Speaker 1: Using free speech to free minds.
Speaker 2: You are listening to the David Knight Show.
Speaker 1: It's August thirtieth. You're our lords, twenty twenty four, and
Speaker 1: this is the David Knight Show. I'm Gardner Goldsmith filling
Speaker 1: in for David today on a beautiful day. Thank you
Speaker 1: for joining us, and thank you to David and the
Speaker 1: entire David nineteen for letting me fill in on this
Speaker 1: very busy and beautiful day. We've got a lot to
Speaker 1: discuss today, breaking news, philosophy, history, and your opinions. Get ready,
Speaker 1: everybody will be rolling until noon today with special appearances
Speaker 1: by people like Kamala Harris, Dana Bash and even some
Speaker 1: more astute people like opinions from Glenn Greenwald and perhaps
Speaker 1: a joke or too from jd Vance a joke. Thanks
Speaker 1: for joining us on the David Night Show, one and all. Well,
Speaker 1: it has been a very busy past twenty four hours
Speaker 1: since the last David Knight Show started off at nine am.
Speaker 1: Of course, you can find David Knight's program live every
Speaker 1: Monday through Friday from nine to noon Eastern time, or
Speaker 1: as I sometimes say I often say on my Liberty
Speaker 1: Conspiracy program at six pm whatever time zone you call home.
Speaker 1: Hope you can make this your home away from home.
Speaker 1: Thanks for being here everyone. I'm Gardner Goldsmith filling in
Speaker 1: for David today who's taking so much deserved time off
Speaker 1: with the family. And I get to join the David
Speaker 1: Knight family here, join us live on d Live on Rumble,
Speaker 1: on Rockfan and of course on David's X. And I
Speaker 1: hope you will check his show out after the fact
Speaker 1: as well. Follow him at Liberty Terrian on X and
Speaker 1: of course the Davidknightshow dot com. Go to David Knight
Speaker 1: dot gold if you want to check out the Great
Speaker 1: Connection with the Great Tony Rdeburn, The Wise Wolf, Gold
Speaker 1: and Silver Exchange. And thank you for being here. And
Speaker 1: if you're interested in my work, I do work for MRCTV,
Speaker 1: the Media Research Center, and I also do my Liberty
Speaker 1: Conspiracy program every Monday through Friday at six pm or
Speaker 1: whatever time zone you call home. We are there Monday
Speaker 1: through Friday, breaking apart the news, gathering intellectual ammunition from
Speaker 1: the breaking news, making sure we don't forget things from
Speaker 1: the news cycle amnesia as things pass by us, and
Speaker 1: hopefully getting some information that we can pass on to
Speaker 1: our progeny to defend liberty, defend peace, and defend our
Speaker 1: God given rights and make friends. It's a beautiful day
Speaker 1: here in southern Russia, Hampshire, Ire, Yes, indeed Moscow, hamp Sharanski.
Speaker 1: As we spread the Russian propaganda, we are the adjut
Speaker 1: prop masters. So I want to welcome everyone and please
Speaker 1: hit the thumbs up, give it the shares over on X.
Speaker 1: I already see one of our fellow liberty conspirators is there.
Speaker 1: He goes by the name of I can't believe so
Speaker 1: I saw you out of the corner of my eye.
Speaker 1: I'll say a big hello to you and happy morning
Speaker 1: or night, whatever time zone. Thanks for being there, my friend,
Speaker 1: and everybody in the original home of Rockvin. Terrific people,
Speaker 1: and of course terrific people at the folks at MRCTV.
Speaker 1: I don't advertise my Liberty Conspiracy show at MRCTV. It's
Speaker 1: not part of my contract. But those of you who
Speaker 1: do find me at X thank you for doing so,
Speaker 1: because I do get to mention that at Liberty at MRCTV.
Speaker 1: So it's been an absolutely busy past twenty four hours.
Speaker 1: We've got a lot on tap today. We're going to
Speaker 1: be joined in the ten o'clock hour for a little
Speaker 1: while by the former head of the Free State Project,
Speaker 1: Carla Garrick, and she if you're not familiar with Carla,
Speaker 1: she actually won a Supreme Court ruling on being able
Speaker 1: to film the police, so it's going to be a
Speaker 1: very interesting conversation with her. We'll talk about local communities
Speaker 1: avoiding the technocratic, technotronic state and the snoopers that we
Speaker 1: see are trying to invade more and more with the
Speaker 1: most recent arrest of of Paval Durov, and what has
Speaker 1: been going on with the pressures on Rumble and X,
Speaker 1: and we'll discuss how we can create those local bonds
Speaker 1: with people and what the Free State Project has been doing.
Speaker 1: They're terrific, terrific people. I love them. I grew up
Speaker 1: in New Hampshire and yet having all these fellow libertarians
Speaker 1: here in New Hampshire has been such a blessing. I'm
Speaker 1: sort of an honorary Free State Project member. We'll also
Speaker 1: be joined by Eric Peters to talk about the latest
Speaker 1: on Ford's move to get away from their evs, which
Speaker 1: have been an absolute disaster, plus other information about freedom
Speaker 1: of movement and freedom of speech, because of course Eric
Speaker 1: has a lot to say about that, and perhaps we'll
Speaker 1: be joined by Jason Barker in the last half hours.
Speaker 1: So of course, Jason Barker Knights of the Storm. You
Speaker 1: can go to their website and find out all the
Speaker 1: information about so many exceptional broadcasters and opinion and thought
Speaker 1: thought investigators, you might say, over at the Nights of
Speaker 1: the Storm. And of course he has his show, The Foxhole.
Speaker 1: Nights of the Storm will be going out live tomorrow
Speaker 1: at ten am, so check them out on Rumble. So
Speaker 1: thanks for being here everyone. I hope I do a
Speaker 1: fantastic job for David on this day that optimistically we
Speaker 1: can say that we're going to be looking at some
Speaker 1: of the shadows of the shadow play. I was talking
Speaker 1: about Plato Socrates as parable of the Cave the other day.
Speaker 1: Evidently Plato and Socrates thought they were smart enough to
Speaker 1: see the puppets, and everybody else was just too ignorant.
Speaker 1: But there does seem to be a certain amount of
Speaker 1: shadow play that these folks are involved with this spectacle.
Speaker 1: Perhaps maybe not so much as shadow play, but the spectacle,
Speaker 1: the simulacrum, this spectacle, simulacrum of choice and free will
Speaker 1: and self government. As we saw the CNN interview pre
Speaker 1: recorded and it was so hard hitting with Dana Bash
Speaker 1: and Kamala Harris doing the wall. So we'll talk about
Speaker 1: that as well as a number of other things, as
Speaker 1: well as discussing, of course, a very interesting story that
Speaker 1: I brought up last night, and if you get to
Speaker 1: see the preview for the show, for the David Knight Show,
Speaker 1: we're going to be talking about the climate cult and
Speaker 1: just how disastrous it has been on Cape Cod in Massachusetts.
Speaker 1: You might have heard some of the stories about one
Speaker 1: of the wind turbine blades breaking apart off of Nantucket,
Speaker 1: washing up fiberglass pieces onto the beach, which everybody knows.
Speaker 1: It's absolutely great for the fish, it's great for the whales,
Speaker 1: it's great for the lobsters, and it's great for all
Speaker 1: the people whose livelihoods depend on it, who plunked a
Speaker 1: lot of money, time and effort into having families dependent
Speaker 1: upon their income. And yes, we're going to be hearing
Speaker 1: from one of those lobster men who's been working at
Speaker 1: it since essentially he was nineteen eighteen years old, and
Speaker 1: he had some very good opinions that we're making a
Speaker 1: buzz around New England. So I wanted to get that
Speaker 1: out to all of you, So thank you everyone for
Speaker 1: being there. Want to say hi, give me the fin
Speaker 1: by five and don't forget this is the last day
Speaker 1: for the month. So if we can generate some donations
Speaker 1: to David's show, and you can be the producers, as
Speaker 1: David's been saying recently, it's a great idea. You can
Speaker 1: help produce the show. You can back this show. Remember
Speaker 1: we're open over at Rumble, We're open at Rockfinn, and
Speaker 1: I'd love to see great amount of folks contributing because
Speaker 1: of course it's on my back today to finish off
Speaker 1: the month for David, and they were getting close, but
Speaker 1: we want to make sure that they can get as
Speaker 1: close as possible or surpass their goal for the month
Speaker 1: for donations for the show, because that's how this show operates.
Speaker 1: Thanks for being here, everybody. Really good time last night
Speaker 1: with the crew, the gang over at Liberty Conspiracy and
Speaker 1: I see already populating inside Rock Finn. We've got Harps inside,
Speaker 1: Steve Swan is there, Octo Spook is there, Lacy Toad
Speaker 1: is there, and Doug Luck. I salute you, I take off,
Speaker 1: I put on my Redactive Care and I take it
Speaker 1: off for you, and they're a great team as well.
Speaker 1: Monday through Thursday at four, So let's see what's on
Speaker 1: tap for the rest of the program and take a
Speaker 1: look at some of the things that happened over the
Speaker 1: past twenty four hours, or perhaps go back a little
Speaker 1: way so we don't get that news cycle amnesia. On
Speaker 1: my program, I often do something that I like to
Speaker 1: call the news flash. So today we're going to go
Speaker 1: on David Knight Show with the news flash, and it's
Speaker 1: got a little music in there, a little theme for warfare,
Speaker 1: not only internationally kinetically, but the politicians against you. Let's
Speaker 1: see what's been going on recently.
Speaker 3: Oh.
Speaker 4: Coinciding with this on Monday morning was the five hundredth
Speaker 4: flight of a plane from the United States to Israel
Speaker 4: bringing military equipment. Five hundred flights in the nine months
Speaker 4: of this genocidal war that we have paid for absolute.
Speaker 5: Jail.
Speaker 3: What sac Angel, You said that you carried weapons in war,
Speaker 3: but you have never deployed actually in a war zone.
Speaker 3: A campaign official said that you misspoke, did you.
Speaker 1: Well?
Speaker 6: First of all, I'm incredibly proud I've done twenty four
Speaker 6: years of wearing uniform of this country, equally proud of
Speaker 6: my service in a public school classroom, whether it's Congress
Speaker 6: or the governor. My record speaks for itself. But I
Speaker 6: think people are coming to get to know me. I
Speaker 6: speak like they do. I speak candidly, I wear my
Speaker 6: emotions on my sleeves, and I speak especially passionately about
Speaker 6: our children being shot in schools and around guns. So
Speaker 6: I think people know me, they know who I am,
Speaker 6: they know where my heart is. And again, my record
Speaker 6: has been out there for over forty years to be
Speaker 6: for itself.
Speaker 3: And the idea that you said that you were in war,
Speaker 3: did you miss speak as the campaign has said.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I said we were talking about in this case,
Speaker 6: this was after school shooting, the ideas of carrying these
Speaker 6: weapons of war, and my wife the English tone, my
Speaker 6: grammar's not always correct. But again I think we need
Speaker 6: to push back on this. There's no guarantee of free
Speaker 6: speech on misinformation or hate speech, and especially around our democracy.
Speaker 6: Right if it's not this, it's an attack on my
Speaker 6: children for showing love for me, or it's an attack
Speaker 6: on my dog. I'm not going to do that. And
Speaker 6: the one thing I'll never do is I'll never demean
Speaker 6: another member's service in any way. I never have and
Speaker 6: I never will.
Speaker 7: I know you, guys, sure. From the new splash. My
Speaker 7: name's Dan.
Speaker 8: I fish eight hundred lobster traps right where you're putting
Speaker 8: these tombstones, which is also the end of my business
Speaker 8: and the other people that fish down there.
Speaker 7: Let's just start with that second of all.
Speaker 8: In regards to toxicity of fiberglass, I have fiberglass boats.
Speaker 8: I don't know what you know about fiberglass, but when
Speaker 8: you apply it in the resins and the bonding units
Speaker 8: that are holding it together, you have to wear respirators
Speaker 8: for what reason, because it's toxic. If you breathe those fumes,
Speaker 8: the bonding agents that hold this stuff together, you'll get
Speaker 8: higher than a rat I.
Speaker 7: Know you, guys.
Speaker 9: Sure.
Speaker 10: From the new spash, We've increased disinformation research and tracking
Speaker 10: within the Surgeon General's Office.
Speaker 7: We're flagging problematic.
Speaker 10: Posts four Facebook that spread disinformation. We're working with doctors
Speaker 10: and medical professionals to connect to connected medical experts with
Speaker 10: popular with popular who are popular with their audiences, with
Speaker 10: accurate information and boost trusted content. So we're helping get
Speaker 10: trusted content out there.
Speaker 11: So what do you think about the use of artificial
Speaker 11: intelligence or lavender by the IDEF in identifying Hama's targets.
Speaker 11: And secondly, do you agree with Elon Musk about that
Speaker 11: the population decline is a risk for humanity?
Speaker 1: Well, well, always interesting things as the trajectory of the
Speaker 1: growth of the state seems to be not parabolic in
Speaker 1: any way whatsoever, but it just seems to be increasing, increasing, increasing.
Speaker 1: So we'll work together to see how we can break
Speaker 1: apart some of these stories. Offer your opinions, and of
Speaker 1: course get our guests involved in this as you saw, yes,
Speaker 1: Harrison Waltz, we're doing the Waltz with the ever hard
Speaker 1: hitting Dana Bash on the ever increasing or perhaps decreasing
Speaker 1: CNN as they just let a bunch of people go
Speaker 1: and they said they were going to be applying more
Speaker 1: of their attention to online cultural news. So whether you
Speaker 1: want to believe that cultural news, that's up to you
Speaker 1: as well. But of course last night was the very
Speaker 1: exciting discussion between Harris and Waltz and Dana Bash, and
Speaker 1: I thought there was a bit of an amusing one
Speaker 1: that came from of all people, jd Vance. So let
Speaker 1: me show you this because this is actually amusing. It's
Speaker 1: not his original idea, but it is kind of funny.
Speaker 1: And this is perhaps the way that some people thought
Speaker 1: the conversation went with Kamala Harris last night, as repeatedly
Speaker 1: she got asked questions and seemed to answer with completely
Speaker 1: different subjects that were on her own mind.
Speaker 12: Recent polls have shown a fifth of Americans can't locate
Speaker 12: the US on a world map.
Speaker 7: Why do you think this is?
Speaker 12: I personally believe that US Americans are unable to do
Speaker 12: so because some people out there in our nation don't
Speaker 12: have that. And I believe that our education like such
Speaker 12: as South Africa and Iraq everywhere like such as and
Speaker 12: I believe that they should our education over here, and
Speaker 12: the US should help the US, or should help South
Speaker 12: Africa and should help dirac in the Asian countries so
Speaker 12: we will be able to build up our future for
Speaker 12: Thank you very much, South Carolina.
Speaker 13: Okay, all right, I loved Mario's reaction as he's holding
Speaker 13: the microphone going okay that.
Speaker 1: That was interesting. It was at least it was interesting
Speaker 1: last night. And of course I'm a libertarian, voluntarist, a
Speaker 1: Christian anarchist. I believe that there is no claim that
Speaker 1: another person can legitimately make over you. I don't have
Speaker 1: a right to force you to do anything. You have
Speaker 1: a right to be left alone by me. I have
Speaker 1: a right to be left alone by you. We are
Speaker 1: blessed with rights by God, and superseding that and taking
Speaker 1: over somebody's choices for his own free will is to
Speaker 1: put ourselves between that person and God, and I think
Speaker 1: that that is illegitimate. I don't believe that any state
Speaker 1: entity has any authority over anyone, no matter how many
Speaker 1: pieces of paper they write, and no matter how long
Speaker 1: ago those pieces of paper were written by other people
Speaker 1: to force you to say you complied to it, you
Speaker 1: didn't give your consent. In most cases, most people, unless
Speaker 1: they joined the military, unless they got into politics, they
Speaker 1: didn't give their consent. However, I have done a lot
Speaker 1: of research and done a lot of writing on constitutional issues,
Speaker 1: taught political philosophy and things like that, so I'm aware
Speaker 1: of the way that the rules are supposed to operate
Speaker 1: under the US constitutional system, and I admire a lot
Speaker 1: of the things that those people tried to do during
Speaker 1: the constitutional period. I'd much prefer the Articles of Confederation,
Speaker 1: which saw eleven I believe people who actually served as
Speaker 1: President of the Congress, the Continental Congress. I believe John
Speaker 1: Hancock was one of them. But I understand what the
Speaker 1: rules are. And strangely, it is a simulacrum, isn't it,
Speaker 1: Because what they're doing and what is actually in the
Speaker 1: Constitution don't often comport. As people get closer and closer
Speaker 1: to the election time and they've got to decide, they've
Speaker 1: got to decide for their own self control. I don't
Speaker 1: understand how that works, but I've got a theme for that,
Speaker 1: and it's pretty good with this little video from the
Speaker 1: Psychedelic Furs. Fellow anarchists. Don't know whether there are Christians anarchists.
Speaker 1: Is really just anarchy, no human ruler. It's not violence
Speaker 1: the way that it was depicted by a lot of
Speaker 1: the socialist the early nine in nineteen hundreds.
Speaker 7: Uh.
Speaker 1: This comes from the Psychedelic First. It's called President Gas.
Speaker 1: It's pretty good.
Speaker 5: Yeah, stay, you can really move. Oh you have the
Speaker 5: Vultan Shaine. Have to get right out out.
Speaker 1: Of all this mass.
Speaker 7: You'll say that you anything, you believe all this cry hearing.
Speaker 12: Sac the prise.
Speaker 7: Kim Zoom.
Speaker 1: Yes, indeed, so many, so many pieces of choice lyrics
Speaker 1: there from Richard Butler who moved over from England, uh,
Speaker 1: basically chased out by the tax system and critics and
Speaker 1: so on, and lives in upstate New York and is
Speaker 1: an oil painter actually as well. Love those lyrics, stand up,
Speaker 1: We'll put you on your feet again. That facade of
Speaker 1: self control when everything is being managed and so on.
Speaker 1: So yes, let's get into a little bit of last
Speaker 1: night's extravaganza. What are we going to be discussing on
Speaker 1: the David Knight Show overall tonight today everyone, Well, for
Speaker 1: this thirtieth day, we're going to be of course talking
Speaker 1: about the Harris Waltz dance across CNN. While Trump provides
Speaker 1: promises to mandate insurance companies to pay for IVF, he
Speaker 1: was doing that while they were broadcasting the CNN interview.
Speaker 1: He was there with Tulsey Gabbert. So there are some
Speaker 1: major problems with IVF, and there's some major problem morally
Speaker 1: with IVF, and there are some major major constitutional and
Speaker 1: moral problems with mandating insurance companies pay for it or
Speaker 1: having the federal government subsidize it. And of course, Tim
Speaker 1: Waltz claimed in an indirect way that he and his
Speaker 1: wife father to children through IVF, which often is seen
Speaker 1: as a free choice parallel to abortion so called rights,
Speaker 1: the right to take another human life after it's already
Speaker 1: been created. No, I'm sorry, Well IVF they freeze embryos,
Speaker 1: human lives, they put them in stasis. So people who
Speaker 1: are backing that particularly forcing other people to pay for it,
Speaker 1: either insurance companies or my neighbor through taxation. And we'll
Speaker 1: look at this Donald Trump quote that is very problematic,
Speaker 1: and I understand how emotional it is for some people
Speaker 1: who can't can't have kids, and they try these different ways.
Speaker 1: But there's a much larger picture here that I hope
Speaker 1: people will consider. Then we'll have a Durov update, we'll
Speaker 1: have the speech attacks in the UK and more that
Speaker 1: tie into that war on producers, Kamala Harris's Border Tyrannus
Speaker 1: and more s'mores. We'll talk with of course, the Free
Speaker 1: State Project and Carla Garrick who be telling us about
Speaker 1: our Supreme Court battles. And we'll get into yes, evs
Speaker 1: and climate cultis on Cape cod with Eric Peters. But
Speaker 1: let's get into this CNN story. And here's some of
Speaker 1: the quotes that I found. I wanted to share them
Speaker 1: one with you.
Speaker 3: You said that you carried weapons in war, but you
Speaker 3: have never deployed actually in a war zone. A campaign
Speaker 3: official said that you misspoke, did you well?
Speaker 6: First of all, I'm incredibly proud I've done twenty four
Speaker 6: years of wearing the uniform of this country, equally proud
Speaker 6: of my service in a public school classroom, whether it's
Speaker 6: Congress or the governor. My record speaks for itself. But
Speaker 6: I think people are coming to get to know me.
Speaker 6: I speak like they do. I speak candidately, I wear
Speaker 6: my emotions on my sleeves, and I speak especially passionately
Speaker 6: about our children being shot in schools and around guns.
Speaker 6: So I think people know me, they know who I am,
Speaker 6: they know where my heart is. And again, my record
Speaker 6: has been out there for over forty years.
Speaker 14: To be for itself.
Speaker 1: So in other words, I'm not directly answering the question.
Speaker 1: I think people understand that you know, they know me,
Speaker 1: so they know you're a liar. Is that is that
Speaker 1: the story? Is that the story? And bring in all
Speaker 1: that folksy stuff that you know you worked with the
Speaker 1: schools and all that other stuff. In other words, you
Speaker 1: were a public parasite even then? Is that is that
Speaker 1: the story? Tim? And Emmy Moore is chatting with us
Speaker 1: over on X and she says, our governor Timmy is
Speaker 1: the worst evil Santa. Thank you, Mary Ellen. That's classic.
Speaker 1: We'll continue.
Speaker 7: The idea that you said that you were in war.
Speaker 7: Did you misspeak as the campaign has had.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I said we were talking about in the cases
Speaker 6: was after school shooting.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, so there was a reason, see it was
Speaker 1: it was it was it was more important to see
Speaker 1: the issue of me trying to make sure that, oh,
Speaker 1: teachers can't exercise their right to self defense, and kids
Speaker 1: are put at greater risk by not having anybody who's
Speaker 1: an adult who works at the place being armed, you know,
Speaker 1: being more vulnerable because people know nobody has guns there,
Speaker 1: so obviously they'll choose to go to the place that
Speaker 1: doesn't have guns. Yeah, we won't talk about that stuff.
Speaker 1: And it was really important to me because of course
Speaker 1: I'm just a massive gun grabber. So don't you get it.
Speaker 1: Anything I say should be acceptable. And of course if
Speaker 1: you actually think that what I said was a lie,
Speaker 1: well I've got an excuse for that too. My wife
Speaker 1: knows I'm kind of a dufus.
Speaker 6: Carrying these weapons of war, and my wife the english
Speaker 6: and tone. My grammar is not always correct, but again.
Speaker 1: Thank you, thank you. There's another check off for me
Speaker 1: for vice president, which I would never never support anyway.
Speaker 1: That's good. Ah, she knows I'm not really good with
Speaker 1: my Steve Martin says, some people they have a way
Speaker 1: with words, and other people, well, they just not have way.
Speaker 1: I guess, well, I guess that's Tim Walltz.
Speaker 6: If it's not this, it's an attack on my children
Speaker 6: for showing love for me, or it's an.
Speaker 1: Attack on my dog, and now we engage in gas lighting.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Tim. Great. Yeah, your ticket is at the
Speaker 1: end and you can go grab your Samson night luggage.
Speaker 1: Thanks for playing our game.
Speaker 7: I'm not going to do that.
Speaker 6: And the one thing I'll never do is I'll never
Speaker 6: demean another member's service in any way.
Speaker 14: I never have and I never will.
Speaker 1: Okay, So, as I noted in the notes, as the
Speaker 1: team here at the Liberty Conspiracy Program noted, of course,
Speaker 1: he won't demean in any way. He'll just pretend that
Speaker 1: he left the service at a rank that was actually
Speaker 1: higher than the rank that he had, so he won't
Speaker 1: demean others. He'll just try to put himself above where
Speaker 1: he actually was, which is actually indirectly demeaning others, claiming
Speaker 1: that you're better than you actually were, while they actually
Speaker 1: do the work to get there. But he's not demeaning
Speaker 1: others in any way whatsoever. Wow, Wow, what an offensive person. Unbelievable. Now,
Speaker 1: let's show what Donald Trump was doing at the same
Speaker 1: time time that this was on.
Speaker 15: This is only the second time I've spoken about it publicly.
Speaker 15: But my husband and I were married almost ten years ago.
Speaker 7: We wanted to start a family. We were very excited
Speaker 7: about it. Unfortunately, it was very difficult. We were not.
Speaker 15: Successful in trying to get pregnant for us, IVF seemed
Speaker 15: to be the only option and the last resort. As
Speaker 15: you know, it's a pretty difficult process.
Speaker 7: It's very very expensive. I was in Congress at the time.
Speaker 15: Traveling, I would carry the medicine that I had to
Speaker 15: administer shots to myself, sometimes at an airport bathroom, And
Speaker 15: ultimately the most difficult part was every time going to
Speaker 15: the doctor for another transfer and hoping that it would
Speaker 15: result in a positive pregnancy test, and then.
Speaker 7: Being heartbroken over and over every time that test came
Speaker 7: back negative. Now I know some of your opponents, your
Speaker 7: political opponents are saying that you want to ban IVF.
Speaker 7: While it didn't work for us, it's worked for a
Speaker 7: lot of families.
Speaker 15: And I just know that there are women and couples
Speaker 15: in this crowd or those who are watching here tonight,
Speaker 15: who may be going through this same struggle and are
Speaker 15: concerned about being able to have this option, either because
Speaker 15: they might not be able to afford it, or they're
Speaker 15: concerned that it just may not be available, And I'd
Speaker 15: love for you to talk to them about how they
Speaker 15: should feel.
Speaker 16: Well, thank you very much, Chelsea. And I didn't know
Speaker 16: about your situation. And it's tough stuff, right tough. Life
Speaker 16: is pretty tough. It can be beautiful, but it can
Speaker 16: be difficult. We are doing something with IBF because if
Speaker 16: as you know, for friends and people, you know, it's
Speaker 16: really worked.
Speaker 7: Out very well. For a lot of people.
Speaker 16: It gave them a child when they would not have
Speaker 16: had a child. And I told my people I wanted
Speaker 16: to look at this a couple of weeks ago. And
Speaker 16: as you know, we have no taxes. One of the
Speaker 16: thing called tips. You know that, and I said, tell me,
Speaker 16: we did three things. We did that and we did
Speaker 16: no tax to seniors on social security benefits. We want
Speaker 16: to have that. And I've been seeing a lot of IBF,
Speaker 16: and I kept theory that I'm against it, and I'm
Speaker 16: actually very much forward in fact in Alabama where the
Speaker 16: judge ruled against it, and I countered the judge and
Speaker 16: came out with a very strong statement for it, and
Speaker 16: the Alabama.
Speaker 7: Very quick in your response.
Speaker 16: I was, but they were too. They were amazing. The
Speaker 16: legislature approved virtually my statement. I mean full IBF, and
Speaker 16: it's really gone. It's terrific. And I said, so with
Speaker 16: the tips in with the Social Security that no taxes
Speaker 16: on Social Security, I said, maybe for IVF, and I've
Speaker 16: been looking at it, and what we're going to do
Speaker 16: is for people that are using IVF, which is fertilization,
Speaker 16: we are going the government is going to pay for it,
Speaker 16: or we're going to get or mandate your insurance company
Speaker 16: to pay for it, which is going.
Speaker 1: To be great. Okay. So I decided to wedge that
Speaker 1: Donald Trump's statement in between bookends of the Harris Waltz
Speaker 1: interview specifically an editorial decision, specifically to remind myself and
Speaker 1: perhaps give me the opportunity to tell others that, in
Speaker 1: my view, this is not a this is a non choice.
Speaker 1: You don't have I don't have a choice here. Now,
Speaker 1: maybe some people think that they can see that sort
Speaker 1: of thing from Donald Trump. They can see the massively
Speaker 1: u blatantly unconstitutional approach and the lack of any sort
Speaker 1: of moral conversation about IVF and how it is a
Speaker 1: cipher to abortion because numerous fetuses are created. These are
Speaker 1: created and then put into stasis and they're frozen. And
Speaker 1: that point is not being addressed by some people. Maybe
Speaker 1: they're hearing it, but they think there are other things
Speaker 1: on balance that would drive them towards voting for Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: As we get closer and closer to the elections, I
Speaker 1: think it's important for me to make sure that I
Speaker 1: put them together and show that for me, at least,
Speaker 1: they are a non choice. I already philosophically will not
Speaker 1: support putting people into offices, occupying the offices of levers
Speaker 1: of control over people. I just won't do that. I
Speaker 1: won't do that in any way, in any way that
Speaker 1: I can. I try to eliminate the burdens of the
Speaker 1: state over other people. In argumentation or if I do vote,
Speaker 1: it's a town vote on a budget, and I always
Speaker 1: vote no, and so I think that this hopefully will
Speaker 1: generate some people who might be on the fence. As
Speaker 1: we get closer and closer and the explosion of the
Speaker 1: election arrives, is that pressure builds and builds and builds.
Speaker 1: I know a lot of people are going to say, well,
Speaker 1: I've got to make a choice. This is to me
Speaker 1: a non choice. So I thought that it would be
Speaker 1: pretty important to bring that up. And I want to
Speaker 1: just mention again the idea of mandates on anybody through
Speaker 1: the state is immoral, and mandates under the Constitution for
Speaker 1: anything like that are just They're rivaled, they're in your
Speaker 1: face unconstitutional. And he already has sworn an oath to
Speaker 1: the Constitution, So I don't know if someone might want
Speaker 1: to remind him of that, but I understand how emotional
Speaker 1: is for Tulca Gabbard. She didn't address it. She's sworn
Speaker 1: an oath to the Constitution numerous times, and she did
Speaker 1: so while she was in the Middle military. So that,
Speaker 1: of course then brings me to thoughts of how could
Speaker 1: she remain in the military when the United States government
Speaker 1: was shipping her overseas without any declaration of war, When
Speaker 1: as a judge Apollo the Neapoloitano mentioned to Gerald Celente
Speaker 1: in their conversation on Wednesday, the United States has essentially
Speaker 1: nine hundred bases scattered all around the globe. No declaration
Speaker 1: of war. The president is not supposed to lead troops
Speaker 1: unless there's a declaration of war. The rest of it,
Speaker 1: it's supposed to be we are the members of the militia.
Speaker 1: We can be called up if there's a declaration of
Speaker 1: war to go after enemies from a foreign nation state.
Speaker 1: If the enemies are not suited under the guise of
Speaker 1: the foreign nation state, they don't declare war against the
Speaker 1: nation state. They issue letters of mark and reprisal. So
Speaker 1: all of this authorization to use military force, the AUMF
Speaker 1: from the w Bush era going into Iraq, going into
Speaker 1: Afghanistan and then taking people at the rendition sites, putting
Speaker 1: them in Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, none of that that
Speaker 1: is so offensive to the concept of the US Constitution.
Speaker 1: But it is a mutation, and I think a logical
Speaker 1: mutation from the Monroe doctrine, where James Monroe essentially started
Speaker 1: that to say, well, you know, in order to protect
Speaker 1: the United States, we're going to go make sure that
Speaker 1: most of the Caribbean is protected wink wink by the
Speaker 1: United States, which led to a lot of United States
Speaker 1: overthrows of government in the Caribbean and South America, and
Speaker 1: they just metastasized it. Now it's all around the world.
Speaker 1: Got to give money to Israel, got to give weapons
Speaker 1: to Israel. How about you leave us out of it,
Speaker 1: regardless of where one stands on the issue. How about
Speaker 1: I'm left out of all of that, and I'm left
Speaker 1: out of the moral imposition of having to pay for
Speaker 1: somebody else to create fetuses and then freeze them and
Speaker 1: never see their lives actually come about any more than that. Essentially,
Speaker 1: it's freeze killing. You know, it's birds eyeing other people.
Speaker 1: I don't get it. But there's a lot more to
Speaker 1: talk about regarding the CNN interview, So let's go with
Speaker 1: Glenn Greenwald. Glenn Greenwald had a very good comment on this,
Speaker 1: and we'll show a little bit of the interview with
Speaker 1: Harrison Waltz. He says, of course, Glenn Greenwald, of course,
Speaker 1: working with Edward Snowden now lives in South America because
Speaker 1: he's not coming back to the United States very often.
Speaker 1: He's not going to live here. He'll be in danger
Speaker 1: of getting shut down by the government, sort of like
Speaker 1: you know what the French have done to the CEO
Speaker 1: of Telegram. And by the way I mentioned last night
Speaker 1: in the program, this has secondary effects for all the
Speaker 1: employees of these businesses. The businesses, the employees of Telegram
Speaker 1: that were who were stationed in the UAE, they've been
Speaker 1: they left. They were obviously warned by the heads get
Speaker 1: out of there. We don't know whether it to be
Speaker 1: safe for you. Because of course the authorities, whether it
Speaker 1: be in France or another nation state can a also
Speaker 1: go after the employees for being part and parcel. They
Speaker 1: can say it's joint liability. You too are involved in
Speaker 1: getting this open platform for people to share information and
Speaker 1: we just don't like that. Even though they don't actually
Speaker 1: go after the criminals who might be dealing in child
Speaker 1: porn on Facebook or mastadon or something like that, they
Speaker 1: just go after the platform and say we don't like
Speaker 1: what you're putting out there. We want that censored, and
Speaker 1: we want backdoors to get access to what you do.
Speaker 1: Here's what Glenn Greenwald said, Kamala didn't even remotely pretend
Speaker 1: she was explaining why the things she pretended to believe
Speaker 1: when running in twenty twenty are now things she pretends
Speaker 1: she no longer believes, and from all appearances, he says,
Speaker 1: there was no zero attempt to insist on an answer.
Speaker 1: They picked Dana Bash for a reason, So here we go, Jangs.
Speaker 3: Generally speaking, how should voters look at some of the
Speaker 3: changes they you've made that you've explained some of here
Speaker 3: in your policy. Is it because you have more experience
Speaker 3: now and you've learned more about the information? Is it
Speaker 3: because you were running for president and a Democratic primary?
Speaker 3: And should they feel comfortable and confident that what you're
Speaker 3: saying now is going to be your policy moving forward?
Speaker 17: Dana, I think the most important and most significant aspect
Speaker 17: of my policy perspective and decisions is my values have
Speaker 17: not changed. You've mentioned the Grey New Deal. I have
Speaker 17: always believed and I've worked on it, that the climate
Speaker 17: crisis is real, that it is an urgent matter to
Speaker 17: which we should apply metrics that include holding ourselves.
Speaker 1: Hear that she said the word metrics, so it's obviously
Speaker 1: very sophisticated, even though she's not addressing the fact that
Speaker 1: she has completely different positions on certain things like the
Speaker 1: border wall and fracking. That sort of stuff. She's changed
Speaker 1: a position on those things. Fracking should have nothing to
Speaker 1: do with the federal government unless there's a dispute between
Speaker 1: the states and the border. Well, there's no word immigration
Speaker 1: in the US Constitution is a state issue, as Thomas
Speaker 1: Jefferson mentioned in the Kentucky Resolve number four and seventeen
Speaker 1: ninety eight. But we'll continue because she just mentioned metrics,
Speaker 1: so obviously she knows more than all the rest of
Speaker 1: the people out there. She's going to try to control to.
Speaker 17: Deadlines around time. We did that with the Inflation Reduction Act.
Speaker 17: We have set goals for the United States of America
Speaker 17: and by extension, the globe around when we should meet
Speaker 17: certain standards for reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.
Speaker 1: And of course it's we because it's a crisis as
Speaker 1: they define it, they'll define the crisis. It's all for
Speaker 1: the public good, and of course the term public good,
Speaker 1: as David Night has mentioned, as I've mentioned about public
Speaker 1: health or public good for defense, you can be sacrificed.
Speaker 1: There's no such thing as the public that's just a
Speaker 1: word that's applied to groups of individuals. However they want
Speaker 1: to group them so they can sacrifice your rights for
Speaker 1: the so called public defense or for the so called
Speaker 1: public health lockdowns, like Tim Wallas had. David and I
Speaker 1: did a great interview with a woman and her husband.
Speaker 1: She went to jail for months just because they tried
Speaker 1: to keep their business open. Which, by the way, if
Speaker 1: you want to bring this up to any of your
Speaker 1: state politicians, there's something in the US Constitution called the
Speaker 1: contract Clause, and that states that no state government can
Speaker 1: interfere in the fulfillment of already existing private contracts. So
Speaker 1: if you've got a contract as an employee with your
Speaker 1: employer or the other way around, or you've hired somebody
Speaker 1: to come work at your house or whatever it is,
Speaker 1: and then all of a sudden, Tim Walla says, we're
Speaker 1: going to have lockdowns. It's going to be really, really
Speaker 1: important for the public health, so we're going to sacrifice
Speaker 1: your individual rights. Guess what he's breaching the contract clause.
Speaker 1: Of course, if you bring it up to him in
Speaker 1: a town hall, any forum, even though he multiple times
Speaker 1: has swore an oath to protect and defend the Constitution,
Speaker 1: I doubt he would understand anything of what you're talking about,
Speaker 1: but you would be right. You would nail them but
Speaker 1: doesn't matter if they've got the power that you can
Speaker 1: be right all you want. That's the problem. I'm sure
Speaker 1: Alexander Hamilton is very pleased with his made up idea
Speaker 1: of the Constitution being malleable and a living document. Wink wink.
Speaker 1: Thanks Al.
Speaker 17: As an example, that value has not changed. My value
Speaker 17: around what we need to do to secure our border,
Speaker 17: that value has not changed. I spent two terms as
Speaker 17: the Attorney General of California prosecuting transnational criminal organization violation.
Speaker 1: So was she going after NATO? Who U? N other ones?
Speaker 1: Maybe the CIA, the NSA? How about the people in Congress? Yeah?
Speaker 1: You know, great, when you get a guy like Fetterman
Speaker 1: walking out of Congress, you got a couple of ladies
Speaker 1: who have relatives probably living in gods, and they're like, hey,
Speaker 1: could you stop sending weapons to Israel? And he waves
Speaker 1: an Israeli flag at them. But there's no international criminality
Speaker 1: going on in any way with the United States government,
Speaker 1: just as counter Biden or the members of barismations.
Speaker 17: Of American laws regarding the passage illegal passage of guns, drugs,
Speaker 17: and human beings across our border.
Speaker 13: My values have not changed, so full Okay, thanks Dana,
Speaker 13: that was Gardana or whatever your name is.
Speaker 1: That was hard hitting, the hard hitting journalism. I don't
Speaker 1: want to go in, you know, too hard on these people.
Speaker 1: But yeah, Greenwald nailed it pretty well. I think now
Speaker 1: let's talk about Walsh and his lies. Colin Rugg has
Speaker 1: something else on X which I thought was valuable, and
Speaker 1: I want to go into just a little bit about this,
Speaker 1: you know, this claim and just give you a reminder
Speaker 1: from my MRCTV work a Colin Rugg says. Just in
Speaker 1: CNN's Dana Bash asks Tim Waltz about his stolen valor scandal.
Speaker 1: Waltz immediately starts bragging about his record. Question you said
Speaker 1: you carried weapons in war, but you have never deployed
Speaker 1: actually in a war zone. Have you ever? You have never,
Speaker 1: she says. He says, I'm super proud of my military service.
Speaker 1: I'm proud to have done twenty four years of wearing
Speaker 1: a uniform in this country. I will never shame someone
Speaker 1: else for their service. This guy has holy s on it.
Speaker 1: I just want to mention, as a matter of constitutional fact,
Speaker 1: ever since World War Two, no United States soldier, regardless
Speaker 1: of the fatuous claims of that man. Waltz as he
Speaker 1: dances around the truth. No US soldier has carried weapons
Speaker 1: of war in war. Technically speaking, they might have gone
Speaker 1: into combat, but they weren't at war because they have
Speaker 1: not declared war. And that is a very hard truth
Speaker 1: to mention to people. It sounds brutal, but it is
Speaker 1: the truth. That is the truth. And if people believe
Speaker 1: that they are constitutionalists, they had to look for the
Speaker 1: word immigration in the Constitution. It's not there. And just
Speaker 1: remember the declaration of war has a capital D in
Speaker 1: a capital W because it was seen as a term
Speaker 1: of art. You didn't take out women and children and
Speaker 1: other civilians. He didn't torture people. But of course the
Speaker 1: Bush administration sent Alberto Gonzalez from the White House to
Speaker 1: Congress at the time they wanted to invade Iraq to
Speaker 1: ask them specifically not to declare war. And one guy
Speaker 1: named Ron Paul said, the United States shouldn't be invading
Speaker 1: this land, but I will offer a declaration of war
Speaker 1: to put you all on record to show, and he
Speaker 1: got three votes. Tom Tancredo voted in favor of it,
Speaker 1: and someone else did, but he didn't vote for it.
Speaker 1: Ron Paul did not vote for it, so as a
Speaker 1: quick reminder. I want to turn to my MRCTV site
Speaker 1: because there are a couple pieces here that I think
Speaker 1: he might find valuable, and this one is one of
Speaker 1: them that pertains to Tim Wallace's troubles. As I noted,
Speaker 1: Tim Wallace's troubles, troubles with truth appear to multiply. So
Speaker 1: here's this piece, and thanks to the MRCTV team for
Speaker 1: putting together a good production.
Speaker 18: Hey guess what.
Speaker 19: In addition to his offensive attacks on freedom of association
Speaker 19: during his unconstitutional COVID lockdowns in Minnesota, In addition to
Speaker 19: his offensive adulation for censorship of speech that he doesn't like,
Speaker 19: and added to his extant padding of his military record,
Speaker 19: charming Minnesota Governor Tim Waltz is being cited for.
Speaker 14: More apparent deceit.
Speaker 1: About his own life.
Speaker 19: Hi everyone, I'm Gardner Goldsmith for MRCTV, and here's this story.
Speaker 1: Eleanna Johnson reports for the Washington Free Beacon that the
Speaker 1: deceit of mister Waltz seems to go as deep as
Speaker 1: his boast that the Nebraska Chamber of Commerce called him
Speaker 1: and get this outstanding young Nebraskan. Yes, all the way
Speaker 1: over to his claim that he and his wife had
Speaker 1: children through in virtual fertilization IVF. Now, on the self
Speaker 1: promotion of his time in Nebraska, she writes this quote
Speaker 1: Waltz's two thousand and six boast about being named outstanding
Speaker 1: Young Nebraskan can still be found in an archived version
Speaker 1: of his campaign website. That November, the president of the
Speaker 1: Nebraska Chamber of Commerce, Barry Kennedy, wrote Waltz to object,
Speaker 1: It has come to my attention that is part of
Speaker 1: your campaign for US Congress, you have posted your by
Speaker 1: biography on your website that claims you received an award
Speaker 1: from the Nebraska Chamber of Commerce for your service to
Speaker 1: the business community. He stated, plainly, we researched this matter
Speaker 1: and can confirm that you have not been the recipient
Speaker 1: of any award from the Nebraska Chamber of Commerce. End quote. Well, clearly,
Speaker 1: that is speech from mister Kennedy that should be censored. Ms.
Speaker 1: Johnson also notes that mister Kennedy asked that Waltz eliminate
Speaker 1: the reference from his website, and that mister Kennedy said
Speaker 1: that the Chamber had endorsed Walts's opponent, Gil Guttenet, the
Speaker 1: Republican incumbent, and what was the public response from Wallace's
Speaker 1: congressional campaign quote. Walce's campaign manager at the time said
Speaker 1: he'd in fact won an award from the Junior Chamber
Speaker 1: of Commerce, according to a report from Minnesota's Alpha News,
Speaker 1: and attributed the mistake to a typographical error. The Harris
Speaker 1: Waltz campaign did not respond to a request for comment,
Speaker 1: but Gutenacht, who lost to Waltz that year, did speak
Speaker 1: to the Washington Free Beacon. It fits a pattern of
Speaker 1: misleading and fabricated statements he has made throughout his political
Speaker 1: and personal life. He recalled all political figures are guilty
Speaker 1: of a bit of puffery. He frequently went well beyond
Speaker 1: that into prevarication end quote. Yet it's Waltz who gets
Speaker 1: on the proverbial high horse and endorses government censorship to
Speaker 1: stop what he calls misinformation.
Speaker 20: There's no guaranteed of free speech on misinformation.
Speaker 1: Well, Johnson has uncovered more, and it gets even more disturbing.
Speaker 1: Not only does these censorious Waltz appear willing to lie
Speaker 1: about his military record, even as he receives little pushback
Speaker 1: for trampling the Bill of Rights via his lockdowns and
Speaker 1: calls for gun grabs, he appears to have lied about
Speaker 1: the conception of his own children. Thank God from IVF,
Speaker 1: my wife and I have two beautiful children.
Speaker 19: Quote.
Speaker 1: In the midst of the Democratic Convention, it emerged that
Speaker 1: Waltz had lied about his own children. The governor has
Speaker 1: made his family's fertility struggles a central part of the
Speaker 1: narrative as he introduces himself to the country. Thank God
Speaker 1: for IDF, my wife and I have two beautiful children,
Speaker 1: he told MSNBC in July. But his kids were not
Speaker 1: actually conceived via in vitro fertilization. Rather, they were conceived
Speaker 1: through a far less costly, less invasive, and non controversial
Speaker 1: procedure known as intrauterine in seminar, which does not involve
Speaker 1: the cultivation and potential destruction of embryos end quote. But
Speaker 1: of course one can readily recognize two characteristics from that statement. First,
Speaker 1: it's a statement that is slightly ambiguous, not offering a
Speaker 1: direct cause and effect relationship between IVF and his children.
Speaker 1: But of course what he does is imply it he
Speaker 1: thanks God for IVF, allowing the reader or the viewer
Speaker 1: to think that it is a procedure that actually led
Speaker 1: to his offspring. But it also allows him an out
Speaker 1: to say that he never directly claimed IVF gave him
Speaker 1: and his wife their two beautiful children. And then there's
Speaker 1: the thinking of God part thanking of God for IVF
Speaker 1: in the first place. Well, since IVF creates so called
Speaker 1: spare embryos that are human beings but become trapped in stasis, frozen,
Speaker 1: not implanted in them, and not allowed to live, one
Speaker 1: wonders how Walts could muster the gall to cite the
Speaker 1: Lord as he praises the procedure. Obviously, Walts brings in
Speaker 1: IVF because in many cases it is a parallel to abortion. Okay,
Speaker 1: so posit there, And you know, to be as fair
Speaker 1: as possible to those people who have you know, discussed
Speaker 1: this amongst you know, in couples and things like that,
Speaker 1: some people might like an IVF too. Well, what if
Speaker 1: you're a couple and your wife has had numerous miscarriages
Speaker 1: and and you know, how how do they decide that
Speaker 1: doesn't that show that there's an increased risk of another
Speaker 1: miscarriage or something that's I think that's quite different than
Speaker 1: intentionally knowingly working with scientists to intentionally and knowingly create
Speaker 1: human lives that you know, some of those lives will
Speaker 1: never continue. That's a different matter. You know, one of
Speaker 1: it is up to God and one of in the
Speaker 1: hands of people, and you're actually taking steps to prevent
Speaker 1: the furtherance of life. So there's a major problem with that,
Speaker 1: I think. But you know, I did want to add
Speaker 1: that at least to you know, mention some of the
Speaker 1: things that come to my mind as I try to
Speaker 1: engage in a pseudo conversation with people, or at least
Speaker 1: to some of the things that I've heard from people
Speaker 1: about the procedure. So Tim Waltz, Yeah, Tim ay Is,
Speaker 1: he's got some problems, but there's some other problems when
Speaker 1: we look at this conversation, and of course I want
Speaker 1: to talk about this. Let's go with Max Blumenthal on
Speaker 1: Kamala Harris and her lies about the United States support
Speaker 1: sending weapons out. And regardless of someone's position on this
Speaker 1: about Israel and Palestine, the occupy occupying, I think we
Speaker 1: know who might be on the bad side, the occupying
Speaker 1: force of the Zionist State of Israel. And by the way,
Speaker 1: I guess I can't complain about statism the state in
Speaker 1: the generic sense if it's attached to Israel. If I'm
Speaker 1: in Florida, on a college campus or anything like that, because,
Speaker 1: of course, of two pieces of legislation that Ron DeSantis
Speaker 1: signed that Kurtail's speech when it comes to Israel, he
Speaker 1: signed both of these in Israel. One of them means
Speaker 1: that you can't hand out flyers opposing the United States
Speaker 1: policy on a college campus, a state run campus in Florida.
Speaker 1: And so of course that's a big black mark on
Speaker 1: Ron DeSantis. But here's what Max Blumenthal had to say
Speaker 1: about Harris's hypocrisy. Here's the clearest indication, of course, he's
Speaker 1: from the gray zone. He's going to be at Gerald
Speaker 1: Solente's gathering on the twenty eighth of September. In fact,
Speaker 1: I'll show you the sign for that, just to make
Speaker 1: sure that I promoted a little bit, because it's going
Speaker 1: to be a great one in Kingston, New York. He's
Speaker 1: got a great spot there. Here's the closest indication that
Speaker 1: Kamala Harris is bought and bossed by the Israel lobby,
Speaker 1: which is one of the top I think five or
Speaker 1: three lobbies in Washington, the APEX, and will do nothing
Speaker 1: different than genocide Joe. In between tired bromides, Kamala repeats
Speaker 1: the Hamas mass rape hoax that was fed to her
Speaker 1: by Israel lobbyists. There is no evidence of that. And
Speaker 1: as I've mentioned on my program, the family of one
Speaker 1: of the women whom they said was mass raped before
Speaker 1: the Hamas attackers killed her, she was on the phone
Speaker 1: with her sister minutes before she got killed, so she
Speaker 1: didn't get mass raped. There is no evidence. It hasn't
Speaker 1: been brought up. The beheading of children of babies, that
Speaker 1: hasn't been brought up. And if you saw that road
Speaker 1: with all the burned out cars from that festival on
Speaker 1: October seventh, the weapons necessary to do that were not
Speaker 1: brought over by Hamas on their motorcycles from Apache helicopters
Speaker 1: supplied by the United States government. As of course, they
Speaker 1: engaged in the Hannibal directive saying just wipe out everybody
Speaker 1: and just show massive retaliatory force, which is exactly what
Speaker 1: they're doing in Gaza. And of course they're not even
Speaker 1: giving anybody. They're using the Lavender AI brought to us.
Speaker 1: And I've got a piece on this that I want
Speaker 1: to show a little bit later to Carla and see
Speaker 1: what she thinks about this. The Lavender AI, which was
Speaker 1: helped to be developed by Peter Teel, which has a
Speaker 1: massive error rate. And they supposedly target terrorists there in Gaza,
Speaker 1: and of course they kill more civilians in places like
Speaker 1: schools where people are praying. Of course they've killed un
Speaker 1: food workers and independent food workers. So and shut down
Speaker 1: food gates, put up that bogus pier which operated for
Speaker 1: twenty days cost almost four million dollars, didn't do any thing.
Speaker 1: All they have to do if they want to cease
Speaker 1: fire in Israel is stop giving them the weapons. But
Speaker 1: let's go with Max and hear what Kamali says.
Speaker 3: President Biden has tried unsuccessfully to end the war between
Speaker 3: Israel and Hamas in Gaza.
Speaker 14: He's been doing it for months and months along with you.
Speaker 3: Would you do anything differently, for example, would you withhold
Speaker 3: some US weapons shipments to Israel. That's what a lot
Speaker 3: of people on the progressive left want you to do.
Speaker 17: Let me be very clear, I'm unequivocal and unwavering in
Speaker 17: my commitment to Israel's defense.
Speaker 1: And it's because you know, they've totally signed on to
Speaker 1: the US Constitution too. And even if they made Israel
Speaker 1: the fifty first state hypothetically and they signed on to
Speaker 1: the constitution that gives her no more moral authority to
Speaker 1: tell me to pay for anything at all. That is
Speaker 1: the most fundamental, basic aspect of human relations.
Speaker 17: Ability to defend itself, And that's not going to change.
Speaker 17: But let's take a step back. October seven, twelve hundred
Speaker 17: people are massacred, many young people who are simply attending
Speaker 17: a music festival. Women were horribly raped. As I said then,
Speaker 17: I say today Israel had a right, has a right
Speaker 17: to defend itself. We would, and how it does so matters.
Speaker 17: Far too many innocent Palestinians have been.
Speaker 1: Killed, and how many is too many? Just again the
Speaker 1: fatuous language of these people as they dance around things.
Speaker 1: If Dana Bash is interested in, you know, at all
Speaker 1: play acting like a journalist, she might want to bring
Speaker 1: up some of these facts, but of course she's not.
Speaker 1: She's more interested in appearing on camera with the vice
Speaker 1: president and the governor of Minnesota and talking about these
Speaker 1: things on camera and get your paycheck. It seems we
Speaker 1: have got to.
Speaker 17: Get a deal done. We were in Doha. We have
Speaker 17: to get a deal done. This war must end, and
Speaker 17: we must get a deal. That is about getting the
Speaker 17: hostages out I've met with the families of the American hostages.
Speaker 17: Let's get the hostages out, Let's get the ceasefire done.
Speaker 3: But no change of policy in terms of arms and
Speaker 3: so forth.
Speaker 17: No, we have to get a deal done, Dana. We
Speaker 17: have to get a deal done. When you look at
Speaker 17: the significance of this to the families, to the people
Speaker 17: who are living in that region.
Speaker 1: Okay, that's enough. That's enough of that, just a couple
Speaker 1: of facts. Max has brought this up. Aaron Monte has
Speaker 1: brought this up. Judge Andrew Napolitano has brought this up.
Speaker 1: Douglas McGregor has brought this up. All sorts of people
Speaker 1: have brought this up. The peace proposal that is out
Speaker 1: there right now is not a peace proposal. It's being
Speaker 1: pushed by Israel. It's a temporary ceasefire that would see
Speaker 1: Hamas return their hostages and would not see what many
Speaker 1: people have not seen because Kamala Harris doesn't want to
Speaker 1: discuss it, the hundreds and hundreds of people that the
Speaker 1: Israeli government kidnaps inside the occupied territory of Gaza every year,
Speaker 1: sometimes thirteen fourteen year old kids and women, and the
Speaker 1: citation from the International Criminal Court. Calling Benjamin net and
Speaker 1: Yahoo a war criminal is not about what happened after
Speaker 1: October seventh. It's about what happened to some of those
Speaker 1: innocent people who were never given due process, who have
Speaker 1: been tortured according to the ICC in Israeli prisons. So
Speaker 1: there's a bit of a problem there. She tries to
Speaker 1: play to women, evidently with information that she can't back up.
Speaker 1: Dana Bash doesn't question it, but again, if she wants
Speaker 1: to play it a journalist, maybe she could actually, I
Speaker 1: don't know, talk to Max, go to the judge's rally
Speaker 1: on the twenty eighth and talk to some of the
Speaker 1: people who are going to be there twenty eighth Piece
Speaker 1: and Freedom Rally. Joe, Yes, indeed, Gerald Soilente is going
Speaker 1: to be there, of course, putting it on along with
Speaker 1: Max Blumenthal, his wife Anya Parampeal. Scott Ritter is going
Speaker 1: to be there as long as the FBI doesn't rate him. Again, yes,
Speaker 1: I know. It's a pretty interesting thing to see how
Speaker 1: they try to shut down anybody who seems to be
Speaker 1: associated with RT. They also went after that man Rick
Speaker 1: Sanchez as well. And Andrew Nepolitano of course is going
Speaker 1: to be speaking there on the twenty eighth in Kingston,
Speaker 1: New York at the Four Corners. It is a very
Speaker 1: cool place and they have great food, wonderful people. And
Speaker 1: that's where I got to meet in person, got to
Speaker 1: meet David and Karen and Travis after having been in
Speaker 1: touch with David for you know, quite a while, just
Speaker 1: chatting with him thanks to his help on an MRCTV
Speaker 1: project I was working on. So great, great people all
Speaker 1: the way around there September twenty eighth. I hope I
Speaker 1: can make it down. I think it's going to be great. Now,
Speaker 1: let's talk a little bit about the reactions to this. Actually, yes,
Speaker 1: I've got an opportunity. I want to show you how
Speaker 1: CNN is showing some of the key takeaways. So here
Speaker 1: it is. This is analysis from CNN by Zachary Wolf. Okay,
Speaker 1: so there they are. Great photograph. Vice President Kamala Harris
Speaker 1: sat down with CNN's Dana Bash for her first major
Speaker 1: TV interview since becoming the Democrats presidential nominee. I know
Speaker 1: it's great, Get warm up the coffee. It's going to
Speaker 1: be a blast. And they say, what would she do
Speaker 1: on day one in the White House?
Speaker 19: Lie?
Speaker 1: Oh sorry, no, sorry, that was the team. They put
Speaker 1: that in my other ear. I got it beamed in
Speaker 1: from Scotty at Star Trek when I was working at
Speaker 1: Star Trek, Livelong and prosper Scotty. Yeah, after a broad
Speaker 1: claim about focusing on the middle class, and by the way,
Speaker 1: don't forget they've already redefined the middle class as people
Speaker 1: who can get the earned income tax credit. And then
Speaker 1: they back when Obama came into office, they claim they
Speaker 1: gave the middle class a tax break. What they did
Speaker 1: was they amplified and expanded the number of people that
Speaker 1: they considered poor to get the earned income tax credit.
Speaker 1: They gave them forward forward payments for their Medicare, and
Speaker 1: of course they're going to double pay later evidently if
Speaker 1: the government's still around to these people. And then they
Speaker 1: claimed that that was a tax break for the middle class.
Speaker 1: Just asked Senator Jean Shen about that. She was one
Speaker 1: of them who lied her way all the way back
Speaker 1: into the Senate. It was classic, she says. I think sadly,
Speaker 1: in the last decade we have had the former president,
Speaker 1: someone who has really been pushing an agenda and an
Speaker 1: environment that is about diminishing the character and the strength
Speaker 1: of who we are. There's that all inclusive pronoun we,
Speaker 1: the most dangerous pronoun in political parlance. It is the
Speaker 1: forced inclusion program. It's even if you don't want to
Speaker 1: be part of it. It's the Kumbaya. We're wrapping our
Speaker 1: arms around you. It doesn't matter. It's we. Yes. There's
Speaker 1: a great novel called We by a man named Zemi Yatin,
Speaker 1: who was a dissident Soviet novelist, and it got published
Speaker 1: in France, and evidently George orwell Einrand were heavily influenced
Speaker 1: by it. Strangely, in the book, nobody has a name.
Speaker 1: They all have a number, just like the prisoner. Pushed
Speaker 1: by Bash about her specific plans, Harris said she would
Speaker 1: focus on her quote opportunity economy plan to bring down
Speaker 1: the cost of everyday goods, you know, putting price caps
Speaker 1: on stuff like a fascist Yeah, which is always really
Speaker 1: good for supply. It really incentivizes people to recognize that
Speaker 1: there might be a value in supplying more of something
Speaker 1: that people value more. Might be it might be an
Speaker 1: item that is en dearth and so perhaps it might
Speaker 1: incentivize people to see high price and say, hey, I'll
Speaker 1: switch some of my resources over to that and supply more, No,
Speaker 1: you get diminished supplies, and then when they finally lift
Speaker 1: the price caps, prices shoot up. And of course there's
Speaker 1: nothing in the Constitution that let them do that. They're
Speaker 1: misreading the Interstate Commerce Clause, which is supposed to be
Speaker 1: state on state tariff problems that could be resolved by Congress,
Speaker 1: not if anything goes over state borders. And of course
Speaker 1: she's going to offer the six thousand dollars tax credit,
Speaker 1: in other words, a payment of subsidy for newborns. She
Speaker 1: wants to give twenty five thousand dollars per person for
Speaker 1: new houses. That'll be great again, an artificial inflation of
Speaker 1: the housing industry. And then we've got this. She maintains
Speaker 1: Bidenomics is a success. I maintain that when we do
Speaker 1: the work of bringing down prescription medication for the American people,
Speaker 1: in other words, shifting the cost onto others for the
Speaker 1: government run medical system, including capping the costs. There you
Speaker 1: go of prescription medication for seniors at two thousand dollars.
Speaker 1: When we do what we did in the first year
Speaker 1: of being in office to extend the Child's tax credit, yep,
Speaker 1: you got it. The eitc all that stuff subsidies, that
Speaker 1: we cut child poverty in America by over fifty percent,
Speaker 1: which is false. They didn't. Child poverty is increased. She's lying,
Speaker 1: but Dana Bash or Dana Bash said nothing about that. Finally,
Speaker 1: let's offer this the opinions from the CNN gang as Yes,
Speaker 1: it was great. They offered their reactions. They were very excited.
Speaker 1: This is like again, it's more of the horse race. Oh,
Speaker 1: their performance. It was a wonderful performance, was it.
Speaker 20: Let's see, it wasn't a huge I don't think she
Speaker 20: moved the ball that much forward.
Speaker 4: And I don't think there's a policy separation that they've
Speaker 4: created with Biden.
Speaker 20: Obviously, she gave me kind of personal defensive them.
Speaker 21: Now you might not like the way she answered them,
Speaker 21: but she answered them as a capable, qualified leader, and
Speaker 21: I do think she I think she moved the ball
Speaker 21: forward a little bit.
Speaker 1: You know, I just have to ask and maybe you're
Speaker 1: get in the same vibe for me. I want to
Speaker 1: check in with all of you in the chats on
Speaker 1: X on Rumble, on Rockman. Do we have to Maybe
Speaker 1: I won't even play anymore, But I say to myself,
Speaker 1: do I have to listen to these people? Like? Why
Speaker 1: Why are they on camera? Why why did they choose
Speaker 1: these people? Why don't they put all this money into
Speaker 1: this set? I don't understand it. It just is a
Speaker 1: world I can't comprehend. I don't get it at all.
Speaker 1: It's nuts.
Speaker 14: Maybe she has to go a touchdown.
Speaker 22: I think the two biggest issues coming out of Biden
Speaker 22: for her are the economic policies, which she clearly wants
Speaker 22: to embrace, but also the immigration policies. Dan asked her
Speaker 22: if she had anything to say about what they did
Speaker 22: for three and a half years leading up until the
Speaker 22: back and forth this year. Completely sidestepped it, did not
Speaker 22: answer it. She goes back to her time as Attorney general.
Speaker 22: But again, absolutely nothing, nothing, no responsibility, no reflection at
Speaker 22: all on the day one executive actions or anything else
Speaker 22: they did for three and a half years, or anything
Speaker 22: she said in her previous campaign, which was to have
Speaker 22: the most permissive immigration structure. She's trying to skip a
Speaker 22: block of time at the debate. Trump cannot allow it.
Speaker 1: I gotta say. I'm sure the CNN people are like, no, sorry,
Speaker 1: we can't allow that sort of substance in this program.
Speaker 1: We can't have that. This is all supposed to be
Speaker 1: whipped cream cool whip in fact, so we can't have that.
Speaker 1: And hey, you know the guy was with George W. Bush.
Speaker 1: I had major problems with George W. Bush. Obviously should
Speaker 1: have been tried as a war criminal, but he made
Speaker 1: Scott Jennings made very good points there. So there you go. Now,
Speaker 1: let's talk a little bit about history and just discuss
Speaker 1: some of the things that people are bringing up as
Speaker 1: to why this mysterious continuation of funneling of weapons all
Speaker 1: around the world and specific to Israel seems to be
Speaker 1: going on. And this goes back a ways thirteen years ago.
Speaker 1: A person who goes by at Resist Underscore zero five
Speaker 1: posted this from thirteen years ago from a documentary from
Speaker 1: Press TV. Thirteen years ago, the president of the Council
Speaker 1: of National Interest Foundation sounded the alarm on the influence
Speaker 1: and he appears with Judgemapolaitano oftentimes.
Speaker 15: Uh.
Speaker 1: He sounded the alarm on the influence of Apak over
Speaker 1: the politicians and the money America was sending to Israel.
Speaker 1: So here we go. I think you find this interesting.
Speaker 18: A tempers flared at the prestigious National Press Club in Washington,
Speaker 18: d C.
Speaker 7: And you have gone, h choose face a pro.
Speaker 18: Israeli advocate not to Camra out of the hands of
Speaker 18: Alison Weir, president of the Council for the National Interest Foundation.
Speaker 18: The group just finished the press conference on what they
Speaker 18: call unjustifiable USA to Israel. The two sides met when
Speaker 18: the Press Club scheduled a pro Israeli news conference to
Speaker 18: follow held in the same room. The altercation illustrates heightened
Speaker 18: tensions on differing views regarding America's relationship with Israel.
Speaker 1: The Council for the National Member, whatever they decide is
Speaker 1: America's relationship with Israel. You and the Land of the Free,
Speaker 1: that's also your relationship with Israel, Palestine, Ukraine, the Philippines, Australia,
Speaker 1: Hong Kong, all those places where the United States military
Speaker 1: is active. It's awesome. Just keep it in mind. Couldn't
Speaker 1: get any better than this, mom, Thank you, repo man.
Speaker 18: No Interest Foundation wants Americans to know how much of
Speaker 18: their tax dollars are going to Israel.
Speaker 23: Three trillion dollars.
Speaker 18: That's including a massive amount of direct money to Israel,
Speaker 18: then a lot of hidden costs. CNIF alleges Israel received
Speaker 18: so much aid and special treatment because the US Congress
Speaker 18: is controlled by APAK. America's pro Israeli Lobby executive director
Speaker 18: Philip Girardi says Israel spends a lot of money on
Speaker 18: US elections.
Speaker 24: There are many Israeli packs, and they do give a
Speaker 24: lot of money very selectively to congressmen that they want
Speaker 24: to support.
Speaker 18: The Council for the National Interest Foundation says many members
Speaker 18: of Congress, if they don't always side with Israel, that
Speaker 18: they will face retaliation in their own re election campaigns.
Speaker 24: If a Congressman crosses the Israel lobby by voting against
Speaker 24: aid for Israel or voting against some legislation that Israel favors,
Speaker 24: they very often will find that the next time they're
Speaker 24: running for office, there will be a candidate put up
Speaker 24: against them who is very well funded.
Speaker 18: Geraldy is a former CIA counter terrorism expert. He questions
Speaker 18: why America gives aid to Israel when Israel conducts more
Speaker 18: espionage for profit against the US than any other US
Speaker 18: friendly country.
Speaker 24: They steal military technology, they steal information that is useful
Speaker 24: for telecommunications.
Speaker 18: Retired Lieutenant Colonel Karen Katowski works at the Pentagon and
Speaker 18: says Israel receives preferential treatment.
Speaker 16: We do not question what the Israelis want.
Speaker 18: Katowski believes America is beginning to take more interest in
Speaker 18: US foreign policy in the Middle East, in large part
Speaker 18: due to tougheconomic times. More and more Americans want to
Speaker 18: know where their harder and tax dollars are going and why.
Speaker 1: All right, So I love that, you know, they want
Speaker 1: to know where they're harder and tax dollars they're going. Well,
Speaker 1: that's the whole thing when you collectivize it. At the
Speaker 1: point is, as Frederick Basti has said, the state is
Speaker 1: that great fiction whereby everyone tries to live off of
Speaker 1: everyone else. And this is not just to be selective
Speaker 1: about the United States policies regarding Israel and what's going
Speaker 1: on in Israel, because you can apply this in a
Speaker 1: neutral fashion to the United States, as I said, in
Speaker 1: so many other areas, whether it's the new base that
Speaker 1: they opened up last year in Poland, and of course
Speaker 1: when Joe Biden went into Poland and he met members
Speaker 1: of the one hundred and first Airborne Division back then
Speaker 1: he was talking about Ukraine and he's like, Oh, they're
Speaker 1: really courageous people, almost as courageous as I was when
Speaker 1: I was playing professional baseball. On top of the truck
Speaker 1: that I was driving, and I wasn't talking to Hunter
Speaker 1: Biden about anything having to do with China or Barrisma,
Speaker 1: and hey man, I'm gonna take you out behind the
Speaker 1: corn shed and beat you up behind the gym whatever,
Speaker 1: you know, whatever nonsense. He was spewing the United States
Speaker 1: policies regarding Poland when he went there. He actually said
Speaker 1: to these guys, you've been into Ukraine, you'll know that
Speaker 1: they are very courageous people. Oh some of you've already
Speaker 1: been there. He let the cat out of the bag.
Speaker 1: United States troops were already on the ground in Ukraine.
Speaker 1: And as I mentioned before on my show, just to
Speaker 1: give you an idea of some of the funky things
Speaker 1: that go on behind the curtain, I was reporting on
Speaker 1: the overthrow of Ukraine in twenty thirteen because I was
Speaker 1: sort of tipped off to the United States interest in
Speaker 1: isolating Russian energy exports back in twenty eleven. I was
Speaker 1: tipped off to this, I think twenty eleven when I
Speaker 1: was out West my friend Glenn who used to play
Speaker 1: you know Glenn Jacobs. He's the mayor of Knox County now,
Speaker 1: and so I think he was on when I filled
Speaker 1: in for David one other time. Great guy obviously very
Speaker 1: oppost the lockdowns and mask mandates and stuff like that.
Speaker 1: Really great guy in Tennessee and Knox County. Glenn used
Speaker 1: to play Kine in the WWE. And so I was
Speaker 1: out there working on a script for somebody on contract
Speaker 1: and Glenn said, Oh, I'm going to be in La.
Speaker 1: You want to grab some dinner. So we went to
Speaker 1: a Middle Eastern restaurant and the guy knew Glenn and
Speaker 1: he came over to us. The manager came over after
Speaker 1: and started talking about what the United States was going
Speaker 1: to start to do in Syria. He says, you watch,
Speaker 1: they're going to try to overthrow assad Asad's not a
Speaker 1: great guy, but you know, they want to stop Russian
Speaker 1: energy exports. They have a pipeline they're going to be
Speaker 1: building over to Eastern Europe. They don't want that. They
Speaker 1: want to play with the Saudias to keep the dollar afloat.
Speaker 1: And of course the Russian said already dropped a lot
Speaker 1: of the long term bonds starting in two thousand and
Speaker 1: nine because of the Obama American Recovery Act pumping all
Speaker 1: the money into the system. They knew that if they
Speaker 1: got paid back on long term bonds. The money would
Speaker 1: be worth a lot less than when they invested it,
Speaker 1: So why get it when you're cutting out a certain
Speaker 1: percentage of your return. So they started to invest in gold,
Speaker 1: and of course that was when the whole move for
Speaker 1: bricks started up. So I saw what was going on.
Speaker 1: I was watching, and I saw when they overthrew Yanikovich
Speaker 1: in late twenty thirteen, and they had the might on kup.
Speaker 1: Yanikovic had just made a deal with the Russians for
Speaker 1: about I think it was twelve billion dollars in aid, energy,
Speaker 1: energy purchases and things like that. Barisma, of course, the
Speaker 1: biggest state owned energy company. Sure enough, a few months later,
Speaker 1: Victoria Newland Jeffrey Pyek get caught on the F the
Speaker 1: EU conversation on the phone, and what happens You hear
Speaker 1: them if you pay attention obviously people in this audience
Speaker 1: probably do. But if you pay attention to something other
Speaker 1: than what the media wanted people to focus on, which
Speaker 1: was the f part of it, you can see that
Speaker 1: they're discussing working with a guy named Johnnibach, who is
Speaker 1: the head of the Slovada Party, which is a neo
Speaker 1: Nazi party. There were photographs of him with Joe Biden,
Speaker 1: with Lindsey Graham, with Amy Klovitschar and others, John McCain
Speaker 1: as well, and we hate those Nazis. Oh really, yeah,
Speaker 1: we support Israel, then why you're working with Nazis and you,
Speaker 1: I mean, the whole thing's ridiculous. RT did some very
Speaker 1: good coverage in a documentary showing the post the Cold
Speaker 1: War work of the United States working with dissidents from
Speaker 1: Ukraine to get back into Ukraine, to use Ukraine as
Speaker 1: a chess piece as the USSR started to dissolve, and
Speaker 1: then the continuation of the propping up of those people
Speaker 1: with hardcore neo nationalist heroes that had actually worked with
Speaker 1: the Germans, the Nazis in Germany. And that's where that
Speaker 1: whole malage comes from. And it is a bitter taste
Speaker 1: and brute that's for darn shore. But the United States government,
Speaker 1: it's not just Israel. I think right in front of us,
Speaker 1: we're seeing manifest some of the most blatant, terrible things
Speaker 1: that are exposures of the genocide that's been going on
Speaker 1: in Israel. But of course what's been going on with
Speaker 1: the United States and NATO expansion towards Russia, contrary to
Speaker 1: what James Baker promised the revivified Russian government back in
Speaker 1: nineteen ninety five. I think it's very clear as well.
Speaker 1: It's a great book called How the West Brought War
Speaker 1: to Ukraine, and if you go to the anti War
Speaker 1: dot com website, I think they have an ad for
Speaker 1: it over in one of their panels. I read it
Speaker 1: out loud in pieces on Liberty Conspiracy a few nights
Speaker 1: in a row, and it seemed like the audience appreciated that.
Speaker 1: I want to turn to our Rumble audience, our Rockfan audience,
Speaker 1: and our ex audience here on the David Knight Show.
Speaker 1: Gardner Goldsmith filling in for David. I do the Liberty
Speaker 1: Conspiracy six o'clock pm Monday through Friday at Rumble at Rockfann.
Speaker 1: You can follow me on x at guard Goldsmith Jr.
Speaker 1: D Goldsmith. And I should mention I went to Boston
Speaker 1: University and the population there is like eighty something percent
Speaker 1: Jewish people, right, but there's sort of the Asconazi jew people,
Speaker 1: and they thought that I was Jewish because my last
Speaker 1: name's Goldsmith is actually an English and Irish. It's an
Speaker 1: English name and I come from English and Irish stock.
Speaker 1: It's like Naylor or Farmer or you know, cook, any
Speaker 1: of those profect names from from the UK. But I
Speaker 1: would hear them say things because they thought I was Jewish.
Speaker 1: A lot of the kids there say things about the
Speaker 1: Palestinians and I couldn't really understand it. It was just alien.
Speaker 1: They just didn't even think of them as human beings.
Speaker 1: It was bizarre. And now I'm seeing it manifest and I,
Speaker 1: you know, I sort of didn't think about it and
Speaker 1: once it get out of bu, but it's really come back,
Speaker 1: and it is not good. I want to mention inside
Speaker 1: rumble a lot of great, great quotes in here from
Speaker 1: a number of folks, and I want to go back
Speaker 1: if I can to see. Oh see mcellas says Glenn
Speaker 1: Jacobs is my mayor thank you. Also, there was someone
Speaker 1: else in here who had a great handle. I don't
Speaker 1: know whether I'll be able to find it. I see
Speaker 1: Michelle Baum, obaman is there? Oh and do O N
Speaker 1: T C do not obey? In lit speaks as I
Speaker 1: choose freedom over force, and someone says hurump way to
Speaker 1: go three stooges. I dig it. That's excellent. Trucker. Chris
Speaker 1: FTW says Hitler had all kinds of price controls on
Speaker 1: his economy and it worked for the people. The issue,
Speaker 1: once again, isn't a policy, it's the people implementing the policy. Well,
Speaker 1: I disagree with you. Price controls never work, They're immoral,
Speaker 1: and it's as people say, you know, it's economics one
Speaker 1: oh one. Price controls disrupt the price signal. The only
Speaker 1: way that you can find out how people value something
Speaker 1: is if you allow them the free will to exchange
Speaker 1: in a free market, free from fetters from other people
Speaker 1: and directions from other people. That is the only way
Speaker 1: that actually resources can be recognized. As I've mentioned on
Speaker 1: liberty conspiracies, I have taught economics, resources that we generally
Speaker 1: call resources aren't even really resources until human beings apply
Speaker 1: a value to it that supersedes the value of other things. So,
Speaker 1: for example, the whales and whale oil was becoming very expensive,
Speaker 1: but thanks to the creation of diesel fuel, they were able,
Speaker 1: which was actually quite expensive when it was first put out.
Speaker 1: But whales were becoming so dear and difficult to get.
Speaker 1: It was so dangerous to go whaling that it got
Speaker 1: to a price point where they said, okay, the signals
Speaker 1: from people, they're saying, this is very difficult to get.
Speaker 1: It's not as easy to get, it's not in as
Speaker 1: great quantity. The price is going up, the demand is
Speaker 1: not decreasing. For say, lanterns at night, And if you
Speaker 1: walked into people's houses in you know, seventeen ninety, it
Speaker 1: would have smelled like paraffin and fish oil because they
Speaker 1: were burning whale oil to keep lanterns going. But diesel,
Speaker 1: not diesel. Kerosene was something that as a replacement. Eventually
Speaker 1: the price of it signaled by people saw that they
Speaker 1: could switch over, and then more people saw that there
Speaker 1: was a profit to be made, so they switched their
Speaker 1: time and their resources into creation of diesel, the movement
Speaker 1: of diesel, the refining of diesel, and the whole diesel industry.
Speaker 1: You have to allow for those individuals who want to
Speaker 1: express their values personally to express them at the moment
Speaker 1: of sale in the price that information. That price is
Speaker 1: then turned into information that others can see, and the
Speaker 1: market is allowed to be regulated by individuals. Central planning
Speaker 1: never works. And even in a war economy, what you discover,
Speaker 1: like they often say, oh, you know, the World War
Speaker 1: two brought the United States out of the Great Depression.
Speaker 1: That's faults Robert Higgs. One of the first pieces I
Speaker 1: read by economists and economic historian Robert Higgs was all
Speaker 1: about how at the time they were turning resources into
Speaker 1: things like tanks, not refrigerators, or washing machines, or beds
Speaker 1: for hospitals or new houses for people. So you're shifting
Speaker 1: all those resources. And when you put price controls on things,
Speaker 1: you're shifting the ability of people to be able to
Speaker 1: decide what the proper price is for them, and you're
Speaker 1: retarding the proper movement of resources and human resources into
Speaker 1: areas that people want. So it's just axiomatic that price
Speaker 1: controls are bad mojo. They're immoral, and they're bad for
Speaker 1: an economy. And you know, you can try to try
Speaker 1: to splice out areas where well, it was a wartime
Speaker 1: economy and they were successful. Sorry, you know, when you're
Speaker 1: having a normal, a normal economy, people aren't going to
Speaker 1: want to invest in, say on to know, bombs and
Speaker 1: weapons as much as the US government will want to
Speaker 1: or the central planners will want to with their favors
Speaker 1: given to special people. So I wanted to bring that up.
Speaker 1: Thanks for the comment. Appreciate that truck. I appreciate that.
Speaker 1: And then we've got a lot of other folks here.
Speaker 1: We've got Michelle Obama, thank you, and don't forget everybody.
Speaker 1: You can contribute to The David Knight Show, Inside Rumble,
Speaker 1: Inside Rock Finn. Hopefully here the last day of the month,
Speaker 1: I can do a little bit of work and bring
Speaker 1: in some donations to the show. And I also want
Speaker 1: to mention that the David Knight Show has has some
Speaker 1: good folks who contributed at Patriot be Best and I
Speaker 1: wanted to bring up their website so that it could
Speaker 1: show it to you. I went over and it's really
Speaker 1: interesting and I actually know a person. I don't think
Speaker 1: he was inspired by Patriot b Best, but he just
Speaker 1: got into beekeeping and getting honey. Patriot be Best. If
Speaker 1: you want to find out how to help bees survive
Speaker 1: and prosper go to patriotbbest dot com. They have a
Speaker 1: lot of really interesting items and you can grab those.
Speaker 1: You can go to their site and check out all
Speaker 1: the great things they have for suggestions on how to
Speaker 1: get folks who are patriotic folks and believe in being
Speaker 1: independent to restore the American bee population. It's Patriot be
Speaker 1: Best and want to thank them for supporting the David
Speaker 1: Knight Show. Patriot b Best. Check them out. They're very
Speaker 1: very cool and you can get all sorts of really
Speaker 1: cool documents. You can buy separate documents. You can subscribe
Speaker 1: anything you want at Patriotbebest dot com if you're interested
Speaker 1: in this or you just want to learn a little
Speaker 1: bit from people who know what they're doing. Very interesting
Speaker 1: stuff to see. I appreciate what they do, all right.
Speaker 1: And also I want to thank Martin Thorn for commenting
Speaker 1: inside X. He says thought Provokers that was a while back.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Martin. Appreciate that very very much. Okay, So
Speaker 1: a couple of items that I want to sur round
Speaker 1: off here on the reactions from CNN, all the you know,
Speaker 1: the gamesmanship while all that is going on, don't forget
Speaker 1: that they hate free speech. So I want to give
Speaker 1: an update about the Durov situation and telegram and for
Speaker 1: that I want to bring in a little bit of
Speaker 1: a theme. This again is from the Psychedelic Furs. This
Speaker 1: is a song called entertain Me, and this is when
Speaker 1: the Psychedelic Furs, who a lot of people thought were
Speaker 1: sort of poppy not you know, sort of new wave pop.
Speaker 1: Their first two albums are incredibly powerful, incredibly dark, two
Speaker 1: of the best albums ever recorded, Steve Lilly White working
Speaker 1: on the production of it. And then they went with
Speaker 1: Forever Now working with Todd Rudgren, where you see President
Speaker 1: Gas the song I just played very vari astute lyrics.
Speaker 1: They also do another song called Forever Now where they
Speaker 1: mentioned the character of President Gas and they say President
Speaker 1: Gas is tap dancing for the banker. He's a thief.
Speaker 1: He isn't very honest, but he's obvious at least. It's
Speaker 1: very good stuff, and he talks about the worthlessness of
Speaker 1: paper money, Fiat currency. They're on the ball, they know
Speaker 1: what they're talking about. Psychedelic first. So this is a
Speaker 1: song called entertain Me, which comes from their album. After
Speaker 1: they did a little bit of a stint when pretty
Speaker 1: in Pink was used for that movie and they redid it,
Speaker 1: made it a little more slick and so on, they
Speaker 1: came back with an album called Book of Days and
Speaker 1: it is a cacophony. It's epic, and this is a
Speaker 1: song told from the perspective of a singer who can't
Speaker 1: really understand why people sort of want to live vicariously
Speaker 1: through him, like he's a cipher or an avatar for them,
Speaker 1: and the lyrics are speak, talk to me, show what
Speaker 1: I am and cannot be entertain me. I thought that
Speaker 1: was pretty interesting, coming from a guy who earned most
Speaker 1: of his loving doing that. So I play this as
Speaker 1: an opening on my show as a way to introduce
Speaker 1: the subject of free speech. And it is quite a
Speaker 1: noisy song. It's good.
Speaker 5: Speak talk to me, shows once I am and can't
Speaker 5: be Tom.
Speaker 9: And take me.
Speaker 5: Why the wand.
Speaker 7: I count touch?
Speaker 9: I can't see why the wand.
Speaker 7: I coun't speak?
Speaker 1: So the question is can you speak or is it
Speaker 1: going to be entertainment like the folks on CNN. Well,
Speaker 1: let's go to I think a really good recapper on
Speaker 1: the Durov situation and Telegram. This came from Glenn Greenwald
Speaker 1: from his System Update. It's a terrific overview. Want to
Speaker 1: give this to you right away. Here we go.
Speaker 25: On mind Night's episode, we covered what we understood right away.
Speaker 25: It was the very disturbing and from the perspective of
Speaker 25: Internet freedom, very dangerous news that the Russian born founder
Speaker 25: and CEO of the privacy app platform Telegram that is
Speaker 25: used by close to a billion people on every continent
Speaker 25: around the world to speak with privacy and with freedom.
Speaker 25: Was detained by the French police immediately upon landing his
Speaker 25: jet in Paris. Now one of the mysteries of that
Speaker 25: incident was why would he go to France given what
Speaker 25: I'm certain had been the informed and understood risk that
Speaker 25: he might be arrested in France, giving the French governments
Speaker 25: growing anger with free speech platforms, including Rumble, which is
Speaker 25: no longer available in.
Speaker 26: France.
Speaker 25: And one of the reports from a reliable French newspaper
Speaker 25: suggested that the reason pavldurav traveled to France was he
Speaker 25: was invited to lunch by French President Emanuel Macrone, which
Speaker 25: certainly seems to have been a pretextual invitation designed to
Speaker 25: lure the telegram founder onto French soil there so that
Speaker 25: he could be arrested and then prosecuted. There was a
Speaker 25: lot of speculation about what those charges were. We covered
Speaker 25: a press release by the prosecutors that didn't make clear
Speaker 25: explicitly that it was about Pablo Duram on Monday night.
Speaker 25: But now we have confirmation that the detention was based
Speaker 25: on a series of charges that a court has in
Speaker 25: its first instance, found is a plausible and reasonable set
Speaker 25: of crimes that weren't further investigation, and that require Pablo
Speaker 25: Duram to remain in France, bar him from leaving France
Speaker 25: pay millions of dollars in.
Speaker 14: Order to be free.
Speaker 25: And if you look at this indictment which we're about
Speaker 25: to show you, essentially, it would be the end of
Speaker 25: internet freedom.
Speaker 7: It would be the.
Speaker 25: Clear message to anyone who has any sort of tech platform,
Speaker 25: whether it be Rumble or Twitter or anything else, that
Speaker 25: they had better start immediately and unquestioned, unquestioningly complying with
Speaker 25: every order from every government, including Western European governments, not
Speaker 25: only about the censorship orders those governments issue, but also
Speaker 25: their demands to have full and unfettered access to the
Speaker 25: private data information of every user. And if they even
Speaker 25: think about failing, if they don't build their system to
Speaker 25: give these governments a back door, they very well may
Speaker 25: end up being criminally prosecuted. And if palbal Dura of
Speaker 25: a multi billionaire can be obviously any of the other
Speaker 25: ones can as well. Now let's go back up to
Speaker 25: the top a little bit and we will see the
Speaker 25: document released by the French prosecutors today just to give
Speaker 25: you a sense for house sweeping and deliberately dangerous. These
Speaker 25: charges are there's the prosecutor of the Republic and this
Speaker 25: is his statement.
Speaker 7: Quote.
Speaker 25: Pavel Durav, founder and CEO of instant Messenger and platform Telegram,
Speaker 25: was arrested in the outskirts of Paris on Saturday, the
Speaker 25: twenty fourth of August, then taken into police custody at APM.
Speaker 25: This measure comes in the context of a judicial investigation
Speaker 25: opened on the eighth of July twenty twenty four, following
Speaker 25: a preliminary inquiry initiated by Section J three of the
Speaker 25: Paris Public Prosecutor's Office, specifically the organ that fights against
Speaker 25: quote cybercrime. The document goes on quote this juditional investigation
Speaker 25: was opened against persons unnamed on charges of quote and
Speaker 25: there's a variety of charges that we told you about
Speaker 25: a Monday night called Complicity, in which it's alleged that
Speaker 25: a variety of users on Telegram, not Pabl Durav, but
Speaker 25: other users use telegram to engage in various crimes, whether
Speaker 25: money on during or sale of prohibited technology, or the
Speaker 25: sale and transfer of child pornography. And the charges against
Speaker 25: Paubl duav stem from a theory that as the operator
Speaker 25: of the social media platform, he can be criminally liable
Speaker 25: for the criminal acts of anybody who uses his platform, which,
Speaker 25: as I said when we first reported, this would be
Speaker 25: akin to arresting AT and T executives and charging them
Speaker 25: with the crimes of allowing people who have a to
Speaker 25: have a platform, who say, use the telephone to commit
Speaker 25: and plan criminal acts. Obviously, the second that you bring
Speaker 25: in a prosecution like that, the telephone companies will be
Speaker 25: highly incentivized to shut down the accounts of any conceivable
Speaker 25: person who even breathes an ounce of dissent and only
Speaker 25: allow people who are full fledged, explicit supporters of the
Speaker 25: US government or it's ideological dogma to communicate. It's the
Speaker 25: same analogy for operators these tech platforms. Now in addition
Speaker 25: to all of these complicity charges, meaning if someone commits
Speaker 25: a crime using your platform, so somebody uses Twitter to
Speaker 25: spread criminal disinformation in France and then Elon Musk can
Speaker 25: become criminally liable for that. Mark Zuckerberg can be if
Speaker 25: that happens on Facebook. There's also other charges here that
Speaker 25: are even more disturbing, including quote the refusal to communicate
Speaker 25: at the request of competent authorities information or documents necessary
Speaker 25: for carrying out and operating interceptions allowed by law. In
Speaker 25: other words, when the French government wants Telegram to turn
Speaker 25: over information about its users, even though Telegram is constructed
Speaker 25: with an encryption shell, that makes it impossible even for
Speaker 25: Telegram to find out that data. Simply building a privacy
Speaker 25: app with encryption that cannot have a backdoor, that does
Speaker 25: not have a backdoor that allows the government or even
Speaker 25: Telegram to enter as itself now a criminal offense that
Speaker 25: can not only result in prosecution of the corporation or
Speaker 25: fins of the corporation, but a rest of the individuals
Speaker 25: who are running that corporation. Now, if we go down
Speaker 25: a little bit, we will see there's a bunch of
Speaker 25: complicity complicity charges. But then there's also this charge that
Speaker 25: is unbelievably alarming, quote providing cryptology services aiming to ensure
Speaker 25: confidentiality without certified declaration. In other words, anybody who provides encryption,
Speaker 25: which was the technology that really became popular after this
Speaker 25: note in reporting, is a way for people to protect
Speaker 25: their communications from government intervention simply providing encryption. In the
Speaker 25: second charge, here is quote providing a cryptology tool not
Speaker 25: solely ensuring authentication or integrity monitoring without prior declaration. Any
Speaker 25: kind of encryption that doesn't allow the government to have
Speaker 25: a backdoor to have full access to it is now
Speaker 25: a criminal offense that can subject the heads of these
Speaker 25: technology companies to prison.
Speaker 1: Because I want to pause it there everybody, just to
Speaker 1: let you know. Initially, folks like Jonathan Turley during the
Speaker 1: at the very first of Pavel durov arrest news, people
Speaker 1: like Jonathan Turley had said, you know, this has to
Speaker 1: He said he thought it had to do with the
Speaker 1: Digital Services Act Services Act of the EU, which is
Speaker 1: being there trying to apply that to force Twitter slash
Speaker 1: x to allow for censorship. But a lot of people
Speaker 1: like David and others, we're saying, I think a lot
Speaker 1: of this on a parallel track. Actually it has to
Speaker 1: do with trying to gain access back doors. As Glenn
Speaker 1: Greenwald said, that seems to have been confirmed, and it
Speaker 1: does seem like it's the French government which is doing
Speaker 1: it itself. But the Digital Services Act of the EU
Speaker 1: offcom up in the UK and what they're doing to
Speaker 1: free speech there, just for people who are reposting things
Speaker 1: on Facebook that they say is anti Semitic or islam
Speaker 1: Islam islamophobic because they don't like the idea that the
Speaker 1: government is paying for people to migrate to small towns
Speaker 1: in England. Somehow that is Islamophobic. Any way that they
Speaker 1: can broadbrush and paint the enemy as the bad guy
Speaker 1: that they see who might be opposing their state policies,
Speaker 1: their growth of this hegemonic one world concept that will
Speaker 1: control everything in the giant wi. They will go out
Speaker 1: to those people. And what Glenn Greenwild I thought said there,
Speaker 1: I thought was very pertinent, and I think it's also
Speaker 1: important to bring up what I mentioned a little bit earlier,
Speaker 1: which is that the employees of Telegram have left Dubai.
Speaker 1: This could have an impact on the employees and if
Speaker 1: you extrapolate that, let's not forget first before I even
Speaker 1: go into the employee point. When he talks about encryption,
Speaker 1: I would like to remind people I wrote an article
Speaker 1: for MRCTV back in the start of the year because
Speaker 1: at the start of the year, El Presidente Joe Biden
Speaker 1: issued another massively unconstitutional executive order. The executive order was
Speaker 1: for national security, So of course it's all about you.
Speaker 1: It's all about the security of the public, which is
Speaker 1: they claim you, but if you actually want to be
Speaker 1: left alone, no, the public will crush your rights their
Speaker 1: claim of the interest of the public the greater good.
Speaker 1: Of course, it's like public health, it's like all that stuff.
Speaker 1: National defense is the same thing as public health. It's
Speaker 1: all your rights can be eliminated for the protection and
Speaker 1: furtherance of the group that we claim, which of course
Speaker 1: negates its own logic because if every individual in their
Speaker 1: specific group who retains his individuality could be a potential
Speaker 1: target of state action, that actually puts everyone at risk.
Speaker 1: And then what it does is even when they pick
Speaker 1: off one person, say they drone strike a man who's
Speaker 1: a US citizen oversees, or they drone strike his son,
Speaker 1: right al Alwauki and his son without trial, totally extra
Speaker 1: judicial murder. Right, Let's say they do that. That doesn't
Speaker 1: mean that your risk of being targeted has decreased at all.
Speaker 1: There's at least no change, and it might have increased
Speaker 1: because now the pool of targets is two people smaller.
Speaker 1: So the state is always your enemy. It can only
Speaker 1: exist by it's there for your protection and then telling
Speaker 1: you you have to pay for your protection and if
Speaker 1: you want to find out whether it's a ganglan thug agency,
Speaker 1: whether it's a protection racket, just try asking to not
Speaker 1: pay for it sometime and you'll see what happens. That's
Speaker 1: the nature of the state. It doesn't protect rights, it
Speaker 1: invades rights and claims that it's protecting everybody's rights. That's
Speaker 1: not possible. It can't protect everybody's rights and take your
Speaker 1: money at the same time. And then you get into
Speaker 1: the operations of the state where supposedly you have free
Speaker 1: speech rights. Right, Well, if they make everything a public place,
Speaker 1: which the marsh Viva Alabama decision essentially does, it's up
Speaker 1: to the government to decide, well, is this for commerce?
Speaker 24: Is this for that?
Speaker 1: No, they're opening up your private property to their government
Speaker 1: controls over what is good for the public. And that's
Speaker 1: exactly what they're trying to do with all these online platforms.
Speaker 1: They're trying to say, this is for the public safety.
Speaker 1: We're going to try to stop child porn drug trafficking
Speaker 1: like the Silk Road. We're gonna imprison ross Albrik. He
Speaker 1: didn't do anything wrong. We're not going to go after
Speaker 1: the specific people who are involved in this trafficking. We're
Speaker 1: gonna actually just make sure that we pressure people like Facebook,
Speaker 1: people at Facebook or Meta even though they're ideologically with them,
Speaker 1: or people at Twitter, at slash x, and you know,
Speaker 1: people question whether Elon Musk is in this for some
Speaker 1: sort of long game or not. Or they go after
Speaker 1: pavl Durov and they're going to pressure them to open
Speaker 1: things up. But at the same time, once they've got
Speaker 1: that opened up to them, they don't seem to go
Speaker 1: after the people whom they claimed they were trying to
Speaker 1: get access in order to stop. Those would be the
Speaker 1: child predators and so on and so forth. So I
Speaker 1: think it's important to bring this up because not only
Speaker 1: does it apply to pav al Durov, but it applies
Speaker 1: to the employees as this person. Mario Knofal wrote telegrams.
Speaker 1: Dubai office where Pavel Durov moved the company in twenty
Speaker 1: seventeen has been vacant since his detention. No employees have
Speaker 1: been seen, and the building's security directory lists no contact information.
Speaker 1: A French magistrate has charged durof with six preliminary criminal
Speaker 1: counts for allegedly permitting illegal activities on the app. He
Speaker 1: has posted bail of five million euros and is barred
Speaker 1: from leaving France, and he has his sources noted there
Speaker 1: the Wall Street Journal and RT And then it gets
Speaker 1: even worse for more people because why for people who
Speaker 1: are creators or maybe you're donating. What happens if you're
Speaker 1: donating at a free speech platform like rumble and they're
Speaker 1: taking a percentage, maybe that sort of thing or rockfin,
Speaker 1: then you're contributing to this online platform where if they're
Speaker 1: not censoring, if they're not doing what the policing agencies want,
Speaker 1: whether it's in the United States or anywhere else, then
Speaker 1: you too, and creators like me, like David, we could
Speaker 1: be shut down. They could come after us. Yes, And
Speaker 1: just to bring it up again, the executive order from
Speaker 1: Joe Biden at the start of the year said that
Speaker 1: any software company or developer individual developer who's developing something
Speaker 1: that the government defines could be used for a biological
Speaker 1: or military purpose has to have has to give the
Speaker 1: federal government, the executive branch, access to all of their algorithms,
Speaker 1: all of their software, and all of their back door security.
Speaker 1: That is an executive order that Joe Biden issued at
Speaker 1: the start of the year, and they will define, what
Speaker 1: is biological security, what is to fight the next pandemic?
Speaker 1: Any of that stuff where they claim, as they've already
Speaker 1: been funding all that gain of function reshirts, they shouldn't
Speaker 1: even be funding any viral research. The NIH, the CDC,
Speaker 1: they shouldn't even exist constitutionally or morally, and yet they do.
Speaker 1: And somehow RFK Junior thinks he's going to change things
Speaker 1: by I don't know. I have no idea how he's
Speaker 1: going to do it. What's he going to do? Try
Speaker 1: to stop donations from eventually getting into the people who
Speaker 1: decide who's going to be appointed at the NIH and CDC.
Speaker 1: That's not gonna happen. They'll find ways around it. It's
Speaker 1: just it's amazing to see what's going on here. And
Speaker 1: the other thing I want to bring up is, you know,
Speaker 1: David played that shot that video from Surprise Arizona of
Speaker 1: the young woman who had had some problems with members
Speaker 1: of the government and she went to the meeting with
Speaker 1: the mayor. I played it on my show as well,
Speaker 1: and they forced her to sign a document in order
Speaker 1: to be able to speak for her wonderful three minute
Speaker 1: allotment to speak to the mayor and the city board, right,
Speaker 1: So they pulled her away because they didn't like what
Speaker 1: she was saying, and they escorted her out. In other words,
Speaker 1: a guy in a costume, a police costume, went and grabbed,
Speaker 1: assaulted her, and pulled her out in front of her
Speaker 1: ten year old daughter. That's the real of it. That's
Speaker 1: person on person aggression backed by a bunch of other
Speaker 1: people who claim they have authority over that woman, and
Speaker 1: she's just trying to say, leave me alone. Well, they
Speaker 1: not only did they not leave her alone through the
Speaker 1: government's operations before that, they certainly didn't leave her alone
Speaker 1: in the room. And this gets us to the big
Speaker 1: problem of public places versus private places. Public places introduce
Speaker 1: in economics what's called the tragedy of the commons. Anything
Speaker 1: that is not privately owned will see all the people
Speaker 1: who are forced to pay for it. In this case,
Speaker 1: government try to utilize the resource the way they want
Speaker 1: to and to do it before other people do, which
Speaker 1: then depletes the resource. You don't actually see the actual
Speaker 1: price being reflected on what people claims the value of it.
Speaker 1: You can't see people turning to alternatives and turning things
Speaker 1: that were mineral sludge like oil into a resource. You
Speaker 1: know again that term resource only comes about when people
Speaker 1: realize that there's a really good use for it and
Speaker 1: it's valuable.
Speaker 26: Right.
Speaker 1: Even water, the collection of water takes some sort of
Speaker 1: human ingenuity unless you're living with a river or near
Speaker 1: a river, and then it comes up to property rights
Speaker 1: or lakes or something like that to make sure that
Speaker 1: people can manage that properly. Then they come up with
Speaker 1: these things organically, right. They work with each other. That's
Speaker 1: why local communities are best. You can see the people
Speaker 1: who are offensive, you can try to handle it, and
Speaker 1: if you don't like what's going on locally, you can escape.
Speaker 1: I've brought up before the ancient Irish had the Brehon
Speaker 1: laws system for a thousand years. Nobody was forced to
Speaker 1: pay for it. It was a tribal clan system, no taxes.
Speaker 1: It was done through reputation and exclusion. The ancient Israelites
Speaker 1: when they fled Egypt for years, they had the tribal
Speaker 1: system with the elders as the judges before they brought
Speaker 1: in the king, and they were warned, don't bring in
Speaker 1: a king. You're going to give up the tenth of
Speaker 1: your crops. Your women will be taken advantage of men
Speaker 1: will be sent off the war for the ideas and
Speaker 1: the and the agendas of the state. Don't do it.
Speaker 1: What was the theme for barretta Don't do It? By
Speaker 1: Sammy Davis Junior, right I the sparrow was the song
Speaker 1: keep your on the spare row. So, when you've got
Speaker 1: a public room like that, or we can extrapolate and
Speaker 1: talk about a courtroom, supposedly you have the right to
Speaker 1: free speech. Congress is not supposed to write any laws
Speaker 1: about that. A lot of people look at these free
Speaker 1: speech issues saying, oh, that's a First Amendment abridgment by
Speaker 1: a low locality or a city or something a state. Actually,
Speaker 1: you're supposed to be looking at the state constitution because
Speaker 1: Congress is delineated in the First Amendment, and many states
Speaker 1: had speech codes and they gave money to religious institutions
Speaker 1: all the way through to the reconstruction era. But if
Speaker 1: you look at the state of Arizona, it has speech
Speaker 1: protections in it. So here's a question. You're also supposed
Speaker 1: to have the right to do process and a speedy trial,
Speaker 1: amongst in front of your peers, a fair trial. So
Speaker 1: what happens if you get into the tax provided government
Speaker 1: run tragedy of the Commons courtroom. And someone wants to
Speaker 1: sing when you're on trial. That person has a First
Speaker 1: Amendment right to say whatever he wants where wherever he
Speaker 1: or she wants right. But you are supposedly have a
Speaker 1: protected right to a speedy trial in front of your peers.
Speaker 1: So those two can't comport. You can't have a public
Speaker 1: place and allow for everybody's rights. You can't have publicly
Speaker 1: run land and allow everybody to see their interests facilitated
Speaker 1: on the land. It just doesn't work. The government is
Speaker 1: not a facilitator and protector of rights. The state is
Speaker 1: an invader and manipulator and manager of rights based on
Speaker 1: what the state thinks takes precedent. And that woman in Arizona,
Speaker 1: in Surprise, Arizona, her free speech rights certainly didn't take
Speaker 1: precedent to what the mayor thought was more important the
Speaker 1: operation of the government, and that goes towards anything that
Speaker 1: they turn into a public place. If people think think
Speaker 1: that these social platforms are so called the public square,
Speaker 1: then it doesn't open everything up to everybody being having
Speaker 1: a right to say anything. It opens it up to
Speaker 1: the government managing it because they can't allow everybody to
Speaker 1: say everything, and then they're going to come up with
Speaker 1: excuses to say, well, we certainly can't allow everybody to
Speaker 1: say anything. We need these back doors. We need to
Speaker 1: suppress and pressure the people who run these companies if
Speaker 1: they don't allow us the back door to unlock their doors,
Speaker 1: because we're trying to protect people. So the state and
Speaker 1: rights are totally different things, and no state exists to
Speaker 1: protect your rights. The states can only exist by being
Speaker 1: parasitic off of society. They are sociopathic. That by definition,
Speaker 1: that's just lexicography. That's the way it is. That's the
Speaker 1: definition of it, right it is. And so what we're
Speaker 1: seeing with this man paval Durov is something that they're
Speaker 1: trying to repeat all over the place, and it could
Speaker 1: become even worse. Want to go into a couple other
Speaker 1: things on people in the UK who are being arrested
Speaker 1: on the speech things. And then it looks like Carla
Speaker 1: couldn't join us. I just checked to see if I
Speaker 1: get the reply on Twitter while I was playing the
Speaker 1: Glenn Greenwall video. It looks like Carla can't join us
Speaker 1: from the Free State project. So we'll talk about this
Speaker 1: one real quick. I want to go to don't forget
Speaker 1: that pro piece son of two Nobel Prize piece win
Speaker 1: Nobel Peace Prize winners. For what that's worth, you know,
Speaker 1: given that Obama got one and was it Outgore got
Speaker 1: the Nobel Prize for science. I don't know what he
Speaker 1: got or was it for lying? I don't know. But
Speaker 1: Richard Medhurst is a longtime journalist, comes from a thousand
Speaker 1: years of families in England. He got detained and arrested
Speaker 1: under their Terrorism Act for the Protection of Everybody at
Speaker 1: Heathrow Airport when he returned from one of his trips
Speaker 1: on a journalism trip. Also, another person has been arrested,
Speaker 1: as Roger Waters discusses, she was just released but she's
Speaker 1: a journalist. British human rights activist and social media journalist
Speaker 1: influencer Sarah Wilkinson was arrested by UK police on the
Speaker 1: twenty ninth of August, reportedly over so called content that
Speaker 1: she posted online. You don't want to collectivize this stuff.
Speaker 1: The police came to her house just before seven point
Speaker 1: thirty a m twelve of them in total, some of
Speaker 1: them in plain clothes from the again like Medhurst, counter
Speaker 1: terrorism police. They said she was under arrest for content
Speaker 1: that she has posted online. Her house has been raided
Speaker 1: and they have seized all her electric electronic devices. Jack
Speaker 1: Wilkinson said that he was quoted and on the social
Speaker 1: media account of Suppressed News, which is where she publishes.
Speaker 1: Now let's hear from Roger Waters of Pink Floyd, who
Speaker 1: has some thoughts on this.
Speaker 23: So twelve cops the Old Bell come round to the
Speaker 23: house and arrest you, Sarah Wilkinson, I'm talking about now,
Speaker 23: They arrest you for standing up for human rights, campaigning
Speaker 23: against genocide. We know that these are policies that Kirstarmer
Speaker 23: doesn't agree with and Richie Suna didn't agree with, but
Speaker 23: you cannot get the old Bill to come around and
Speaker 23: arrest people who have hearts.
Speaker 27: And minds and have made up their own mind what they.
Speaker 14: Think about foreign policy.
Speaker 24: This is wrong.
Speaker 27: If you allow this to stand, the arrest of Sarah
Speaker 27: Wilkinson and the persecution of my friend Craig Murray, among others,
Speaker 27: then you have absolutely accepted that England is now a
Speaker 27: fascist state.
Speaker 23: Nineteen eighty four has arrived and is alive and well.
Speaker 14: In the United Kingdom.
Speaker 27: Out of my dead buddy.
Speaker 1: Well done, good job, Roger Waters, appreciate what he did.
Speaker 1: And just to let you know everybody the mention of
Speaker 1: Craig Murray. I've had Craig Murray on my show. I
Speaker 1: have a personal interest in that. Craig Murray has been
Speaker 1: on my show. We were talking about Juliana Sange and
Speaker 1: he is a remarkable guy. Former ambassador stood for election
Speaker 1: to Parliament just recently and didn't win. But he has
Speaker 1: been very, very outspoken about the expansion of NATO, the
Speaker 1: United States weapons and British weapons. They have manufacturing plants
Speaker 1: in England where people have been protesting weapons in the
Speaker 1: Middle East, and so kudos to Roger Waters again, great
Speaker 1: work by him. I appreciate what he has done and
Speaker 1: those criticisms of him being somehow anti Semitic. I don't
Speaker 1: understand when you're standing for the Semitic peoples of Palestine,
Speaker 1: how you can be anti Semitic when you're talking about
Speaker 1: state policies. What does that have to do with the people.
Speaker 1: I don't get it. It's ridiculous. So get ready with
Speaker 1: some of your comments, going to take a quick break.
Speaker 1: Hears some of the wonderful music that David has put
Speaker 1: together and read some of the comments and contributions from
Speaker 1: people on the David Night Show. I'm Gardner Goldsmith filling
Speaker 1: in for David, and thanks for being here everybody. I
Speaker 1: really appreciate you being here on this last day of
Speaker 1: the month. Don't forget that you can contribute and help
Speaker 1: out with the David Knight Show. I really appreciate anybody
Speaker 1: who is willing to contribute or offer thoughts, and especially
Speaker 1: if you want to help him get over the hump
Speaker 1: towards the end of the month on the David Night Show.
Speaker 16: You're listening to the David Night Show.
Speaker 1: Great stuff, boy, he's just got so much talent. A
Speaker 1: couple of quick reminders and then we'll hop into the
Speaker 1: chats and see what your opinions are and so on.
Speaker 1: I want to mention this over at my MRCTV page.
Speaker 1: You'll see that I wrote an article recently about continuation. Actually,
Speaker 1: this is the first part we'll tell you about the
Speaker 1: continuation of it extreme misogyny. This is something David brought
Speaker 1: up last week on the program. Around this time, I
Speaker 1: think is going to be considered a national security threat
Speaker 1: in the UK. So as a quicker reminder of some
Speaker 1: of the things that the UK government has done to
Speaker 1: people let's not forget what they did, starting in twenty
Speaker 1: eighteen when they went after Count Dankula. I have my
Speaker 1: Count Dankula shirt, and they targeted him for simply doing
Speaker 1: a spoof of Adolf Hitler with his pug. Then, of
Speaker 1: course the British government prosecuted a retired scientist for holding
Speaker 1: a sign that offered conversation to people outside an abortion mill.
Speaker 1: Man was I believe sixty two years old, and as
Speaker 1: I mentioned here in nineteen eighty four, the line from
Speaker 1: Winston Smith, he thinks to himself, nothing was your own
Speaker 1: except the few cubic centimeters inside your skull. And I
Speaker 1: mentioned that this man was a sixty two year old
Speaker 1: retired medical scientist and he was just holding a sign
Speaker 1: that said here to talk if you want to. And
Speaker 1: then there were other instances of a woman silently praying
Speaker 1: on a sidewalk. They arrested her. British woman arrested for
Speaker 1: silently praying outside an abortion clinic, as she was honest
Speaker 1: enough to tell them what she was thinking. As the
Speaker 1: aggressive cops who get paid on her dime took her away.
Speaker 1: I believe she just had a settlement from them. Actually,
Speaker 1: for I think it was eighteen pounds, and there's a
Speaker 1: lot more that they've been doing recently. Of course the shocking,
Speaker 1: as I mentioned, shocking Heathrow Airport arrest under section two,
Speaker 1: section twelve of the two thousand Terrorism Act. That's Richard
Speaker 1: Medhurst right there, and there's a great video that he did.
Speaker 1: You can follow him on an X at rich Eye
Speaker 1: the letter I Medhurst medhu rst. You'll see me reposting
Speaker 1: a lot of his material. So if you want to
Speaker 1: see and if you can't remember it, just head over
Speaker 1: from my site at guard Goldsmith on X. And then
Speaker 1: of course there's even more. But here they're saying police
Speaker 1: are openly bullying people who post information or opinions the
Speaker 1: state doesn't like. And Camilla Turner reports for The Telegraph
Speaker 1: that the Home Secretary of Ed Cooper has ordered a
Speaker 1: review for twenty twenty five to add extreme misogyny to
Speaker 1: their possible arrests of people for so called national security.
Speaker 1: But in addition to that, there is more information about
Speaker 1: how they're now thinking about reintroducing monitors, actual video monitors,
Speaker 1: which they had stopped the mass recording of non crime
Speaker 1: hate incidents under Keir Starmer. You know, the labor man
Speaker 1: and I mentioned earlier on my program on Liberty conspiracy.
Speaker 1: I found a bit of delight in seeing a twenty
Speaker 1: twenty one video during the lockdowns of a pub own
Speaker 1: owner in Bath who was telling Keir Starmer to get
Speaker 1: out of his pub in Bath because Keir Starmer was
Speaker 1: pushing on the lockdowns. Love the lockdowns. The man said,
Speaker 1: you're ruining my business. Get out, get out, get out.
Speaker 1: And one of Kiir Starmer's guards then he was just
Speaker 1: a member of Parliament, of course, not the PM. At
Speaker 1: number X Downing Street. One of the bodyguards was trying
Speaker 1: to push the guy around in his own pub and
Speaker 1: the entrance of his pub. Well, it turns out that
Speaker 1: was the very first pub in which I ate in Bath.
Speaker 1: That's the very first place where I got fish and
Speaker 1: chips and mash peas. So now they're trying to expand it.
Speaker 1: They're going to make it even worse. Let's head into
Speaker 1: now that might not necessarily lead to arrests, but they're
Speaker 1: going to start the video monitoring again. Let's go over
Speaker 1: to Rock Finn. I want to thank Jhja, want to
Speaker 1: make sure it got that right. Jja. Thank you Jjeff
Speaker 1: for your contribution to the program as we head out
Speaker 1: through the end of the month to help out the
Speaker 1: David Show. Really appreciate that very very much so, and
Speaker 1: anyone can contribute live here. I will definitely look for that,
Speaker 1: and we're looking at Rumble as well. Thank you all
Speaker 1: inside Rumble for being there. Tony Garrett, Hello, I see
Speaker 1: let's see, do not obey. Thank you again, he says,
Speaker 1: I won't participate in evil collectivism. We have let's see, Tony. Thanks,
Speaker 1: he says. If you're asked, if you're silently praying, silently
Speaker 1: answer the question. That's great compelled speech, as Thomas Jefferson
Speaker 1: would say. And again, thanks to everyone who's watching on
Speaker 1: x comments. We've got to call Priestess inside Rock. Ben
Speaker 1: Dougalug is there and thanks for listening, Dougalalug, and thank
Speaker 1: you for making me feel so at home to you.
Speaker 1: I want to thank you, and I want to thank
Speaker 1: David and Travis and everyone, Karen, everyone who's just been
Speaker 1: so wonderful. And don't forget tomorrow ten am on Rumble.
Speaker 1: Check out the fox Hole. It's a great show. Jason Barker,
Speaker 1: one of the two founders of Knights of the Storm, awesome,
Speaker 1: awesome people and let's take the opportunity now to talk
Speaker 1: about other cool websites and some places that I might
Speaker 1: suggest to you as we round off this hour of
Speaker 1: the program, I want to give you a little preview
Speaker 1: to something we're going to discuss in just a minute.
Speaker 1: Let's go with a slightly different theme, everybody. Let's start
Speaker 1: talking about the climate cult on the David Knight Show.
Speaker 1: And when we have the opportunity to talk about the
Speaker 1: climate cult, sometimes I like to play a little something
Speaker 1: to cool off. I play a little something that is
Speaker 1: part of that theme. I get the opportunity to go
Speaker 1: with Cool in the Gang.
Speaker 28: I gotta run for Shelton, gotta run Bussy, it's too hot.
Speaker 28: I got a cool to thank you what a man
Speaker 28: we have made.
Speaker 1: So that's some good stuff. Is that from the Midnight
Speaker 1: Special or Don Kirshner's Rock Concert? I don't know which,
Speaker 1: but they are cool. I love Cool in the Gang.
Speaker 1: And that's a little theme to talk about global climate
Speaker 1: warming change. So we have some interesting information coming to
Speaker 1: you on GM's latest delay. A shaker coming on the
Speaker 1: delay from Ford, I know, don't forget a number of
Speaker 1: I think it was GM dealers broke off from GM
Speaker 1: because they didn't want to take the EV cars anymore
Speaker 1: because they're not selling. They're sitting on the lot, require
Speaker 1: energy to keep the batteries going. That's expensive. Their potential
Speaker 1: fire hazards, as we just saw with the Rivian plant
Speaker 1: where they were making batteries. I'll show you that story
Speaker 1: up in Illinois. Terrible fire there destroyed fifty cars in
Speaker 1: a parking lot. I am now shying away from parking
Speaker 1: garages when I go down to Boston because I'm worried
Speaker 1: that one of those cars maybe got some salt water,
Speaker 1: or maybe it hits a pothole because the Boston streets
Speaker 1: are so awesome, so maybe the battery might be ready
Speaker 1: to explode near my car. Not good. And of course
Speaker 1: they're super heavy, So how many of those electric vehicles
Speaker 1: can they allow into parking garages which are not designed
Speaker 1: for that in the same space with increased weight. So
Speaker 1: here's the latest from GM. They're delaying their Indiana battery
Speaker 1: factory and the latest EV pullback. It's almost like central
Speaker 1: planning doesn't work.
Speaker 7: Hmmm.
Speaker 1: Future plant with Samsung to start output in twenty twenty seven,
Speaker 1: about a year later than planned. Okay, good luck with
Speaker 1: that one. Yep, that's great. I wonder why they might
Speaker 1: have changed their plans. Maybe it's because they're not selling well. Well,
Speaker 1: don't forget everybody. Very important to keep this in mind
Speaker 1: that one person's very upset about electric batteries, and that
Speaker 1: is Marco Rubio. Marco Rubio is upset about electric batteries,
Speaker 1: so he doesn't want them used. Oh wait, I'm sorry. No,
Speaker 1: it's not that he's upset about car batteries, lithium being mined,
Speaker 1: all the problems on getting rid of the batteries. No,
Speaker 1: it's that he doesn't want them to come from China.
Speaker 1: It's the China boogeyman Rubio and a surprise Michigan Republican
Speaker 1: car industry. Anyone asked the Pentagon to blacklist the world's
Speaker 1: biggest EV battery maker from contracts, that would be China.
Speaker 1: There's Marco. Oh, he's awesome. Yep, just a quick mention
Speaker 1: on that one, because he's just full of class. That's great.
Speaker 1: And of course they're going to get rid of TikTok
Speaker 1: because China's so evil. Even though it's not owned by
Speaker 1: the Chinese government, it's owned by a Chinese company. And
Speaker 1: the United States wants the back doors and to control
Speaker 1: things like Facebook and already paid off Twitter three and
Speaker 1: a half million dollars during the lockdown period to suppress speech.
Speaker 1: They didn't like, you know the fact that they started
Speaker 1: up the uh oh Ministry of Truth with what's the
Speaker 1: name Jankowitz, you know, the singing censor. Yeah, they don't
Speaker 1: the fact that they fund NewsGuard, which has come after
Speaker 1: me and other people at MRCTV and taking up hours
Speaker 1: of our time, even though they send us these letters,
Speaker 1: right and they say, oh, we have questions about your
Speaker 1: climate change article, And I was like, well, they didn't
Speaker 1: click on the hyperlinks there. You need to prove this, like, oh,
Speaker 1: I have it, it's in there. I'll show you the
Speaker 1: study you didn't click on. It's busy work. They send
Speaker 1: us this stuff to keep us from working on other stuff.
Speaker 1: So I spent four or five hours on a Friday
Speaker 1: a couple months ago having to write. Eric Shiner, the
Speaker 1: head of MRCTV, sends all our replies out, and in
Speaker 1: my latest reply, I actually challenged NewsGuard and I said, hey,
Speaker 1: it might be constructive if you'd like to engage in this,
Speaker 1: we could probably do it for charity. Why don't you
Speaker 1: have somebody from NewsGuard engage in a debate. I'll go
Speaker 1: up there with you and we can talk about the issues.
Speaker 1: They got no reply. Not only did they not get
Speaker 1: a reply from them on that, MRCTV found out that
Speaker 1: they downgraded MRCTV via NewsGuard, the subsidized by the federal
Speaker 1: government tax money NewsGuard. Not only that, but they also
Speaker 1: downgrade at MRCTV before they even acknowledged receiving the replies.
Speaker 1: That's NewsGuard. They're classic, and censorship is awesome, especially when
Speaker 1: it comes to dumb things like the climate change canard.
Speaker 1: That's great stuff. Let's not forget about that Rivian fire, everybody.
Speaker 1: Here's the Rivian fire. We can talk to Eric Peters
Speaker 1: about that fire at Rivian's Illinois plant. Damages multiple evs.
Speaker 1: How about multiple multiple that nothing like keeping it low key,
Speaker 1: fifty cars, no injuries. Yeah, that was awesome. The fire
Speaker 1: lasted for hours cause it's so easy to put out there.
Speaker 1: It is awesome. Huh. The Rivian fire. And just one
Speaker 1: other quick one. I think you're gonna dig this. Hopefully
Speaker 1: this is an interesting one. Yeah, don't forget that. It
Speaker 1: turns out that the head of the Department of Energy,
Speaker 1: that being Jennifer Granholm, former governor of Michigan. As I
Speaker 1: mentioned before, when she was governor, she got six million
Speaker 1: dollars of the American Recovery Act that was given a
Speaker 1: GM split off to go to Protera, the bus electric
Speaker 1: bus maker. And of course there are multiple multiple municipalities
Speaker 1: that are now dropping their electric buses because you know,
Speaker 1: they catch on fire. That there was a double decker
Speaker 1: electric bus that basically burned for hours in England. It
Speaker 1: was on a city street. People are like, ah, this
Speaker 1: is fun. Well, you know, it's kind of hard to
Speaker 1: heat the home right now, so maybe we could just
Speaker 1: you know, go warm our hands over that. That'll be great. Well,
Speaker 1: she after leaving the governorship and getting that money to
Speaker 1: pro Tara, got on the board of Protera. I know,
Speaker 1: it's a shocker, right. Then after she left the board
Speaker 1: of Protera, they gave her a big stock stock option.
Speaker 1: And then when she joined the Biden administration, she didn't
Speaker 1: reveal her stocks on time. That was actually that was
Speaker 1: actually something for which she could have been prosecuted, and
Speaker 1: Josh Holly brought it up to her a while ago. Well,
Speaker 1: it turns out that she's not alone. There are others
Speaker 1: who are involved with this institutionalized corruption. As Josh Holly
Speaker 1: says at the DOE, this is from a while ago,
Speaker 1: but very good points. As we hear Josh Holly bring
Speaker 1: this up. Oh, there's going to be an ad, So
Speaker 1: let me skip over this commercial and just play this audio.
Speaker 1: We're going to have a blast as Josh blasts this
Speaker 1: woman for her corruption. Oh. By the way, the stocks
Speaker 1: that she got from Protera, as I mentioned on my
Speaker 1: show a couple of times, she sold them for nearly
Speaker 1: three million dollars about a month before Portera filed for
Speaker 1: Chapter eleven government bankruptcy protection. Let's go with Josh Holly,
Speaker 1: shall we?
Speaker 26: Then? One hundred and thirty officials in the Energy Department
Speaker 26: reported more than two thousand, seven hundred trades of shares, bonds,
Speaker 26: and options and companies that ethics officers said was directly
Speaker 26: related to the agency's work. This is institutionalized corruption.
Speaker 1: Ah, that's okay. We have no problem with that, do we. Well, everybody,
Speaker 1: let's get some further thoughts on this and on my program.
Speaker 1: When I introduced guests, I like to introduce them because
Speaker 1: I spent some time at Star Trek. I like to
Speaker 1: introduce them with my so called mind meld theme. So
Speaker 1: let's go with the mind meld and because yes I did,
Speaker 1: I did spend some time at UH at Star Trek
Speaker 1: Voyager in their in their script department. It was a
Speaker 1: lot of fun. I got to know a lot of
Speaker 1: people there, and there was actually a libertarian there. I'll
Speaker 1: give you a hint. He created the borg, so I
Speaker 1: think you can understand he's not a fan of collectivism.
Speaker 1: So let's go with that introduction of the mighty mind meld.
Speaker 1: Because it's almost time for us to bring in our guest,
Speaker 1: the great and awesome Eric Peters. This is gonna be
Speaker 1: a lot of fun.
Speaker 9: I must try to mind meld with It's gonna be ms.
Speaker 7: Merchant doctor.
Speaker 14: Our minds are one. I feel what you feel, I know.
Speaker 3: What you know.
Speaker 1: Indeed, yes, my friends, it's time for the mind meld
Speaker 1: with none other than Eric Peters of Eric Peters Autos. Eric,
Speaker 1: great to have you here on the David Night Show.
Speaker 1: When I get to fill in. I love being able
Speaker 1: to talk to you and being able to talk to
Speaker 1: you on my show. Eric petersautos dot com. Welcome to
Speaker 1: the program, my friend. How are you.
Speaker 14: I'm good Garth, thanks for having me and I'll say
Speaker 14: I'll do the Doctor Severn thing. We reach remember that.
Speaker 1: Oh yes, absolutely absolutely. Boy, you've got a great memory.
Speaker 14: Of course, I'm encyclopedic about that, oh man.
Speaker 1: And you know, it really was quite an interesting experience
Speaker 1: going over there. You know, as I mentioned on my show,
Speaker 1: I used to take the bus down from Pasadena and
Speaker 1: I go through all the barrios and out of town
Speaker 1: and now we get off at the gates at Paramount.
Speaker 1: I didn't drive in. I took the bus, and you know,
Speaker 1: it'd be like Lamborghini's pulling in. And it was interesting
Speaker 1: to see the way that, you know, the network of entertainment,
Speaker 1: the web of entertainment brought so much money from so
Speaker 1: many places for things that people just enjoyed. And you know,
Speaker 1: there was good and bad about Star Trek Voyager, but
Speaker 1: I really enjoyed hanging out with a lot of those people.
Speaker 1: And I love hanging out with you. Eric. It's great
Speaker 1: to have you here. We had a couple of those stories.
Speaker 1: We had a story of Ford dropping a lot of
Speaker 1: it's ev plans. We had the new GM battery thing.
Speaker 1: We had the battery fire and of course Kamala Harris,
Speaker 1: it's just water off her back. She's not even thinking
Speaker 1: about it. Tell us what your thoughts are on that,
Speaker 1: and then let's talk about some of the stories at
Speaker 1: Eric peters Otto's Okay and how to follow you.
Speaker 14: Let's start. I was listening to the program before I
Speaker 14: came on, and you were talking about Jenny Granholm and
Speaker 14: the institutionalized corruption. If only it were just institutionalized corruption.
Speaker 14: You know, they have institutionalized corruption in third world banana republics,
Speaker 14: where everybody understands that the government is corrupt and if
Speaker 14: you want to get something done, you have to pay
Speaker 14: off somebody in the government. You know, whether it's the
Speaker 14: local cop who pulls you over, you give him twenty
Speaker 14: bucks and he leaves you alone, right right right. Uniquely,
Speaker 14: in this country, you've got not just the institutionalized corruption,
Speaker 14: but this this unctuous moralizing garbage that goes along with it.
Speaker 14: You know, it's not enough. They can't be honest about
Speaker 14: the graft. It's like, Okay, we have power, and you're
Speaker 14: going to give us money, because that's basically the dynamic here.
Speaker 14: You know, we're actually doing this for your own good.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, that's that's one of their modes of defense.
Speaker 1: It's worse than the mafia.
Speaker 14: It's terrible, you know, to be to be preached to
Speaker 14: by a mugger is just about the most insufferable thing imaginable.
Speaker 14: Now's the true thing I wanted to mention. You know,
Speaker 14: you talked about this business with the Ruvian fires and
Speaker 14: how about the cash burn.
Speaker 1: You know, I didn't even mention a good point.
Speaker 14: They admit to losing something like thirty thousand dollars on
Speaker 14: the sale of each one of their vehicles, and you know,
Speaker 14: how they continue to stay in business is a very
Speaker 14: interesting question. And they continue to stay in business because
Speaker 14: they're essentially they are propped up rent seeking entities that
Speaker 14: exist solely because of the government. That's it. You know,
Speaker 14: Tesla created this trend. You know, people constantly talk about
Speaker 14: how profitable Tesla is, and it's true, but the profitability
Speaker 14: is based on two things, primarily, and neither of those
Speaker 14: has to do with selling cars as such. The first
Speaker 14: has to do with stock valuation, and the stock valuation
Speaker 14: of Tesla has gone through the group and why because
Speaker 14: the government has sent out the signal that they're going
Speaker 14: to force people to buy battery powered vehicles. For a time,
Speaker 14: Tesla was the primary manufacture of battery powered vehicles. So, uh,
Speaker 14: this forced demand for these vehicles is going to increase
Speaker 14: the value of the company that makes them. There's that.
Speaker 14: And the other thing that's not very well known is
Speaker 14: the Tesla essentially founded it's business on extortion via this
Speaker 14: mechanism called carbon credits. So the government will say to
Speaker 14: a company that you have to reduce your carbon footprint,
Speaker 14: that's what they call it, the amount of carbon that
Speaker 14: you emit. And one of the ways to do that
Speaker 14: is to pay Elon musk Ye some money. And what
Speaker 14: you get then is a credit for you know, for
Speaker 14: Elon not having produced carbon, and you can then use
Speaker 14: his credit to sort of pay off the government. And
Speaker 14: you know, it's just it's astounding. What he has done
Speaker 14: is to milk the mainline auto industry to finance him.
Speaker 14: So it's the first instance that I'm aware of. It's
Speaker 14: like that wasp that lays an egg on a caterpillar,
Speaker 14: you know, and then the larva grows inside, yeah, feeds
Speaker 14: off of it, and then casts aside the husk once
Speaker 14: it's done feeding on it. He's managed to build his
Speaker 14: business off the backs of his competition using the government.
Speaker 14: You know, I'm not a fan of Elon Musk for
Speaker 14: that reason because he is the greatest grifter rent seeker
Speaker 14: that I can think of the past one hundred years.
Speaker 14: And the second reason I don't like the guys because
Speaker 14: he postures as a free speech addicate advocate and that's
Speaker 14: a lot of nonsense. Ask anybody who is on his platform.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you've investigated this yourself on X because you yourself
Speaker 1: have posted about this and said, you know, you've been
Speaker 1: very skeptical and I think appropriately so about how many
Speaker 1: people aren't seeing the so called benefits of X's openness here.
Speaker 14: Yeah. Yeah, And now I'm going to be having an
Speaker 14: article up that will actually provide some backing up of
Speaker 14: what I'm saying here. I can't really go into it
Speaker 14: right now because if I did, they would figure it out.
Speaker 14: So I'm not going to talk about that right now.
Speaker 14: But I want to talk about one thing. You know,
Speaker 14: they have this blue check thing, right you have to
Speaker 14: be verified? Yeah, okay, Well, I use my full name.
Speaker 14: I'm well known. I'm not hiding behind a pseudonym or anything.
Speaker 14: So why would I need to get verified, you know,
Speaker 14: to be on X. Well, the reason is because they
Speaker 14: want me to pay eight dollars a month to have
Speaker 14: my data mind by Elon Musk, and I'm just not
Speaker 14: going to do that.
Speaker 1: You know, it's interesting you bring up up all of
Speaker 1: these things because we can attach personalities and their immediate
Speaker 1: policy moves or business moves. But as we drilled down
Speaker 1: into these things, you mentioned the cost of carbon. I've
Speaker 1: written numerous times from MRCTV about that so called cost
Speaker 1: of carbon. It's all predicated on an absolute canard. You know,
Speaker 1: the temperature readers that they have outside of air conditioning
Speaker 1: vents on tarmacs, the temperatures they come up with don't
Speaker 1: even comport with the satellite data. And then of course
Speaker 1: we have the whole climate EATE one and two from
Speaker 1: the University of East Anglia, the emails that they caught
Speaker 1: between people saying we're not seeing the temperatures that we
Speaker 1: want and they say, oh, well, just follow what Michael
Speaker 1: Mann does. I'm paraphrasing hide the decline.
Speaker 24: Right.
Speaker 1: We see Michael Mann's own graph, the hockey stick graph,
Speaker 1: where he doesn't show the medieval warm period. He starts
Speaker 1: at a cooler period so that it makes it look
Speaker 1: very alarming as temperatures increase seemingly because not caused by
Speaker 1: but some sort of correlation that they claim his causation
Speaker 1: of the introduction of the internal combustion engine. As I've mentioned,
Speaker 1: and I've shown the graph on my show. If you
Speaker 1: actually look at the graph Al Gore used it in
Speaker 1: Inconvenient Truth, carbon dioxide increases don't precede the temperature increases
Speaker 1: on their own graph, it's the temperature increases by eight
Speaker 1: hundred years that precede the carbon dioxide increases. And yet,
Speaker 1: you know, so all of that, then they apply, well,
Speaker 1: it's dangerous to everybody, it's for the public good. So
Speaker 1: we're going to control everybody, and we're going to apply
Speaker 1: this cost of carbon. And that's one of the areas
Speaker 1: where I have criticism of Donald Trump again because he
Speaker 1: didn't expose that he just reduced the cost of carbon.
Speaker 1: It was fifty something dollars under Barack Obama, like fifty six.
Speaker 1: And then Trump didn't say this is ridiculous, this is stupid,
Speaker 1: you know, even as he was sitting on the oil
Speaker 1: in Syria. We're sitting on the oil. We've got the
Speaker 1: oil in Syria. It's going to be great. We're holding
Speaker 1: a thirdin Syria. You know, utterly unconstitutional, you know, Yeah, thanks.
Speaker 1: I don't have the air for it though, but sometimes
Speaker 1: I'll have to go as Donald Trump get an orange wig.
Speaker 1: They'll probably arrest me. They'll probably charge me with something
Speaker 1: coming out of New York State. You know. But he
Speaker 1: didn't reduce the cost of carbon thinking. He didn't get
Speaker 1: rid of it. He just reduced it to seven. Now
Speaker 1: the Biden administration has brought it up to sixty one,
Speaker 1: and they're coordinating that to sixty one dollars per metric ton.
Speaker 1: It's not killing people, it's not causing the climate canard
Speaker 1: that they you know, the climate catastrophe, and they're incorporating
Speaker 1: that through the Federal Reserve system with some of the
Speaker 1: major banks. The Federal Reserve almost over a year ago
Speaker 1: directed the banks who obviously are very dependent on the
Speaker 1: Federal Reserve. And now the Fed can can directly buy
Speaker 1: the bonds of any corporation they want, thanks to Donald
Speaker 1: Trump's move with the Cares Act that was put in there,
Speaker 1: they can and they don't even have to expose the
Speaker 1: companies the bonds they're bond. They don't have to expose
Speaker 1: their bottom line, open up the books or anything. They
Speaker 1: just buy it. So it's pure corporatism. Fascism, and they
Speaker 1: are now telling these major banks come up with how
Speaker 1: you're going to address the cost of carbon. In other words,
Speaker 1: tell us where you're going to be investing and where
Speaker 1: you're not, because you want to be on our good side.
Speaker 1: And it's exactly what you're saying is you drill down
Speaker 1: into these with the face of Tesla elon Musk, you
Speaker 1: start to expose all of these layer upon layer upon
Speaker 1: layer of falsehoods and crony capitalism that they've established that
Speaker 1: hopefully we can sort of open up that onion. You know.
Speaker 14: Yeah, it's two steps forward, one step back, and it's
Speaker 14: always in a certain direction, isn't it. Yeah, it's not
Speaker 14: so much fascism, though that's an aspect of it, as
Speaker 14: it is fabianism.
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 14: It's this progression towards the end goal of socialism, which
Speaker 14: is essentially a softer, squishier version of communism. It's indoctentable. Ultimately,
Speaker 14: that's where we're headed. You'll notice that these Republicans, Trump
Speaker 14: is one of them, will never, as you say, challenge
Speaker 14: the underlying principle of something so officiate it completely. An
Speaker 14: excellent example is the Obamacare thing. You know, once that
Speaker 14: became cemented in law. You had these Republicans talking about
Speaker 14: how they were going to repeal and replace, not repeal period,
Speaker 14: but repeal and replace because Republicans always have a better plan.
Speaker 14: But there's always a plan, isn't there.
Speaker 1: They've got to look caring, got to look caring to.
Speaker 14: Leave you alone. Yeah, Not to be back to the
Speaker 14: other thing. It's not so much the science of climate
Speaker 14: change that people should focus on. It's the politics of it.
Speaker 14: When you hear them talking about carbon really what they're
Speaker 14: talking about is energy, and it's a subtle and ingenious thing.
Speaker 14: They understand that for average people, particularly working in middle
Speaker 14: class people, to have access to affordable energy is anathema
Speaker 14: to their goal of ultimately creating this world socialist, communist
Speaker 14: system in which everybody is controlled, and they're going to
Speaker 14: be controlled by being dependent. Because if you can't afford
Speaker 14: to heat your home, if you can't afford food, if
Speaker 14: you can't afford the basic necessities of life, let alone
Speaker 14: any luxuries at all, what have you been reduced to?
Speaker 14: You've been reduced to us, to the state of a surf.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And it's first to what.
Speaker 14: They're told, because if they don't, you know, they freezed
Speaker 14: it up outside or they starved it at that's what
Speaker 14: they're trying to accomplish here.
Speaker 1: Yeah, absolutely, And you know, the hypocrisy of these people
Speaker 1: is stunning. It's you know, it reminds me of Karl Marx.
Speaker 1: I was chatting with Travis about this last night. Karl
Speaker 1: Marx and the Communist Manifesto said that inheritance should be
Speaker 1: taken up by the state for the greater good right.
Speaker 1: And yet when his father died, he fought tooth and
Speaker 1: nail to get his inheritance, and not just get his inheritance,
Speaker 1: get it before everything was resolved back in Russia. He
Speaker 1: alienated his sister. Paul Kangor has a great book on
Speaker 1: the madness of Karl Marx. His mother was writing to
Speaker 1: him saying, what are you doing? Why are you doing this?
Speaker 1: We sent you a bunch of money, now you want
Speaker 1: more money. And of course he also decried industry and
Speaker 1: manufacturing plants when Engles was giving him the money to
Speaker 1: supply him, to pay pay for a lot of his
Speaker 1: writing and keep him supported. And that money came from
Speaker 1: Engles his father's textile plant.
Speaker 14: I mean, it's just double these people long when it
Speaker 14: comes to the things like the dismal science of economics.
Speaker 14: Just terrible people, you know, when when you dig down
Speaker 14: into it, they are They are mean minded, vindictive, they're entitled.
Speaker 14: Uh you know, Marx was a parasite who mooched off
Speaker 14: of angles, who felt that he was he felt that
Speaker 14: he was too good to work. And yet same time
Speaker 14: he despised people who did you know, he particularly targeted
Speaker 14: the middle class, you know, the working middle class, uh,
Speaker 14: you know, and and and turned them into a pariah class.
Speaker 1: And this is oh sorry, And I.
Speaker 14: Was going to say, you know, to bring us up
Speaker 14: into current events. Now you know you're hearing talk about this.
Speaker 14: They call it the unrealized capital gains, which really is
Speaker 14: a federal tax sign your property ultimately is where this
Speaker 14: is headed. And I wish people would understand it. You know,
Speaker 14: it's being presented as, oh, it's only going to be
Speaker 14: the billionaires and big corporations that are going to pay
Speaker 14: this unrealized capital gains tax. And I say, yeah, just
Speaker 14: like when they passed the thirteenth Amendment and the income
Speaker 14: tax one hundred years ago, only the rich, only the rich,
Speaker 14: are going to pay the income taxt.
Speaker 1: And you know, Eric, that just shows me and you know,
Speaker 1: I understand how if you're looking at the corporatist fascist
Speaker 1: system we have, and the British were especially a lot
Speaker 1: of the British libertarians and even many of the left
Speaker 1: wing socialists. They were very clued into the favoritism being
Speaker 1: played at the end of the royal peerage system into
Speaker 1: the start of the Industrial Revolution. As the royal peerage
Speaker 1: system started to collapse, some of those people got, as
Speaker 1: I've mentioned on my show maybe on David Show before,
Speaker 1: they got what we're called special Acts of Parliament and
Speaker 1: literally the city of Bath, England was basically given to
Speaker 1: two guys. That's why a lot of the architecture is
Speaker 1: very similar in the city of Bath. And so I
Speaker 1: understand that they don't like those connections to what Marks
Speaker 1: successfully depicted as free market capitalism, but it's not. It's cronyism.
Speaker 1: And when you see the ways that markets actually work,
Speaker 1: the people who are in charge of real markets are
Speaker 1: the consumers. And so if we have this anti gouging
Speaker 1: thing with price controls that Kamala Harris wants, or they
Speaker 1: want to take money from the so called rich to
Speaker 1: help the poor and all that sort of stuff, what
Speaker 1: we're seeing is a total disconnect from any logical or
Speaker 1: moral historical analysis of how markets work. They work by
Speaker 1: catering to the consumer. The consumer wants to pay less
Speaker 1: for his stuff, not work harder for his stuff. And
Speaker 1: the people who are offering things to people at higher
Speaker 1: prices are going to be undercut if someone can undercut them,
Speaker 1: because the consumer wants it for less. So the nature
Speaker 1: of the market is to conserve resources, not expend a
Speaker 1: lot more energy to get what you want. That's why
Speaker 1: we have the simple machines the less for the inclined plane.
Speaker 1: It's not that we want to make something that took
Speaker 1: two people to do, now we want to make one
Speaker 1: person unemployed. No, we want to free up that person
Speaker 1: so that that work isn't as hard to do. So
Speaker 1: when they're taking money from people who have actually aggregated
Speaker 1: a certain amount of money for their own wealth, whether
Speaker 1: it's in their business, and now they've got an extra
Speaker 1: drag on their business which won't allow them to invest
Speaker 1: in new employees or R and D or people who
Speaker 1: have saved and are willing to invest in a real market,
Speaker 1: not a manipulated market the way we have it. What
Speaker 1: they're doing there is they're actually taking away all of
Speaker 1: that incredibly important benefit, all the incredibly important benefits from productivity.
Speaker 1: So they're taking away the inclined plane, they're taking away
Speaker 1: the lever saying, well, we know you've saved out that
Speaker 1: money and that money could be put to work. Now
Speaker 1: we're going to put it to work instead. That's what
Speaker 1: they're doing. They're redirecting human efforts all the way to
Speaker 1: the very concept of saving money that individuals could could
Speaker 1: spend and invest on other things. And they're doing it
Speaker 1: through envy. They don't want the poor people to recognize
Speaker 1: that they're actually taking advantage of their emotions.
Speaker 14: Right well, And to get back to this thing about
Speaker 14: Marxism being malicious, one of the tenants in the Communist
Speaker 14: Manifesto was the abolition of private property, and one of
Speaker 14: the mechanisms for doing that is the tax on property,
Speaker 14: which renders ownership of property of fiction. What ends up
Speaker 14: happening is that you are allowed conditional possession of your
Speaker 14: property so long as you continue to pay effectively rent
Speaker 14: to the state. So we live under the happy delusion
Speaker 14: that we are homeowners if you have a home, but
Speaker 14: do you truly own your home? If the government can
Speaker 14: come in and say, well, we think your home's worth
Speaker 14: a certain amount of money, and we require you to
Speaker 14: send us this amount of money. You owe us money,
Speaker 14: even though wait a minute, I paid for my house.
Speaker 14: I bought it from the seller. I paid the seller.
Speaker 14: How is it that I owe the government money? And
Speaker 14: if I don't pay the government money, then the government
Speaker 14: will send men with guns to forcibly evict me from
Speaker 14: what I like to think of was my house, and
Speaker 14: I'll be in the street and the government will seize
Speaker 14: my property. So it's a delusion to think that where
Speaker 14: we have home ownership in this country. Now what they're
Speaker 14: talking about doing with regard to this unrealized capital gains thing,
Speaker 14: and it's incredibly it's existentially dangerous if this thing should
Speaker 14: come to pass. Once they establish, if they do the
Speaker 14: principle that it is possible to tax unrealized capital gains,
Speaker 14: they will come in and say, well, last year your
Speaker 14: house was worth I'm just going to pull a figure
Speaker 14: two hundred and fifty thousand dollars. Well, a year's passed,
Speaker 14: and now your house is we say your house is
Speaker 14: worth two hundred and seventy five thousand dollars. You have
Speaker 14: an unrealized gain of twenty five thousand dollars, and therefore
Speaker 14: this will be considered income, this twenty five thousand dollars,
Speaker 14: and you will be obliged to pay a tax on that,
Speaker 14: and it will be a substantial tax, and it will
Speaker 14: be in addition to the tax that you have to
Speaker 14: pay on your property at the county or state level.
Speaker 14: And what it's going to do is exactly what Marx intended,
Speaker 14: which is to drive middle and working class people out
Speaker 14: of their homes so that they become and served, so
Speaker 14: that they become renters, so that they at best are
Speaker 14: allowed to live in some sort of a government housing situation,
Speaker 14: provided you know, they don't offend the party. Yeah, where
Speaker 14: this is headed?
Speaker 1: Yeah, And isn't it interesting too just looking at it
Speaker 1: logically and philosophically. Marx took advantage of the dislike that
Speaker 1: people had for the old royal fiefdom's peerage system. And
Speaker 1: you know, you and I have spoken about this before.
Speaker 1: I've got a visit from the kitty cat here. She's
Speaker 1: my copilot, so I'm going to try to handle a
Speaker 1: few things subtly here. But it is interesting because here
Speaker 1: we had Karl Marx using the attacking the so called bourgeois,
Speaker 1: which is a derivation from Burger from you know, German
Speaker 1: feudal days, the royal governor sort of thing pointed by
Speaker 1: the royalty because locals didn't like that feudal system, and
Speaker 1: creating a new feudal system. That's exactly where it goes.
Speaker 1: You know, we've got a new feudal system. You can't
Speaker 1: have private property. It's all got to be for the
Speaker 1: greater good. Well, who's going to run who decides on
Speaker 1: the greater good? Well, that's going to be a group
Speaker 1: of people. So what you're saying is people are too
Speaker 1: stupid to handle their own lives, but a group of
Speaker 1: people will be smart enough to handle not only their
Speaker 1: own lives, but the lives of everybody else. And to
Speaker 1: have that system gained by special interests like the ones
Speaker 1: like at Protera who were so friendly with Jennifer Granholm.
Speaker 14: You've got to give evil credit because evil it is crafty.
Speaker 14: So you know, what they've succeeded in doing now is
Speaker 14: to foem, just as Marks did, this resentment, this despair
Speaker 14: of people, particularly young people. You know, you've probably read
Speaker 14: the stat that the cost of an average house now
Speaker 14: in this country is over four hundred thousand dollars. Yeah,
Speaker 14: as a result of the inflation of fiat currency and
Speaker 14: so on, which is the same people are behind the
Speaker 14: doing that. So what they've done is they've made home
Speaker 14: ownership essentially unaffordable now for young people coming into the market.
Speaker 14: And naturally the young people are angry about that. You know,
Speaker 14: they're frustrated, like, what's the point Why should i work
Speaker 14: when there's essentially zero chance that I'm going to be
Speaker 14: able to own one of these homes? Because you know
Speaker 14: who's going to come up with a ten percent on
Speaker 14: a four hundred thousand dollars half. You can't do it.
Speaker 14: So the solution, oh, the government will come in that,
Speaker 14: you know, the government will well, the same government that
Speaker 14: created the problem. That's how it works. And it's so
Speaker 14: frustrating to you and I and I'm sure a lot
Speaker 14: of people who understand how this game is played because
Speaker 14: we see it, but a lot of the kids coming
Speaker 14: up they don't see it, and they are per Lenin
Speaker 14: And I don't mean this in a derogatory sense. They're
Speaker 14: useful idiots. Absolutely, they do not understand how they are
Speaker 14: being manipulated, and they think that they're going to get
Speaker 14: something for nothing. And what's going to happen is that
Speaker 14: everybody is going to get nothing ultimately, except for a
Speaker 14: handful of people at the cadres at the top who
Speaker 14: have everything. You know, I point out historically, look at
Speaker 14: the old Soviet Union. Technically nobody had any private property,
Speaker 14: but Stalin had At Datcha, he.
Speaker 1: Had multiple absolutely, you know, he had a.
Speaker 14: Packard, limousine, He had everything that he could conceivably want. Now,
Speaker 14: technically he didn't own those things. They were Soviet state property.
Speaker 14: But who owns who controls Soviet state property? Well, Stalin did.
Speaker 14: Stalin and the party controlled the property. If you control
Speaker 14: the property, effectively, it's your property.
Speaker 5: Right.
Speaker 14: It's a really important point that people don't understand. If
Speaker 14: you don't have the ownership the control of something, you
Speaker 14: don't own it, no matter what a piece of paper.
Speaker 1: Says, and it goes into you know, like I said,
Speaker 1: recognition of something as a resource. Like I said, oil
Speaker 1: was basically a mineral slime that was used for lubrication
Speaker 1: until they were able to develop it into something that
Speaker 1: provided b to use and light and then that became
Speaker 1: a good alternative to whale oil. And I want to
Speaker 1: bring this up to you, Eric, and then talk to
Speaker 1: you about some of the items on your website. But
Speaker 1: first I want to mention all the kitty kat is
Speaker 1: meowing Hi. She wants to talk to you evidently. Yeah. Well,
Speaker 1: I love the pictures of your kiddies. Those are those
Speaker 1: are great, great animals, good pals. I want to introduce
Speaker 1: the website first of all, so I want to go
Speaker 1: over show this off to people. First. It's X. The
Speaker 1: X is at Libertarian car G at Libertarian card g.
Speaker 1: And then we have a number of items on the
Speaker 1: site which are great. There's one of them that have
Speaker 1: already delineated right there, but check it out. It's Eric
Speaker 1: petersautos dot com. Eric. Before oh, sorry, before we go
Speaker 1: into any of those topics on your site, I would
Speaker 1: like to introduce this story from Cape Cod. You probably
Speaker 1: saw the information about the wind turbine blade that broke
Speaker 1: up off of Nantucket pieces of fiberglass, very sharp. I
Speaker 1: want to show you a little something about this. I'm
Speaker 1: gonna go down over here in my little notes here
Speaker 1: and yeah, so okay, so this is the lobsterman, Dan
Speaker 1: Pronk and others. There's an article that was posted at
Speaker 1: Heartland Daily and Dan Pronk is a guy who got
Speaker 1: into the lobstering and fishing when he was like nineteen
Speaker 1: years old. And this is the story. Nantucket local slam
Speaker 1: offshore wind developer for polluting shores. But of course this
Speaker 1: isn't just the offshore wind developer. They're working with the
Speaker 1: government of Massachusetts. They're working with the Nantucket government to
Speaker 1: supply this energy. And the Biden administration just announced that
Speaker 1: it is going to be engaging in the largest rollout
Speaker 1: of wind farms so far. Let me see if I've
Speaker 1: got this one. Let me see. Umm, yeah, I don't
Speaker 1: know if I've got it here, but I'll see if
Speaker 1: I can find it for my history later. But I
Speaker 1: want to show you some video of this man as
Speaker 1: he actually went to this meeting, and I showed a
Speaker 1: little bit of it before. And there's a piece from
Speaker 1: X that I've got here. Let me see if I
Speaker 1: can find it. Yeah, let me see Daily Caller. Oh,
Speaker 1: this is it. This is it. This is him talking
Speaker 1: about it in July on X And this will show
Speaker 1: you what they're doing to their livelihoods. Here here it is.
Speaker 14: My name is Dan Pronk.
Speaker 8: I fish eight hundred lobster traps right where you're putting
Speaker 8: these tombstones, which is also the end of my business.
Speaker 8: And the other people that fish down there, let's just
Speaker 8: start with that second of all, In regards to toxicity
Speaker 8: of fiberglass, I have fiberglass boats. I don't know what
Speaker 8: you know about fiberglass, but when you apply it in
Speaker 8: the residence and the bonding units that are holding it together,
Speaker 8: you have to wear respirators for what reason, because it's toxic.
Speaker 8: If you breathe those fumes, the bonding agents that hold
Speaker 8: this stuff together, you'll get higher.
Speaker 7: Than a rat.
Speaker 8: So as far as it not being toxic and you
Speaker 8: not knowing about it being toxic, what's this made out of?
Speaker 6: Then?
Speaker 8: This is styrofoam, I believe, which is a chemical compound.
Speaker 8: It doesn't just grow naturally.
Speaker 14: So it is toxic.
Speaker 8: What do you have to say about that? Klouf oh
Speaker 8: anybody else? My other question is this dogg or bank
Speaker 8: incident that happened two months ago. It was asked previously
Speaker 8: in this meeting about other circumstances that were similar to this,
Speaker 8: and you two people that claim to be in Hihennas
Speaker 8: in separate rooms, now you're in the same one. You
Speaker 8: didn't say anything about it. Until it was brought up
Speaker 8: to your attention. I'll come because you got it to hide.
Speaker 8: What's happened down there already that we don't know about
Speaker 8: that you haven't reported. How come it took you called
Speaker 8: everybody else except for the closest neighbor being us, before
Speaker 8: we were the last ones to find out. We found
Speaker 8: out about it online yesterday. That's how I found out
Speaker 8: about it, looking on the internet and seeing all the
Speaker 8: shit washed up on excuse my language, washed up on
Speaker 8: the beach. You didn't wake up to that.
Speaker 1: We did.
Speaker 8: You guys are just turning a blind eye to all this.
Speaker 8: And then my final question is, and nobody's asked this
Speaker 8: question yet in this room, what is to keep this
Speaker 8: from happening again? Because here's twice now it's happened in
Speaker 8: two months. We haven't even had winter yet, never mind
Speaker 8: a hurricane. What's going to happen when that happens?
Speaker 1: Thanks for your time, so good stuff from him, and
Speaker 1: I appreciate what he did. And I just want to
Speaker 1: show you one other item here, which I'm not going
Speaker 1: to show the full clip, is a great interview from
Speaker 1: Grace Curly. I'm acquainted with Grace. She does a noontime
Speaker 1: show Eric on this Howie Card Network, sort of a
Speaker 1: traditional conservative person, very very cool, and she was his
Speaker 1: former producer and she had him on. I didn't know
Speaker 1: about this story until in her second hour yesterday. She
Speaker 1: brought this man on and he was phenomenal. So just
Speaker 1: show you the image, just real quick. We'll probably have
Speaker 1: that harmless yellow turn turns out the fun from Rumble.
Speaker 1: But she had him on the phone, just talking. But
Speaker 1: I do want to give her credit. It's from her
Speaker 1: show from yesterday, August twenty ninth. People can follow her
Speaker 1: on Rumble. So this is Grace speaking with him yesterday live.
Speaker 21: That we have heard about thanks to this blade from
Speaker 21: Vineyard Wind Development. So the blade broke on July thirteenth,
Speaker 21: and since then you've probably seen it's been covered, you know,
Speaker 21: a decent amount by the media here spilling styrofoam, fiberglass
Speaker 21: and other debris. And what'll caught my eye about the
Speaker 21: stories how a lot of these fishermen are banding together.
Speaker 21: They're protesting this. They are sick of this false narrative
Speaker 21: that's being put out about wind turbines. And there was
Speaker 21: a town hall meeting on July seventeenth and there was
Speaker 21: a Nantucket lobsterman named Dan Pronk, and I loved the
Speaker 21: comments that he made because he was talking about the fiberglass.
Speaker 21: He was talking about how toxic it is, and he said,
Speaker 21: if you breed those fumes, you'll get higher than a rat.
Speaker 1: And so it's a great conversation. One of the things
Speaker 1: that he brought up Eric that I want to point
Speaker 1: out is she asked him, what about some of these
Speaker 1: nature organizations, you know, the wildlife organizations, the marine organizations.
Speaker 1: He said, Oh, they were there at the start. They're
Speaker 1: not there now. And he said they've been now. He said,
Speaker 1: they've been bought out. And it again brought me back
Speaker 1: to the core of economics and private property and individual
Speaker 1: valuation for consumers. The guys on hand, who have a
Speaker 1: private property stake in managing those waters not to over fish,
Speaker 1: to make sure they can get the stuff to the
Speaker 1: consumers who want it at a good price. Their livelihoods
Speaker 1: are dependent on this place being clean. And you can
Speaker 1: see how even those organizations that don't rely on that
Speaker 1: specific place for their livelihoods, they're slightly distanced. Even though
Speaker 1: they have this goal of keeping the waters clean. They
Speaker 1: can be purchased or bought out or incentivized to look
Speaker 1: the other way this time because oh, we'll give you
Speaker 1: a donation for that project or overall for that project.
Speaker 1: Wouldn't you like a contribution for this? And it really
Speaker 1: shows me again how important it is to recognize first
Speaker 1: the NGO stuff, you know, very tricky to find out
Speaker 1: what they're really doing. But the local people on hand,
Speaker 1: leave them alone, they'll manage things themselves.
Speaker 14: This is fundamentally an ideological issue, you know, with regards
Speaker 14: to what we're talking about. Specifically, Conservationism used to be
Speaker 14: a thing, and that was about fifty years ago, and
Speaker 14: you had conservationist organizations. When I was in Boy Scouts,
Speaker 14: we talked about being good stewards of you know, the
Speaker 14: outdoors and so on, to not litter, and then that
Speaker 14: got very subtly replaced by environmentalism. What is that It
Speaker 14: has a quasi kind of scientific sound to it, but
Speaker 14: it's not scientific. It's political, you know, it is the
Speaker 14: pretext that's being used now. You know, Communism had to
Speaker 14: adapt because it didn't sell when they talked about the
Speaker 14: working class and you know, the bourgeois. It didn't work
Speaker 14: in this country. So around fifty years ago they started
Speaker 14: using environmentalism as the new wedge issue Earth Day in
Speaker 14: nineteen seventy and all this other stuff, and there was
Speaker 14: just like with the abuse of the working class in England,
Speaker 14: there was a grain of proof to it, and then yeah,
Speaker 14: there was a pollution issue and there was a problem. Well,
Speaker 14: the solution, of course, isn't let's just you know, reasonably
Speaker 14: clean up the pollution. It's essentially communism. That's what the
Speaker 14: that's what they're using now to forward this stuff along.
Speaker 14: And it's really ordant to understand that. You know, look
Speaker 14: at the auto industry, which is my ballowik and the
Speaker 14: thing that I know about. If rational controls of pollution
Speaker 14: were the criteria, the EPA would have closed shop around
Speaker 14: nineteen ninety six because, meaningfully speaking, exhaust emissions from new
Speaker 14: vehicles have not been an issue in terms of pollution
Speaker 14: since then. But the public isn't aware of that because
Speaker 14: the public is told, oh, well, whatever the latest proposal
Speaker 14: is is going to result in a reduction of thirty
Speaker 14: percent of exhaust emissions, so they never explain to people
Speaker 14: what they're talking about is, yeah, thirty percent of point
Speaker 14: oh something percent. In other words, a difference that's in irrelevance.
Speaker 14: It's just become a pretext and excuse now to continue
Speaker 14: to push, push, push this ideology. Another good way up
Speaker 14: to look at it is the whole Mother's Against Drunk
Speaker 14: Driving organization. That's another example. Even the woman who founded
Speaker 14: that organization has turned against it because it's no longer
Speaker 14: about you know, hey, don't be a jerk and drink,
Speaker 14: you know, a case of beer and go out and
Speaker 14: brib it. In other words, don't literally drink and drive.
Speaker 14: Now they're talking it's essentially neo prohibitionism. The slightest drop
Speaker 14: of alcoholism is now considered drunk, and the federal government,
Speaker 14: through Biden, has executive ordered that essentially, everybody's going to
Speaker 14: be assumed drunk until they prove otherwise in their cars. Right,
Speaker 14: you have to be convicted of drunk driving before you
Speaker 14: had a breathalyzer put in your car. Now they're going
Speaker 14: to have passive alcohol detectors installed in the car to
Speaker 14: sample your breath or sample your skin or however they're
Speaker 14: going to do it. And if the thing thinks you've
Speaker 14: had anything to drink at all, you know, it'll just
Speaker 14: automatically disable the vehicle.
Speaker 11: You know.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And of course do that, get people to go
Speaker 1: into their electric vehicles, get them in their fifteen minute cities.
Speaker 1: That sort of nonsense control everything, the collectivist mindset. It
Speaker 1: is interesting you have a piece and if I can
Speaker 1: refer to this one. First off, Eric, you have a
Speaker 1: piece over your website. And also i'd like to bring
Speaker 1: in to sort of copile it here for a little while.
Speaker 1: I'd like to bring in Jason Barker, who is of
Speaker 1: course of the Foxhole Nights of the Storm. Jason, welcome
Speaker 1: to the show, and thank you for being such a
Speaker 1: good supporter. As we bring you in, Jason, I want
Speaker 1: you to let everybody know how they can find you,
Speaker 1: and we'll let you say hi to Eric as well.
Speaker 1: Good men, All all these guys here a great people
Speaker 1: as well as David Knight. Thanks for being here. Jason.
Speaker 20: Hey, good morning Guard. It's always a pleasure and honor
Speaker 20: to be on with you. Yeah, if you want to
Speaker 20: find me, just go to the Nightsothstorm dot com and
Speaker 20: you can see all the places to find all the shows,
Speaker 20: including Guards, including Eric's. I got everyone listed there. It's
Speaker 20: good to see you again.
Speaker 14: Eric, Good to see you too, Jason.
Speaker 1: Listen and guys, I do want to mention also a
Speaker 1: wonderful thing has happened over at Rockfinn. Contribution over at
Speaker 1: Rockfinn from let's see Amos Pool. Thank you, thank you,
Speaker 1: Amos one hundred dollars contribution at the David Knight Show
Speaker 1: for this end of the month. Thank you. I can't
Speaker 1: tell you that is just I appreciate that very much.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Amos, you rock. He says, thanks for the
Speaker 1: great show. Guard, thank you, Amos awesome, awesome stuff. And
Speaker 1: thanks to the guests that they really help out. So Jason,
Speaker 1: I'd love to get your thoughts on this too, Eric,
Speaker 1: want to get your opinions about this here this story
Speaker 1: city versus country this time, and if you could tell
Speaker 1: us a little bit about your observations on the Civil War.
Speaker 1: A lot of people don't know what a criminal Abraham
Speaker 1: Lincoln was, the concept of so called perpetual union, I
Speaker 1: don't get that. But let's talk a little bit about
Speaker 1: how you see a civil war coming around because of
Speaker 1: these urban mindset people versus the people who actually want
Speaker 1: to engage in their own work and drive their own
Speaker 1: cars and go long distances out in the country. So
Speaker 1: I just sort of put it all together. Tell us
Speaker 1: about this piece.
Speaker 14: Well, okay, we should probably start with just an etymological point.
Speaker 14: You know, we're conditioned to refer to what happened in
Speaker 14: eighteen sixty one to eighteen sixty one as a civil war,
Speaker 14: which is just factually incorrect. It was not a civil war.
Speaker 14: Civil war is when you have two factions that are
Speaker 14: vying for control over a territory. What happened in eighteen
Speaker 14: sixty one was that the Southern States did not want
Speaker 14: to be part any longer of this union with the North,
Speaker 14: very much as the thirteen American colonies no longer wanted
Speaker 14: to be part of a union with Great Britain, so
Speaker 14: they attempted to withdraw from the Union, and the war
Speaker 14: was over the North forcing the South back into the
Speaker 14: Union at Bayonet Point. So that's the first point. The
Speaker 14: second point, of course, is that it was fundamentally a
Speaker 14: geographic war. You had the Mason Dixon line, you had
Speaker 14: the South and the North, and you had different cultures,
Speaker 14: and you had different economic systems, which was a factor.
Speaker 14: And the same thing is happening now in a way
Speaker 14: that I think is interesting in that it's kind of
Speaker 14: the city versus the countryside in that I use my
Speaker 14: own state as an example, Virginia. If you look at
Speaker 14: a map, it is profoundly read meaning conservative. It votes
Speaker 14: conservative except for Virginia, the area around Richmond and the
Speaker 14: area around Norfolk. So essentially, you've got this minority of
Speaker 14: urbanites that are controlling the state politically. Even in California.
Speaker 14: Most people don't realize that, for the most part, California
Speaker 14: is actually a pretty conservative state if you excise San Francisco,
Speaker 14: Los Angeles, and San Diego. So these people effectively have
Speaker 14: no voice, and this is politically and socially explosive. You know,
Speaker 14: you've heard the Democrats, and I like to call them
Speaker 14: leftists because I think that that's more accurate. You know,
Speaker 14: the last Democrat was RFK Junior, and he's become a
Speaker 14: Republican at any rate. They want to have the direct
Speaker 14: election of the president because they know that if they
Speaker 14: get rid of the electoral College, there will no longer
Speaker 14: be an election that matters in any meaningful sense, because
Speaker 14: these cities will control who becomes the president and they
Speaker 14: will consistently vote for a leftist and we will be disfranchised.
Speaker 14: And at that point, then what do we do, because
Speaker 14: we no longer have any meaningful way, you know, to
Speaker 14: have effect change through process. So you know, the question
Speaker 14: is begged and I'll leave you guys to answer it.
Speaker 1: Well, I'll just bring this up, Jason, you go ahead.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna call up one of the photographs from what
Speaker 1: you have on your website at Eric Peters autos dot
Speaker 1: com in a minute, But go ahead, Jason.
Speaker 20: Yeah, that's a that's absolutely perfect. Eric. I grew up
Speaker 20: in Illinois as a kid, a little bit in Missouri.
Speaker 20: I live in Missouri now, and you're looking at that
Speaker 20: exact situation where the vast majority of the state is red,
Speaker 20: which it shouldn't be read because that's the color of communism, right,
Speaker 20: But you know, but yeah, Illinois basically Chicago runs the
Speaker 20: entire state. And then here in Missouri we're still a
Speaker 20: red state. We're not a blue state. I don't think.
Speaker 20: Maybe we're going a little purplish. But you got Kansas
Speaker 20: City and Saint Louis or on the on the left,
Speaker 20: really far in the left, and they do drive a
Speaker 20: lot of politics here. So I don't know how we
Speaker 20: deal with that. I think it's going to bite him
Speaker 20: in the butt if we get to the fifteen minute
Speaker 20: city and they push all urban or the rural people
Speaker 20: into the urban because then the voice and the balance
Speaker 20: is going to tip. And Texas is a good example
Speaker 20: as well. People moved out of California down into Texas
Speaker 20: and took that from a deep red state to almost
Speaker 20: a purplish state now because of Austin and Dallas and
Speaker 20: places like that. You know, they ruined their own place.
Speaker 20: I don't know why they can't figure this out. They
Speaker 20: ruin their own area. Then they moved to an area
Speaker 20: where people are on the opposite political spectrum, and then
Speaker 20: they tried to re make the same thing they just left.
Speaker 14: Socialism will always work the next time. We just have
Speaker 14: to be in charge of it right now. Actually, there's
Speaker 14: an alarming thing and there's sort of a positive thing
Speaker 14: that I see about this. And the alarming thing and
Speaker 14: the positive thing is that the cities can't exist without
Speaker 14: the country. You know, the country provides everything that the
Speaker 14: cities would die without. So what will happen then if
Speaker 14: we refuse to provide what the cities need? Are they
Speaker 14: going to come and drag us into colcoy's you know,
Speaker 14: collective farms like they did in the old Smooth Union.
Speaker 14: They very well may try to do that, but shy
Speaker 14: of that we still have a great deal of power
Speaker 14: and that we can just go on strike and just
Speaker 14: refuse to fund finance and provide our enemies so that
Speaker 14: they can enslave us.
Speaker 20: And that's why David talks a lot about local and
Speaker 20: I know that's kind of controversial in the chat. People say, oh,
Speaker 20: you can't do anything local. Well, it depends on where
Speaker 20: you're at. Okay, here, local is great. We can choose
Speaker 20: to ignore the federal government if we want, and we
Speaker 20: have the politicians in seat here that we'll do that.
Speaker 20: You know, we have to be able to self sustain,
Speaker 20: of course. I mean the transportation and the supply chain
Speaker 20: is so intertwined now it's really hard to be self sufficient.
Speaker 20: But you can get there. But you got to start somewhere, right,
Speaker 20: and it's getting to know your neighbors. It's getting to
Speaker 20: know the politicians. I mean, I would love to ask
Speaker 20: somebody who's running for mayor, who's running for your local sheriff.
Speaker 20: I guarantee you they don't know because they're focused on
Speaker 20: the federal thing. Right, need to start paying attention to local,
Speaker 20: getting educated on that, getting the right people in and
Speaker 20: then starting the right movements. Okay, let's start a farm
Speaker 20: co op around here, Let's get rid of Walmart for
Speaker 20: a grocery store. Let's start a farm co op and
Speaker 20: support our local people. And then, you know, energy is
Speaker 20: the key to me and Guard talked last night, and
Speaker 20: energy is really the bottleneck, especially when it comes to
Speaker 20: fuel and electricity. So that's going to be the challenge.
Speaker 20: I don't know, maybe we could start making our own
Speaker 20: ethanol or something. I mean, there's lots of options that
Speaker 20: we can explore.
Speaker 1: So you know, it's interesting, gentlemen, because Eric, you posted
Speaker 1: this picture on your site on that story Paradise versus hell.
Speaker 1: You've got paradise with the countryside of farm pretty well
Speaker 1: delineated property there that you can see, you know, and
Speaker 1: you can imagine. One of the things that I don't
Speaker 1: want to extend the thought on this too far, but
Speaker 1: in comparing what I've always disliked the city to the countryside,
Speaker 1: one of the things that I noticed is in the
Speaker 1: sure inside buildings you get ownership of buildings and property
Speaker 1: rights and things like that for the buildings, but there
Speaker 1: seems to be a dissillusion or a reduction in the
Speaker 1: concept or understanding of private property. The streets are run
Speaker 1: by the government, they have politicians, that everybody's packed together,
Speaker 1: the buildings themselves. You don't feel like you have a
Speaker 1: sense of privacy. So the very idea of private property
Speaker 1: seems to me to be at least functionally mentally reduced
Speaker 1: inside cities, inside urban areas, and they've sort of translated
Speaker 1: some of that. We've got to control what's going to
Speaker 1: happen on this city street. We've got to do this
Speaker 1: to manage the city. It's all for everybody's good here
Speaker 1: in the city. They've translated that into zoning and things.
Speaker 1: Out in the countryside. Where the countryside really, especially in
Speaker 1: small enclaves of smaller groups of people, not packed in
Speaker 1: massive populations. You get to know your neighbors fairly well well.
Speaker 1: You keep the government out of it, and it's person
Speaker 1: to person contacts, as Alexei to Toddfield tried to explain
Speaker 1: to people. And even in the cities back then they
Speaker 1: would do four square block areas where people would help
Speaker 1: each other voluntarily, the lions, the four age, the elks,
Speaker 1: that sort of thing, and indigence was very low. But
Speaker 1: out in the countryside you really do get to know
Speaker 1: your neighbors in the less urban areas, and there does
Speaker 1: seem to me to be a greater at least vestigial
Speaker 1: recognition of property rights there than the city, which, by
Speaker 1: its nature I think doesn't really contribute to an understanding
Speaker 1: of property rights the way that the countryside does. I
Speaker 1: don't know if you guys think that that's maybe them
Speaker 1: off based there, I don't know.
Speaker 14: It's just let's say, New York City, Manhattan. Even if
Speaker 14: you are somebody who is affluent enough to be able
Speaker 14: to afford a two million dollar condo, you're just packed
Speaker 14: in a hive. You don't have Yeah, you may own
Speaker 14: your little space within the building, but like you said,
Speaker 14: you've got somebody else across the on the other side
Speaker 14: of that wall, right, Yeah, Now you know I've got,
Speaker 14: you know, a house, and there's nothing outside of my
Speaker 14: walls except for my fields and my grass. So I
Speaker 14: feel much more independent, you know, I have much more
Speaker 14: control over my immediate environment than the guy who lives
Speaker 14: in the two million dollar condo in New York City.
Speaker 14: I think the whole dynamic of living in a tightly
Speaker 14: packed city fosters this attitude, you know, this of dependence
Speaker 14: and uncertainty because it's true, you know, you don't really
Speaker 14: you can't grow your own food in your two million
Speaker 14: I guess you could, but who's going to do that?
Speaker 14: You know, And everything comes into the city from somewhere else,
Speaker 14: and as long as you have money to pay for it,
Speaker 14: I guess it's okay. But you know, whatever services, I've
Speaker 14: got a well, even if the power goes out, I've
Speaker 14: got water. You know, I've got a great deal more
Speaker 14: ability to provide for myself here in my country abode
Speaker 14: than I would have in a two million dollar apartment
Speaker 14: in New York City.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah, And I know Jason needs to be taken a
Speaker 1: lot of steps to get more independent and do things
Speaker 1: out on your property. You got a lot of acreage
Speaker 1: and you're taking advantage of it, right, Yeah.
Speaker 20: And I wanted to point something out as well. Convenience
Speaker 20: is always the glide path to tyranny and control. And
Speaker 20: when you live in a city, okay, it's very appealing,
Speaker 20: especially to young people that don't know how to you know,
Speaker 20: they didn't grow up mowing the grass or you know,
Speaker 20: drawing water from the well or feeding the animals. So
Speaker 20: to live in a building where I don't have to
Speaker 20: mow the grass, I don't have to worry about I
Speaker 20: just call the maintenance guy. You know, all this stuff.
Speaker 20: It takes all the responsibility off of you, you know,
Speaker 20: and and it's kind of convenient, of course, because now
Speaker 20: we have to work more hours to be able to
Speaker 20: pay that rent. But when you move into the rural side,
Speaker 20: there is more freedom, but it takes work.
Speaker 1: But that work.
Speaker 20: You know, as I'm mowing my grass, I bump into
Speaker 20: the neighbor. Now I get to know my neighbor, we
Speaker 20: get to talking. I mean, it is, it's more work,
Speaker 20: but as you get used to it, it gets easier
Speaker 20: and you help each other out. But in a city,
Speaker 20: you know, how many people live in an apartment and
Speaker 20: they don't know a single person in their building. You know,
Speaker 20: maybe once in a while they say hello on the
Speaker 20: elevator and that's it. I know, like people I believe
Speaker 20: in here a year, and I know all kinds of
Speaker 20: people in my neighborhood. So yeah, but I wanted to
Speaker 20: point that out that you know, the lack of responsibility
Speaker 20: of having to care for property leads to you know,
Speaker 20: it's convenient, but it leads to control because now you're
Speaker 20: depending on other people for your daily life.
Speaker 1: So yeah, yeah, great point, Eric, You've got to Oh,
Speaker 1: go ahead, sir.
Speaker 14: I'm going to see the other day. I can't remember
Speaker 14: which article it was, but I related the old country tale,
Speaker 14: and I was thinking about this because we're talking about
Speaker 14: the country of how to cash a wild hog? Did
Speaker 14: you catch that one?
Speaker 20: Because yeah, I haven't seen that one yet.
Speaker 14: So the old story goes, if you want to cash
Speaker 14: a wild hog, what you do is you put out
Speaker 14: a bucket of food. Now, the hog will be suspicious
Speaker 14: at first, because he's a wild hog and he's got
Speaker 14: innate natural suspicion of everything. But after a while, he
Speaker 14: gets used to being fed, so he keeps coming back.
Speaker 14: So then you put up a piece of fence in
Speaker 14: front of them, in front of the bucket, and again
Speaker 14: he's going to be wary of that at first, but
Speaker 14: after a while, the fact that there's food there and
Speaker 14: he doesn't have to root around for it will cause
Speaker 14: him to coming back. Then you put up another section
Speaker 14: offense on the other side, and then one more, and
Speaker 14: the pig gets used to it, and finally you put
Speaker 14: down the gate and you've caught your pig. That's what
Speaker 14: they do, you know, They profer something that's a convenience.
Speaker 14: Look at how everybody has a smartphone now. Oh, it's
Speaker 14: so convenient. I know, I can make a phone call,
Speaker 14: where I can send a text, or I can take
Speaker 14: a picture anytime I want to, you know, as opposed
Speaker 14: to the battle days when you had a landline at
Speaker 14: home and if you wanted to call somebody, you had
Speaker 14: to be at home right or wherever. Well, now everybody's
Speaker 14: carrying around basically their own personal tracking device. You know
Speaker 14: that lets entities know where you are in real time.
Speaker 14: And eventually I'm convinced plan to use to get rid
Speaker 14: of cash, so that if you don't buy anything, you're
Speaker 14: going to have to use an app on this phone.
Speaker 14: Very convenient. You don't have to carry around those bills anymore.
Speaker 14: You know, it's seductive. They just use this desire that
Speaker 14: we all have for an easier life to enslave us.
Speaker 20: Yeah, I want to add something to that guard if
Speaker 20: I can.
Speaker 1: Sure.
Speaker 20: Yeah, I was when you were talking about the catching
Speaker 20: of the hog. That's basically what they're doing with CBDC
Speaker 20: as well.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 20: And you know there's another aspect to CBDC, and that's biometrics,
Speaker 20: and that's going to lead to something physically in your
Speaker 20: and maybe right hand or forehead. I don't know. But
Speaker 20: what they did, you know, you think about it. They
Speaker 20: started with debit cards, right, You no longer have to
Speaker 20: write a check or whatever. You don't carry cash, you
Speaker 20: get debit cards. Then they moved you know, credit cards
Speaker 20: as part of that. Then all of a sudden it's like, well,
Speaker 20: maybe we should put a chip in there. Okay, well, okay,
Speaker 20: let's make a tap to pay RFID. That's more convenient.
Speaker 20: Right now, people are loading their card info on their
Speaker 20: phones and they're smart watches, right, and you could tap
Speaker 20: to pay. Now they have apps, so or I don't
Speaker 20: even need a credit card, I could just link my
Speaker 20: bank account to my cash app or whatever. Slowly, incrementally
Speaker 20: they're getting us used to it, and crypto is part
Speaker 20: of that, right, So to get to a CBDC, they
Speaker 20: have to get people used to the idea of digital currency.
Speaker 20: So they've let bitcoin. And I actually think bitcoin is
Speaker 20: a like, not a sy out, but it's a grooming tool.
Speaker 20: I think bitcoin was not created by a dude. I
Speaker 20: think it was created by the government. People got into it,
Speaker 20: but not everybody can afford bitcoin, so all these other
Speaker 20: coins come out that are like fractions of a cent
Speaker 20: per coin. And my last unit I was in, every
Speaker 20: single person except for myself was playing around with their
Speaker 20: different cryptos and talking about it. So they've gotten people
Speaker 20: used to the idea of crypto. So now, okay, cryptos,
Speaker 20: we could do transactions with crypto. I don't even need
Speaker 20: my card anymore. I don't even need to deal with
Speaker 20: the bank anymore. But you have things like FTX come along,
Speaker 20: so and FTX had nothing to do with the insecurity
Speaker 20: of crypto. It had to do with a guy mismanaging
Speaker 20: the crypto. But everyone started thinking cryptos, you know, not
Speaker 20: safe or whatever. I think there's gonna be another big
Speaker 20: event and then that's gonna be what pushes the government
Speaker 20: to come take control. Out of convenience and safety. They
Speaker 20: need to then take control of that crypto, which then
Speaker 20: is a de facto CBDC.
Speaker 1: Really good point, and I was just thinking, just to
Speaker 1: keep it in mind. Actually that we've got was it.
Speaker 1: Microsoft is going to be updating their terms of service
Speaker 1: to police hateful copyright and copyright infringement content, and they're
Speaker 1: going to be doing everything they can to control any
Speaker 1: of the communications we have and money is a form
Speaker 1: of communication, especially when it goes electronic, so they'll be
Speaker 1: controlling that as well, one hundred percent. And there was
Speaker 1: a city, was it in Denmark where they're starting, uh,
Speaker 1: like a test program for CBDC, Like if you're it's
Speaker 1: it's for tourists. I can't remember which city it is,
Speaker 1: but they're starting it. It's special deals. If you get
Speaker 1: this app, you can get a special extra bounce to
Speaker 1: your electronic buck that you get for this city. It's
Speaker 1: only for tourists and only for the businesses that sign
Speaker 1: up to it, but it's a test run and they're
Speaker 1: going to try this in other areas as well.
Speaker 14: Fencing hawks a couple of weeks ago, you know, I
Speaker 14: test drive new cars every week, and I I got
Speaker 14: a new Volvo. It happened to be an electric Volvo.
Speaker 14: And for the very first time, I couldn't figure out
Speaker 14: how to start the car. You know, they dropped it
Speaker 14: off and I went out to go for a drive
Speaker 14: in the thing. So I get in and I sit
Speaker 14: down and I'm looking around. And normally when you get
Speaker 14: in a new car, there will typically be a button
Speaker 14: on the dash somewhere, you know, even if it's an
Speaker 14: electric car an on button, and if it's not an
Speaker 14: electric car, there'll be a start button that you have
Speaker 14: to push. You carry the fob around with you, right,
Speaker 14: They got people used to the fob because it was
Speaker 14: just so difficult so taxing. They have to take a
Speaker 14: key and put a key in the ignition and turn
Speaker 14: it right, So they got people into this whole idea. Well,
Speaker 14: so convenient. You just carry the fob with you and
Speaker 14: then all you have to do is push the button
Speaker 14: and the door will unlock, you know, as you approach.
Speaker 14: The next step was in that Volvo you no longer
Speaker 14: even have to have the button. The car turned itself
Speaker 14: on because the fob was present. Now then the question
Speaker 14: becomes sort of question today, Well, why did and bother
Speaker 14: with the fob?
Speaker 12: Yeah?
Speaker 14: Do you want to carry around this clunky thing? Just
Speaker 14: have the car identify you. To get to Jason's point,
Speaker 14: you know about having some sort of an RFID or
Speaker 14: some kind of a embedded embedded in your body. Oh,
Speaker 14: the car knows it's you. Look how convenient that is?
Speaker 1: Yes, yes, this is it. It's amazing, real quick, real quick.
Speaker 20: If they sell you that as a convenience and people
Speaker 20: go along with it. Now you're trackable anywhere, even when
Speaker 20: you're not near your car.
Speaker 14: So the thing is these cars. You've heard the term
Speaker 14: connected the Internet of things, Well, implicit in that is
Speaker 14: that it can be disconnected. You know, when I when
Speaker 14: I get in my old truck, I've got a physical key.
Speaker 14: Nobody else has control over that except myself. I determine
Speaker 14: whether the engine turns on or off because I have
Speaker 14: physical control over the ignition switch that turns the starter
Speaker 14: and starts the engine. Now, in a connected car, the
Speaker 14: thing knows you know that you're attempting to start it,
Speaker 14: and it can be controlled remotely, just like a phone.
Speaker 14: Have you ever been seen that your phone is in
Speaker 14: the process of being updated and you didn't ask for
Speaker 14: it to be, but it's being updated, and all of
Speaker 14: a sudden, things are different on your phone because some
Speaker 14: external party has decided it wants to jitter with your phone. Yeah,
Speaker 14: that's what we're going to do with vehicles, And ultimately
Speaker 14: this is the mechanism by which they'll determine when you're
Speaker 14: allowed to drive, if it's an electric car, when you're
Speaker 14: allowed allowed to charge, how much you're allowed to charge,
Speaker 14: and all of that will be tied into some kind
Speaker 14: of a Chinese style social credit system where you know,
Speaker 14: if you've been good according to the standards of the state,
Speaker 14: they'll allow you to do these things. But if you haven't,
Speaker 14: of course you won't be allowed.
Speaker 1: So for the greater good, come on, yeah seriously, right, yeah, Eric,
Speaker 1: Also I want to mention. I want to mention also
Speaker 1: real quick that I should mention again. People can follow
Speaker 1: you on x at Libertarian car G. At libertariancar g
Speaker 1: it's Eric Peters autos dot com. Then Nights of the
Speaker 1: Storm tomorrow ten am. Check you out on rumble right Jason, Yes, sir,
Speaker 1: all right and Eric. There are a number of other
Speaker 1: key articles here, but if you want me to highlight,
Speaker 1: I was looking at the one on the property text
Speaker 1: from a few days ago. But you've got the new
Speaker 1: feature why speed. You've got a number of other ones
Speaker 1: in there, that one about the country versus the city,
Speaker 1: or review of the new Lexus twenty twenty four g
Speaker 1: x five fifty talking about that Volvo, and then of
Speaker 1: course down onto the property tax. So many key ones,
Speaker 1: and of course the shop where you can get the
Speaker 1: great ba hats. Those are awesome and so is there
Speaker 1: one that you'd like to highlight before we go that
Speaker 1: maybe anyone you want to that one that's right here
Speaker 1: underneath the house one, the Federal, the compliance engine. I've
Speaker 1: been trying to get across to people. You may have
Speaker 1: noticed a trend if you've been car shopping lately, or
Speaker 1: if you just follow the industry, that that engines just
Speaker 1: keep getting smaller and smaller and smaller. And why is that? So?
Speaker 14: You know, recently, for example, Toyota brought back the land Cruiser,
Speaker 14: which is a big four by four suv. It was
Speaker 14: off the market for a couple of years and then
Speaker 14: brought it back. Well, it used to come standard with
Speaker 14: a V eight engine because it's a big, heavy suv.
Speaker 14: I mean, that was the kind of engine you typically
Speaker 14: find in a vehicle like that. Well, the new one
Speaker 14: comes standard with a four cylinder engine. Course is insufficient
Speaker 14: to move five thousand plus pounds of four x four suv.
Speaker 14: So they turbocharge it and they hybridize it. And the
Speaker 14: reason they do that is because by itself, this little
Speaker 14: engine would never be powerful enough to lug five thousand
Speaker 14: pounds of vehicle, right, so they do the turbocharging and
Speaker 14: the hybridizing to maintain an adequate power of performance level
Speaker 14: for buyers who would otherwise be pretty peed off about, Hey,
Speaker 14: you want me to spend fifty thousand dollars to get
Speaker 14: a four cylinder engine.
Speaker 20: No.
Speaker 14: Now, the reason for the four cylinder engine, of course,
Speaker 14: is the smaller engines. An engine that you can think
Speaker 14: of it as an air pump. It moves air. That's
Speaker 14: fundamentally what an internal combustion engine does. So the more
Speaker 14: air that is gas that's going into the cylinders and
Speaker 14: then exiting the cylinders, the more emissions there will be
Speaker 14: and the more fueled it will use, all else being equal.
Speaker 14: So you know, the automakers are in this rock in
Speaker 14: a hard play situation of trying to placate the government
Speaker 14: on the one hand, which continue used to insist the
Speaker 14: cars get ever higher gas mileage, irrespective of the fact
Speaker 14: that the market would solve that problem. You know, if
Speaker 14: people wanted, you know, if they wanted a super high
Speaker 14: efficiency car, the market would provide that. And this other
Speaker 14: boogeyman about the emissions, particularly of carbon dioxide, and I
Speaker 14: point out to people that ultimately these standards are going
Speaker 14: to become impossible to comply with, and it's not going
Speaker 14: to just stop with a four cylinder engine. The next step,
Speaker 14: and it's already here, three cylinder engines. I had a
Speaker 14: Buick in Vista, which is a four thousand pound crossover suv.
Speaker 14: It's powered by a one point two lead three cylinder engine.
Speaker 14: I've got motorcycles with bigger engines than that.
Speaker 1: That's insane. I see here in the article you've got
Speaker 1: here that you have a three point zero leader cylinder engine.
Speaker 1: It thus more readily complies with federal regulations that demand
Speaker 1: higher gas milage and lower emissions of gases, especially the
Speaker 1: evil so called pollutant CO two. They control the roads,
Speaker 1: they won't allow certain things on the roads. They control
Speaker 1: the companies, they won't allow them to make certain things,
Speaker 1: and they have all of these boogeymen behind it.
Speaker 14: Well, the really ingenious thing I'll make, the final point
Speaker 14: before you cut me loose, is that they're smart enough
Speaker 14: to not formally outlaw vehicles that aren't electric vehicles, because
Speaker 14: people might actually say, wait, wait a minute, you're doing here.
Speaker 14: So what they do is they impose regulations that are
Speaker 14: effectively impossible to comply with without making electric vehicles. That's
Speaker 14: what's driving all of this.
Speaker 1: That's it. That's it. Eric, thank you so much for
Speaker 1: being here. I will, yes, I will recommend every day
Speaker 1: people go and check out what you do at Eric
Speaker 1: Peters autos dot com. And thank you also to Jason
Speaker 1: for joining me like this. This has been fun, guys.
Speaker 1: I really appreciate it. And I'll say farewell to you
Speaker 1: guys now and text you later. But thank you for
Speaker 1: rounding off the show in such a wonderful way on
Speaker 1: a Friday. And I'll talk to you guys both offline. Thanks.
Speaker 1: It sounds good, Okay, guys, We'll see you later. Boy,
Speaker 1: good guys, good guys all the way. And wow, you
Speaker 1: can't beat them, can't beat them at all. And I
Speaker 1: want to thank you everyone who's been watching here as
Speaker 1: I fill on the David Night Show. And I want
Speaker 1: to thank Dusty Dusty Milton for contributing twenty dollars on
Speaker 1: Rock Finn. What a great way to end the month
Speaker 1: for David. I really really appreciate it, everybody. I'll be
Speaker 1: back on Monday, on the holiday, and I hope David
Speaker 1: and his family have a terrific weekend. I hope you
Speaker 1: have just a wonderful, fantastic weekend as well. I'll see
Speaker 1: you tonight on Liberty Conspiracy at six o'clock and thanks.
Speaker 1: If you're just finding out about my show and you
Speaker 1: want to hop over, maybe you're going to check out
Speaker 1: the video from last night that we put out the
Speaker 1: show last night, Feel Free. Jason hopped in last night.
Speaker 1: We had a great conversation. It was really really good
Speaker 1: and of course, you know, I'm hopefully continuing the tradition
Speaker 1: of people like my folks who gave me a real
Speaker 1: good head start on understanding liberty and also working with
Speaker 1: good people like Jason, like Eric, like David Knight. So
Speaker 1: thank you to everybody for being here, and don't forget
Speaker 1: if you do want to follow David, it's at Liberty
Speaker 1: Tarrian at Liberty Tarrian on on X and of course
Speaker 1: the David Knight Show every Monday through Friday here on
Speaker 1: Rockfinn Rumble d Live. And of course I'll give you
Speaker 1: this to go. Of course we've got the Davidnightshow dot Com.
Speaker 1: So time to hit the road. I'm gonna go with
Speaker 1: let me see, I'm gonna go with this one. I
Speaker 1: think the common man I like this to close things off.
Speaker 1: Thank you to David and everyone. Five minutes over noon
Speaker 1: we went extra and I'm happy we did. Thanks everybody.
Speaker 1: Remember the website The Davidnightshow dot com, remember the nights
Speaker 1: of the Storm, Eric Peters, and of course if you
Speaker 1: want to join us at Liberty Conspiracy, look up Liberty
Speaker 1: Conspiracy and Rumble YouTube well sometimes YouTube, and my ex
Speaker 1: is at Guard Goldsmith and Rockfann as well. Thanks everyone,
Speaker 1: God bless talk to you tonight on Liberty Conspiracy.
Speaker 2: The common Man. They created common Core and dumbed down
Speaker 2: our children. They created Common Past to track and control us.
Speaker 2: They're Commons project to make sure the commoners own nothing
Speaker 2: and the communist future. They see the common man as simple,
Speaker 2: unsophisticated ordinary. But each of us has worth and dignity
Speaker 2: created in the image of God.
Speaker 1: That is what we have in common.
Speaker 2: That is what they want to take away. Their most
Speaker 2: powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation. They desire to know
Speaker 2: everything about us, while they hide everything from us. It's
Speaker 2: time to turn that around and expose is what they
Speaker 2: want to hide. Please share the information and links you'll
Speaker 2: find at the Davidnightshow dot com. Thank you for listening,
Speaker 2: Thank you for sharing. If you can't support us financially,
Speaker 2: please keep us in your prayers. D Davidnightshow dot com