
Speaker 2: stock market crashes, because there's been so much speculation on
Speaker 2: that with Nvidia and AI and all the rest of
Speaker 2: the stuff. If that crashes, then what happens to this
Speaker 2: well goes back to something that is real. They said,
Speaker 2: there's simply not enough gold in existence to settle these
Speaker 2: trade balances, and when you look at the massive debts
Speaker 2: that all of the governments have piled up, they said,
Speaker 2: there's not enough gold, however, to settle these trade balances
Speaker 2: at the current gold price, and that's where they're coming
Speaker 2: up with these large numbers. We'll trigger this move to
Speaker 2: trade settlement and gold newsletter highlighted one possibility the collapse
Speaker 2: of a bubble in American tech stocks. That would be
Speaker 2: one aspect of it. But there are so many different
Speaker 2: things that are hanging out there in this coming year.
Speaker 2: It truly is amazing. And of course, even with all
Speaker 2: of the Trump optimism that is out there and the
Speaker 2: signaling of flipping the switch from a full on war
Speaker 2: against crypto to being crypto friendly, still the fundamentals that
Speaker 2: are there in terms of the overall debt of the
Speaker 2: world and the exchange stuff, it's looking still very shaky.
Speaker 2: Gold flips to twenty six twenty nine to support as
Speaker 2: Trump tariffs and inflation boost goals safe haven status and
Speaker 2: that is what we're looking at. So it's traded a
Speaker 2: two week high on the first train day of twenty
Speaker 2: twenty five last week. Again, you know it is I
Speaker 2: don't give investment advice, but when we look at what
Speaker 2: is coming ahead, it's a lot of very It's gonna
Speaker 2: be a very interesting year, a lot of instability, a
Speaker 2: lot of trouble, perhaps even violence, and in those types
Speaker 2: of environments, gold is really a safe haven. We're gonna
Speaker 2: take a quick break and we will be right back,
Speaker 2: and you.
Speaker 14: Can walk five fund dot steps, but not us sing
Speaker 14: that they have more pnies and a fewel Agnivates and
Speaker 14: all bout cops spent at.
Speaker 17: Your door.
Speaker 9: Making sense common again. You're listening to the David Knight Show.
Speaker 2: And I'm Marty. Hey, Marty, thank you for let me,
Speaker 2: he says. Liberty Haarian is not live. The x feed
Speaker 2: went down a minute ago, so as a fit guy,
Speaker 2: says David, and I was being critical of Elon Musk.
Speaker 2: That's probably why it wouldn't be surprised. I mean it
Speaker 2: is as a matter of fact, Jane James Essica send
Speaker 2: me an email, and he says, I'm getting off at Twitter.
Speaker 2: I'm done with Twitter. It's like I said it last
Speaker 2: week as a I really don't care Elon what you
Speaker 2: do to my account. You don't control me, you don't
Speaker 2: control free speech. I've had bigger threats than you to me,
Speaker 2: and you're not going to tell me what I say. Anyway.
Speaker 2: I want to do a follow up on this story
Speaker 2: that I talked about last week. I thought was just amazing.
Speaker 2: It appeared that someone in a neonatal intensive carry in it.
Speaker 2: This is where you have the young babies that are born,
Speaker 2: many of them premies, and somebody was breaking the bones
Speaker 2: of some of these newborn babies. And so one family
Speaker 2: filed an official government complaint with it, and they looked
Speaker 2: and there's like, you know, three other people by year,
Speaker 2: and as they kept looking, they found another four cases,
Speaker 2: so it was a total of seven cases. They've now
Speaker 2: arrested Aaron Elizabeth Strautman, twenty six, arrested in connection with
Speaker 2: the abuse of multiple babies who had fractured bones. Well
Speaker 2: this did was it triggered an investigation where they went
Speaker 2: back and looking at the video footage. Everything is on
Speaker 2: video now and they had records of this. Evidently she's
Speaker 2: been charged with malicious wounding and felony child abuse for
Speaker 2: legedly breaking the bones of several premature babies at the hospital.
Speaker 2: And it's like, what is going through the mind of
Speaker 2: somebody like this again, you know the baby that triggered it,
Speaker 2: all those twins and one of the babies had a
Speaker 2: broken shin bone, the tibia, and so at first they said, well,
Speaker 2: you know the babies premies they have kind of fragile
Speaker 2: bones because they're still pretty young, and that type of thing.
Speaker 2: But it's like, no, there's a history of this type
Speaker 2: of thing. And when I talked about this, I said,
Speaker 2: so as horrendous as this is, think about the fact
Speaker 2: that there are babies that are older than these premies
Speaker 2: that have abortions, that planned parenthood where they rip the
Speaker 2: legs and arms off of the baby together, kill it,
Speaker 2: they rip it to pieces, and you stop and think
Speaker 2: about this, and this is this is felony child abuse.
Speaker 2: Why isn't that felony child abuse? These doctors know exactly
Speaker 2: what they're doing. Planned parenthood knows exactly what they're doing.
Speaker 2: The people who are there may not fully comprehend it.
Speaker 2: They may have been gas lit all of this stuff,
Speaker 2: but still the practitioners, the people who actually commit the murders.
Speaker 2: It's just amazing. Two hundred million to one chance of
Speaker 2: identical triplets and they're now home after their parents refused
Speaker 2: an abortion. They got three identical boys, all from one egg.
Speaker 2: This was a situation where they were doing in vitro
Speaker 2: fertilization IVF. It's a story from Live Action News. I said,
Speaker 2: although we don't support the use of IVF. We do
Speaker 2: believe that all human beings, regardless of the means of conception,
Speaker 2: have human dignity and have value and have the right
Speaker 2: to life. And so what happened was and this is
Speaker 2: something that is very common. This is one of the
Speaker 2: arguments against IVF is that frequently what they'll do to
Speaker 2: enhance the enance the chance of success. They may implant
Speaker 2: several different fertilized embryos and then you might, you know,
Speaker 2: if they all take you wind up with a lot
Speaker 2: of babies. And then they come back and they say, well,
Speaker 2: we've got to do a selective abortion, and they put
Speaker 2: pressure on you to do that because if you don't
Speaker 2: do it, none of them are going to survive. And
Speaker 2: that was kind of what happened in this particular pregnancy.
Speaker 2: At about seventeen weeks of pregnant see Shannon Page, began fainting.
Speaker 2: That was when doctors discovered a complication that can occur
Speaker 2: with multiple pregnancies. It's called twin to twin transfusion syndrome,
Speaker 2: where the babies share a placenta, which sometimes results in
Speaker 2: one infant thriving at the expense of the others. One
Speaker 2: or more of the infants can be born unusually small
Speaker 2: and even die, and as a remedy, the doctors recommended
Speaker 2: a selective abortion for one or two of the babies
Speaker 2: to ensure the survival of the third. The doctors are
Speaker 2: pretty certain that we weren't going to be able to
Speaker 2: make it past twenty one weeks, which if we didn't,
Speaker 2: none of the babies would have survived, said the father.
Speaker 2: But we decided not to go ahead with this, and
Speaker 2: it was the best thing that we have done. We
Speaker 2: let nature take its course and we are super grateful.
Speaker 2: Are they super grateful to nature? Thank you Nature? Not God?
Speaker 2: That's when I look at it. You know, so many
Speaker 2: times people talk about thanksgiving. Are they talk about how
Speaker 2: grateful they are that this happened? It's like grateful to who?
Speaker 2: Doesn't that imply a who that's there. Jordan Peterson, as
Speaker 2: a matter of fact, says net zero is a brutal
Speaker 2: form of nature worship. Well, yes it is. It always
Speaker 2: has been very clear. He didn't. He's not the one
Speaker 2: who discovered this. Quite frankly, you know, we were as
Speaker 2: mentioned in two thousand and one, we took the family,
Speaker 2: the two boys and Karen and I went to the
Speaker 2: UK and we're on a train, came across Science magazine.
Speaker 2: It's all about Lovelock's Gaia theory, you know, And I
Speaker 2: kept seeing that over and over again. They're playing this
Speaker 2: loop about it in the children's museum that we took
Speaker 2: them to so they could play and things like that.
Speaker 2: But it was all about Gaia theory. Well, who was
Speaker 2: gya mother Earth? The earth goddess. This is a pagan
Speaker 2: religion and you can see that in these people from
Speaker 2: the fifty years ago when my uncle was a forestry
Speaker 2: professor University of Missouri and Columbia and he's had the
Speaker 2: department there, and he said, you know that they're getting
Speaker 2: away from stewardship and taking care of the land and
Speaker 2: they're moving over into this environmentalism. He goes, it's just
Speaker 2: worship of nature. Don't touch anything. And when you do that,
Speaker 2: you wind up with all this dead wood that you
Speaker 2: can't take out and do anything useful and not going
Speaker 2: to allow that to happen. And so what happens is
Speaker 2: it becomes fuel and it burns the entire forest down.
Speaker 2: And we've seen this now happening in the intervening fifty years.
Speaker 2: We've seen it over and over and over again. Even
Speaker 2: happened here in the Smoky Mountains about ten years ago.
Speaker 2: I had a massive forest fire that got out of
Speaker 2: control because the government won't take care of the forest
Speaker 2: like they used to. They're not doing stewardship anymore. It
Speaker 2: happened in a Yellowstone as well. We had a huge
Speaker 2: fire there. And we went out to Yellowstone with a
Speaker 2: family and we're driving and it was just put the
Speaker 2: windows down as the summer it was nice and cool,
Speaker 2: and we could smell all the pine stuff that was there,
Speaker 2: and all of a sudden boom, it's like everything is
Speaker 2: burned down. And it's this scene of devastation because we
Speaker 2: transitioned from private property to federal property where they don't
Speaker 2: take care of anything. And so yeah, it is you know,
Speaker 2: Guya in Greek mythology was the Earth goddess gave birth
Speaker 2: to the Titans and so forth. Well, this particular one
Speaker 2: has given birth to all kinds of lies to take
Speaker 2: everything from us. He said. This fanatical agenda, said Jordan Peterson,
Speaker 2: is leading only to petty tyranny and is a catastrophe
Speaker 2: for the world. Well, that's putting it mildly. But so
Speaker 2: we are afraid of Mother Earth and you have seen
Speaker 2: this from actresses like Jennifer Lawrence and others. Oh, look,
Speaker 2: Mother Earth is angry at us. We had all these
Speaker 2: storms and everything. It's like, no, they fear this, this
Speaker 2: idea that nature is doing something. But even in a
Speaker 2: Toronto Catholic school, the trustees there are opposing a prayer.
Speaker 2: This is Saint Michael's prayer. I'm not Catholic. I don't
Speaker 2: know what that is, but they oppose the prayer because
Speaker 2: they said, we don't want the fear of God put
Speaker 2: in our children. It's like, what. So this is from
Speaker 2: Campaign of Life coalition originally, but it's also put up
Speaker 2: on Life site news, which is a Catholic site. They said,
Speaker 2: this is a quote from the Catholic school trustee. Rizzo
Speaker 2: is his last name, and he said, I don't want
Speaker 2: to put the fear of God in our children. And
Speaker 2: as they point out in this news on Life side,
Speaker 2: they said, well, Proverbs nine says the fear of the
Speaker 2: Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and the knowledge of
Speaker 2: the Holy One is understanding. I guess in these schools,
Speaker 2: even in some religious schools, they don't want people to
Speaker 2: be wise or understanding. They don't want the fear of God,
Speaker 2: and they said, it's not just him. He wasn't the
Speaker 2: only trustee who said this the bizarre opposition to the
Speaker 2: fear of God. Trustee Angela Kennedy also joined Inn and said,
Speaker 2: I don't think that any of us need to have
Speaker 2: the fear of God put in us. They said, it
Speaker 2: was surreal watching these two say this thoroughly Unchristian things.
Speaker 2: I had to ask myself, what am I really witnessing here?
Speaker 2: It felt as if there was someone else speaking through them.
Speaker 2: Just say this. Homeschool your kids. You can't know. Even
Speaker 2: if you're going to put your kid in a religious school,
Speaker 2: you better pay attention to who is schooling your child
Speaker 2: and what curriculum are they using, because in so many cases,
Speaker 2: the schools that are getting government money, if it's a
Speaker 2: choice program or something like that, they're going to use
Speaker 2: the same curriculum that the public schools are using because
Speaker 2: they want to get that money, and there's strings attached
Speaker 2: to that. And you don't know who any of these
Speaker 2: people are. You may have somebody who has no fear
Speaker 2: of God and doesn't think that anybody should fear God,
Speaker 2: and that's the kind of person you should be afraid of.
Speaker 2: It's so funny to watch people freak out when they
Speaker 2: see a politician who talks about God and as if
Speaker 2: they're the threat. Let me tell you who the threat is.
Speaker 2: The threat are the politicians who think they are God,
Speaker 2: and they're the ones who are going to be the
Speaker 2: biggest persecutors of those who are religious. Sadly, trustees ended
Speaker 2: up voting against requiring schools to pray this Saint Michael
Speaker 2: the Archangel prayer. It was defeated by a vote of
Speaker 2: eight to four. Wow. Two thirds of the board of
Speaker 2: trustees at this school, a religious school, don't want the
Speaker 2: fear of God. And as I said before, what you
Speaker 2: should fear are the politicians who think they are God.
Speaker 2: And you can see that on display in China very
Speaker 2: much so. China has demanded more rigorous governance of religion
Speaker 2: and mandates that Catholics study socialisms. As Life Site News,
Speaker 2: the Communist government in China ordered all Christians and Catholics
Speaker 2: in the nation to study President She's thoughts on socialism,
Speaker 2: along with enabling further rigorous governance of religion. You see,
Speaker 2: she is in the image of mal who had his
Speaker 2: little Red Book and his philosophy and all the rest
Speaker 2: of this stuff. And he wants to be another Mao.
Speaker 2: I guess you could say he's a neo maw. He's
Speaker 2: not a neo con. He's a neocom of course, they've
Speaker 2: never gotten away from communism. But anyway, President she came
Speaker 2: up with this little book on socialism. He wants everybody
Speaker 2: to read his little book. He wants to be remembered
Speaker 2: like Mao, Well, guess what nobody cares about you? And
Speaker 2: all of you politicians and all the things that you build.
Speaker 2: They're going to burn up one day. Just amazing to
Speaker 2: watch these guys. But it was a few years ago.
Speaker 2: I still to this day it makes me laugh when
Speaker 2: I see the president. She told all these Christian churches
Speaker 2: and again, you know, there's some churches who tried to
Speaker 2: play along with the religious persecution, and a church of
Speaker 2: the Three Persons self, that's what they called it. They
Speaker 2: don't understand English or the Bible either one of these things.
Speaker 2: They're trying to make sense of this. They don't understand
Speaker 2: what's going on. It's very much like Caesar, who thought,
Speaker 2: you know, when they talk about the Kingdom of God,
Speaker 2: thought that he was that it was a political competition.
Speaker 2: To him, but he had a regulation. He said, if
Speaker 2: you're going to put up Jesus on the cross in
Speaker 2: your church, you're going to have to put a picture
Speaker 2: of Mao on one side and she on the other.
Speaker 2: And I laughed. I said, oh, so there are the
Speaker 2: two thieves on either They don't understand that, and they
Speaker 2: don't understand how they just own themselves. So you got
Speaker 2: Jesus and the two thieves, Mao and She on either side.
Speaker 2: But the people who tried to play along with this
Speaker 2: and tried to appease this kind of tyranny, they've been
Speaker 2: knocking their churches down left and right and coming up
Speaker 2: with all kinds of new regulations to shut them down.
Speaker 2: You cannot appease tyrants. Whether you're talking about religion, whether
Speaker 2: you're talking about environmentalism, that religion, any of this stuff.
Speaker 2: You cannot appease these tyrants. It'll always they'll come back
Speaker 2: for more. On December the twenty third, they sent out
Speaker 2: a Christmas greeting letter and listening that was the one
Speaker 2: that was making threats to them. Christmas Greeting, we got
Speaker 2: some new regulations for you. It was sent out by
Speaker 2: the State Administration for Religious Affairs. It outlined the government's
Speaker 2: plans for religion in China throughout twenty twenty five, published
Speaker 2: via the state approved church in China, the Chinese Catholic
Speaker 2: Patriotic Association. They said the letter was simply signed as
Speaker 2: coming from the Religious Affairs Office. In the past year,
Speaker 2: the Catholic and Christian communities said have fully implemented the
Speaker 2: Communist Party's theory of religious work in a new era,
Speaker 2: fully implemented the party's basic policy and religious work adhere
Speaker 2: to the direction of the cenicization that is making it
Speaker 2: China fied. You know, that's religion in China. They adhered
Speaker 2: to the principle of independence and autonomy, held high the
Speaker 2: banners of patriotism and socialism, and enthusiastically celebrated the seventy
Speaker 2: fifth anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of
Speaker 2: China and carried out the three Loves, Five histories and
Speaker 2: three loves. They thought that twice May it's supposed to
Speaker 2: be loaves. I don't know. I have no idea what
Speaker 2: those things are. I didn't spend the time to look
Speaker 2: it up. But Life site News, which is Catholic, says
Speaker 2: thanks to the still secret Sino Vatican deal. In other words,
Speaker 2: there was a secret deal that the Vatican did with
Speaker 2: the Chinese Communists. They said, the Vatican now has much
Speaker 2: closer relationship with the leading prelates of the Chinese Communist Party. Well,
Speaker 2: of course, because the Pope is a Marxist. He is
Speaker 2: a hardcore Marxist. Francis is. As a matter of fact,
Speaker 2: there was just a I saw that there's a big
Speaker 2: kerfuffle about some another garbage movie out of Hollywood called
Speaker 2: The Conclave, and in it you find out that the
Speaker 2: Pope is a hermaphrodite or intersex or well, I don't
Speaker 2: know if those two things are different or not. I'm
Speaker 2: not sure what intersect means. That's what the term they
Speaker 2: were using is thinking ourmaphrodite as male and female parts. Okay, well,
Speaker 2: here's the thing that you need to know about the Pope.
Speaker 2: Got people are really angry because they're pulling in this
Speaker 2: LGBT agenda and everything in it. This Pope is going
Speaker 2: to pull it in anyway, because this Pope is a Marxist.
Speaker 2: But Francis is marx so of course he would do
Speaker 2: a secret deal with the Chinese Communists. All bishops who
Speaker 2: refused to join the Catholic Patriotic Association being placed under
Speaker 2: house arrest or disappeared by the CCP. Although the Vatican
Speaker 2: said several years ago that the Sino Vatican Agreement doesn't
Speaker 2: require anyone to join the schismatic organization, refusal to do
Speaker 2: so results in persecution and punishment, and the Vatican stands
Speaker 2: by and does nothing, said Cardinal Joseph Sen, the Hong
Speaker 2: Kong's Emerita's cardinal. And that's you know, that's what you're
Speaker 2: going to get when you've got a communist leader. In
Speaker 2: twenty eighteen, in a letter to Chinese Catholics, Francis described
Speaker 2: the deal as forming a new chapter of the Catholic
Speaker 2: Church in China. Doesn't say it was good, just as
Speaker 2: it's something new. However, Cardinal Joseph Send style the deal
Speaker 2: as an incredible betrayal, selling out Chinese Catholics. It was
Speaker 2: the ink was barely dry on the deal. In twenty eighteen,
Speaker 2: before Asia News, which regularly documents the abduction and the
Speaker 2: torture of underground Catholics, reported that underground Catholics bitterly suspect
Speaker 2: that the Vatican has abandoned them. I would say it's
Speaker 2: even worse than that. Betrayed them, betrayed them. And then
Speaker 2: when we look at furries, there now is an organization
Speaker 2: called for Christian Furries. What a oxymoron that is? This
Speaker 2: article from a dissenter. So as it's hard to believe
Speaker 2: that Christian furyes are actually a thing, here's a hint.
Speaker 2: They're not. They're not a thing at all. And they
Speaker 2: get that, they understand. But look, this is where the
Speaker 2: transgenderism is leading. You know, First of all, transgenderism is
Speaker 2: at its essence, and we can see this. They vigorously
Speaker 2: demand access to children to mutilate them and all the
Speaker 2: rest of the stuff. It is a form of pedophilia.
Speaker 2: And it also plays into pedophilia because if children can
Speaker 2: make a decision to permanently alter their body, mutilating and
Speaker 2: sterilizing themselves at a very young age, if we presume
Speaker 2: that they have the mental capacity to do that, we
Speaker 2: have to say, by extension that they can consent to sex,
Speaker 2: which is not true and we've never held that, but
Speaker 2: that is what the you know what the principle that
Speaker 2: is being established here as a principle of pedophilia. But
Speaker 2: when you can imagine that you're any gender that you want,
Speaker 2: then what that does is that also feeds into transhumanism.
Speaker 2: You can be any specie you want, you can be anything,
Speaker 2: and all of this is feeding into a virtual reality,
Speaker 2: a virtual reality that uvil Harari said would be used
Speaker 2: to control people. You see, drugs are used to control people.
Speaker 2: That's one of the reasons why the CIA and the
Speaker 2: DEA are involved in drug use. That they want it
Speaker 2: as a means of control. And they can use it
Speaker 2: both ways, right, they can use it to establish a
Speaker 2: police and surveillance state to say, well, we've got to
Speaker 2: protect you from this stuff. At the same time, they
Speaker 2: want it out there because they want people to become
Speaker 2: dependent on that. And uvil Harari has said the same
Speaker 2: thing about virtual reality, talking about the fact that hey,
Speaker 2: people can have drugs and they can have virtual reality
Speaker 2: and they're out of our way. It's one way that
Speaker 2: we make sure that they don't bother us, that they
Speaker 2: don't take what we've got. And so all of this stuff,
Speaker 2: from transgenderism to transhumanism to virtual reality, all this stuff
Speaker 2: is channelling people in the same direction. But to Center
Speaker 2: says Imaginal World, we're grown men and women done fuzzy
Speaker 2: animal costumes, prancing through life as if reality itself is
Speaker 2: a bad sitcom, pretending that they can rewrite at will.
Speaker 2: That is the furry movement. It is escapism, it is eccentricity,
Speaker 2: is all wrapped up in brightly colored tales and ears.
Speaker 2: It is about loving ones self and about escaping from reality.
Speaker 2: He says, enter the so called furry Fellowship, a quote
Speaker 2: unquote ministry that claims to merge the gospel of Jesus Christ,
Speaker 2: of the movement that revolves around for tending to be animals.
Speaker 2: Does that sound stupid? Well, you're not alone if you
Speaker 2: think so. Essentially, they're co opted the objective truth of scripture,
Speaker 2: trying to jam it into a fluffy, furry covered box
Speaker 2: that reeks of escapism and denial. But is that any
Speaker 2: different than the race with all these mainline denominations to
Speaker 2: jump into lgbtism. We're going to meet people where they are,
Speaker 2: and we don't care about the reality, and we don't
Speaker 2: care about what God says in the Bible. We don't
Speaker 2: care about any of that stuff. We're going to compromise
Speaker 2: everything for our agenda in order to be relevant. You know,
Speaker 2: the Furry Fellowship. What have you believe that you can
Speaker 2: honor God? While simultaneously rejecting the very reality that he created.
Speaker 2: Is that any different from the LGBT agenda altogether? They're
Speaker 2: retreating into a self constructed wonderland or accountability dissolves like
Speaker 2: warning do, and the anthropomorphic fantasies rule the day. And
Speaker 2: that is exactly what the globalists want to see happen.
Speaker 2: That's what euvil Harai wants to see happen. It's what
Speaker 2: Satan wants to see happen. They speak of sharing the
Speaker 2: gospel within the furry community, as if the gospel needs
Speaker 2: their niche subculture to remain relevant. But how can they
Speaker 2: share the message of a savior who walked in flesh
Speaker 2: and blood when they themselves don't even walk as humans.
Speaker 2: They claim to be post denominational, which is just a
Speaker 2: euphemism for avoiding accountability to a meaningful doctor or a
Speaker 2: church authority. How convenient it is simply cause play with
Speaker 2: a side of scripture. And of course all this stuff
Speaker 2: again feeding into the post human posthumanism it is. It's
Speaker 2: not post doctrinal, it is a posthuman that they're looking at.
Speaker 2: So we have some a study that has come out
Speaker 2: that I mentioned this briefly earlier in the program. They
Speaker 2: think half of American children will escape government education by
Speaker 2: twenty thirty. That's the headline from the Gold Report. My
Speaker 2: question is why so few I suspect that it's because
Speaker 2: they're going to be continually bringing in more foreign children
Speaker 2: to be educated at our expense, to be educated at
Speaker 2: the expense of our homes. You know, we talk about
Speaker 2: the government the unaffordability of homes in America, and we
Speaker 2: talk about the local governments confiscating people's homes and keeping
Speaker 2: the excess equity over and above the rent that they
Speaker 2: were unable to pay. That is really where the education
Speaker 2: money is coming from, and where are they going to
Speaker 2: get their students. This educational bureaucracy is going to be
Speaker 2: pushing very hard to make sure that they have foreign students.
Speaker 2: We already see this with colleges as well. Right, You're
Speaker 2: seeing this across the board. It's not just the Democrats
Speaker 2: who want the voters. It's not just the big business
Speaker 2: and Elon Musk who want to have cheap labor. It's
Speaker 2: also the schools who want to have students that are
Speaker 2: naive enough to parents who are naive enough to send
Speaker 2: their kids to that school. The learning Council and Educational
Speaker 2: Research Institute said it expects a number of children in
Speaker 2: public schools to drop by sixteen million over the next
Speaker 2: six years, leaving just fifty percent of students enrolled. About
Speaker 2: a third of American students, they say will likely be homeschooled. Ultimately,
Speaker 2: the researcher said the most significant drivers of the exodus
Speaker 2: will be choice legislation, a preference for remote and flexible learning,
Speaker 2: political and cultural distrust of government, rising violence and bullying,
Speaker 2: and the impacts of immigration. That's a report from Alex Newman,
Speaker 2: who has been spot on with all this stuff. Accaranceays
Speaker 2: we're back on x so elon Musk cousins shut me down.
Speaker 2: Yet something else that happened. I guess I don't know.
Speaker 2: But the Washington Post looked at sixty percent of the
Speaker 2: school age population in seven thousand school districts across thirty
Speaker 2: two states, and they found that homeschooling defies political, geographical,
Speaker 2: and economic borders. For example, while Republican Florida has the
Speaker 2: largest homeschool population one of one hundred and fifty four
Speaker 2: thousand homeschooled children, Democratic New York is showing the fastest growth,
Speaker 2: with fifty two thousand children homeschooled, more than double since
Speaker 2: twenty seventeen, and the New York City boroughs of Manhattan, Brooklyn,
Speaker 2: and the Bronx saw the highest growth rates with homeschool population.
Speaker 2: Some districts surged by over three hundred percent in the
Speaker 2: last six years. Now society breaks down as government more
Speaker 2: and more focuses on breaking us, you will see that accelerate,
Speaker 2: just like you see it accelerating in New York City.
Speaker 2: The trend is gaining popularity even in the air with
Speaker 2: high academic achievement, and then they start talking about homeschoolers
Speaker 2: and how they are seeing improved academic performance. Is that
Speaker 2: what education is really about? Though? And I've said this before,
Speaker 2: What is the purpose of education? And I suggest you
Speaker 2: go back and read R. L. Dabney who wrote right
Speaker 2: after the Civil War. He was Stonewall Jackson's chaplain, and
Speaker 2: he predicted exactly what was going to happen with government schools.
Speaker 2: And so the government should never have any involvement in
Speaker 2: education because ultimately education is about worldview and it's about religion,
Speaker 2: and the government shouldn't be taking one side or the
Speaker 2: other in that. That is also a violation of the
Speaker 2: Bill of Rights. And yet you know, the other part
Speaker 2: of this is what is it that we are trying
Speaker 2: to What is it that we're trying to get across
Speaker 2: to our kids. What is it that we want them
Speaker 2: educated about. Is it simply about reading, writing, and arithmetic. No,
Speaker 2: not at all, because you can I mean when you
Speaker 2: look at the guy, for example, let's just go with
Speaker 2: a narrative that's coming out of New Orleans. Here's a
Speaker 2: guy who was accomplished. You know, he had a good
Speaker 2: work record. He was making like one hundred and twenty
Speaker 2: thousand dollars working at Deloitte and counting things like that.
Speaker 2: He had a military career. He's obviously he had problems
Speaker 2: financially because of two divorces. He had some religious issues
Speaker 2: that were there too, perhaps, but he was still savvy.
Speaker 2: You know, pictures of him going around with metaglasses, using
Speaker 2: that to lay his plans and things like that, and again,
Speaker 2: you know, see what happens with us. But that seems
Speaker 2: to be a plausible one. I mean, the one that
Speaker 2: I've got big questions about is the one in Vegas,
Speaker 2: But you know, the one in New Orleans. Let's just
Speaker 2: go with an official story and here's somebody who is
Speaker 2: well educated, and yet how does he use that education?
Speaker 2: It makes them more dangerous, right, And so when we
Speaker 2: look at what it is that we're trying to do
Speaker 2: with our children, we really do need to think about
Speaker 2: what the goal is. Is the goal to find them
Speaker 2: a comfortable, lucrative position working for government or working for
Speaker 2: big business. That's really what most parents are angling for.
Speaker 2: That's why you had that situation in New York where
Speaker 2: they're paying forty five thousand dollars a year to private school.
Speaker 2: Because and then at the private school, the parents were
Speaker 2: quietly contacting people in the press and say, you can't
Speaker 2: believe the kind of woke Marxist stuff that they're doing there.
Speaker 7: Now.
Speaker 2: It is you know, it is critical race theory and
Speaker 2: all the rest is pure on racism, and it's horrible
Speaker 2: what's happening there. But they would not go on record,
Speaker 2: why because they'd get kicked out of that school and
Speaker 2: they're paying forty five thousand dollars a year because they
Speaker 2: wanted their kids to have that on their resume and
Speaker 2: because they wanted their kids to get a comfortable job. Well,
Speaker 2: that's not what's going to happen in the future. Is
Speaker 2: they've played earlier. We had Berkeley and you've got people
Speaker 2: with a four to zero grade point average in computer
Speaker 2: science and they can't get a job. And so these
Speaker 2: people who are running these countries, they have absolutely no interest.
Speaker 2: And the people that have no interest in our society,
Speaker 2: they have no interest in our values. Is it simply
Speaker 2: about academics, is it simply about money or is there
Speaker 2: something else? School choice is taking its fight from red
Speaker 2: and the right to the blue. This is an article
Speaker 2: from Real Clear Investigations. They said private school choice advocates
Speaker 2: expect that twenty twenty five will be the year that
Speaker 2: they finally bring the last big red state, Texas, into
Speaker 2: the fold. Well, I don't know about these people, but
Speaker 2: I mean Texas is already really big in terms of
Speaker 2: school choice. That was why Mark Hall, with his killing ed,
Speaker 2: showed the documentary about Fatalagulin and those schools they masqueraded
Speaker 2: as schools of science and math and they were making
Speaker 2: last time I had him on, it was about five
Speaker 2: years ago, and at that point in time, they're getting
Speaker 2: about seven hundred and fifty million dollars a year from
Speaker 2: the state of Texas. And so again you have to
Speaker 2: look at what is being talked, taught at these schools.
Speaker 2: Inspired by free market ideology and Christian faith, advocates aim
Speaker 2: to give families more educational choices by providing them with
Speaker 2: public funds. And that's where you need to be concerned
Speaker 2: about the danger and how they take it over. Once
Speaker 2: we finished with a low hanging fruit Texas and a
Speaker 2: few other red states, this movement will go to a
Speaker 2: blue straight state strategy, said Robert Enlow, CEO of an
Speaker 2: advocacy group called ED Choice. The political battles over school
Speaker 2: choice have and fierce, with critics such as the American
Speaker 2: Federation of Teachers president Randy Winegarden claiming that the programs
Speaker 2: will defund public schools. Well, we can all hope. And
Speaker 2: she is exhibit a this radical Marxist lesbian who is
Speaker 2: really not an activist. She is more of an evangelist
Speaker 2: for what she wants. She is one of the best
Speaker 2: reasons for people to get out of their schools because
Speaker 2: the teachers are like her, and you can't really know
Speaker 2: who these people are, they said. In universal programs now
Speaker 2: in twelve red states, all families rich and poor are
Speaker 2: typically eligible for public funds, even for children already in
Speaker 2: private school but you have to be very careful about
Speaker 2: how you take this money, be very careful that it
Speaker 2: doesn't come with strings attached, and be very careful that
Speaker 2: even if their strings are not there at the beginning,
Speaker 2: that they don't eventually put them on. And that's what
Speaker 2: my concern is, especially for the homeschoolers. I've always been
Speaker 2: concerned about this. When we put together a program when
Speaker 2: I was there with the Libertarian Party, we came up
Speaker 2: with a policy of saying, well, you know, we don't
Speaker 2: want to have the situation where the government is making
Speaker 2: demands and tweaking the curriculum all the rest of the stuff.
Speaker 2: So let's keep it. Let's let the money bypass the government,
Speaker 2: and let's do it with tax deductions or better yet,
Speaker 2: tax credits. It's a dollar for dollar thing. And let's
Speaker 2: allow individuals to give money to people for education. They
Speaker 2: don't have to be related. They can just pick a
Speaker 2: family and they can give them money for their education.
Speaker 2: It can be for homeschooling, or it can be for
Speaker 2: a private school or charter school or anything like that.
Speaker 2: And that way it bypasses the government and it doesn't
Speaker 2: go through their tentacles, and they cannot claim that they
Speaker 2: are therefore funding it, and that they are therefore going
Speaker 2: to define it and to control it. But unless you
Speaker 2: do something like that, you've got to be very careful
Speaker 2: that they don't wind up telling you what you can
Speaker 2: and cannot do. That's the real downside of this. And
Speaker 2: if it is something when we talked about it, we said, okay,
Speaker 2: so education is so important to the state that they're
Speaker 2: going to prioritize it over a lot of other things.
Speaker 2: They're going to make massive property taxes and all the
Speaker 2: rest of the stuff on our homes. Well, let them
Speaker 2: put their money where their mouth is. If you say
Speaker 2: that education is that important, fine, I agree. Let us
Speaker 2: pay for our education first before we send you any
Speaker 2: tax dollars. And I would say the same thing, And
Speaker 2: we did say the same thing about medical expenses. If
Speaker 2: you want to come in and tell us that you're
Speaker 2: going to provide free medical care, at least allow me
Speaker 2: to fully deduct or better yet, to take a tax
Speaker 2: credit on my medical expenses. But they don't do that
Speaker 2: because that's just a line for them to get control.
Speaker 2: In the same way, if you're a parent and you
Speaker 2: say that your children are the most important thing and
Speaker 2: the education is the most important thing. Put that before
Speaker 2: the money, and don't allow the money to give them
Speaker 2: control over your children. Render to Caesar. What is due
Speaker 2: to Caesar, and your children are not due to Caesar. S. C.
Speaker 2: Shank says. Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau just finished announcing
Speaker 2: his resignation. Parliament is prorogued until March the twenty fourth.
Speaker 2: Well that's good. People in Canada are safe for another
Speaker 2: couple of months. Look to Mark the Beast Carney. Oh yeah,
Speaker 2: Mark Karney is a piece of work, the UK's former
Speaker 2: central banker to replace them. Oh that out of the
Speaker 2: frying fan and end of the fire, isn't it. Thank
Speaker 2: you so much for joining us. Have a good day.
Speaker 7: Hello me, Voladimir Zelenski.
Speaker 11: I'm so tired of wearing these same T shirts everywhere
Speaker 11: for years. You'd think with all the billions I've skimmed
Speaker 11: off America.
Speaker 7: I could dress better.
Speaker 11: And I could if only David Knight would send me
Speaker 11: one of his beautiful gray mcguffin hoodies or a new
Speaker 11: black T shirt with the mcguffin logo in blue. But
Speaker 11: he told me to get lost. Maybe one of you
Speaker 11: American suckers can buy me some at the David Knightshow
Speaker 11: dot com.
Speaker 7: You should be able to buy me several hundred.
Speaker 11: Those amazing sand colored microphone hoodies are so beautiful, I'd
Speaker 11: wear something other than green military cosplay to my various
Speaker 11: gallas and social events.
Speaker 7: If you want to
Speaker 11: Save on shipping, just put it in the next package
Speaker 11: of bombs and missiles coming from the usas