Speaker 1: In a world of deceit, telling the truth is a
Speaker 1: revolutionary act. It's the David Knight Show.
Speaker 2: As the clock strikes thirteen, it's Tuesday, the thirteenth of January.
Speaker 2: You have our lord, twenty twenty six. Well, another day,
Speaker 2: another war from Trump. This time is another domestic war,
Speaker 2: and he's gone to war with FED Chairman Powell. And look,
Speaker 2: I have no I'm not making any excuses for the
Speaker 2: outrageous costs two and a half billion dollars for remodeling.
Speaker 2: That's obviously over the top, but it's just a tip
Speaker 2: of the iceberg with a federal reserve, isn't it. We're
Speaker 2: going to audit the building remodeling of the FED, but
Speaker 2: we're not going to audit the FED itself, and we're
Speaker 2: not going to audit Fort Knox's gold either. Isn't that interesting? Yeah,
Speaker 2: there should be a criminal investigation, but we all know
Speaker 2: that what is really behind this is just another crime.
Speaker 2: It's just more of Trump wanting to consolidate control into
Speaker 2: the Oval office. And it's not going to just be
Speaker 2: control for him. It'll be control for the next to Obama,
Speaker 2: the next Biden, the next artillery. That control will be there. Well,
Speaker 2: it's not going to take a look at the state
Speaker 2: of Trump's foreign wars. He says he's only limited by
Speaker 2: his own morality. If we don't have any limits, then
Speaker 2: I guess with And today is our forty sixth sweating anniversary.
Speaker 2: Happy anniversary. Care Yeah, time is passing quickly, silver threads
Speaker 2: among the goal. Right, let's take a look at the
Speaker 2: federal reservoir that is happening here. And we got all
Speaker 2: over the business press. Everybody is wringing their hands about
Speaker 2: FED independence, and I was like, yeah, I want independence
Speaker 2: from you know, there's only one way that you can
Speaker 2: get independence from the FED. Buy gold. And the nice
Speaker 2: thing about that is you can do it incrementally. You know.
Speaker 2: Trump is also talking about pulling some lovers to try
Speaker 2: to make it remains to be seen if his strategy
Speaker 2: would work. He's talking about different authoritarian, central, central planning
Speaker 2: issues to try to make homes more affordable, about fixing
Speaker 2: the biggest problem that is making life on affordable for us,
Speaker 2: and that is the federal government. It's taxing and it's spending.
Speaker 2: It's not going to do anything about that. Instead, he
Speaker 2: will try to finesse it with interest rates or this
Speaker 2: or that, The reality is though, that you can gradually
Speaker 2: start to accumulate wealth, not with real estate, which you
Speaker 2: have to buy in a really large chunk all at once,
Speaker 2: but you can do it a little bit at a time.
Speaker 2: Tony's got wise wolf gold and it goes with a
Speaker 2: wolf pack. Lets you start to save in currency that's
Speaker 2: going to retain its value. And we're going to talk
Speaker 2: about that. Because gold had a big day yesterday, silver
Speaker 2: had an even bigger day because of the chaos, because
Speaker 2: the central planning, because the stupid economics behind these policies.
Speaker 2: So again, as I said at the beginning, rather than
Speaker 2: ending the FED, he wants to end the FED. Chairman,
Speaker 2: that's going to make any difference. We're going to audit
Speaker 2: the building expenses, which how in the world do you
Speaker 2: justify spending two and a half billion on a couple
Speaker 2: of buildings. That's what we're talking about, two buildings, you know,
Speaker 2: over a billion dollars each. And we're not talking about
Speaker 2: building the buildings, we're talking about remodeling them. I think
Speaker 2: it is a shrewd move on Trump's part to focus
Speaker 2: on that kind of waste and opulence. What are they
Speaker 2: doing lining it with gold that they took out of
Speaker 2: Fort Knox. I don't know. Trump's gotten a lot of criticism,
Speaker 2: I think justifiably so for guilding the Oval Office for
Speaker 2: this ballroom thing that is happening there, but that pales
Speaker 2: in comparison to what the Federal Reserve is doing, and
Speaker 2: he knows that, and so that's a good way to
Speaker 2: inoculate himself against these charges of opulence. Of course, he's
Speaker 2: got a lot of insider trading and a lot of
Speaker 2: backroom deals and corruption that are going on as well.
Speaker 2: So but anyway, I think it is a smart political move.
Speaker 2: The stock market shrug. It affected it early on in
Speaker 2: the day, but then it had new highs at the
Speaker 2: end of the day. After this war, which were powell
Speaker 2: It looked like it was going to resuscitate the what
Speaker 2: they call the Cell America trade, which began last summer
Speaker 2: in response to Trump's stupid economic policies of tariffs and
Speaker 2: what was what I was going to do to the dollar?
Speaker 2: But that only happened at the beginning of the day. Ultimately,
Speaker 2: the Dow gained eighty six points, stocks rebounded, the dollar
Speaker 2: remained under pressure, weakened against other major currencies. It's unusual
Speaker 2: for stocks bonds and the dollar to fall in tandem.
Speaker 2: So the initial overnight market moves caught Wall Street's attention,
Speaker 2: while the stock market largely stabilized. By Monday afternoon, investors
Speaker 2: will be keen to see whether stocks hold their ground. Meanwhile,
Speaker 2: gold rallied sharply. Goal futures gained two and a half percent,
Speaker 2: hitting a record high above forty six hundred dollars announce.
Speaker 2: Silver searched seven point three percent, outpacing even gold and
Speaker 2: going up to eighty six dollars announce. So the side
Speaker 2: market investors are now shrugging off the Justice Department's investigation
Speaker 2: into Powell. Investors might think efforts to undermine the Fed's
Speaker 2: independence will fail, but the surge in gold and silver,
Speaker 2: paired with pressure on the dollar and Treasury bills is
Speaker 2: a should say bonds is a sign that Wall Street
Speaker 2: is bracing for volatility in US markets. That's right. You know,
Speaker 2: there's a common thread and everything that Trump is doing,
Speaker 2: especially domestically, it's all about consolidation and centralization of power,
Speaker 2: and not just into Washington, into the office of the Presidency.
Speaker 2: And that's true whether we're talking about law enforcement or
Speaker 2: whether we're talking about economic central planning. There's bad economic
Speaker 2: outcomes from his policies as well, like his terrorists, like
Speaker 2: his interest rates. With the lower interest rates, well, that's
Speaker 2: going to reinflation. That's why everybody we've had the record
Speaker 2: year in gold, and that's why this year I said,
Speaker 2: this last year, I said, I think these statements coming
Speaker 2: out of the various banks like Bank of America, JP
Speaker 2: Morgan all the wrestling forty six hundred dollars sometime by
Speaker 2: the second quarter or whatever, I think that's very, very
Speaker 2: conservative because the policies nothing has fundamentally changed. That's what
Speaker 2: we're talking about this Christmas. For the last Christmas when
Speaker 2: we had the Yukon Cornelias thing, it's like everybody was
Speaker 2: so excited Trump is going to make cryptocurrency go sky high.
Speaker 2: Well he did for himself. He put out some junk
Speaker 2: meme coins, Trump Coin, Milania Coin, all the rest of
Speaker 2: the stuff. He may out like a bandit, because he
Speaker 2: is a bandit, and a lot of people lost a
Speaker 2: lot of money on that pump and dump. But I said,
Speaker 2: the fundamentals that have been driving gold and silver up
Speaker 2: are only going to be worse than twenty twenty five.
Speaker 2: And I say they're only going to be worse in
Speaker 2: twenty twenty six. A lot of this that made me
Speaker 2: certain who's going to be this way in twenty twenty
Speaker 2: six is Powell, who is going to be leaving in May.
Speaker 2: And Powell has resisted Trump's urge to lower interest rates,
Speaker 2: and that's going to be inflationary, and so Trump desperately
Speaker 2: wants him out. And notice the kind of tactics that
Speaker 2: he uses. He wants to get rid of Lisa Cook,
Speaker 2: one of the Board of Governors, because she's opposing the
Speaker 2: economic policies that Trump has and so you know, we
Speaker 2: don't even have to debate whether the policies are right
Speaker 2: or wrong. But it's looking at the tactics that he uses.
Speaker 2: So he goes back and he audits Lisa Cook and says, well,
Speaker 2: I've got some issues here with a mortgage you took
Speaker 2: out years ago. He's got his guy there at where's
Speaker 2: the FHA I think Pulty is, And he used AI
Speaker 2: to go back and audit. Think about that. Think about that.
Speaker 2: It gives all new meaning to Stalin's bring me the man,
Speaker 2: I'll find the crime. When you got AI to go
Speaker 2: back through mountains of data and sort through it and
Speaker 2: sift through it. They can find that needle in the
Speaker 2: haystack for anybody. I mean, this is this makes Harvey's
Speaker 2: Silverglate's book Three Phonies a Day pale in comparison. You know,
Speaker 2: he talked about how complicated and complex the laws are,
Speaker 2: and how people are violating obscure laws that they don't
Speaker 2: even know exist. I remember the case of a couple
Speaker 2: who in their anniversary, the husband took her to the
Speaker 2: beach and he released some balloons, some helium balloons that
Speaker 2: were part of the celebration of whatever. He got charge
Speaker 2: of the phony. I didn't know that was a felony,
Speaker 2: that type of thing. Well, guess what, AI is going
Speaker 2: to go back and find all those little things in
Speaker 2: people's lives. If you are an interesting person, as Michael
Speaker 2: Hayden said, you know Michael Hayden, the guy who was
Speaker 2: head of the CIA, head of the NSA. He said,
Speaker 2: we're not interested in people in general. Were interested in
Speaker 2: interesting people, and we will go back and look at
Speaker 2: them very carefully using AI. So that's what we're looking at.
Speaker 2: But the other things that you see the are characteristics
Speaker 2: of Trump, whether you're talking about foreign policy, the military.
Speaker 2: Let's take it up to a trillion dollars this record,
Speaker 2: and then immediately after a record budget of over a
Speaker 2: trillion dollars in the military, he immediately wants to jump
Speaker 2: it up to one and a half trillion, drawing by
Speaker 2: leaps and bounds. So it's a rapid expansion of debt,
Speaker 2: which we saw in twenty twenty. He had no problem
Speaker 2: doing with the COVID bills and things like. That's where
Speaker 2: he first ran into conflict with Thomas Massey, when Thomas
Speaker 2: Massey said, we can't just throw three and a half
Speaker 2: trillion dollars out here, and if we're going to do that,
Speaker 2: I want everybody to come back to Washington. Well that
Speaker 2: made him very hated, not just by Trump but by
Speaker 2: the Washington establishment. So this rapid expansion of debt, and
Speaker 2: we could see that the cumulative debt of the government
Speaker 2: was going up at a pearly pretty rapid rate as
Speaker 2: it was rising. And then when Trump did all this
Speaker 2: stuff in twenty twenty, the slope of the curve went
Speaker 2: straight up and starts going up very very rapidly, and
Speaker 2: interestingly enough, Biden maintained that same slope of spending. So
Speaker 2: Trump set the precedent and Biden continued it, and this
Speaker 2: is what's so dangerous about everything that Trump is doing
Speaker 2: in terms of usurping power into the office of the presidency.
Speaker 2: The Democrats will keep that and build on that, just
Speaker 2: like Biden didn't just build on the new rapid accumulation
Speaker 2: of debt. Biden built on the idea that Trump put
Speaker 2: out there that he could do gun control by executive
Speaker 2: order and violation of the Second Amendment. Used to be
Speaker 2: that you had to have Congress to violate the Second
Speaker 2: Amendment or the Supreme Court or whatever. Now I'm going
Speaker 2: to do it just by executive fiat. Well, Biden kept
Speaker 2: that precedent and expanded it. Well, rapid increases and the
Speaker 2: price of gold and dollars is another hallmark of a
Speaker 2: Trump administration. Remember Jerald Slint, he said, you know, Trump
Speaker 2: was really good for gold in his first harmony was
Speaker 2: he's going to be even better for gold in a
Speaker 2: second term, and he's looking even better. So the issue
Speaker 2: is why is you know, why is lowering of the
Speaker 2: Fed rates really not lowered home mortgages. And that's a
Speaker 2: whole nother thing that we'll talk about what Trump is
Speaker 2: doing here. It's because the long term mortgage rates, like
Speaker 2: a home mortgage is thirty years, not fifty years. That's
Speaker 2: another idiotic quote unquote solution from Trump. But when you're
Speaker 2: looking at a long term rate like thirty years that's
Speaker 2: set by the market, you can go out and do
Speaker 2: buy fiat. You can say, well, here's going to be
Speaker 2: the interest rate we're going to charge banks or whatever
Speaker 2: you can change by decree. I think we had to
Speaker 2: stop calling it the fiat dollar. I think we should
Speaker 2: call it the decree dollar because I like alliteration, which
Speaker 2: the decree dollar is the death of the dollar. That's
Speaker 2: really what we're looking at here. But when you look
Speaker 2: at the actual mortgage rates, those are going to be
Speaker 2: set by a competitive market. You know, when you refinance home,
Speaker 2: you shop around, right because not everybody has the same rate.
Speaker 2: But the FED just by decree will set the rate
Speaker 2: that they're going to pay the banks. But that doesn't
Speaker 2: necessarily percolate through to everything else. So, as they point
Speaker 2: out in this article here, they said, lower rates can
Speaker 2: lead to lower credit card rates and borrowing costs for consumers,
Speaker 2: but a central bank that lowers rates too quickly without
Speaker 2: regard to inflation can spook investors who begin to worry
Speaker 2: that inflation could run rampant, thus demand a high return
Speaker 2: for the risk of investing in American assets. And that's
Speaker 2: why when the FED has lowered interest rates, the FED rate,
Speaker 2: that's why we've seen the mortgage rates either stay the
Speaker 2: same or go up in the opposite direction. So the
Speaker 2: decree dollar is looking really bad at this point. Sunday
Speaker 2: in early Monday's trades were more muted echo of the
Speaker 2: sell America trade from the spring of twenty twenty five,
Speaker 2: when fear of Trump tariffs sent investors pouring out of
Speaker 2: American assets that sent bonds and dollars tumbling and stocks
Speaker 2: an inch away from a bear market in April before
Speaker 2: recovering sharply to the end of twenty twenty five after
Speaker 2: Trump backed off of some of the tariff threats. We
Speaker 2: think the cell America trade may gather pace and will
Speaker 2: even have legs. With FED independence risk a key theme
Speaker 2: throughout twenty six. To the chairman of Evercore, the surge
Speaker 2: in precious metals like gold and silver and mid renewed
Speaker 2: threats of the fed's independence is also reflective of what
Speaker 2: Wall Street has dubbed the debasement trade. Investors pile into
Speaker 2: hard assets like gold and silver, which are not beholden
Speaker 2: to the reputation of a government or an institution because
Speaker 2: of worries that the currency and bonds tied to this nation,
Speaker 2: this particular case, the US, but this is an issue
Speaker 2: in every single country. That's the thing that's really worrying
Speaker 2: about the time that we live in. When you look
Speaker 2: at every single one of the Western nations, they're all
Speaker 2: involved heavily in d industrialization because of this green grift
Speaker 2: that's going on. But they're also heavily heavily involved in debt.
Speaker 2: And this is the background, the backdrop for why they
Speaker 2: desperately want war. When you look at what they're doing
Speaker 2: where they're talking about Germany, France, UK or America or Russia,
Speaker 2: any of them, they all want war. Why well, because
Speaker 2: they see what is happening domestically. That's why the Trump's
Speaker 2: saber rattling in the wake of domestic unrest in Iran
Speaker 2: is so stupid, because all that does is strengthen the
Speaker 2: hand of the domestic leaders against a foreign enemy. This
Speaker 2: has always been the mechanism of dictators and charlatan's who
Speaker 2: are hurting their own people, they create another enemy, either
Speaker 2: somebody within the country or somebody outside the country. Usually
Speaker 2: both of those. Well, Trump is doing that, and you've
Speaker 2: got the other European countries, the other part of NATO,
Speaker 2: they're all doing that as well. So this is where
Speaker 2: we are at this point in time. So Trump favors
Speaker 2: government control of interest rates, writes The New American Trump
Speaker 2: took to his Ministry of Truth Social last week to
Speaker 2: support a one year ten percent cap on credit card
Speaker 2: interest rates. I should be playing at this point in time,
Speaker 2: the Admiral Akbar clip. It's a trap. This is this
Speaker 2: is the same kind of come on that you get,
Speaker 2: you know, uh, you know, change your debt over to
Speaker 2: this credit card company. We'll give you low interest rates
Speaker 2: for a year or whatever. Then it's going to skyrocket.
Speaker 2: So this is really a debt trap more than anything else.
Speaker 2: It's not fixing the bad or the lack of usury
Speaker 2: laws in the United States at all. Trump did not
Speaker 2: explicitly say whether he was simply asking Congress to use
Speaker 2: the power of the federal government implement this price control
Speaker 2: or whether he intended to simply make a law to
Speaker 2: that effect by issuing a presidential executive order. I think
Speaker 2: that he's going to do an executive order because he
Speaker 2: gave a time certain he said, by such in section
Speaker 2: we're going to do and he gave the date. We're
Speaker 2: going to do a one year moratorium on credit card rates,
Speaker 2: and you know, we're going to cap them, not more toyum,
Speaker 2: but we're going to cap them at ten percent. And
Speaker 2: that happens to be the one year anniversary of his inauguration.
Speaker 2: So I think it's going to be an executive ordery.
Speaker 2: He claims that everything is an emergency, so he's going
Speaker 2: to say this is an emergency as well. He said,
Speaker 2: we will no longer let the American public be ripped
Speaker 2: off by credit card interest rates. Well, I looked into
Speaker 2: the history of usury and these rates, because you know,
Speaker 2: if you've listened to this program for very long, you
Speaker 2: know that is a pet peeve of mine. The massive
Speaker 2: spread between what the banks get their money for when
Speaker 2: they borrow it from the FED and what they charged
Speaker 2: people when they lend it out and what they pay
Speaker 2: on savings and the criminal interest rates that they charge
Speaker 2: on credit cards. I've talked about that for a long time,
Speaker 2: and so you would think I'd be one hundred percent
Speaker 2: behind this, but the reality is that this is just
Speaker 2: shared magoguery, and it is a debt trap for people
Speaker 2: as well. So I was really surprised to learn that
Speaker 2: there was never a federal usery law. I thought there was.
Speaker 2: You know, we had the rapid inflation of the nineteen seventies,
Speaker 2: the late nineteen seventies. I was still in college and
Speaker 2: my head was in the engineering books. I wasn't paying
Speaker 2: too much attention to news, politics and economics at the time,
Speaker 2: but my dad did, and I remember that happening, and
Speaker 2: I just kind of vaguely, Oh, yeah, they changed this
Speaker 2: and that, and so now they're going to remove this
Speaker 2: restriction of a ten percent interest rate. How did that happen? Well,
Speaker 2: there was no federal law, no federal usury law. However,
Speaker 2: we had a tradition in Western civilization, especially in England,
Speaker 2: going back to the fifteen hundreds, there were laws that
Speaker 2: would limit interest rates to between six to ten percent,
Speaker 2: and if you charge more than that, it was considered
Speaker 2: to be a crime. And what happened in America was
Speaker 2: of course, government in America was primarily state government. You know,
Speaker 2: the states created the central government, and the states handled
Speaker 2: pretty much everything except for the common defense. That was
Speaker 2: really the main reason that they created a federal government
Speaker 2: was for defense purposes, and so the laws about what
Speaker 2: were legal interest rates for pretty much state laws. And
Speaker 2: what happened in nineteen seventy eight, you had a Supreme
Speaker 2: Court case that said and there was a lot of
Speaker 2: economic pressure for this because we had very, very high
Speaker 2: interest rates. As a matter of fact, I said, we
Speaker 2: got married. Today's our forty sixth anniversary. We got married
Speaker 2: in nineteen eighty. When we bought a house in nineteen
Speaker 2: eighty because both of us had had jobs, we bought
Speaker 2: a house, we had a thirteen percent fixed interest rate.
Speaker 2: Like I said, I wasn't paying too much attention to
Speaker 2: economics at the time. We're trends, and so we got
Speaker 2: slammed with that, and that was not a good decision.
Speaker 2: Would not do that. I wish I could go back
Speaker 2: and talk to my younger self. It's one of the manything,
Speaker 2: one of the many things I would change, But a
Speaker 2: thirteen percent fixed rate on a home mortgage, and it
Speaker 2: got higher than that before they started coming down and
Speaker 2: got up to sixteen percent. I think I saw some
Speaker 2: people had, but we had the one that was thirteen percent,
Speaker 2: and so there was a lot of pressure to get
Speaker 2: rid of this ten percent cap, and by nineteen eighty
Speaker 2: they had gotten rid of it. But how it happened was,
Speaker 2: first the Supreme Court came in and said, well, since
Speaker 2: this is done by states, we're going to say that
Speaker 2: the governing rule here is going to be what is
Speaker 2: the legal interest rate to charge in the state we
Speaker 2: were headquartered. So one of the reasons why Delaware, the
Speaker 2: criminal state of Delaware, is so popular with corporations, Joe
Speaker 2: Biden's state. People could go there and they didn't have
Speaker 2: a cap or it was very very high. I don't
Speaker 2: know what it was, but Delaware was that was a
Speaker 2: big draw for Delaware. If you were headquartered in Delaware,
Speaker 2: incorporated in Delaware, not headquartered, but incorporated in Delaware, then
Speaker 2: according to the nineteen seventy eight Supreme Court decision, you
Speaker 2: could charge whatever you wanted to in every other state.
Speaker 2: Then what happened in nineteen eighty was the Congress came
Speaker 2: in with a law in nineteen eighty they had the
Speaker 2: Deregulation and Monetary Control Act. And what that did was
Speaker 2: by an act of Congress, not by changing the Constitution,
Speaker 2: but an unconstitutional act by Congress. Why, as I say,
Speaker 2: is it unconstitutional, Well, because the Tenth Amendment makes it
Speaker 2: very clear that any powers not specifically delegated to the
Speaker 2: states are retained by the states and by the people.
Speaker 2: And so just like the definition of marriage, for example,
Speaker 2: or the definition of when life begins, this was a
Speaker 2: usurpation by the courts to say we will decide what
Speaker 2: that is. Well, you don't have the authority to decide that.
Speaker 2: And then the Congress jumped in with the nineteen eighty Act. Again,
Speaker 2: no branch of the federal government, not the Supreme Court,
Speaker 2: not the Congress, and not the Presidency has the right
Speaker 2: to set interest rates. That is not in the Constitution.
Speaker 2: And so with a demonetation the deregulation brother and it
Speaker 2: is a demonetation right deregulation a monetary Control Act of
Speaker 2: nineteen eighty they overrode pretty much all of the state
Speaker 2: usery laws, and they extended these exemptions to secondary things,
Speaker 2: not just to things coming from the banks, but also
Speaker 2: to other corporations and credit lenders and things like that.
Speaker 2: So yet again we see the example that central government,
Speaker 2: rather than being protective, centralized government always becomes a tool
Speaker 2: of special interest in corruption. These people do whatever their
Speaker 2: corporate donors and patrons want them to do. And so
Speaker 2: in this particular case, rather than there was never a
Speaker 2: situation where the federal government was protecting people from usury.
Speaker 2: What the federal government's role in the interest rates was
Speaker 2: was to expose us to usury and to institutionalize it
Speaker 2: with both the Federal Reserve and the banks that they
Speaker 2: were canning in love with. And so again, the presidency
Speaker 2: Trump doesn't have the authority with interest rates, Congress doesn't,
Speaker 2: the Supreme Court doesn't on these credit cards, and they
Speaker 2: shouldn't have it. But when we look at this, and
Speaker 2: as I said, we look at these issues, I really
Speaker 2: hate the high interest rates and the exploitation that is
Speaker 2: involved in it, and it is, I think a form
Speaker 2: of debtors prison. You know, we're all familiar with Charles
Speaker 2: Dickens and how many times he talked about debtor's prison.
Speaker 2: As a matter of fact, it was the central theme
Speaker 2: of one of his stories, a Little Dorit. And the
Speaker 2: character that was in that, the father that was in
Speaker 2: that was put in the same debtors prison that Charles
Speaker 2: Dickens father had been put in. And it's amazing to
Speaker 2: me how similar to the credit card trap is to
Speaker 2: these debtors' prisons that we saw with that, and that
Speaker 2: was a key issue with him because of his father
Speaker 2: being in prison. His father was spent many years in
Speaker 2: debtor's prison over a forty pound bill that was unpaid
Speaker 2: to a baker, not banker, but a baker of you know,
Speaker 2: cookies or whatever. Debtor's prison over those keypler elf cookies.
Speaker 2: But boy they were good. Can't pay for him. But anyway,
Speaker 2: that's that's where we are right now. So the credit
Speaker 2: card companies oppose the plan. Surprise, surprise. Yeah. Again, we've
Speaker 2: had centuries of wise moral policy that has been overturned
Speaker 2: by central government, the federal government. It was always considered
Speaker 2: to be loan sharking because companies are charging interest rates
Speaker 2: of twenty to thirty percent on these credit cards, and
Speaker 2: that here's the argument from the credit card companies. Amazingly,
Speaker 2: major credit card companies oppose the move, arguing that any
Speaker 2: such interest rate ceiling would hurt lower income Americans the most.
Speaker 2: They were so concerned about lower income Americans that they
Speaker 2: charged them twenty to thirty percent, so they can never
Speaker 2: get out of debt. I mean, they're like the mafia.
Speaker 2: You know, this is yeah, You shouldn't charge this guy
Speaker 2: fifty percent interest and break his legs and he doesn't pay.
Speaker 2: That's going to hurt this guy. It's like, I think
Speaker 2: you're the one hurting him. The credit card companies and
Speaker 2: the big banks argue that lowering interest rates on their
Speaker 2: credit cards would lead to fewer cards being issued to
Speaker 2: high risk borrowers. That's the idea, that would be a
Speaker 2: good thing. If you can't pay it back, you don't
Speaker 2: need a line of credit. Of course, the federal government
Speaker 2: wouldn't understand that, not with a thirty eight trillion dollar
Speaker 2: credit card that they can't pay off. So again, like
Speaker 2: I said, this is the twenty first century equivalent of
Speaker 2: debtors prison, never going to get out of it. And
Speaker 2: yet the New American sees this as a form of
Speaker 2: price control. I understand that argument, and I'm not for
Speaker 2: wage and price controls, which is what Richard Nixon tried
Speaker 2: to do in order to keep inflation under control. But
Speaker 2: some have described debtor's prison as less about punishment for
Speaker 2: a crime and more about a cruel, profit driven system
Speaker 2: that pummeled poverty itself punished it right, And so it
Speaker 2: is a cruel, profit driven system that we're talking about here.
Speaker 2: This is not a marketplace. Let's understand that we don't
Speaker 2: have a marketplace in these things anymore. You know, it
Speaker 2: isn't like when you go we just take a look
Speaker 2: at home mortgages for example, especially in the context of
Speaker 2: a situation like you know, it's a wonderful life where
Speaker 2: you've got competition. You know, you've got the savings alone,
Speaker 2: and you've got mister Potter, right, so there's competition on
Speaker 2: the rates. He doesn't like that. He wants to have
Speaker 2: a monopoly on homes and he can charge people whatever
Speaker 2: he wants at that point in time. And that really
Speaker 2: is where we are right now. We don't have a
Speaker 2: system of competition. We have a system of collusion between
Speaker 2: big government and these corporations. Just take a look at
Speaker 2: these interest rates that we have there for example. You know,
Speaker 2: we have a massive spread in a sense, it's kind
Speaker 2: of a debtorous prison. You know, if you fall back
Speaker 2: on some of your payments your credit card, your credit
Speaker 2: rating will drop and then they'll add like another five
Speaker 2: to ten percent on the already confiscatory interest rates that
Speaker 2: are there. So you people are struggling to pay. And
Speaker 2: I staid, what they do is they jack up the
Speaker 2: interest rates on this and so I see this as
Speaker 2: a systematic I see it as structurally immoral, structurally exploitative.
Speaker 2: In the same way the banks are no longer paying
Speaker 2: interest on savings accounts, and how they have maintained this
Speaker 2: massive spread between the mortgage rates that they charge you
Speaker 2: if you buy a house and what they pay you
Speaker 2: on your savings account. If you go back to the
Speaker 2: nineteen fifties, and I remember going back and doing this
Speaker 2: research from people saying, oh, look at this, interest rates
Speaker 2: dropped down to five percent at one point time. That's
Speaker 2: the lowest that we've seen since like the nineteen fifties
Speaker 2: or whatever. At that point time, I thought, well, what
Speaker 2: do they pay people on savings accounts? Rather than a tiny,
Speaker 2: tiny fraction of one percent. They were paying people four
Speaker 2: percent on the savings accounts, while they were charging people
Speaker 2: five percent on home mortgages. So it was like a
Speaker 2: one percent spread. That's not what we're seeing right now.
Speaker 2: These banks, especially when you go back and look at
Speaker 2: what happened in two thousand and eight and so forth,
Speaker 2: they're getting their loans in the wake of two thousand
Speaker 2: and eight, they were getting their loans at zero percent interest. Yeah,
Speaker 2: what were they charging people? Right? The home loans were
Speaker 2: going like four to six percent for the next eight years,
Speaker 2: seven years from two thousand and eight to twenty fifteen.
Speaker 2: And when you look at the credit card rates that
Speaker 2: were there, the credit card rates, even though the banks
Speaker 2: were getting their money from the Federal Reserve at zero percent,
Speaker 2: and that was the other thing they were telling everybody, Yeah,
Speaker 2: we got bailed out, but we paid that all back.
Speaker 2: You paid it all back with money that you got
Speaker 2: at zero percent interest on the federal reserve. I don't
Speaker 2: see that as paying it back. You were given the
Speaker 2: money for free on the federal reserve and you paid
Speaker 2: off your quote unquote paid off your debt. Anyway, they
Speaker 2: were getting the money for a zero percent and the
Speaker 2: credit card rates were thirteen fifteen percent. Aware they've skyrocketed
Speaker 2: up from that as well, So all of this is
Speaker 2: a criminal So again, it used to be they had
Speaker 2: a spread of one percent, not four to six percent
Speaker 2: on the home loans. And then when you look at
Speaker 2: the interest rates spread that they had on credit cards.
Speaker 2: They'd get the money for a zero percent loan, it
Speaker 2: out on the credit cards for thirteen to fourteen percent. Well,
Speaker 2: they're getting it at zero percent. It's absolutely criminal. And
Speaker 2: so I don't see it as a situation of wage
Speaker 2: and price controls. You know, they look at and say, well,
Speaker 2: this is distorting the market. I'm sorry, there isn't a
Speaker 2: market when you're talking about banks and we're talking about
Speaker 2: federal regulation. That there's the whole idea of it being
Speaker 2: a marketplace sailed a long time ago. That ship is
Speaker 2: not at port anymore. Said, Lenders with high interest rates
Speaker 2: are typically accused of predatory lending. And I just laid
Speaker 2: it out. Why they get the money at zero percent,
Speaker 2: and if they wanted to for a real estate loan
Speaker 2: four to six percent, they go it to in credit
Speaker 2: card thirteen to fourteen percent. They got it for nothing.
Speaker 2: It didn't cost them anything, and so that is predatory.
Speaker 2: And they say, here, if a free people determine the
Speaker 2: price and the free market, well, we can all talk
Speaker 2: about those hypotheticals, just like we can always talk about
Speaker 2: the hypothetical what if the federal government obeyed the constitution?
Speaker 2: Can you imagine what that would look like? It looked
Speaker 2: like nothing like today. They don't obey the constitution on anything.
Speaker 2: Another concern about Trump's proposal is that if he were
Speaker 2: to actually impose the controls as did Emperor Diocletian via
Speaker 2: residential executive order, it would be a gross violation of
Speaker 2: the Constitution and it's separation of powers. They're right about
Speaker 2: that executive orders by a president are to enforce existing law,
Speaker 2: not to make law. And that's one of the hallmarks
Speaker 2: of the Trump administration this first year, executive order after
Speaker 2: executive order after executive order, all of them over phony emergencies,
Speaker 2: claiming that there's an emergency, so now he can usurp
Speaker 2: the power that he doesn't have to address an emergency
Speaker 2: that doesn't exist. He's not the commander in chief. He
Speaker 2: is the liar and thief is what Trump is. So
Speaker 2: UBS explains why Trump's ten percent credit card rate cap
Speaker 2: is unlikely to happen, and again it would only be
Speaker 2: for one year, so it'd be a trap, I think
Speaker 2: for many people. But they said it would take an
Speaker 2: Act of Congress for rate caps like this to be
Speaker 2: put in place by the way authority for which they
Speaker 2: really don't have any authority, something that could be done
Speaker 2: right now by the States and challenge the usurpation of
Speaker 2: power by the Congress and probably by the Supreme Court,
Speaker 2: so you probably lose, but you know, it's one of
Speaker 2: these things that's a fight worth having. Anyway. Credit card
Speaker 2: rate caps were discussed but failed to be included in
Speaker 2: the twenty twenty five Genius Act, which suggests that the
Speaker 2: industry lobby has made an impact. Well, you know, we've
Speaker 2: had this last year. We've had the Genius Act, and
Speaker 2: we've had the Genesis Act. The Genesis Act was to
Speaker 2: clear the decks and give everything to the big technocracy,
Speaker 2: the AI people that they wanted. The Genius Act was
Speaker 2: to do the same thing for crypto the industries that
Speaker 2: are favored by Trump because they are his donors. He
Speaker 2: tweeted out all upper case affordability effective January twenty twenty six.
Speaker 2: I as President of the United States, I'm calling for
Speaker 2: a one year cap on the credit card interest rates
Speaker 2: of ten percent. That's why I say, I think he
Speaker 2: intends to do it by fiat, by decree, by executive order,
Speaker 2: as the king, or should say the Caligula, right, Neo Caligula.
Speaker 2: I think that's who this guy really is. The caps
Speaker 2: proposed state date coincides to the anniversary of Trump's second
Speaker 2: term inauguration and if implemented, would fulfill his twenty twenty
Speaker 2: four election campaign pledge. Well, again, it is shared demagoguery
Speaker 2: and it is a debt trap. Meanwhile, he's looking at
Speaker 2: a Supreme Court ruling on the tariffs that everybody is
Speaker 2: believing is going to be unfavorable to him because of
Speaker 2: the arguments that were heard and the statements that are
Speaker 2: made by the Supreme Court justices questioning this, it looks
Speaker 2: like they don't believe that he has as the authority
Speaker 2: which he doesn't have to do this, and so Trump
Speaker 2: is issued a grave warning saying we're screwed if the
Speaker 2: Supreme Court strikes down his tariff bonanza. Think about this,
Speaker 2: Think of the mindset of this guy. As I said
Speaker 2: the longest time, this is one of the best examples
Speaker 2: of how you can tell that Trump is a New
Speaker 2: York City Democrat, a tax and spend liberal pedophile covering
Speaker 2: up for Jeffrey Epstein after hanging out with him and
Speaker 2: then thinking that the way to prosperity is through taxing
Speaker 2: and spending money, and so you know, he wants to
Speaker 2: the tariffs are really a stupid game for stupid players.
Speaker 2: So he lies about the emergencies he violates the Constitution
Speaker 2: U service power. And then he throws this out and
Speaker 2: he creates chaos in the marketplace, and it's created chaos
Speaker 2: and banker for businesses, small, medium, in large, especially the
Speaker 2: small businesses, and for retail as well as for manufacturing,
Speaker 2: simply because it doesn't really matter what the economic policy is.
Speaker 2: He's changed it constantly, and so here you're saying that
Speaker 2: we're going to be it's going to be just terrific
Speaker 2: if the Supreme Court comes in and changes his terraffs.
Speaker 2: He spent the entire year changing his tariffs on a
Speaker 2: whim if he had a bad phone call with the
Speaker 2: leader of China, Okay, you're getting over one hundred percent tariffs.
Speaker 2: Just temper tantrums, narcissism, ego. That was the yardstick by
Speaker 2: which you could look at the teriffs that were there.
Speaker 2: It made absolutely no sense. He punished people with whom
Speaker 2: we had a trade surplus. But while this was all happening,
Speaker 2: he completely ignores the actual cumulative deficit of thirty eight
Speaker 2: trillion dollars, which is far, far, far more important and
Speaker 2: consequential economically than any of these trade deficits that are there.
Speaker 2: But again he tries many businesses out of business with
Speaker 2: a chaos, and now he claims that the effects are
Speaker 2: just going to be too big if you change what
Speaker 2: he finally settled on, the effects are going to be
Speaker 2: too big and too catastrophic, and they can't comply with it,
Speaker 2: and they don't know who paid them the money and
Speaker 2: all the rest of the stuff. Really, you had the
Speaker 2: dog eat your tariff records? Is that what happened. He
Speaker 2: doesn't even have a dog in the White House, one
Speaker 2: of the few presidents that doesn't have a dog. But
Speaker 2: and again a lot of them put the dog. They're
Speaker 2: just trying to humanize themselves to the people. But he
Speaker 2: doesn't care about looking human. So what happened to all
Speaker 2: the records? You can't tell who you got this money
Speaker 2: from and who you've got to pay it back to
Speaker 2: give me a break. What's even worse is that if
Speaker 2: the Supreme Court finds rules in favor of the truth,
Speaker 2: saying that Trump in fact did not have the authority
Speaker 2: to create taxes that is under the Constitution, the authority
Speaker 2: of Congress. And so if they overturn it on that basis,
Speaker 2: the people who have paid these tariffs have to then
Speaker 2: sue the government in civil court, so you'll know Trump
Speaker 2: exactly how much people paid, because they'll give you a
Speaker 2: bill for it, just in case you didn't keep the records.
Speaker 2: And so he says, we're screwed at the Supreme Court
Speaker 2: strikes down the tariffs that he has unilaterally imposed on
Speaker 2: most of the rest of the world. He said, it'd
Speaker 2: be a complete mess, almost impossible for our country to pay.
Speaker 2: It may not be possible, but if it were, it
Speaker 2: would be dollars. It would be so large that would
Speaker 2: take many years to figure out what number we're talking about,
Speaker 2: even who, when, and where to pay. This is a
Speaker 2: reminder this guy drove a half dozen casinos bankrupt because
Speaker 2: he does know what he's doing. So he's just stole
Speaker 2: the money from people. And now he can't figure out
Speaker 2: who he has to repay. If he's told that, he's
Speaker 2: got to get it back. And again, this is money
Speaker 2: that has been taken out of the voluntary market, if
Speaker 2: you will, and sent to Washington. When is that ever
Speaker 2: a good thing? When are conservatives actually going to wake
Speaker 2: up to what are they trying to conserve? Anyway? I
Speaker 2: just can't figure that out. I think conservatism is absolutely
Speaker 2: dead in this country. There isn't anything that they want
Speaker 2: to conserve. They don't want to conserve the Constitution, they
Speaker 2: don't want to conserve the rule of law. They don't
Speaker 2: want to conserve the separation of powers. There's nothing that
Speaker 2: they want to conserve. They don't even want to conserve money.
Speaker 2: It's like, spend, spend, spend. Give him a pat on
Speaker 2: the back whenever he spends a lot of money, so
Speaker 2: he can't tell who he's taxed. And only a Democrat
Speaker 2: and a failed casino would think that taxes are prosperity.
Speaker 2: During the arguments, Chief Justice John Roberts characterized the tariffs
Speaker 2: as taxes on Americans, and that's key. He maintains that
Speaker 2: they're not taxes, they're not taxes on Americans. That it's
Speaker 2: just magic money. You know. The Democrats have their modern
Speaker 2: monetary theory MMT, which I always call the money the
Speaker 2: magic money tree. We don't have to worry about deference.
Speaker 2: It's it just you know, it's just money that we
Speaker 2: make up and everything. Trump is the same way. He's
Speaker 2: a supply side modern monetary theorist. Right now, this magic
Speaker 2: tariff money just comes from nowhere and nobody's paying it.
Speaker 2: Isn't that great, and so it just appeared. And you know,
Speaker 2: the amazing thing about it, too, is that he's already
Speaker 2: come up with multiple ways that he wants to spend
Speaker 2: this bonanza that he calls it. You know, first he's
Speaker 2: going to hand out a big check to all Americans.
Speaker 2: Then he thinks about a little bit longer, and he says, no,
Speaker 2: let's give it all to military spending. I can't make
Speaker 2: up his mind on that either. So then we get
Speaker 2: to FED Chair Powell who holds a press conference and says,
Speaker 2: I'm under criminal investigation, and he says, this is not
Speaker 2: about any crime that has actually been committed. He said,
Speaker 2: this is about the fact that Trump wants control over
Speaker 2: the Federal Reserve and he wants to push me out.
Speaker 2: I think, and many other people think that this is
Speaker 2: going to actually backfire on Trump. Remember he went to
Speaker 2: a lot of trouble to try to get Lisa Cook out.
Speaker 2: Why Well, because the Fed Chair himself has a lot
Speaker 2: of influence. But he's not the only guy that votes
Speaker 2: as to whether or not to raise the lower interest rates.
Speaker 2: He is the face of this group of invisible people
Speaker 2: that are back there that we don't see. And yet
Speaker 2: it's the governors that are actually voting on that. That's
Speaker 2: why it was so important for Trump to get rid
Speaker 2: of Lisa Cook, who's going to impose his ideas on
Speaker 2: what he thought the economy needed, his central planning. They've
Speaker 2: got their own central plans and they are political in
Speaker 2: terms of their opposition to Trump, so he wanted to
Speaker 2: get rid of her. Well, what happens is that Chairman Powell,
Speaker 2: who Trump put into place. Trump made him the chair
Speaker 2: of the Federal Reserve. Well, his term ends in May,
Speaker 2: so he's gone as the chair. However, he can remain
Speaker 2: as one of the governors and still have a vote
Speaker 2: on all of these economic issues, you know, whether they're
Speaker 2: going to do quantitative easing or they're going to lower
Speaker 2: interest rates or whatever raised interest rates. He will still
Speaker 2: be there as a governor until twenty twenty eight. Typically,
Speaker 2: that's not what happens. Typically, if somebody is the FED chair,
Speaker 2: once their term is up, they leave the Federal Reserve.
Speaker 2: They don't stick around as a demoted you know, get
Speaker 2: demoted from chair to back to one of the governors.
Speaker 2: But he might stick around, in which case Trump was
Speaker 2: looking at, well, I get to replace the FED chair
Speaker 2: and I get to replace a governor position. No, No,
Speaker 2: this guy might stay there to be a thorn in
Speaker 2: your side if you make him angry, which is what
Speaker 2: Trump has a history of doing. Federal prosecutors are conducting
Speaker 2: a criminal investigation. The Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell focused
Speaker 2: on the extraordinarily excessive two and a half billion dollar renovation.
Speaker 2: I don't know how you justify that, except we're talking
Speaker 2: about Washington, the district of criminals and the district of
Speaker 2: corruption and the district of debt. Really his resistance. He
Speaker 2: had also testified to Congress. That's a part of it
Speaker 2: as well. Now the person who's bringing these charges is
Speaker 2: Fox News commentator Jeanine Periro Piro whatever, who is now
Speaker 2: Judge Janine, who is now a prosecutor there in DC.
Speaker 2: All of it very political. Powell said the probe is
Speaker 2: a result of long standing frustration by Trump over the
Speaker 2: Fed's refusal to cut interest rates as quickly and as
Speaker 2: much as the president has demanded. And so again this
Speaker 2: is thuggish, corrupt law fair by Trump, as we've seen
Speaker 2: over and over again. So the threat of criminal charges
Speaker 2: as are a consequence of the Federal Reserve setting interest
Speaker 2: rates based on our best assessment of what will serve
Speaker 2: the public rather than following the preferences of the president.
Speaker 2: This is about whether the federalill be able to continue
Speaker 2: to set interest rates based on evidence and economic conditions,
Speaker 2: or whether instead monetary policy will be directed by political
Speaker 2: pressure or intimidation. So he threw down the gauntlet. And
Speaker 2: what public now Trump is the man is denying that
Speaker 2: this is coming from him, that it is political, But
Speaker 2: everybody knows what the truth is. Paul said, this is
Speaker 2: not about my testimony last year, and it's not about
Speaker 2: the renovation of the Federal Reserve buildings. Quite frankly, it
Speaker 2: should be I think, I think that looks incredible. How again,
Speaker 2: I just I can't conceive of how you can spend
Speaker 2: two and a half billion dollars just to renovate a building.
Speaker 2: They're not even talking about building it. I mean, you're
Speaker 2: talking about building it. It's be hard to spend two
Speaker 2: and a half billion dollars building a building, but he's
Speaker 2: just doing renovation. Must be some expensive chair railing fitting
Speaker 2: up there.
Speaker 3: Maybe Trump mandated that it all needed to be gold.
Speaker 2: That's right, Yeah, they're going to clean out for Knox
Speaker 2: or this. It's not about Congress's oversight role. The FED,
Speaker 2: through testimony and other public disclosures, made every effort to
Speaker 2: keep Congress informed about the renovation project, he said, So
Speaker 2: those are pretexts. I have deep respect for the rule
Speaker 2: of law, for the accountability of our democracy, said no one,
Speaker 2: certainly not. The chair of the Federal Reserve is above
Speaker 2: the law. But this unprecedented action should be seen in
Speaker 2: the broader context of the administration's threats and ongoing pressure.
Speaker 2: So he is ready to fight Trump. I think it's
Speaker 2: backfired here. I have served as at the Federal Reserve
Speaker 2: under four administrations, Republican and Democrat alike, and he was
Speaker 2: actually appointed by Trump as chair, a DOJ spokesman in
Speaker 2: a statement to CNBC without saying the comment was about Powell.
Speaker 2: So the Attorney General has instructed her US attorneys to
Speaker 2: prioritize investigating any abuse of taxpayer dollars. So, yeah, we're
Speaker 2: just this is just like a doge thing, right.
Speaker 3: Is there anything that the government does that taxpayer They're
Speaker 3: going to be busy for an ordinately long time.
Speaker 2: Yeah, they're ready to stop. Yeah. I remember there's an
Speaker 2: organization around TEA Party Time Citizens against the Government Waste.
Speaker 2: I said, you could just drop that wright off of there,
Speaker 2: because everything the government does is a waste and abuse
Speaker 2: and fraud.
Speaker 3: Yeah, if you start going through this line by line,
Speaker 3: you will never get finished. You really just got to
Speaker 3: bust out the chainsaw and start cutting this out wholesale.
Speaker 2: That's right, That's right anyway, So the bottom line is
Speaker 2: is that rocked the markets as usual. It set all
Speaker 2: new precedents as usual, and we're not really sure I
Speaker 2: where this is going to go. But anyway, Trump is
Speaker 2: right saying this is the most per square foot of
Speaker 2: any project that you've seen in the history of the world.
Speaker 2: Probably that might be the first true thing that Trump
Speaker 2: has said. I mean, it truly is a scandal that
Speaker 2: they would spend that kind of money on a renovation.
Speaker 2: But it tells you something about their attitude towards us,
Speaker 2: doesn't it The other contempt that they have for the
Speaker 2: little guys. This probe came to light nearly six months
Speaker 2: after Representative Anna Paulina Luna first said that she'd referred
Speaker 2: power to the DOJ for potential crimes of perjury and
Speaker 2: false statements to federal officials in connection with his testimony
Speaker 2: about the renovation project for the headquarters. And again this
Speaker 2: is another one of these. It is very much like lawfair.
Speaker 2: It's kind of what they did to Trump. You know,
Speaker 2: this is I think it's wrong. I think it needs
Speaker 2: to be stopped. As to whether it's as unusual crime
Speaker 2: for things that typically happen in the district of criminals,
Speaker 2: I don't think it rises to anything that's unusual, anything
Speaker 2: that is not being done by any of the rest
Speaker 2: of them. It's very much like what Trump did when
Speaker 2: we came after the mortgage loans for Lisa Cook and
Speaker 2: for Letitia James, saying that you put down that this
Speaker 2: is going to be for your own personal use, and
Speaker 2: yet you never lived in this, used it as income property,
Speaker 2: or in the case of James, she rented it out
Speaker 2: to a family member and did it at a discounted rate.
Speaker 2: So I think she's actually pretty safe on that. But nevertheless,
Speaker 2: this is another one of these kind of processed crimes
Speaker 2: that they're looking at, which is the same game that
Speaker 2: they did to Trump. He just decided he's going to
Speaker 2: do it back to them and double down. Public opinion, however,
Speaker 2: doesn't support that kind of thing, and Trump should understand
Speaker 2: that it wasn't that people said well, you shouldn't do
Speaker 2: that Trump, because I love Trump. We just looked at
Speaker 2: it and we said, that's wrong to do that to somebody.
Speaker 2: We all know that's wrong to do with somebody, Even
Speaker 2: somebody as personally reprehensible as Donald Trump, it's still wrong
Speaker 2: to do it to them. And that's the thing that
Speaker 2: got him elected. So what does he think it's going
Speaker 2: to do when he does this to drum Powell? Maybe
Speaker 2: drum Powell will be the next president anyway, So when
Speaker 2: he starts looking at people who are possible replacements for Powell,
Speaker 2: guess what he's got. One of the guys that is
Speaker 2: at let's see is this Blackstone and black Rock. You
Speaker 2: need to keep these things separate because they are actually different. Here.
Speaker 2: So Blackrock, not Blackstone, but black Rock, and Larry Fink
Speaker 2: of course, is in line to get special favored treatment
Speaker 2: with the Panama Canal. Remember that, I mean that was
Speaker 2: like ancient history in terms of Trump's conquests and intimidations abroad.
Speaker 2: And yet so he's got a Treasury secretary, He's got Bessant,
Speaker 2: it was a sorrows ranking assistant, right, and then he
Speaker 2: wants to make as chairman of the Fed black Rock guy, okay,
Speaker 2: and of course there's three other people that he's looking at.
Speaker 2: But doesn't that send off any warning flags for the conservatives.
Speaker 2: I mean, as soon as you have some of these
Speaker 2: back and forth fights about ice and the people, Oh,
Speaker 2: look at paid protesters from a Soros, you got some
Speaker 2: organization that's fed by another organization, by another organization, all
Speaker 2: these different shell corporations of Soros, and they're giving money
Speaker 2: to some of these people or helping them in some
Speaker 2: way or the other. And I get it. I don't
Speaker 2: like that. I reject that. But again it's the fact
Speaker 2: that they're so selective about when they look at this.
Speaker 2: They don't care about the fact that Soros and Scott
Speaker 2: Bessant were the two who broke the Bank of England,
Speaker 2: and so he puts them in there to bank to
Speaker 2: break the Bank of America, I guess, or in the
Speaker 2: Central Bank of America that break the dollar or whatever.
Speaker 2: But they don't care. They don't care about his close
Speaker 2: relationship with Blackrock and Larry Fink either, and all of this,
Speaker 2: and so some of the other people. So the sky
Speaker 2: Blackrock is the chief investment officer of Global fixed Income
Speaker 2: and he's going to be interviewed as well, So you'll
Speaker 2: have the sorow Sky as I call Scott Bessant, he's
Speaker 2: Sorous's soy boy, will be interviewing him along with Susie
Speaker 2: Wiles and Donald Trump for a job interview. When it
Speaker 2: comes to getting rid of the Fed chair, not being
Speaker 2: able to wait another five months to get rid of him,
Speaker 2: I've got to get rid of him now with law fair.
Speaker 2: Scott Bessant allegedly told this is Axios reporting it as
Speaker 2: a scoop. Besn't told Trump that investigation of the Fed
Speaker 2: chair is going to create a mess. Well, that's putting
Speaker 2: it mildly. So he told Trump late Sunday, the federal
Speaker 2: investigation into drum Pal the Fed Reserve Chair made a
Speaker 2: mess and it could be very bad for financial markets.
Speaker 2: Two sources familiar with the call told Axios Vessant's worries
Speaker 2: about the financial fallout were somewhat realized on Monday, when
Speaker 2: the dollar dropped as bond yields and the price of
Speaker 2: gold rose, mid worries about potential political interference. The Secretary
Speaker 2: isn't happy, and he let the President know it, said
Speaker 2: one source who talked to Axios. Again, it's Jeene Pirout's
Speaker 2: office in DC launching the probe. The White House officials say, well,
Speaker 2: she didn't give a heads up to the Treasury, she
Speaker 2: just did it on her own. Well, she knows what
Speaker 2: Trump wants. Senior Administration officials told Axios they believe the
Speaker 2: idea for the criminal investigation was launched partly at the
Speaker 2: urging of the faha's director, Bill Pulty. This guy is
Speaker 2: a snake. If everthe was one, he's one who's going
Speaker 2: back with AI, going back to decades of people's real
Speaker 2: estate history, trying to find a process crime for them.
Speaker 2: So he denied that on Bloomberg TV. But who knows anyway.
Speaker 2: Many people call this a bone headed move because it is.
Speaker 2: Yet again it is another bone headed move from a
Speaker 2: bone headed president. This is law fair at its worst,
Speaker 2: set a former Dallas FED president Richard Fisher. The Justice
Speaker 2: Apartment's threat to criminally indict Powell may even make it
Speaker 2: harder for Trump to replace Powell with a loyalist. And
Speaker 2: it'll probably, as I said before, keep Powell there long
Speaker 2: after his term as chair expires. Typically they after they
Speaker 2: are no longer the chair, they leave, and so Trump
Speaker 2: would had that place to replace. But now he's not
Speaker 2: going to have that as well. So again about three
Speaker 2: percent up for gold over forty six hundred dollars, and
Speaker 2: silver spiked another eight percent, rounding up on Monday. This
Speaker 2: is all a reaction to reality, and this is not
Speaker 2: a temporary thing because there's a lot of different things
Speaker 2: that are pushing up the price of gold and silver.
Speaker 2: And in addition to the economic issues that the US
Speaker 2: is having, all of the countries are having economic issues.
Speaker 2: And the Western financial system is referenced by the Fiat dollar,
Speaker 2: by the swift clearance process, and all the rest of
Speaker 2: the stuff has been thoroughly discredited by the Russian sanctions
Speaker 2: and other things like that. So nobody trusts this criminal government.
Speaker 2: I think it was just the fifth oil tanker has
Speaker 2: been seized again. This is amazing civil asset forfeiture on
Speaker 2: such a grand scale in the name of the war
Speaker 2: on drugs, and it was never legal to start with.
Speaker 2: And so nobody trusts this illegal, criminal operation that we
Speaker 2: have here called America anymore. And so everybody is looking
Speaker 2: to create a different financial system, and everybody is stocking
Speaker 2: up on gold. The central banks are stocking up on gold,
Speaker 2: and you've got bricks stock up on gold. You've got
Speaker 2: the people who are are looking at creating another alternative
Speaker 2: approach here in the United States with stable coins, the
Speaker 2: Commerce Secretary Lucky Lutnik and his tether stable they're looking
Speaker 2: at backing up the stable coin, not with dollars, but
Speaker 2: with a real stable coin gold. And so there's a
Speaker 2: lot of people that are accumulating and stacking gold, big
Speaker 2: institutional buyers. And then there's all the issues about war,
Speaker 2: domestic as well as international. All of these are things
Speaker 2: that are going to continue to drive gold and silver up.
Speaker 2: And of course it also gets you some independence away
Speaker 2: from the Federal Reserve as they continue to devalue the dollar,
Speaker 2: which has already lost more than nine nine percent of
Speaker 2: its purchasing power since the Federal Reserve was created one hundred,
Speaker 2: one hundred and twelve years ago. Now this is an
Speaker 2: outrageous act which from any other president would be a shocker,
Speaker 2: said former FED Vice Chair Alan Blinder in an email.
Speaker 2: FED watchers say that Trump's attack on the institution could
Speaker 2: make officials who are on the fence about a rate
Speaker 2: cut reluctant to be seen to do so at the
Speaker 2: present's bidding. So even if they were looking at the
Speaker 2: economic data, and they thought the rates should be cut.
Speaker 2: They don't want to be seen to be caving to
Speaker 2: the president, so they might vote against it for political reasons.
Speaker 2: It blows back exactly like his invasion of Venezuela. It
Speaker 2: is going to blow back big time on him. I
Speaker 2: think overall this is counter productive to the President's agenda,
Speaker 2: and it almost forces the Federal Open Market Committee to
Speaker 2: be more hawkish in order to resist political pressure or
Speaker 2: to be seen to resist political pressure. Every living former
Speaker 2: FED chair and a bipartisan group of former Treasury secretaries
Speaker 2: and White House economists have issued a statement yesterday defending
Speaker 2: Powell from the unprecedented attempt to use prosecutorial attacks to
Speaker 2: undermine FED independence. And again you see FED independence, FED independence,
Speaker 2: FED independence. You know, the whole structure of the Federal
Speaker 2: Reserve is just corrupt from the get go, and we
Speaker 2: need to look to see how we make this country
Speaker 2: independent from the FED. So I'm all for it in
Speaker 2: that regard, but not the way they mean independence. The
Speaker 2: White House has sought to distance Trump from the DOJ probe,
Speaker 2: they said, and of course Powell is not going to
Speaker 2: ride off into the sunset. He's going to stay there,
Speaker 2: so there can be a thorn in Trump's side. Well,
Speaker 2: he may not ride off into the sunset, but I
Speaker 2: think the gold and silver are going to go the moon.
Speaker 2: So that's uh, you know, that's the takeaway from this.
Speaker 2: And again I'll just tell you it's one thing that
Speaker 2: you can do is most of these policies that we
Speaker 2: look at, there's not too many things that we can
Speaker 2: do to actually guard against or to utilize it for
Speaker 2: our own benefit. But when we look at the economic
Speaker 2: policy seas of the federal government and of the Federal Reserve,
Speaker 2: there are things that we can do individually to try
Speaker 2: to mitigate that or even profit from it. And the
Speaker 2: gradual accumulation of gold and silver, as Tony Rtterman makes
Speaker 2: possible with wise Wolf Gold, and you can let him
Speaker 2: know that we come to him through David Knight do gold.
Speaker 2: If you do that, that's a really wise move for
Speaker 2: your future, because all of the fundamentals that have been
Speaker 2: there now for several years are not changing. They're all
Speaker 2: getting worse. And so we see the new high forty
Speaker 2: six hundred dollars for gold and even higher eighty six
Speaker 2: for silver, and even bigger jump in terms of percentage
Speaker 2: yesterday because they're not going to audit the FED. They
Speaker 2: may look at the building cost they may audit the
Speaker 2: building costs of the Federal Reserve building, but they're not
Speaker 2: going to audit what the FED does. And they're not
Speaker 2: going to look at how much gold is in the
Speaker 2: in Fort Knox because the FED is just a cesspool
Speaker 2: of organized crime, just like the federal government itself. Nothing
Speaker 2: about that is going to change. And then when we
Speaker 2: look at what Trump is going to do in order
Speaker 2: to try to make homes more affordable. David Bonnson, who
Speaker 2: was a wealth management firm of the Boson Group, and
Speaker 2: they've got to forget how many billions of dollars they've
Speaker 2: got under management. But I've interviewed David and he was
Speaker 2: saying that they've got the wrong target. He said, Trump
Speaker 2: is saying he wants to ban large institutional investors from
Speaker 2: buying single family homes. We don't want to. This really
Speaker 2: has played into the concerns that we all have that
Speaker 2: you hear from the World Economic Form all the time,
Speaker 2: you'll own nothing and you'll be happy, right, And so
Speaker 2: you see these large investment firms getting into buying up
Speaker 2: single family homes. It's like, Aha, we know what that's about. Well,
Speaker 2: the problem is is that if you actually look at
Speaker 2: the numbers, it's still not very big. It would be
Speaker 2: a good thing maybe to look at this and say,
Speaker 2: you know what, legally could we do about this. I
Speaker 2: don't think there's any authority under the Constitution to do
Speaker 2: anything about it whatsoever. And you have to ask yourself,
Speaker 2: how do we justify saying that a certain group of
Speaker 2: people can't participate in a market? That makes no sense
Speaker 2: at all. But whether it's going to help from an
Speaker 2: economic standpoint is really what David Bonson is talking about here,
Speaker 2: And clearly when you look at what sources soy boy
Speaker 2: Scott Bessant said at the Economic Club of Minnesota last week,
Speaker 2: he said, yeah, we're looking at this. He goes as
Speaker 2: somebody who's been in markets for forty years. Markets are
Speaker 2: made on the margin, and so we're pushing out the
Speaker 2: marginal buyer. But we haven't exactly decided on the exact contours.
Speaker 2: In other words, translation, Trump hasn't given this any thought
Speaker 2: as to how it's actually going to work. This is
Speaker 2: just sheared demagoguery, folks. We haven't really thought about the
Speaker 2: contours of this. In other words, how do we define
Speaker 2: somebody who's an institutional investor? He said, Is it somebody
Speaker 2: who owns a dozen homes? Is it two dozen homes?
Speaker 2: Are we going to push out the small investor who
Speaker 2: goes in and buys a few houses and maybe makes
Speaker 2: some rental houses, a single family homes or something like that.
Speaker 2: What are we really going to do about this? And
Speaker 2: that's a really troubling that's a troubling issue as well
Speaker 2: as the legal aspects of this and the legal precedence.
Speaker 2: As a matter of fact, the person who's asking him
Speaker 2: the question pointed out to the Soros soy boy Scott
Speaker 2: Bessant pointed out that the White House is aligning itself
Speaker 2: with Senator Elizabeth Warren on these policies, yet another example
Speaker 2: of how Trump is a Northeastern liberal Democrat at tax
Speaker 2: and spend pedophile. That's who the guy is, always has been,
Speaker 2: always will be. And so David Monson said, it's incredibly
Speaker 2: easy to empirically establish that three of the markets that
Speaker 2: have been some of the biggest home price appreciation in
Speaker 2: America Bend, Oregon, Providence, Rhode Island, and San Jose, California,
Speaker 2: have zero institutional ownership three of the worst performing markets
Speaker 2: have the highest institutional ownership. In other words, the value
Speaker 2: of the houses have not gone up, so institutions have
Speaker 2: invested in areas that were not good areas to invest in.
Speaker 2: He said, to the extent that we're talking about total
Speaker 2: institutional ownership, people that own over a thousand homes, and
Speaker 2: this is including multi family, which is what the president
Speaker 2: and secondary vessant have not included. So he says, so
Speaker 2: there's more institutional investing in apartment buildings and they're not
Speaker 2: even including them. They're not talking about apartment buildings, but
Speaker 2: in single family it is zero point four percent of
Speaker 2: the housing stock. Now some will say, no, you can't
Speaker 2: look at it in a total ownership because the marginal
Speaker 2: buyer is the new buyer. Okay, he said, Well, the
Speaker 2: new buyer at the peak year was three percent. And
Speaker 2: if you look at the largest institutional owner, a company
Speaker 2: called black Stone, which is repeatedly confused with black Rock,
Speaker 2: it makes for all kinds of fallacious statements on social media.
Speaker 2: By the way, I've seen these.
Speaker 1: D C.
Speaker 2: Draino, the guy, the Zionist, the hardcore Zionist two was
Speaker 2: one of the biggest guys up front about this. Remember
Speaker 2: when Trump released so called released the Epstein documents to
Speaker 2: some of these MAGA influencers, and D C. Drainer was
Speaker 2: one of the worst in terms of cheering it and
Speaker 2: talking about what he had there. And this guy is
Speaker 2: putting out all kinds of false information about what's happening
Speaker 2: in the real estate market and confusing Blackstone with black Rock,
Speaker 2: perfect example of that. He said, Blackstone owns zero point
Speaker 2: zero six percent about six to sixty three thousand homes
Speaker 2: through conduits and subsidiaries, and a country that has eighty
Speaker 2: five million homes. So we're talking about something that is
Speaker 2: not even remotely rational, he said. When he says that
Speaker 2: we have to pick the contours, like well, do we
Speaker 2: want them to allow do we want to allow them
Speaker 2: to buy twenty homes or do we allow them to
Speaker 2: buy one hundred homes? That is nothing but central planning.
Speaker 2: And that is the problem is, you know, we want
Speaker 2: to talk about affordability. The problem with affordability is that
Speaker 2: the federal government is impoverishing people through their policies and
Speaker 2: through the devaluation of the currency, and through taxes and
Speaker 2: through regulation and the inflation that is the devaluement. If
Speaker 2: you want to do something about affordability, You've got to
Speaker 2: go back to the basic issues. And the most basic
Speaker 2: issue is the federal debt, which Trump himself is responsible
Speaker 2: for blowing up more than anybody else. He made that
Speaker 2: initial twenty Biden kept it up and so is Trump.
Speaker 2: And that's the real issue with affordability. So we look
Speaker 2: at these things like we're going to put ten one
Speaker 2: year cap of ten percent on credit card rates, so
Speaker 2: we're going to tell people to get a fifty year mortgage,
Speaker 2: and we're going to say you can't have institutional investors
Speaker 2: buying homes. None of this is a solution. I mean,
Speaker 2: this is as stupid as Gerald Ford's win buttons whip inflation. Now,
Speaker 2: remember that he put out these buttons, as said when
Speaker 2: and it was stood for whip inflation. Now, so you
Speaker 2: wear that problem is solved. And that's the kind of
Speaker 2: idiotic demagoguery that is a slogan, you know, jingoism and
Speaker 2: everything that the Trump is involved in. When you look
Speaker 2: at his economic remedies, they're laughable, absolutely laughable and unconstitutional
Speaker 2: and illegal to boot. Everything about this is wrong. As
Speaker 2: David Monson is saying, it really goes back to supply.
Speaker 2: It really goes back to income and wealth in general.
Speaker 2: That's the real issue. It's not home ownership more than anything,
Speaker 2: is a reflection of prosperity or poverty. And that's what's happening.
Speaker 2: Our government is making us poor. And all of this
Speaker 2: nonsense that Trump is doing is just like putting a
Speaker 2: new coat of paint on his bankrupt casino. Nothing has
Speaker 2: changed at all. Settle for something that is real, something
Speaker 2: that you can start to accumulate gradually, to try to
Speaker 2: protect yourself and to mitigate the harm that's going to
Speaker 2: be done to all of us. I mean, you're going
Speaker 2: to be harmed with us, even if you're own gold
Speaker 2: and silver. We're all going to be harmed. We're all
Speaker 2: harmed by excessive government regulation, by central planning, by inflation,
Speaker 2: all the rest of the stuff. But you can try
Speaker 2: to mitigate some of that again by getting into gold
Speaker 2: and silver. Tony Ardban can help you at Wisewolf and
Speaker 2: again let him know that you're coming through us through
Speaker 2: David Knight. Do gold. That's all I can tell you.
Speaker 2: And when we look at this stuff, it's just unbelievable
Speaker 2: how ridiculous it is. So that's the Federal Reserve War.
Speaker 2: And when we come back, we're going to take a
Speaker 2: look at the foreign wars that we have everywhere, because
Speaker 2: we've got a whole bunch of them stacked up. A
Speaker 2: little bit of updates about all these different ones. War
Speaker 2: with Russia, War with I ron Worth Greenland, War with Venezuela.
Speaker 2: That's the common thread with Trump. Everywhere he goes, he
Speaker 2: goes to war with everybody. He creates conflict where there
Speaker 2: wasn't any conflict. He says there's emergencies when there aren't emergencies,
Speaker 2: and then his policies create an emergency. And so we're
Speaker 2: going to talk about all that when we come back.
Speaker 2: We'll be right back. Stay with us.
Speaker 1: Because you're listening to the David Night Show. You're listening
Speaker 1: to the David Knight Show.
Speaker 4: APS Radio delivers multiple channels of music right to your
Speaker 4: mobile device. Get the APS Radio app today and listen
Speaker 4: wherever you well go.
Speaker 2: And before we get back to the news, I just
Speaker 2: want to say real quickly thank you to our donors,
Speaker 2: which we call our producers, because they are the ones
Speaker 2: who bring this program to you. And I want to
Speaker 2: thank the people on Zell who have made contributions Sally D,
Speaker 2: Rose G. Mitchell M. Robert A, Sean S, William R.
Speaker 2: Kelly k Lyndon, H. Mary M. John S, Michael L,
Speaker 2: Maurice W. William W. Janice W. And actually that was
Speaker 2: the last day of the year, so I was already
Speaker 2: counted in there. But thank you anyway, thank you so
Speaker 2: much all of you. And I don't have the list
Speaker 2: of the people who send things by mail, but we
Speaker 2: will get that tomorrow. But I want to thank many
Speaker 2: of you, and I really do appreciate your support and
Speaker 2: that's what keeps this program going. And we're about halfway
Speaker 2: through the month, so we had a very good month
Speaker 2: last month. As usual, January really starts off slow because
Speaker 2: people got a lot of bills to pay. But thank
Speaker 2: you to those of you who have been faithful supporters.
Speaker 2: That's always the same names that we see over and
Speaker 2: over again. So let's talk a little bit about the
Speaker 2: foreign wars, and of course there's many of them to
Speaker 2: choose from. How do we start. We got small updates
Speaker 2: on a lot of different ones. We're in instance, in Russia,
Speaker 2: we've had a couple of interesting updates in terms of
Speaker 2: you know, one of the things that has really emboldened
Speaker 2: Trump and the US military industrial complex is the superiority
Speaker 2: of our complex equipment. And yes it is superior, but
Speaker 2: it can still be shot down. A good example of
Speaker 2: this is what is happening in Ukraine. We have an
Speaker 2: F sixteen shot down in Ukraine with the anti aircraft missiles.
Speaker 2: He has three hundreds. In an interview, they said the
Speaker 2: US supplied aircraft was the most interesting target. They said
Speaker 2: their missile battery fired two missiles at the F sixteen.
Speaker 2: The first one damaged the aircraft, the second one delivered
Speaker 2: the final blow. They said. This is a guy who
Speaker 2: was a commander being interviewed on Russian TV. He said,
Speaker 2: we were tracking it, anticipating it. The enemy boasted these
Speaker 2: planes were indestructible. As it turns out, they fall from
Speaker 2: the sky just like the rest of them. And that's
Speaker 2: the key issue, seems to be, that was an issue.
Speaker 2: We were on the right side of this in World
Speaker 2: War two and World War two we had the Germans
Speaker 2: who had extremely complex and advanced planes. They had jet
Speaker 2: planes and things like that, but they didn't have very
Speaker 2: many of them, and they had very advanced panzer tanks,
Speaker 2: but they didn't have nearly as many of them as
Speaker 2: are much simpler, cheaper Sherman tanks, and that type of
Speaker 2: imbalance is even more accentuated now with drone warfare and
Speaker 2: things like that. So it's amazing to me to see
Speaker 2: how the US military and Dosto complexes writing checks that
Speaker 2: it can't cash in so many different areas. But when
Speaker 2: we talk about high tech stuff, it's not even like
Speaker 2: we have a monopoly on high tech stuff anymore. We
Speaker 2: don't have hypersonic missiles. They are building ships that they
Speaker 2: say are going to be launching pads for hypersonic missiles
Speaker 2: and things like that that we don't have. So we
Speaker 2: don't have the ships and we don't have the missiles yet.
Speaker 2: But just wait and if we don't have a war
Speaker 2: and have the military destroyed those who come along in
Speaker 2: due time. Meanwhile, the Russians and the Chinese do have
Speaker 2: hypersonic missiles. They have the Rashnik missile. They just destroyed
Speaker 2: a Ukrainian facility that builds planes in the Ukraine. They're
Speaker 2: actually building old planes. Mid twenty nine jets as well
Speaker 2: as some Western supplied F sixteens are being worked on
Speaker 2: at the facility. The Russian hypersonic ballistic missile system blew
Speaker 2: up the plant and produced long and medium range strike
Speaker 2: drones that being used for strikes against Russia targets deep
Speaker 2: inside the territory of Russia. They said. The strike hit
Speaker 2: production workshops, facilities holding finished drones, and the infrastructure at
Speaker 2: the plant's airfield. keV has not commented on the scope
Speaker 2: of the damage yet, but the mayor confirmed at the
Speaker 2: time that a piece of critical infrastructure had been hit.
Speaker 2: And so again, the wars that we're starting here are
Speaker 2: very and it's not just that, it's also the precedent
Speaker 2: of this kidnapping. As I pointed out last week, you
Speaker 2: got people in Russia like Alexander Dugan, a hardcore, you know,
Speaker 2: let's go take all of Ukraine type of thing, and
Speaker 2: when he saw his comments about the kidnapping of Madua,
Speaker 2: we should be doing that to Zelenski. And within a
Speaker 2: couple of days you see the UK minister say we
Speaker 2: need to go kidnap Putin. Trump's policies are not making
Speaker 2: us safer. You know, when you hear all this stuff
Speaker 2: about national security, it hasn't anything to do with national safety.
Speaker 2: These national security interests, these people who start the wars,
Speaker 2: like the CIA, like depending on. They're not doing things
Speaker 2: that make us safer. Far from it. Trump's policies and
Speaker 2: as precedents are making the world a much more dangerous place.
Speaker 2: Now everybody's saying, yeah, they did that, we could do
Speaker 2: that too, at least try it. So, Moscow said the
Speaker 2: Friday bombardment was with a hyper with the Arrestnic hypersonic
Speaker 2: missile was a response to the attacks against Putin's home
Speaker 2: in the Novgorod region, which the CIA is saying didn't happen.
Speaker 2: I don't know. I mean, when you got Putin versus
Speaker 2: the CIA, I don't know who to believe anymore, an
Speaker 2: old KGB guy and you got the current leadership of
Speaker 2: the CIA. I don't trust either one of them. I
Speaker 2: wouldn't believe anything either one of them says. So anyway,
Speaker 2: Russia first used the Rashianic coipersonic missile in late twenty
Speaker 2: twenty four, targeting a Ukrainian defense industry facility at Denipur.
Speaker 2: At the time, Putin said Rashanic missiles traveled ten times
Speaker 2: a speed of sound and could not be intercepted by
Speaker 2: any existing air defenses. And they actually showed that. So
Speaker 2: that takes us to Iran you know, Trump is already
Speaker 2: getting briefings on military strike options for Iran as the
Speaker 2: protest death's sore. And I look at this and I think,
Speaker 2: so it's just kind of going to snatch defeat. How
Speaker 2: the jaws of victory. Why would you interfere with us?
Speaker 2: It only strengthens the hands of the iyatolas for you
Speaker 2: to say that we're going to jump in on this.
Speaker 2: And it has been very significant pushback that's there. Of course,
Speaker 2: the question is is that really domestic unrest or is
Speaker 2: it something that is being pushed by the US and Israel.
Speaker 2: And I'm sure that they had some of a hand
Speaker 2: in that as well. The New York Times and others
Speaker 2: are confirming that Trump has recently been briefed on a
Speaker 2: series of new military strike options targeting Iran. Buildings and
Speaker 2: even mosques have been burned. Regardless of who is doing this,
Speaker 2: I mean, if this is organic in grassroots or if
Speaker 2: it is some kind of an operation by the US
Speaker 2: and Israel, this is still happening. There a lot of buildings, torched, cars, torched,
Speaker 2: police officials reportedly shot and stabbed, an internet blackout across
Speaker 2: the country. They've just completely shut down the entire Internet there,
Speaker 2: so it's very hard to get any information out of
Speaker 2: there that is reliable. It's not reliable under normal circumstances.
Speaker 2: Starlink terminals are said to be smuggled into the country
Speaker 2: during the twenty twenty two wave of protests. Trump, during
Speaker 2: Friday's meeting of oil executives, again warned Iranian leadership to
Speaker 2: kill protesters. Not to kill protesters. I should say, maybe
Speaker 2: he should tell that to Ice. Yeah, don't don't kill protesters.
Speaker 2: As a matter of fact, I'm talking about that. I
Speaker 2: don't have a I'm not gonna spend a lot of
Speaker 2: time one today because I spent last two or three
Speaker 2: days on It gives me really upset to go to
Speaker 2: social media. I told Careen this morning, I said, you know,
Speaker 2: when I look at the hatred coming out of conservatives
Speaker 2: for people and people writing comments on Rumble saying you know, well,
Speaker 2: I think she should be killed, you know, basically because
Speaker 2: she's got a wife or whatever, and just the pure hatred,
Speaker 2: the tribal hatred that is there is really astounding.
Speaker 5: You know.
Speaker 2: We look at it and christ said, if you you've
Speaker 2: heard that shot might kill But if you look at
Speaker 2: somebody with hatred in your heart, You've committed murder in
Speaker 2: your heart already. Well, these people aren't there saying I
Speaker 2: voted for this, kill them, you know, I mean, this
Speaker 2: is this is way beyond a private death wish that
Speaker 2: you got for somebody that is out there. I mean,
Speaker 2: they're publicly calling for this, and the sad thing about
Speaker 2: it is not only shows the moral condition of America,
Speaker 2: but it shows how willing and anxious both the left
Speaker 2: and the right are in terms of wanting to kill people.
Speaker 2: You know, the Conservatives, in terms of their rabid defense
Speaker 2: of this murder, are looking just exactly like Antifa out there.
Speaker 2: This is what a sheriff out of Michigan had to
Speaker 2: say about the shooting.
Speaker 5: What would you and obviously this is twenty twenty hindsight,
Speaker 5: but how do you think you would have handled that
Speaker 5: situation with Renee Good her car blocking the street? What
Speaker 5: do you think should have been done?
Speaker 2: Well?
Speaker 4: If I was there, and again you're right, it's hindsight,
Speaker 4: but I want to stood in front of the car
Speaker 4: and you give verbal commands if the car is turning away.
Speaker 4: My question is what crime was committed?
Speaker 2: Protesting?
Speaker 4: I mean, you saw what happened to the George Floyd
Speaker 4: protests during the twenty twenty and out of Hennepin County, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Speaker 4: We had forty process that summer here. We didn't arrest
Speaker 4: people that were black in the street. We didn't arrest
Speaker 4: people who were just completely upset. This is part of
Speaker 4: the process, is what law enforcement deals with. So I
Speaker 4: would have kept on verbal commands. You can take the
Speaker 4: context of the situation. She didn't appear to be a threat.
Speaker 4: Although she's protesting, I get it. She can amp people up,
Speaker 4: it doesn't matter. That's not justification for deadly force. And
Speaker 4: then the force continuum that all law enforcement is required
Speaker 4: to follow. As escalation goes up, we go up. As
Speaker 4: it goes down, we go down. Instantaneously. The burden falls
Speaker 4: on law enforcement. And I want to tell you, for
Speaker 4: law enforcement out there watching that shooting, you can't take
Speaker 4: pride in what just happened. Yes, a VEHL can be
Speaker 4: used as a weapon. It wasn't used as a weapon
Speaker 4: that day. It's what the American people saw. Tires turned
Speaker 4: to the right. She's getting out. She's like, I'm not
Speaker 4: mad at you. I'm not mad at you. I don't
Speaker 4: care if she was there all day. You take the
Speaker 4: things that are in context at that moment make a decision.
Speaker 4: Was that decision to use deadly force the best decision?
Speaker 4: I don't think the American people think that, and iconally
Speaker 4: don't think that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and that is a sheriff of Chris Swanson out
Speaker 2: of Michigan. You know, we can have some really good shriffs.
Speaker 2: I have to stand for election, and there are some
Speaker 2: really good sheriffs in America. Unfortunately, there's some really bad
Speaker 2: law enforcement. And when we centralize it. When you look
Speaker 2: at Trump criticizing what's going on in Iran, how is
Speaker 2: that different than what you want to do with ice?
Speaker 2: It's unbelievable hypocrisy for him to complain about what's happening
Speaker 2: in Iran when you look at what he is doing
Speaker 2: and deliberately provoking, deliberately creating chaos. I wonder if the
Speaker 2: police in Iran wear masks? Do they get all hyped
Speaker 2: up in military uniforms and armed to the teeth so
Speaker 2: they go out and you know point as a matter
Speaker 2: of fact, there's a video I haven't even shown it,
Speaker 2: but there's another video that has gone viral where you've
Speaker 2: got a middle aged woman standing there and she's yelling
Speaker 2: at the police protesting. She is redressing her grievances publicly, peacefully,
Speaker 2: as is specifically protected on the Constitution. And he's got
Speaker 2: a pepper ball rifle in his hand. He puts that down.
Speaker 2: He pulls out a real pistol and puts it right
Speaker 2: in her face. This is why when I did the
Speaker 2: thing about about Trump burning the Constitution and apocalypse now
Speaker 2: and all that stuff, I had that same thing done
Speaker 2: by a robot cop. And these guys have been trained
Speaker 2: as robots, dangerous robots to do something like that. So
Speaker 2: more than five hundred and forty four people have been
Speaker 2: killed over the past fifteen days during anti government demonstrations.
Speaker 2: So the scale of this is much bigger than anything
Speaker 2: that's going on with Ice or these leftist immigration people. However,
Speaker 2: it's not the scale that concerns me. It's the same
Speaker 2: principle that you're looking at here, including eight children. According
Speaker 2: to the Human Rights activist news agency, they said Iran
Speaker 2: is looking at freedom perhaps like never before, said Trump.
Speaker 2: Now the USA stands ready to help, and we're locked
Speaker 2: and loaded and we're ready to go kill more people
Speaker 2: for you. So yeah, just stay out of it for once.
Speaker 2: Every time you get into something, you make it worse,
Speaker 2: if Trump were to actually kick off yet more US
Speaker 2: military action in the Middle East, this time against a
Speaker 2: large nation like Iran, which would hold a serious potential
Speaker 2: fruscalating into a full blown conflict, it would likely prove
Speaker 2: deeply unpopular among his base. Broadly, the American public would
Speaker 2: likely not be on board either. Well, I don't know
Speaker 2: so much. I think we've gotten to the point now
Speaker 2: where the delusion of maga is so strong, the ability
Speaker 2: to double think is so strong. They may hate this policy.
Speaker 2: They may hate American adventurism abroad. They may hate the
Speaker 2: idea of America being the world's policeman and an excessive
Speaker 2: use of forced policemen at that, but they will still
Speaker 2: give excuses to Trump, just like they did for the
Speaker 2: vaccine that they hate. Even Iranian state TV as reporting
Speaker 2: from the morgue, they said where a large number of
Speaker 2: body bags can be seen. Goldman Sachs said that this
Speaker 2: US intervention in and of itself would have an impact
Speaker 2: on oil, gold and across the markets. Yeah, what do
Speaker 2: you think is going to be yet another thing that's
Speaker 2: going to affect the price of gold in a positive way? Iran,
Speaker 2: unlike the twenty two twenty twenty two protests that were
Speaker 2: around social liberties. This episode looks to be triggered by
Speaker 2: economic paralysis, with inflation spiking and the sudden collapse of
Speaker 2: the Iranian currency in late December. This is a harbinger
Speaker 2: of things to come to not just to Iran and
Speaker 2: not just to some third world countries, but it's something's
Speaker 2: going to happen in Western Europe and in the United
Speaker 2: States as well, And I think this is why they're
Speaker 2: being so provocative. I think this is why they're ramping
Speaker 2: up the federal army of cops, because I know that
Speaker 2: this type of unrest could easily come to this country
Speaker 2: as well. What can potentially add oil to the fire
Speaker 2: is if foreign interference continues to get talked up, with
Speaker 2: the US signaling the threat of potential intervention. Oil and
Speaker 2: gold crept up as the Iranian unrest unfold and Iranian
Speaker 2: businesses have in many cases been forced to suspend all
Speaker 2: activity because the shutdown of the Internet. It's said to
Speaker 2: be so severe that even the banking system is not
Speaker 2: operating and you can't even get money out of ATMs.
Speaker 2: Again a harbinger of what could easily happen in America
Speaker 2: and Western Europe. Nobody is immune to that. Especially right
Speaker 2: now we are in a very very precarious situation globally
Speaker 2: with all the countries. Leadership in Tehran may have made
Speaker 2: things worse for itself with a decision to block Internet access.
Speaker 2: Clashes of police have grown more intense and violent after
Speaker 2: they've done that. Iranian Foreign minister said the protests were
Speaker 2: brought under control on Saturday and then blamed Israel in
Speaker 2: the United States, and again I believe that there is
Speaker 2: probably some truth to that. As a matter of fact,
Speaker 2: Brian Schallhave has a very long report about the history
Speaker 2: of the Shaw's family. Mohammed Reza Pavlavi was the guy
Speaker 2: that was installed by the CIA and that was pushed out,
Speaker 2: and of course his son is still around, looks a
Speaker 2: good bit like him. Actually is now trying to make
Speaker 2: his bid to be Shaw of Iran again to take
Speaker 2: over Iran, and now he has had some support from
Speaker 2: the net and Yahoo government. Of course, the Americans who
Speaker 2: basically put the Shaw in completely ignored him, as after
Speaker 2: the Shaw died he declared himself to be King or
Speaker 2: Shaw whatever the official title is of Iran, and not
Speaker 2: even the US government recognized him, but now you have
Speaker 2: a big move by Israel to recognize him, and so
Speaker 2: Cia Masad may wind up trying to put a Shaw
Speaker 2: back in control of Iran. We'll have to wait and
Speaker 2: see what really happens with that. But again, this is
Speaker 2: many people don't understand the history of Iran prior to
Speaker 2: the takeover the US embassy. And if you see what
Speaker 2: the Shaw did to people trained by the US CIA,
Speaker 2: that is a real eye opening experience to see that
Speaker 2: our own government pushes the kinds of things that the
Speaker 2: Irani and Shaw did to his own people, and so
Speaker 2: they have distanced themselves from him in the past, but
Speaker 2: now it seems like all is forgiven. And who knows,
Speaker 2: maybe it's going to be another attempt by the US
Speaker 2: government to try to shore up the petro dollar. Look,
Speaker 2: that would be perfectly in line with what the technocracy wants.
Speaker 2: You know, the technocracy back in the nineteen thirties not
Speaker 2: only talked about having a united hemisphere from Greenland down
Speaker 2: to the Galapagos, as I pointed out, but they also
Speaker 2: said we need to get rid of money. And you've
Speaker 2: seen Elon Musk talk about this as well. We need
Speaker 2: to basically have an exchange and economy that is based
Speaker 2: on energy used, and this feeds into all of this
Speaker 2: social credit monitoring of people and how much energy you
Speaker 2: use and how much you consume and all the rest
Speaker 2: of this stuff. And so it's kind of interesting to see,
Speaker 2: even if you kind of think of it as a
Speaker 2: ven diagram, to see the overlap between the green people there.
Speaker 2: Of course, Elon must made all his money as a
Speaker 2: green grifter, and so it's kind of interesting to see
Speaker 2: the overlap of these draconian measures, these green mcguffins that
Speaker 2: they want to use to sell complete surveillance and control
Speaker 2: of all of our economic activity, what we eat, what
Speaker 2: we wear, whether we travel or not, where we live.
Speaker 2: All of this that all harkens back to the technocracy,
Speaker 2: and you can see a lot of these policies being
Speaker 2: brought back with that Denmark. Meanwhile, as we get to
Speaker 2: get to green Legus, we'll let it be sung in
Speaker 2: here by Donnie Jr. And Charlie so Well. We now
Speaker 2: have Congressman Randy Fine of Florida, the guy who has
Speaker 2: decided that, along with the Israeli billionaire Shlomo, that we
Speaker 2: need to get rid of the First Amendment. We should
Speaker 2: not have any free speech, and he was the one
Speaker 2: who was pushing very hard for DeSantis to go to
Speaker 2: Israel and to sign a bill for Florida in Israel
Speaker 2: to make it criminal to criticize the Israeli government. Now
Speaker 2: he's saying that Denmark hasn't treated them well. Well, I
Speaker 2: don't think you're treating Americans too well, Randy. He writes
Speaker 2: a plan to make Greenland the fifty first state, and
Speaker 2: he is sucking up to and supporting Trump in this
Speaker 2: quixotic quest, which is again, when you look at it,
Speaker 2: I don't know how this makes any sense at all,
Speaker 2: except that it is part of the goal of the
Speaker 2: technocracy to create what they called a technate everything in
Speaker 2: the Western hemisphere. There have been some extreme ideas discussed,
Speaker 2: including a military takeover. Also cash payments to residents. Yeah,
Speaker 2: we don't have to worry about the federal deficit. Do
Speaker 2: we can give one hundred thousand dollars to each person
Speaker 2: in Greenland to say that they want to be American
Speaker 2: tax slaves in the future. Always the government hands it
Speaker 2: out with one hand and takes it back with the other. So, yeah,
Speaker 2: we're going to give you a hundred thousand dollars and
Speaker 2: then they're going to start paying income taxes and we'll
Speaker 2: take it back in no time at all. So again,
Speaker 2: going to use bribery, going to use threats, going to
Speaker 2: use blackmail. This is our government. It's always the way
Speaker 2: they operate. And so it's Randy Fine of Florida wants
Speaker 2: to make a Greenland America's fifty first state. I think
Speaker 2: it is in the world's interest for the US to
Speaker 2: exert sovereignty over Greenland, said fine, well, it certainly, and
Speaker 2: Fines interest to copy everything that Donald Trump says.
Speaker 3: The question is is it in Greenland interest? Because that's
Speaker 3: who it's going to be impacting.
Speaker 2: Now, we don't care about that. I mean, you know,
Speaker 2: when you look at when you look at our country here,
Speaker 2: we don't really care what anybody else wants. I mean,
Speaker 2: we have a pirate company country here, you know. We
Speaker 2: just it's fine. I'm taking it because I can. Congress
Speaker 2: he said, still have to make it a state, but
Speaker 2: simply authorized the President to do what he's doing and
Speaker 2: say that Congress stands behind him. So he is introducing
Speaker 2: legislation to support Trump and all this, and Secretary Marco
Speaker 2: Rubio confirmed that he has now scheduled a meeting. People
Speaker 2: from Denmark and Greenland have been begging for a meeting
Speaker 2: from Marco Rubio since Trump started talking about Greenland about
Speaker 2: a year ago, said can we talk, and he's finally
Speaker 2: ready to talk, apparently under them. And so again Congress
Speaker 2: on the Constitution has the power to add states to
Speaker 2: the Union. But again, is this and our interest is
Speaker 2: it in Greenland's interest? Well, when we look at what
Speaker 2: is happening in Venezuela and this is something that is
Speaker 2: again backfiring, it's very much like looking at this whole
Speaker 2: thing unfold. It hasn't been that long since the kidnapping
Speaker 2: of Maduro, and there have been contradictory statements and lies
Speaker 2: coming from the Trump administration about every aspect of this,
Speaker 2: beginning with saying we're blowing up these boats because they've
Speaker 2: got fentanyl um and then they ignore that, and then
Speaker 2: they say, well, it's cocaine and it's coming to the
Speaker 2: United States, but it wasn't coming to the United States,
Speaker 2: and then saying they were being attacked by these people
Speaker 2: that were never attacked by any of these boats. And
Speaker 2: so every aspect of this has been one lie after
Speaker 2: the other. And to say that basically, we have done
Speaker 2: a decapitation strike. Well, that means that the guy then
Speaker 2: was the head of the government, right, except they're not
Speaker 2: going to acknowledge him. Has said they're going to pretend
Speaker 2: that he was a drug dealer and not the Press
Speaker 2: of Venezuela. Why not the president of Venezuela. Well, because
Speaker 2: the election was rigged and we know the person who
Speaker 2: really won the election was either Machado, who was kicked
Speaker 2: off the ballot because it looked like she was going
Speaker 2: to win, or Gonzales. But Trump is not going to
Speaker 2: put either one of them back in power. He's going
Speaker 2: to run the country himself or give it to Marco
Speaker 2: Rubio to be viceroy. None of this holds up to
Speaker 2: any scrutiny. It is completely inconsistent. And so the question
Speaker 2: is is this over oil? Well, he had all the
Speaker 2: oil executives with him on a Friday, and the EXON
Speaker 2: executive publicly said that this doesn't make any economic sense
Speaker 2: for them to get involved and that they can't really
Speaker 2: that it is uninvestible because the chaos in Venezuela. So
Speaker 2: that was the EXON CEO, Darren Woods. Well, Trump is
Speaker 2: going to exclude him out of any of this stuff,
Speaker 2: he's going to He's going to throw massive amounts of money.
Speaker 2: Just like he wants to bribe people in Greenland to
Speaker 2: vote become American. He wants to send massive and we're
Speaker 2: talking about a lot more than a hundred thousand dollars each,
Speaker 2: probably tens of billions of dollars to each of these
Speaker 2: companies to go in and build infrastructure in Venezuela. And
Speaker 2: yet when the Exxon CEO tells the truth about it,
Speaker 2: Trump says, well, I didn't like Exxon's response. He said,
Speaker 2: I'll probably be inclined to keep Exxon out. I didn't
Speaker 2: like their response. They're playing too cute, says Trump. So again,
Speaker 2: if you flatter him, you do whatever he wants, then
Speaker 2: you're going to get massive subsidies from him. But if
Speaker 2: you cross him, he's going to do everything he can
Speaker 2: to destroy you. Trump has argued that Venezuela's vast oil
Speaker 2: reserves could help revive its economy while also benefiting US
Speaker 2: consumers and energy companies. In a recent interview, he said
Speaker 2: he wants companies to commit at least one hundred billion
Speaker 2: dollars to quote rebuild the whole oil infrastructure in the country.
Speaker 2: But they say, well, you know, we just can't count
Speaker 2: on the US remaining there, and the political situation is
Speaker 2: in flux. We don't know that you're going to be
Speaker 2: able to stay there, even if you have a commitment.
Speaker 2: You know, the person who replaces Trump may not have
Speaker 2: a commitment to this, and even if they do have
Speaker 2: a commitment, they may not be able to make it happen.
Speaker 2: You know, just because we wanted to control Afghanistan, we
Speaker 2: still got thrown out of there. And so yet again
Speaker 2: we see these policies that are constantly shifting the narratives,
Speaker 2: where he draws the line in the sand and then
Speaker 2: he changes it again. We were told that taking the
Speaker 2: oil in Venezuela was to go after Cuba, that we
Speaker 2: needed to starve Cuba into submission their economy by cutting
Speaker 2: off oil from Venezuela. So now Trump is going to
Speaker 2: allow Mexico to provide will to Cuba despite his vow
Speaker 2: to cut off the supply. This is very much like
Speaker 2: what we saw with the AI chips from in Video. No,
Speaker 2: you can't, we can't let that high tech go to China,
Speaker 2: not at all. Then he talks to some corporations and
Speaker 2: he talks to Jensen Wang or whatever, and the next
Speaker 2: thing you know, he's going to say, well, okay, you
Speaker 2: can sell the chips to China, but you give a
Speaker 2: cut to me. There is no It's just like what
Speaker 2: Scott Bessel was saying about stopping institutional investment in single
Speaker 2: family homes. We haven't really figured out the contours of this.
Speaker 2: In other words, we don't know who the details are,
Speaker 2: and they don't know what the details are on any
Speaker 2: of this stuff, but he doesn't. It's not just that
Speaker 2: the tactics are changing, but it completely completely contradicts his
Speaker 2: own strategy. He's done this over and over again with tariffs,
Speaker 2: and he's doing it yet again. We got some comments here, Travis. Yes, Oh,
Speaker 2: the New York Times are reporting Scott Adams passed away.
Speaker 2: So sorry to hear that. Yeah, especially because of the
Speaker 2: comments that he was making just a few weeks ago.
Speaker 2: I'm so sorry to hear that. His comments about his
Speaker 2: relationship with christ So sorry to hear that.
Speaker 3: Hopefully he hopefully, Yeah, he made that decision in the end.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we don't know. We never know about anybody. It's
Speaker 2: between the person and God, and we can't really know
Speaker 2: what is happening in somebody's heart.
Speaker 3: We have Steve evs He says, what if you violate
Speaker 3: one of the hundreds of unconstitutional executive orders? Is it
Speaker 3: a crime?
Speaker 2: A good point.
Speaker 3: They'll definitely treat it like one. That's for sure.
Speaker 2: They can make you suffer, you know, if that finds
Speaker 2: and other things like that. I mean, it's what we
Speaker 2: saw through COVID things like that.
Speaker 3: Yes, and original Babe says, the funny thing is Trump
Speaker 3: quoted that snake poem several times. Doesn't anyone see he
Speaker 3: was telling everyone he is the snake and you let
Speaker 3: him in?
Speaker 2: I know, that's that was my comment. I remember an
Speaker 2: Info Worse when he was doing that and Derren mcgreen
Speaker 2: was working on a piece and it had that as
Speaker 2: part of it. I said, that's pretty amazing. I said,
Speaker 2: it's obvious that he's the snake. You know, they didn't
Speaker 2: see it that way. I did see it that way.
Speaker 2: I agree with you.
Speaker 3: Yeah, all right, we have.
Speaker 2: Just as nature. Yeah go ahead, sorry.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, just its nature. Will Tubac says, happy anniversary, surnight.
Speaker 2: Well, thank you very much. It has been a happy
Speaker 2: forty six years. I gotta think, you know, it's like
Speaker 2: the numbers of flying bang's so fast. So who's quick?
Speaker 3: Yes, p a Patriot fourteen, I'm assuming that's Pennsylvania says.
Speaker 3: Thirteen percent interest rate in nineteen eighty is less than
Speaker 3: a six percent interest rate today. Due to the principle
Speaker 3: of the home itself.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, but yeah, it's amazing to see what has
Speaker 2: happened to the average price of a single family home.
Speaker 2: You know, that's the other part of it as well,
Speaker 2: And it's not Look, the cost of homes, just like
Speaker 2: the cost of cars, is not purely inflation. It's inflation
Speaker 2: plus regulation. They have done all kinds of things to
Speaker 2: drive up the price of homes, just like they have
Speaker 2: for cars, and so so much of the affordability issue
Speaker 2: is tied to inflation, but it's also tied to oppressive
Speaker 2: government regulations. I mean, you know, you got your one
Speaker 2: and a half gallon toilets and there. I don't know
Speaker 2: that that costs anymore now than it did before. But
Speaker 2: they micromanage everything. They micromanage the design of light bulbs,
Speaker 2: of toilets, of gas cans. Everything is micromanaged, and that
Speaker 2: of course raises the price of things as well. And
Speaker 2: many of these things have no reason to be the
Speaker 2: way they are.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, and we have high boost saying I paid
Speaker 3: property tax, I am in debtors jail.
Speaker 2: Yeah. That's so that's circulating around quite a bit. There's
Speaker 2: a lot of different proposals out there to look at that.
Speaker 2: They know that's a hot spot for people, and it
Speaker 2: absolutely is. And you can never get rid of the
Speaker 2: property tax.
Speaker 1: Again.
Speaker 2: Every time we talk about property tax, I'm reminded of
Speaker 2: Donald Rainwater and Indiana, a guy who ran as an
Speaker 2: independent as a libertarian. Actually, he had a very good
Speaker 2: approach and it's something that people need to hear. It's
Speaker 2: something people need to give to their state representative to
Speaker 2: think about his approach that he suggested when he's running
Speaker 2: for governor in Indiana. He said, let's say that it's
Speaker 2: going to be seven percent something like that, and make
Speaker 2: it like a sales tax, and so you pay it
Speaker 2: once when you buy the house, and you can fold
Speaker 2: it into the thirty year mortgage, or you can pay
Speaker 2: like one percent a year for seven years and you're
Speaker 2: done and no more taxes, and you freeze it that way.
Speaker 2: Because it's a real issue for all of us as
Speaker 2: we get to retirement, you know, how you know, maybe
Speaker 2: you start to get your mortgage paid off after thirty years,
Speaker 2: but you still can't get rid of the sales taxes. Something.
Speaker 2: People really need to take a look at it. I
Speaker 2: think it is a real injustice story. This thing is
Speaker 2: set up and it needs to be changed.
Speaker 3: Yeah, we have General mcguffin says, the minds are captured
Speaker 3: and public consciousness is fabricated in the public government schools
Speaker 3: well oiled machine.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's right, that's where it begins. As a matter
Speaker 2: of fact, the UN is on a crusade to shut
Speaker 2: down homeschooling course everywhere, but especially now in the UK.
Speaker 2: I was actually surprised that it was allowed in the
Speaker 2: UK because UK has gotten to be very controlling, very authoritarian.
Speaker 2: I was surprised to see that homeschooling is even allowed there.
Speaker 2: But the UN has got its own designs on that.
Speaker 2: And we'll talk about that when we come back after
Speaker 2: the break, because I want to talk about one thing
Speaker 2: that Trump did that I think is really good. He's
Speaker 2: getting us out of a lot of these international organizations,
Speaker 2: and UNESCO is one of those. And these people have
Speaker 2: been pushing the UN Convention on the Rights of the
Speaker 2: Child for quite some time. I've played the videos I
Speaker 2: did see when was I was that like two thousand
Speaker 2: and six, two thousand and seven or something. That's been
Speaker 2: almost twenty years.
Speaker 3: Now, it's in that time frame.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And there's an organization that Michael Ferris, who did
Speaker 2: Homeschool Legal Defense Association also had Theprinal Rights dot Org
Speaker 2: where they were trying to get a short just a
Speaker 2: couple of sentences there in the Constitution to firm up
Speaker 2: the right of parents to educate their own children. That
Speaker 2: is just basic, and yet it is despised by the
Speaker 2: UN because they understand how viotlal it is for them
Speaker 2: to control children's minds from an early age. Yeah.
Speaker 3: And finally we have Wally Wallrice. He says they have
Speaker 3: essentially locked people like me out of the housing market.
Speaker 2: David, I'm sorry, Yeah, it is difficult, and we've seen this.
Speaker 2: I remember seeing this in the UK. They were talking
Speaker 2: about how people who didn't get in a few years
Speaker 2: ago now with all the rapid increase in prices as
Speaker 2: well as interest rates, it is very difficult to break
Speaker 2: in the housing market if you're not already in it.
Speaker 2: And again, you know, the kinds of things that Trump
Speaker 2: is talking about are not going to help. They really aren't.
Speaker 2: They're going to ignore the fundamental problems that have made
Speaker 2: it unaffordable for people, and so I really I'm sorry
Speaker 2: that you're in that situation. We're going to take a
Speaker 2: quick break, folks. When we come back, we are going
Speaker 2: to talk about some of these organizations and hopefully we
Speaker 2: will really get out. We'll be right back. Let's grab
Speaker 2: some music here, you're listening to the Dated Night Show. Well,
Speaker 2: when we talk about central planning in the economy, nothing
Speaker 2: says that the folly of it better than what we've
Speaker 2: seen with all the green grifting that is out there.
Speaker 2: Here's another example. You know, we just had Ford take
Speaker 2: a nineteen billion dollar right down. I mean, they could
Speaker 2: have had a couple of fill reserve buildings for that
Speaker 2: nineteen billion dollars. Off of their electric stuff that they're doing.
Speaker 2: They had investments in electric vehicles as well as battery facilities. Unfortunately,
Speaker 2: Ford is now going to be repurposing this battery facility
Speaker 2: into one of these facilities that makes the really, really
Speaker 2: big and dangerous lithium batteries, the ones they call the
Speaker 2: battery energy storage systems. Right, Bess and Best is the
Speaker 2: worst way to go forward with all this stuff, and
Speaker 2: you think about all of the issues of electric battery
Speaker 2: fires that we've had. When you look at that and
Speaker 2: you scale this up to something's big enough to back
Speaker 2: up the grid, that is just a disaster waiting to happen.
Speaker 2: So I hate to see that happening. But GM is
Speaker 2: now taking a six billion dollar charge, just a couple
Speaker 2: of weeks after Forward took a nineteen billion dollar charge
Speaker 2: because they were following the government's push, not what the
Speaker 2: consumer wanted, and eventually reality catches up to people.
Speaker 3: Sorry, just briefly, but when we're talking about the best,
Speaker 3: they're trying to put them in places, you know, small
Speaker 3: towns around America. Yeah, so they'll give you some kind
Speaker 3: of credit for it. They'll probably give you like, oh, look,
Speaker 3: this will benefit the unity. We're going to give you
Speaker 3: a handout. Are they going to be there when this
Speaker 3: thing eventually catches fire and dumps chemicals all into your environment?
Speaker 2: Yeah?
Speaker 3: Remember, you're probably going to pay for that out of pocket.
Speaker 2: That's right. We've had these things typically put in remote
Speaker 2: areas or something, but now they're talking to the TVA
Speaker 2: around here, the Tennessee Valley Authority wants to put them
Speaker 2: in areas that are heavily wooded, have a large population
Speaker 2: of houses nearby. It's a disaster waiting to happen. And
Speaker 2: you know, it's one of the other things we're talking about,
Speaker 2: gold and silver, the industrial uses of silver. People have
Speaker 2: mentioned that many of just in case you're not aware
Speaker 2: of it. You know, the Samsung battery that is there,
Speaker 2: it sells at a premium because for a car, it's
Speaker 2: got a couple of pounds of silver in it, and
Speaker 2: this particular battery. But their battery is solid state and
Speaker 2: apparently doesn't have the from what I've heard anyway that
Speaker 2: of course that could be pr from the company, but
Speaker 2: it appears to be a way to get around this
Speaker 2: volatility that we see and these lithium batteries that have
Speaker 2: some kind of liquid lithium in them. I'm not really
Speaker 2: i don't know anything about the batteries at all, but
Speaker 2: what they're saying is that they charge much much, much
Speaker 2: faster than any of these other batteries, and I'm talking
Speaker 2: about orders of magnitude faster. That they don't have the
Speaker 2: fire issue, and that they have a battery life that
Speaker 2: is well, they have longer range, they have a shorter
Speaker 2: charging time, and then doesn't have the fire hazard that
Speaker 2: the lithium batteries do, and it has a life that
Speaker 2: they claim is twice as long as the lithium batteries.
Speaker 2: All of that is good except and of course all
Speaker 2: of that is going to really be a squeeze on
Speaker 2: the price of silver. So another interesting thing to think
Speaker 2: about here. Meanwhile, as GM is pulling back from this folly,
Speaker 2: they announced that they're following forwards much larger move in
Speaker 2: December that when they wrote down nearly twenty billion, and
Speaker 2: it's nineteen and a half billion, canceling several different EV programs.
Speaker 2: I remember that all this when GM and Ford go bankrupt.
Speaker 2: Remember the German companies are already seeing the handwriting on
Speaker 2: the wall because they all jumped into the electric vehicle.
Speaker 2: The think they're pushed into it. And it's always the
Speaker 2: case with Central Planning because some of the people like
Speaker 2: Elon Musk, who are in there from the beginning, and
Speaker 2: they're making out like bandits because they're pushing this idiotic
Speaker 2: program that's there. And of course GM's got a CEO,
Speaker 2: Mary Bearra, who has not been serving them well. They
Speaker 2: decided they were going to focus primarily on fully electric vehicles,
Speaker 2: not even with hybrids, and hybrids are selling, but the
Speaker 2: full EV vehicles are not selling at all. And a
Speaker 2: big part of this is the fact that the government
Speaker 2: ended the seventy five hundred dollars federal EV tax credit. Again,
Speaker 2: consumers knew this didn't make any sense unless it was
Speaker 2: heavily subsidized by taxpayers, and so now they ended the subsidy,
Speaker 2: and so now that is a real drain for these companies.
Speaker 2: Trump has withdrawn the US now from sixty six international organizations,
Speaker 2: and I agree with this. I think this is a
Speaker 2: good thing. If we can only withdraw from the federal government,
Speaker 2: that'd be even better. On Wednesday last week, he said,
Speaker 2: we're drawing the United States from international organizations, conventions, and
Speaker 2: treaties that are contrary to the interests of the United States.
Speaker 2: So what does this actually include. The affected international organizations
Speaker 2: are thirty one entities affiliated with the UN. Unfortunately, we're
Speaker 2: not getting out of the UN itself. And Trump will
Speaker 2: still attend Davos as well. As a matter of fact,
Speaker 2: He's going to be there and Lensky's going to be there,
Speaker 2: and it's like the next week or so. It's always
Speaker 2: in January, and so Davos is coming up. I don't
Speaker 2: really believe for all these reasons, we're going to stay
Speaker 2: in the UN, we're going to and he keeps going
Speaker 2: to Davos. I don't buy the idea that he's an
Speaker 2: anti globalist. Frankly, it certainly is not anti technocracy. And
Speaker 2: there's a lot of overlap between those agendas there. And
Speaker 2: look at the last time he was at Davos. Right
Speaker 2: after he comes back, you know, we get the decoration
Speaker 2: from his HHS pharmaceutical executive that he put in there.
Speaker 2: Alex'z Aar declared that we had a pandemic, even though
Speaker 2: they only claimed that there were six cases in all
Speaker 2: of the United States. He declared a pandemic nevertheless, and
Speaker 2: it kicked off all that nonsense right after Trump came
Speaker 2: back from Davos. The memo actually follows up from an
Speaker 2: executive order that Trump signed February fourth last year to
Speaker 2: withdraw the US from the UN Human Rights Council and
Speaker 2: from UNESCO and from the environmental fraud of the IPCC
Speaker 2: that was there. The State Department announced that the US
Speaker 2: is also withdrawing from UNESCO. And again, these are the
Speaker 2: people in the UN that are pushing the education agenda,
Speaker 2: pushing to attack homeschools and that type of thing. On
Speaker 2: Trump's first day back in office, he signed executive orders
Speaker 2: with drawing the US from the World Health Organization and
Speaker 2: the Paris Climate Agreement. Although it took a while for
Speaker 2: these things to go into a fact, I've said for
Speaker 2: the longest time that the Paris Climate Agreement was not
Speaker 2: a legitimate treaty. I know they've got a pre varication.
Speaker 2: They want to try to make a case that because
Speaker 2: of prior treaties were pulled into this thing. I think
Speaker 2: you could fight that. I mean, look at how many
Speaker 2: times Trump has gone against the black letter of the
Speaker 2: Constitution and the law, done what he wanted to do,
Speaker 2: and then you know, take it to court. Sometimes win,
Speaker 2: sometimes you lose. But I think there was a much
Speaker 2: better case to be made for getting out of the
Speaker 2: Paris Climate Accord to say that we were never even
Speaker 2: in it. Nevertheless, in July twenty twenty five, Rubio and
Speaker 2: HHS Secretary RFK. Junior announced that the US formally rejected
Speaker 2: the who's twenty twenty four amendments to the International Health Regulations,
Speaker 2: insuring that there would be no force, no effect in
Speaker 2: the country and again this is something that we've followed them.
Speaker 2: I'm trying to remember the guy who has really been
Speaker 2: the point man on this. I've interviewed him a couple
Speaker 2: of times. His name is escaping me. Maybe you remember it, Travis,
Speaker 2: But he has been on this all over the details
Speaker 2: of this and the devils are in the detail, and
Speaker 2: so the IHR as well as the Pandemic Treaty. It's
Speaker 2: very very good that we are not in this thing.
Speaker 2: So that's a big win right there. Trump administration actions
Speaker 2: including pausing funding for the World Trade Organization, forcing the
Speaker 2: UN's International Maritime Organization to pause a global tax on shipping.
Speaker 2: Why should we have to pay a global tax? To UN?
Speaker 2: What are they going to do with the money. They're
Speaker 2: going to create a global army? What are they going
Speaker 2: to do again? First time formally denouncing the UN's twenty
Speaker 2: thirty agenda Agenda for Sustainable Development. So those are all
Speaker 2: good things. I will hope that thanks. Yes, you're right,
Speaker 2: thank you very much. Apologies to James for forgetting his name.
Speaker 2: I just plead my age.
Speaker 3: That is thanks to Cliffy Kim in the chat.
Speaker 2: Yes, thank you. Yeah, James Orguski has really investigated this thing.
Speaker 2: He was taking the lead on all this and in
Speaker 2: the details, and so hopefully I don't know if his
Speaker 2: take is that this is for real or not, but
Speaker 2: hopefully it is for real. I mean, it's hard to
Speaker 2: tell when we have any of these pronouncements if they
Speaker 2: are actually real or what's going to happen with them,
Speaker 2: But hopefully that is going to be real, that we
Speaker 2: will not be affected by any of that. Despite these actions,
Speaker 2: Trump has also expressed support for strengthened UN. For example,
Speaker 2: an address to the UN General Assembly September This last September,
Speaker 2: he implied support for more powerful UN systems, declaring that
Speaker 2: the globalist body has such tremendous potential. He said. All
Speaker 2: they seem to do, however, is write really strongly worded
Speaker 2: letters and then never follow up that letter. The empty
Speaker 2: words and empty words don't solve wars, he said. And
Speaker 2: I guess evidently they don't have any way to stop
Speaker 2: him from starting these wars, do they? Maybe they take
Speaker 2: that global shipping tax and use it to create a
Speaker 2: UN army with that would be a good thing. He's
Speaker 2: also repeatedly expressed support for NATO, which is a subsidiary
Speaker 2: of the UN as the New American points out, including
Speaker 2: for Article five, which obliges the US to go to
Speaker 2: war if another NATO member is attacked. And again when
Speaker 2: we talk about war with Russia and Ukraine, Zelensky, this
Speaker 2: little horn who wants to try to drag US into
Speaker 2: World War three by whatever means he can, by hook
Speaker 2: or by crook. The idea that we're going to put
Speaker 2: boots on the ground, that we're going to guarantee their
Speaker 2: security for whatever the number of years is, fifteen years,
Speaker 2: fifty years, whatever they are negotiating, I wouldn't want to
Speaker 2: secure I wouldn't want to guarantee their security for fifteen minutes.
Speaker 2: Quite frankly, but just remember when Trump told MAGA that
Speaker 2: he was going to get out of NATO. I think
Speaker 2: that was really just a way to get NATO countries
Speaker 2: to buy more US weapons. He was complaining, for the
Speaker 2: most part, Yeah, we need to get out. You guys
Speaker 2: aren't even spending two percent of your budget, your military budget,
Speaker 2: of your GDP, you're not even spending two percent, So
Speaker 2: you need to get that up. And they got it up,
Speaker 2: and then what do you wind up with. They do
Speaker 2: a military build up so they can go into Ukraine
Speaker 2: and start World War three. Good job. So legislation has
Speaker 2: already been introduced in Congress to get the US out
Speaker 2: of the entire UN system. It's called the Disengaging Entirely
Speaker 2: from the UN Debacle. The acronym for that is defund.
Speaker 2: That is sponsored by Chip Roy and Senator Mike Lee.
Speaker 2: If an acted, the Defund Act would fully withdraw the
Speaker 2: US from all UN entities, completely defund the UN, and
Speaker 2: prevent the US president from unilaterally rejoining it. And then
Speaker 2: there's the WHO Withdrawal Act, sponsored by Andy Biggs, that
Speaker 2: would codify Trump's order withdrawing the US from the WHO,
Speaker 2: so to go from an executive order to an actual law.
Speaker 2: Tom Tiffany would withdraw the US from the World Trade Organization.
Speaker 2: And Thomas Massey and Senator Lee have introduced the NATO
Speaker 2: Act and NATO not a trusted organization. It's the best
Speaker 2: acronym for NATO FC and that would withdraw the US
Speaker 2: from NATO completely. By the way, you could have, I guess,
Speaker 2: come up with a name for the act that would
Speaker 2: spell out Gladio to me. I think Gladio makes one
Speaker 2: of the best cases for US getting out of the UN.
Speaker 2: Operation Gladio and then finally before we run out of time.
Speaker 2: I thought it was kind of interesting. Eric von Danigan,
Speaker 2: the guy who made a fortune with Chariots of the
Speaker 2: God back in nineteen sixty eight, has died at ninety
Speaker 2: And it's kind of interesting because this guy was a
Speaker 2: Swiss hotelier and of all places, Davos, and even as
Speaker 2: his motivation in writing Chariots of God was because he
Speaker 2: had a problem with God. He wanted to disprove God,
Speaker 2: so he wrote this book. He had a real issue
Speaker 2: with God. He also had a real issue with crime.
Speaker 2: He was serving time in jail. As a matter of fact,
Speaker 2: he was in jail when Chariots of the Gods became
Speaker 2: a best seller. And he was always in trouble with
Speaker 2: the law, and he was always a fraudster. He was
Speaker 2: actually even when confronted with his fabricated evidence in a
Speaker 2: British TV documentary, and the evidence was supposedly what he said,
Speaker 2: ancient pots that he thought had come to us from
Speaker 2: aliens far beyond, turned out that they were actually almost
Speaker 2: new pots, and he just dismissed that, said, well, it
Speaker 2: doesn't change my theory at all. He was actually given
Speaker 2: the ig Noble Prize for Literature. He was the first
Speaker 2: recipient of it in nineteen ninety one, something that they
Speaker 2: hand out to people who sell false narratives. So anyway,
Speaker 2: that's where a lot of this alien lore has come from.
Speaker 2: Is somebody like that. Have a good day. Thank you
Speaker 2: for joining us the common man. They created common Core,
Speaker 2: dumb down our children. They create a common past, track
Speaker 2: and control us. Their Commons project to make sure the
Speaker 2: commoners own nothing and the communist future. They see the
Speaker 2: common man as simple, unsophisticated ordinary. But each of us
Speaker 2: has worth and dignity created in the image of God.
Speaker 2: That is what we have in common. That is what
Speaker 2: they want to take away. Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation.
Speaker 2: They desire to know everything about us, while they hide
Speaker 2: everything from us. It's time to turn that around and
Speaker 2: expose what they want to hide. Please share the information
Speaker 2: and links you'll find at the Davidnightshow dot com. Thank
Speaker 2: you for listening, Thank you for sharing. If you can't
Speaker 2: support us financially, please keep us in your prayers. D
Speaker 2: Davidnightshow dot com.