Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 3, 2023 - The David Knight Show

03:01:17

The David Knight Show - 03/03/2023

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Using free speech to free minds.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	As the clock strikes 13, it's Friday the 3rd of March, year of our Lord 2022, 23, day 1086 of the emergency.
	Well, during the pandemic, we found that the lifestyle that we ordered was out of stock, and now we know how they're going to repossess all of our borrowed lifestyle.
	There's going to be technology regulation without representation.
	Bureaucratic mandarins are working to take away our food, our transportation, but our energy.
	Today we're going to begin with that.
	We also see that Biden is about to install another tranny in a high position.
	This pig with lipstick will be focused on attacking speech.
	And along with that, AI is being touted as a way to finally censor one of the last bastions of free speech.
	The podcast.
	It's coming.
	But for today at least, I'm still on the air.
	And we're going to be joined in the third hour by Guy Relford, who has the Gun Guy podcast.
	We'll be right back. Yes, podcasts are one of the last places where we've been able to escape censorship, largely because it doesn't have to go through social media.
	But they're focusing on that in many different ways.
	Spotify is the only podcast source that has banned me.
	And they want to sell that technology to other people.
	But the Brookings Institute, a leftist radical think tank, statist establishment, what other adjectives do I need to throw at these people?
	They are zooming in, putting the bullseye on podcasts.
	They published an op-ed piece just a couple of weeks ago that was just now noticed by reclaimthenet.org.
	They said it accuses podcasters, especially those labeled as political, in other words, me, people like me, of spreading disinformation unchecked.
	They can't stand for anything to get outside of their narrative.
	There is a global mania as part of all of this is why it's so essential to shut down free speech.
	They don't want people seeing what is happening.
	You see what's happening in Palestine, Ohio, and it's outraging.
	But what they have done with these Trump shots and the Biden mandates worldwide, this is happening.
	Is far more extensive than what is happening in Palestine.
	And we're going to talk more about that today.
	And about the government's attitude about that.
	But what has happened with these genetic code injections is astronomically bigger.
	Many, many orders of magnitude bigger than what is happening in that small town.
	Part of that, you know, is people can't get their head around it, as Stalin said.
	You know, a million people dying...
	It's a statistic. One person dying is a tragedy.
	One small town dying is a tragedy.
	But the world being poisoned by the Trump shot is just a statistic that they don't want you to see.
	And they've been able to cover it up.
	In order to find misinformation in podcasts, the Brookings Institute says that we need to have artificial intelligence scanning everything that people are saying.
	So they issued a call to tech companies and regulators to meet this challenge.
	My daughter-in-law looked at chat LGBT to see what they said about me.
	And it was full of disinformation about me.
	Doesn't know anything about me. It knows what political side I'm on.
	Says I've been a journalist for 30 years.
	No, no. Many other things that just made up.
	Just made up facts about me.
	How about that? But it knows where I am on the political spectrum.
	You better believe it does.
	Got that accurately.
	So they can shut me down.
	The rest of the stuff, they just make it up.
	And they'll make up any reasons, if they even need a reason.
	I wasn't kicked off of YouTube, given a reason.
	I just got an email that said, a complaint has been filed.
	Never had a single video that was identified.
	That was when I was first kicked off, back in 2018.
	It was political.
	That is now the mainstay on social platforms.
	And of course, fairly resistant to censorship.
	They still have ways to demonetize you.
	I've been banned from PayPal, Venmo, and other things.
	At the heart of podcasting is still the availability to directly reach listeners via RSS feeds.
	So the decentralized nature of this, they said.
	It's what makes it so problematic to the Brookings Institute and to the governments that they speak for.
	It's problematic, they said, to impose regulatory oversight because it's decentralized.
	Let me show you what is happening on...
	I just saw this yesterday.
	A listener sent this to me.
	And on Twitter...
	This is, he took a screenshot, and you can see down there, there's a tweet from me, and then there's the tweet that says you can listen to the David Knight Show Live.
	He said when he clicks on it, this is what he gets.
	The following media includes potentially sensitive content.
	Here's it, bigger.
	So you click to watch it, evidently that's what he got.
	And so, you know, if you've got something there about sensitive content, if that's on your profile or something, evidently maybe you can still change the setting and still watch the show if you know that I'm there because they're not going to share any information about me.
	So I tweeted this out.
	I took a screenshot of his screenshot.
	And I said, this is being shown to people who want to watch the live stream here on Twitter.
	Warning, sensitive content.
	And it blocks it, unless you do something.
	As I've said before, censorship has been worse under, and I sent this directly to His Majesty, Elon Musk.
	It's been worse under, at Elon Musk.
	Than ever before, restoring a few high-profile accounts is merely a beard for what he will do for government censors.
	And of course, government censors are who he's going to please.
	This guy is the king of crony capitalism.
	He became the world's richest man, how?
	By ESG. What do you think he's going to do with Twitter?
	Well, he's going to monetize it.
	He wants it to be X. He wants it to be everything.
	He wants it to be another reinvention of PayPal.
	He wants financial control, information control.
	He will do the bidding of his masters.
	That's what all of his companies are about.
	He's a big military industrial complex contractor, and he's doing what they want with satellites and all the rest of this stuff.
	And, of course, Tesla was exactly what they want.
	And he put it out there and all the self-driving stuff that everybody's, you know, finally now there's, because he's made some enemies with these people, now they are talking about the fact that they're dangerous and they don't work.
	But it was always the cherry on top to sell the battery-operated cars.
	Anyway, to the Brookings Institute's apparent horror, writes, reclaimed the net.
	Anyone can be a publisher.
	Anyone can be a broadcaster.
	And they're wringing their hands over this.
	That's right. We don't need government approval of gatekeepers like Elon Musk.
	I'm basically done with social media.
	So, again, there's really no reason anymore for me to put anything out on social media.
	Because I've invested my time and energy in that before.
	And YouTube and other places just to have the rug pulled out from underneath me.
	I'm not interested in that.
	If you guys want to share the content, great.
	I can't share the content.
	They've blocked me. I'm not going to pay this guy even $8 a month.
	And so if you don't pay up his $8 a month or whatever he's charging people, he wants to charge you for text verification now as well.
	You know where this is going for the world's richest man?
	What is his number one priority?
	Money. His money.
	Getting more. Just like John D. Rockefeller.
	How much is enough?
	Said the reporter. You're the world's richest man.
	He said, well, just a little bit more.
	Never satisfied.
	It's an addiction. You can never get enough of what you are addicted to.
	And oh, by the way, you might want to pay attention to Jesus.
	The love of money is the root of all evil.
	Anyway, so it gets worse, said Brookings Institute.
	They cited an early 2021 episode of The Verdict with Ted Cruz, where co-host Michael Knowles at one point commented, quote, It's a podcast.
	You can say whatever you want.
	How awful is that?
	You see, this is where we are.
	As I said many times, we used to say, you know, we joke all the time.
	Can I do this? Hey, pal, it's a free country.
	You don't ever hear anybody say that anymore.
	We all know it's not a free country.
	As a matter of fact, Woody Harrelson made that pretty clear.
	He says, America's not a free country after what got blown back on him on a Saturday Night Live monologue that he did.
	But of course, he knew that before he did the monologue.
	That's why he was doing the monologue.
	But it's not a free country anymore.
	The other thing we used to say, hey, man, don't make a federal case out of it.
	Well, everything is a federal case now.
	That's why it's not a free country.
	Anyway, surely no democratic society could possibly withstand such heresy as to have a podcast where you can say whatever you want.
	So the Brookings Institute...
	Enlisted the help of fact-checkers such as PolitiFact and Snopes.
	They sifted through millions of hours of content, all with the goal of proving a particular point.
	And this is their point.
	Quote, conservative podcasters were 11 times more likely than liberal podcasters to share claims fact-checked as false or unsubstantiated.
	Fact-checked by who?
	By the establishment liberals.
	They just disagree with what we're having to say.
	You better believe they're going to disagree with everything I have to say today.
	I really don't care.
	I'm not playing along with them.
	I'm not playing along with the trannies.
	I'm not playing with their pronouns.
	I don't really care what they have to say.
	The truth is the truth, and it will win in the end.
	So the Brookings Institute relied on artificial intelligence to sort through millions of podcasts and rate them as truthy or not.
	So, they want to make censorship, quote, mathematical, not a constitutional concern.
	That's what they say.
	Forget about the First Amendment.
	YouTube CEO, the new CEO, Neil Mohan, So we just call him Mo.
	He's the second of the Stooges to be in control of YouTube.
	When's Curly coming?
	Anyway, Mo says, the power of AI is just beginning to emerge in ways that will reinvent video and make it the seemingly impossible possible.
	Well, what is his goal?
	What is the thing that all the people and technology want to bring to us?
	Censorship, control, austerity.
	That's what it is. That's their goal.
	That's why I say, the best analogy...
	For what these people are doing is that Twilight Zone episode, To Serve Mankind.
	Or To Serve Man.
	I think that's what it was. And, you know, they come to Earth.
	We're going to give you all this technology.
	Look at this. We're able to do all this stuff that we want.
	The aliens are what the technologists are today.
	So the aliens come in.
	We're just here to serve you, right?
	And, yeah, all this stuff is free here.
	All these wonderful things. Wow, look at what we can do with this new alien technology.
	And then some guy gets on the spaceship and they keep saying, we're here to serve man.
	We're here to serve man. And he sees a cookbook to serve man.
	Recipes for all these people.
	We are the cattle for these Silicon Valley technocrats.
	So they want to put up thought guardrails.
	You should call it godrails.
	These people think they're God.
	They've got godrails on us.
	Guardrails. Of our thoughts.
	And they're going to use artificial intelligence to do it.
	See, this is the other side of it.
	One side of it...
	Are these kids who are so easily gaslighted with what is happening with Drag Queen Storytime Hour and all the rest of this stuff, they're going to fall hook, line, and sinker for a machine that comes in and tells them whatever it wants to tell them and pushes the LGBT agenda, Marxism, climate change, all the rest of this stuff.
	Oh, it's coming from a machine.
	The computer hath spoken.
	Fall down and worship the computer.
	I mean, I've been fighting this kind of mentality my entire life.
	People who get a computer printout and never wonder about who programmed it or if their model is correct.
	Look, I've got a computer program. The computer says.
	I've heard that my entire life.
	I'm sick of it. Now we're going to have the computer actually speaking and talking to us in a much more believable way.
	It's not going to be some printout.
	It's going to be actually speaking.
	And kids are going to fall for this hook, line, and sinker.
	You know they are. But they're not just going to use it for that.
	That would be bad enough. I've talked about that the last couple of weeks.
	Looking at Bing Chat and ChatLGBT, the rest of the stuff.
	But where they're going to be coming after us is they're going to use artificial intelligence to war against us.
	They're going to use it in a very effective way.
	To be able to sort through all the mountains of data that they have collected on all of us over the years.
	And stored away in data centers that are using massive amounts of electricity and water in the desert of Utah and other places.
	They're going to use this stuff.
	They're going to use artificial intelligence to data mine and to identify who their enemies are.
	It's going to be full-on mind wars against us.
	Setting up thought guardrails and the rest of the stuff.
	So, he says, Mo at YouTube says, Stay tuned as we roll out tools.
	Protections to embrace this technology responsibly.
	This is a critical moment, he says, for the creation of digital video.
	We're imagining what the future of creation will look like.
	This guy joined Google and YouTube.
	He's been one of the, I guess, a hand-picked successor of the previous stooge there.
	Mo is the one who said that they should be boosting, artificially boosting, Authoritative sources, which is what we saw throughout all of this medical martial law.
	And, of course, in 2020, he said espousing opinions in the basement does not allow context for the news.
	He was the guy that made that famous statement.
	And then that brings us to Biden's latest pick.
	You know, Biden has focused on filling his administration with Marxists, with tyrants, and covering it up by putting these pigs in lipstick.
	That's why, you know, he says...
	More than half the women in my cabinet, more than half the people in my cabinet, more than half the women in my administration are women.
	Yeah, what are the other half?
	Well, the other half are people like this guy who calls himself Zizi.
	Zizi. Thank heavens for little girls.
	For the real ones. But Zizi is a guy.
	Zizi Sohn.
	I think is the way you pronounce the last name.
	S-O-H-N. 22 LGBT advocacy organizations are urging Congress to confirm Zizi.
	The man called Zizi.
	As an FCC commission, to the commission as a commissioner, they have five commissioners, and it's been split two and two since Biden took office.
	They've had one of these positions left.
	So if Biden can get this tranny in, this pig and lipstick in, He will have a 3-2 majority, the Democrats.
	And Rumble, little Johnny boy, thank you for the tip.
	He said, did you see me on Jason Barker's foxhole last night with Billy Ray?
	No, I'm sorry I didn't.
	I'll have to go back and find that.
	I didn't see that, but that's good.
	Hey, look. Go to Nights of the Storm.
	They have a great TV schedule thing.
	And we were working. We got behind yesterday.
	Again, they turned off our internet again as they were still trying to fix it.
	We pushed and pushed and pushed.
	And, you know, it was taken down by trees falling.
	If a tree falls in the forest, do you hear the night podcast?
	No, you don't. Yeah.
	It takes out our internet and our electricity.
	The electricity, they got back right away.
	Internet, that's another story.
	They were telling us it was going to be the end of the week.
	And so we did one broadcast from an Airbnb.
	Kept pushing them.
	They got it set up temporarily.
	They came out yesterday and said, we're going to have to switch you over, but we've got to do some things with the poles.
	I don't know why, since they run on the same poles as electricity, that they couldn't just do that.
	But anyway, in the process, they broke something and they had to wait for somebody to come.
	So we were out... Another reason why it's difficult for us to get the shows posted.
	We were out of internet again yesterday after the show.
	Fortunately, it didn't happen during the morning.
	But anyway, so, yeah, I've been so far behind in work, I haven't had a chance to see anything.
	But I would highly recommend... Angry Tiger and Jason Barker's Foxhole and all the rest of these new programs that are out there.
	And of course, Guard, I did not, I put it in the show description, but I didn't mention it when I was thanking Tony and Billy Ray Valentine and Don Jeffries for standing in.
	And of course, Guard was on the third hour on Tuesday.
	Always does a great job.
	Liberty Conspiracy, you'll find him on Substack and other places as well.
	Thank you, Guard, as well, for what you have done to help us and for all the great information that you put out there, We need to have And I'm glad to see a big community of people who are rising up to tell the truth.
	So even as they're putting out more and more of their censorship, we're getting more and more people out there to tell you what's really happening.
	And that's very important.
	Very important. So go to their website and you'll see a schedule of a lot of different people that they have put in.
	They're all like-minded. And I'm not afraid to tell you the truth.
	But going back to this pig in lipstick, Gigi, what recommends this guy?
	Well, again, 22 LGBT advocacy organizations urging Congress to confirm Gigi because it's past time to have somebody...
	To have a pig in lipstick running our communications.
	And this pig in lipstick is going to be focused not on allocating frequency spectrum.
	That was the original creation of the FCC. There was no constitutional authority for the FCC to exist or pretty much any of the other things that the government runs.
	But from a practical matter, when they started doing broadcast radio and then later with TV, the FCC would hold lotteries for different spots on the frequency spectrum.
	And they would maintain that and then they would make sure that people stayed in their lane, so to speak.
	You know, you have to have engineers that are going to carefully monitor the frequency that you're broadcasting on so you don't step on somebody else's toes.
	And so that was the purpose of the FCC. Just basically allocating resources and then protecting that property, if you will, from encroachment and things like that.
	But now they have decided, going back to the Obama administration, That they should be policing content.
	So the FCC was talking about putting people in newsrooms.
	We want to know how news is created, how you guys make your decision about things like that.
	I kind of know how they do it at other places.
	I know how it was done at Infowars.
	We had, when Megyn Kelly came in, she came in with a big crew, and bigger than the crew that I would use to produce my show, just to follow her around and do stuff.
	And so they were interviewing some people.
	They interviewed me with her, but nothing from that interview made it, interestingly enough.
	I talked to her about civil asset forfeiture, which she'd never heard of.
	She's a lawyer. Got paid $25 million a year or something to talk about news.
	She'd never heard of civil asset forfeiture, which had been around for several decades, at least 30 years in the drug war.
	Nevertheless, they had somebody come up and said, well, how do you guys put your news together on a daily basis?
	You know, you have a meeting, and who assigns stories and reporters to stories and stuff like that?
	I said, are you kidding me?
	It's a free-for-all. It's like every man for himself.
	So, you know, I do all my research, did it all then, and do it all now.
	So there's not any committee that is meeting to tell me what to do, what to cover, what to think.
	If I had more time, I could cover more stuff.
	So let me move on here.
	Our diversity is our power, wrote all these LGBT groups.
	No, no, no. Your squeaky wheel aspect is your power.
	You're a very tiny person.
	A group of people. And diversity doesn't give you power.
	Unity gives you power.
	You have unified on a perverse agenda.
	And that's where your power is coming from.
	This tiny vocal minority.
	And we should all take a lesson from them.
	We're much bigger than they are.
	We could individually make just a tiny fraction of noise that they make.
	And it would be a massive echo throughout the land.
	The FCC has been without a fifth commissioner, as I said, for two years.
	And the other interesting thing about this is that one of these Democrats is about to get bumped out as well.
	So that would take it down from two and two to two Republicans and one Democrat.
	So it's very important for Biden to get this through.
	The Sone sits on the board of directors of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and they have been good on some speech issues.
	They've also been wrong about some very important things.
	And so what the opposition to the man who calls himself Gigi, the opposition to him is focusing on a position that they've taken about sex trafficking on the Internet.
	They have opposed any federal legislation to crack down on sex trafficking on the Internet.
	And so that's being used to attack this guy.
	Breitbart has claimed that he has far-left sympathies.
	And would censor conservative voices if appointed to the FCC? That's the reality of what is happening.
	The reality is that the Biden administration is about censorship.
	And they're going to get focused on these sex issues and these identity issues.
	And so the Republicans are going to fight him on his issues of transgender stuff.
	And the left is going to support him over the transgender stuff.
	Meanwhile, they're going to put him or somebody else in To shut down our speech at the FCC. So, again, everybody playing the identity politics game, checking that box.
	So, the Hill reports, again, that if the candidates are not confirmed by the end of the year, the Republicans will have a 2-1 majority on the FCC. And we can't have that because they've got to start using the FCC as a weapon.
	Sohn is the latest high-level LGBT nominee in the Biden administration, which reports that 15% of its appointees identify as LGBT. As you heard Biden say, more than half of the women in his administration are actually women.
	And so this is the sole qualification of this liberal censor.
	Think about that. Liberals have become associated with censorship.
	You have liberal censors.
	What an oxymoron that is.
	Liberty was supposed to be about freedom, but not anymore.
	So, we're going to take a quick break and we'll be right back.
	And we'll talk about the feminists and how Germany sees feminists and a matriarchy as what we all need, our real salvation.
	Well, I guess we're not going to be coming back.
	I guess we'll come back a little bit sooner than possible.
	Can you play Little Girls for me?
	That's not firing on the board.
	Okay. Well, let's just continue on.
	Germany's foreign and development ministers on Wednesday presented their government's new feminist foreign policy guidelines.
	We want to have socialist nannies.
	That's going to make our society so much better.
	Feminist foreign policy.
	Runs through all areas of our foreign policy actions, from humanitarian aid to stabilization measures, peace missions, also foreign culture and education policy.
	We want to make societies fairer, they say.
	And, of course, we know that if you've got a woman, even real or imagined, they're not going to be a threat to you.
	You know, Jab send to Arden.
	Theresa May, Nikki Haley, they're soft.
	They're feminine. They're soft tyrants.
	They're nannies. The nanny state.
	The warmongers.
	Now, women can fight very effectively.
	To get us pushed into war, can't they?
	We want to make societies fair.
	You can't do that without half of the potentially namely women, they said.
	But they have to be taken into account.
	So guidelines in Germany for feminist development policy is going to stipulate that more than 90% of newly committed project funds should now flow into global projects that also advance gender equality.
	And in 2021, the figure was only 64%, but they're going to get it up to 90%.
	Why not 100%? Why not just get rid of all the men?
	You know, just come up with some injection, genetic code injection that just focuses on men and kills them.
	That'll fix it, right?
	So, I don't know.
	Maybe instead of the key directing principle of the government being, we'll keep you safe.
	No matter what, we're going to create a safety state.
	Maybe we're going to have gender as our number one goal.
	How about if we made liberty, individual liberty, our number one goal?
	But that's not happening anywhere.
	We just run through what is happening country after country.
	It doesn't matter whether it's a Western country or whether it is China or whether it is Russia.
	Russia is now fining Wikipedia for misinformation.
	It's not different anywhere.
	It's global tyranny. Every one of our governments.
	We don't have liberal democracy anymore.
	Liberal in the classical sense about liberty.
	We don't have that anymore. Our societies have become authoritarian censorship societies.
	And nothing ushered that in more than the medical martial law under Trump.
	And it's being maintained.
	That's what's unusual.
	Usually these things come in under liberals.
	And then the conservatives conserve them.
	You know, they make it permanent.
	But this was ushered in by Trump.
	Because he mesmerized all the people that would have and should have opposed it.
	Still does. As a matter of fact, he's speaking at CPAC. He put out a statement saying his speech was a sold-out monster.
	I thought, is that as close as he's ever going to come to a Freudian slip?
	Yes, you can go to CPAC and you can listen to this sold-out monster Trump.
	He sold us out for sure.
	Shortly after Russia invaded Ukraine last year, they introduced sweeping new laws restricting what people can report about the conflict.
	Fining or blocking websites that spread disinformation at odds with the Kremlin's official narrative.
	As you always see this, the first casualty of war is the truth, right?
	Always being done.
	Going back to World War I, look at what Woodrow Wilson did.
	Arresting, jailing, fining, massive fine.
	Ten years in jail. For a movie producer who did a movie called The Spirit of 76 about the American Revolution because Woodrow Wilson wanted to sit on the side of the British.
	And so he told him to censor his movie.
	He didn't censor his movie. So they gave him a 10-year jail sentence, a $10,000 fine, which was a lot of money before the Federal Reserve devalued the currency.
	And so governments have always done that at wartime.
	Not unusual that Russia would do it, not an excuse for them to do it.
	But you understand as we're seeing this, and we understand how normal it is for speech to be censored during wartime.
	When they censor our speech, when we talk about COVID, or the vaccines, or even climate change, what does that tell you?
	They're at war with us over those issues.
	Speech has been the first casualty of the COVID war as well.
	Taiwan, our ally, that we're talking about going to war with China.
	And we have a high-ranking military official in the Pentagon saying, you know, we go to war with China, it's going to come to the U.S. mainland.
	Let's do it. Yeah, let's push the button.
	Let's find out what's going to happen. This is going to be great.
	Taiwan readies plans to curb misinformation.
	Preparing for the war to come.
	The National Defense Ministry is proposing higher penalties for spreading misinformation and fake news and giving the ministry more power to force the media to help the military with investigations that argues that the amendments are necessary to combat cognitive warfare.
	From China, of course.
	Because, you know, Taiwan would never conduct cognitive warfare.
	And neither would the U.S. government.
	They would never do that to their own people.
	It's all coming from China.
	They would never spy on their own people.
	They would never inject their own people with poison and a depopulation injection.
	No, they would never do that. It's those Chinese in that Wuhan lab.
	They did it. They did it.
	So, you got Tucker Carlson selling that.
	Tucker Carlson pushing us into war with China now.
	He's reverted back to type, where he always was before.
	You just have to get people behind you, or get behind the people, I should say, before you can stab them in the back, right?
	It's nice pushing war with China.
	But yeah, mind wars, that's been there a long time.
	It's been a while since I talked about Michael Aquino.
	The open and avowed Satanist who went on with Oprah Winfrey.
	You can find the clips probably still on the internet.
	I don't think YouTube has purged all of them yet.
	But yeah, this guy had this little, you know...
	And he'd created the Temple of Set or something like that.
	He was exposed at the Presidio in California military base.
	There was a chaplain there whose grandchild, I think it was, said, that's the guy with the black room.
	He took me in this room and it was all black and all the rest of the stuff.
	He'd been on Oprah talking about Satanism and everything.
	And so there's an investigation.
	They quickly whisked him out of there, covered all that stuff up.
	But Michael Aquino wrote a book called Mind War.
	It was all about, there you go, that's what he looks like.
	Look, he's got his little eyebrows teased up in horns.
	Yeah, it's been a while that we've been putting people like that in positions of authority.
	They used to be in the dark areas like the NSA. Now Biden has put them out in the sunshine, taking them out of the closet.
	But this guy was always talking about mind wars and how he could control the public, not just with propaganda, but with things like extremely low frequency.
	Yeah. Remember the guy in the Navy shooting yard?
	This is my elf gun?
	That type of thing.
	Because, you know, the extremely low frequency stuff is how they communicate with submarines.
	But Michael Aquino was saying in Mind Wars, hey, we could use that to create certain psychological effects on people as well.
	So that pedophile, Michael Aquino.
	Anyway, NSA pedophile.
	Individuals who violate the law in Taiwan could face three years in prison and a fine of $32,500.
	And the penalties are even higher for media organizations.
	That would be what I would get.
	But, you know, I'll be saying whatever I want about Taiwan until they take me off the air.
	A bill aimed at controlling speech would easily be turned into a political tool for a political party to extend its rules, said a former instructor at the Naval Academy in Taiwan.
	He's absolutely right.
	So, cognitive warfare.
	Well, we just call it mind war here in the U.S. The Czech government is considering criminalizing disinformation.
	Just go through these things just so that you understand.
	This is a global agenda.
	Whether you're talking about the vaccines or the passports with the vaccines, a global ID, taking away our food, taking away our speech, taking away our energy, all of the governments are on board with this.
	They've already taken over all of our governments.
	We already have world governance.
	The question is, what, if anything, are we going to do about it at the local level?
	Because that's really where the rubber meets the road.
	When asked about the plans to shut down disinformation sites that threaten national security, the Czech government said they're going to shut down any website.
	Brand claims that there will be an office here to turn off websites.
	That's complete nonsense, they said.
	But, of course, other people are saying that's exactly what they're going to do.
	They will censor it one way or the other.
	That's the whole purpose of setting this up.
	And then we get to the most disturbing of all.
	We talked about Russia.
	We talked about Taiwan. We talked about the Czech government.
	We can talk about many, many other foreign governments.
	But, of course, you know, the federal government is doing it as well.
	What about the guy that's going to save us all?
	Ron DeSantis in Florida.
	There's now been a Florida bill, and he's not spoken out on this yet in support or opposition to this, but a Republican in Florida has put out what I think is one of the most insidious things in this whole list.
	It would require bloggers who write about the governor to register with the state, and not just the governor.
	If you write about the governor, or if you write about the attorney general, or if you write about members of the Florida executive cabinet, or if you write about members of the Florida legislature, you have to register with the state of Florida.
	And if you don't register with the state of Florida, you start accumulating fines.
	And you have to report to them.
	All the money that you made writing about Governor DeSantis or the Attorney General or the Legislature.
	This is a Republican bill.
	Florida Senator Jason Broder wants bloggers who write about members of the Florida government to register with the state or to face fines.
	His proposal would require any blogger writing about the government officials to register with the Florida Office of Legislative Services or the Commission on Ethics.
	In the bill, he says those who write, quote, an article, a story, or a series of stories about the governor, the lieutenant governor, a cabinet officer, or any member of the legislature, and receives or will receive payment for doing so must register with state offices within five days after the publication and receives or will receive payment for doing so must register with state offices within five days after the people.
	You see, there's no Republicans who are standing up for free speech, and we've known that.
	Since 2018, Trump was silent.
	He had a little rose garden party after we were all purged at Infowars in 2018.
	He brought in a bunch of people who still had all their accounts intact.
	And then before the midterm elections in 2018, there were 800 sites that were taken down at the behest of Democrat-affiliated organizations.
	Still, Trump did nothing about it.
	Most of those organizations, I would say it's about 50-50 Trump supporters, but all of them that were taken down were anti-police state, anti-surveillance state, anti-war, anti-NATO, if you will. That's where it was coming from.
	If another blog post is added to the blog in Florida, the blogger would then be required to submit monthly reports on the tenth of each month with appropriate state office.
	For blog posts that concern an elected member of the legislature or an officer of the executive branch, monthly reports must disclose the amount of compensation received for the coverage.
	Rounded to the nearest $10.
	So what they're going to do is you've got to register, you've got to report, you've got to do all...
	They're setting up all kinds of traps for people to report on Governor DeSantis.
	Maybe you just should not say anything about him.
	No matter what he does, you should just give him, just be quiet.
	Don't talk about, you want to know who the dictators are?
	They're the ones you can't talk about.
	Where is DeSantis? Has he come back against this yet?
	I haven't seen anything where he has come back against this.
	Where are the Republican officials in the party?
	You don't get a bill introduced like that without having some of the GOP officials know about it.
	They're okay with this.
	Are you okay with this?
	Failure to file these disclosures or register with state officials, if the bill passes, would lead to daily fines for the bloggers with a maximum amount per report, not per writer, per report, of $2,500.
	The per-day fine is $25 per report for each day that it's late.
	And so after 100 days, you run up to a $2,500 maximum there.
	This is one of the worst censorship bills I've ever seen.
	Very insidious. And it's coming from those wonderful, freedom-loving Republicans in Florida to target independent journalists because they make an exception for the quote-unquote real journalist.
	If you're with a news organization, newspaper, something like that, the rules will not apply.
	This is targeted to individuals.
	Who tell you the truth. Because the news organizations won't.
	You know, people like Jason Barker, Angry Tiger, Guard Goldsmith, me.
	People who will tell you the truth are the target of this.
	Oh, it's not going to be for ABC, CBS, NBC. No, it's going to be for the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times.
	You know, those people. Not for Fox News or CNN. No.
	No. Because they're easily controlled.
	The First Amendment. It's for mainstream media.
	We were told that by Joe Scarborough.
	You know, Morning Joe with Zbigniew Brzezinski's daughter.
	We were told, hey, you know, these bloggers out there, just like the guy at YouTube, they don't have any context for what they're saying out of their basement.
	Well, I'm not in my basement. I'm in my garage.
	So, there. A total crock.
	Un-American, says Matt Taibbi.
	And that is the state-sponsored blacklisting.
	And of course, at the time this was happening, it was predominantly, back in 2018, it was predominantly the Atlantic Council's Digital Forensic Research Lab, identifying people in the Democrat Party, and the Atlantic Council's Digital Forensic Research Lab.
	They're allied with NATO. Now, there's a lot of different organizations that he's talking about.
	The Global Engagement Center, the Alliance for Securing Democracy, New Knowledge.
	These things are proliferating.
	And again, these are all part of the deputized state.
	And look at that there.
	It's got a constellation there of all these different organizations.
	You got the CIA, you got DARPA, you got, you know, National Security Agency, the NSA, all of them.
	USAID, this front group.
	For the CIA, that was where Barack Obama's mama worked, that CIA front group, USAID. Of course, his grandparents, her parents, were OSS, founders of the CIA type of thing.
	But anyway, yeah, that's what it all is.
	It's all coming from the deep state, the spy state, the surveillance state.
	And they are funding with massive amounts of money all of these new organizations.
	One former intel source sums up the situation perfectly in his comments to Matt Paebi.
	He said, it's an incubator for the domestic disinformation complex, specifically discussing the GEC, the Global Engagement Center, that he shows at the center of all that.
	He says, but the comments could apply to any of these entities.
	He said, quote, all the excrement we've pulled in other countries since the Cold War, Some morons decided to bring it home.
	Well, guess what? You know, the founders all understood human nature.
	Human nature's not changed, even with technology.
	It's just made bad humans more dangerous.
	It was James Madison who said, the means of defense abroad will become instruments of tyranny at home.
	He said that against a standing army.
	We have an army that is standing against us.
	We have an army that is actually violating the Third Amendment.
	The NSA, CIA, all these spy organizations have installed monitoring software on everything.
	In your computer, the rest of the stuff, they know what you're doing.
	They're watching what you're doing.
	They are using your energy that you're paying for on your computer to spy on you.
	And this is the Army of National Security.
	We were told they were going to be focused on foreign things.
	But immediately from their creation, the CIA, the NSA, these organizations were immediately spying on Americans.
	That's why you had the Church Committee hearing and the Pike Committee hearing in the House.
	And they were arrogant at the time.
	The NSA said to Pike, I would like to see your charter.
	I'm not going to show that to you.
	We were created by executive order, by the president.
	I'm not showing you any charter.
	You're just a congressman.
	He didn't say that.
	But that was the attitude. You're just a congressman.
	We're the government. We work for the president.
	And we will do whatever we wish.
	And so they came up with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act saying, you will not surveil anybody in America, even a foreign person, without a search warrant.
	And you're not going to surveil Americans in foreign countries either.
	Only foreigners in foreign countries.
	And we want to make sure that when you do this, because we have to say that for national security, you've got to spy on people.
	So what we'll do is we'll set up the FISA court And you'll go to one person in secret and you'll get a search warrant from him.
	Oh, great. So they got search warrants for Mr.
	and Mrs. Verizon.
	So they created a list at one point, 40,000 accounts of people they said were paid employees or possibly volunteers of a party in India.
	And that's the rest of his article where they went through it.
	And they, even the people at Twitter said, these are not people who are politically active in India.
	Many of these people are just Americans.
	But they figured that they would get people kicked off whose politics they don't like by characterizing them as part of a radical Indian group.
	And maybe they looked at it a little bit more closely because so many of the people that were running Twitter were Indian.
	We're going to take a quick break and we will be right back.
	Let me tell you, the David Knight Show, you can listen to with your ears.
	You can even watch it by using your eyes.
	In fact, if you can hear me, that means you're listening to The David Knight Show right now.
	Yeah, good job.
	Ha ha ha! And you want to know something else?
	You can find all the links to everywhere to watch or listen to the show at thedavidknightshow.com.
	That's a website.
	Yeah, that's a website.
	They haven't taken it down yet.
	Let's talk about what's going to happen with the grid.
	I've said for the longest time, and many times I talk about electric vehicles with Eric Peters, and I say, you know, this is about consolidating everything onto the electric grid as they take down the grid capacity.
	They don't have any possibility of this whole battery-operated electric vehicle thing working.
	They're going to come to us in a few years, just like they have with all the masks and the mandates for this and that and the jabs and everything.
	Sorry, it didn't work. Who knew?
	It was an emergency. We had to just do this.
	We didn't know if it worked. And I'm sorry that we destroyed everything.
	I'm sorry we killed all these people.
	But, you know, they're not even saying that yet.
	That's why I say I really do think that we need to have something like truth and reconciliation.
	Truth first. You want some amnesty?
	Give us the truth. I think if we were to put that out, maybe we'd start having some lower-level people come out and start telling the truth.
	They did that in South Africa.
	I thought that was just a dodge for the Marxists so they could avoid any responsibility for the terrorism that they had done.
	But I think in this particular case, we've got to do something to stop the killing.
	The injections are still going on.
	And we've got to stop that.
	And we've got to expose the truth.
	That ought to be our first two things.
	And if we can... It's the same type of thing you do with any kind of criminal organization, any kind of cartel like that.
	You get some of the people who are lower down, and you give them immunity for turning evidence in, telling the truth about the higher-ups.
	I really do think we have to do that.
	But let's have a little bit of truth about what is happening with this other manufactured emergency.
	The largest U.S. grid supplier...
	Warns of an energy shortage due to undeliverable mandates.
	This is from mishtalk.com.
	You'll also find it on Zero Hedge.
	And we know that these mandates have absolutely no way of working.
	They're shutting down power generation, but they can't get this new technology working and online by their deadline, and that's by design.
	They want it that way.
	And so this organization, which is called PJM Interconnect, This company is one of the nation's largest competitive markets for electricity.
	And so they're looking at the regulatory effects of this.
	And they're looking at the, that's causing them to shut down what is currently online and working.
	And then they're saying, well, are we going to be able to replace that capacity with this new stuff that they're demanding that we use?
	Well, let's see what they have to say here.
	First of all, policies and regulations.
	The EPA coal combustible residuals This regulation from the EPA set a national minimum criteria for existing and new coal combustion residuals, landfills, and existing surface impoundments.
	In other words, they're changing what is currently happening.
	And if you look at this from the standpoint of firearms, for example, If the government comes in, typically now they're going back and saying, well, if you've got any pistol braces or whatever, we're just going to let a regulatory agency, the ATF, ban those.
	Thank you, Trump, for setting that example of executive order gun control without even Congress.
	Violating the Constitution. Now you can just do it by executive order and any bureaucracy can do it.
	So they'll come up with an executive order saying this is no longer allowed.
	And in the past, they would kind of go slow and they would say, well, you can't buy these anymore, but we're not going to try to confiscate them for the people who already have them.
	No, no, no. They're going to make you a felon.
	And that's what they're doing to energy as well.
	And they've been doing this to energy.
	This is why I want to talk about this story.
	To show you how they are confiscating our energy.
	The EPA is not the Environmental Protection Agency.
	The EPA has become Energy Prohibition Agency.
	Just like the ATF is focused on gun prohibition.
	You understand? That's what they're about.
	And so that regulation alone led to a number of facilities that had about 2,700 megawatt capacity being shut down just for this particular group.
	This is not nationwide. This is just this particular group, PJW. So they had to shut down 2,700 megawatts in capacity to comply with this new rule because they had to shut down existing, working, paid-for coal-firing operations.
	The next one, an EPA affluence limitation guidelines.
	These guidelines put out in 2020.
	Who was present in 2020?
	Oh, that's right. Mr.
	Energy himself, Donald Trump.
	It was his EPA who put this out in 2020.
	Triggered the announcement by Keystone and other facilities of about 3400 megawatts to retire their coal units by the end of 2028.
	The EPA is planning to propose a rule to strengthen and possibly broaden this guideline to apply to waste, in particular water, That is discharged from steam electric generating units.
	In other words, they don't want water that's too hot.
	So this is not going to just affect coal plants.
	This is not just going to affect natural gas plants.
	This will affect nuclear.
	This will affect everything other than wind and solar.
	And they'll have to shut it down.
	The EPA is expecting this to impact coal units by potentially requiring investments in plants, renew their discharge permits, extending the time that plants can operate if they agree to a retirement date.
	So we're going to maybe give you a little bit more time on these things without fixing them up if you agree to completely shut them down, okay?
	The EPA is not protecting the environment.
	They're prohibiting energy.
	It's the Energy Prohibition Agency.
	Then a good neighbor rule.
	This proposal requires units in certain states to meet stringent limits on emissions of nitrogen oxides.
	You see, this is what they're using to shut down farms as well.
	Catalytic reduction to reduce nitrous oxide.
	It is assumed that unit owners will not make that investment and will retire approximately 4,400 megawatts of units instead.
	So, you know, 2700 megawatts there, 3400 megawatts over here, 4400 megawatts over there, and they're not done yet.
	In Illinois, they passed an act called the Climate and Equitable Jobs Act.
	Oh, this is a big one. It's going to mandate the phase out of coal and natural gas generation by specified target dates.
	And again, this is Illinois, but that is where PJW, the biggest market for this stuff, that's where they operate as well.
	So it's going to phase out coal, natural gas generation by specific target dates, January 2030, 2035, 2040, and 2045.
	PGM analyzed each generating unit's publicly available emissions data, published the heat rate and the proximity of To Illinois' environmental justice communities.
	And Illinois set up something they call restore, reinvest, renew zones.
	And it doesn't do any of that.
	It doesn't reinvest anything.
	It doesn't restore anything.
	It destroys stuff. It does not renew anything either.
	So they are going to be shutting down about 5,800 megawatts there.
	So we're seeing that stuff that's going to be pulled down immediately, about 6,100 megawatts.
	By 2030, this one particular organization, PJW, said where they operate, they're going to lose 24,000 megawatts by 2030.
	Now, to put that in perspective, What is China doing to protect the world from this so-called emergency?
	Nothing. As a matter of fact, they're talking about shutting down 24,000 megawatts by 2030.
	China added 2 million megawatts of power generation, mostly coal plants.
	Cheap, dirty coal plants.
	They added 2 million megawatts in 2020.
	In 2021, China added an additional 2,380,000 megawatts of power.
	That's what they're doing. It's just incredible how quickly they're building as we're shutting things down.
	And it's not just that, of course.
	It's Biden shutting down pipelines, shutting down with sanctions, oil, and all the rest of this stuff.
	I've played in the past an animated picture that went back to the 1800s and showed power usage.
	And of course, in the 1800s, most of the power usage was coming out of, was in Great Britain, the Industrial Revolution starting there.
	And then you saw a switchover in the latter part of the 1800s to the United States.
	And then the U.S. power generation goes, the bar, I'll do it the other way since you're looking at this, it goes way out and everybody else falls way back.
	And stays there until a couple decades ago.
	And then China starts coming up rapidly as the U.S. starts pulling back to the pack.
	Same thing we've seen with the transfer of power, industrial power from the U.K., Great Britain, to the United States.
	That's now happening with China.
	It is by design.
	The globalists have intended it that way.
	They're giving them a pass on everything.
	This is where the real war is, folks.
	It's an economic sanction against us, and it's helping them.
	And the traders who are running our government and every other Western government are putting this thing through.
	So they said, well, so what do we do in terms of renewables?
	Well, they said, we've got solar projects that have been given to us.
	But we're having to put a two-year pause on this because these solar projects are very, very small.
	Each of them. And they said, look, for due diligence, because they've got to make a profit, right?
	They said, for due diligence, we've got to evaluate each product, each project.
	And they said, in the past, we would have a single big project and we would evaluate that.
	We're going to spend the same amount of time evaluating these small ones.
	We don't have the time to do it.
	So they put a two-year pause on this, and 1,200 of these projects have been put on a two-year hold.
	That's about half of them.
	So where they used to have just a handful of big power generation stuff, now they've got like 2,500 little solar power projects.
	Look, solar is great to get people off the grid.
	And this is what you need to be thinking about.
	How are you going to get off of this grid that is being destroyed deliberately?
	That's why I talk about what Buttigieg is doing.
	The railroads are just one aspect of it.
	The bigger aspect of it Is the electric power grid.
	What are you going to do to make sure that you've got some kind of a power?
	Solar projects are great for that, for an individual use.
	They don't work on the grid. Absolutely don't work on the grid.
	And they know that. And so this is what PJM is talking about.
	A timing mismatch is the way they put it.
	A timing mismatch between resource retirements, between load growth, and the pace of new generation entry under possible scenarios.
	In other words, we've got a timing mismatch.
	Demand is going up.
	Demand is going to go up exponentially because you're putting all of our transportation, all of our heating, and everything else on the grid.
	So you're forcing it to go up even faster than it normally would.
	And yet you are retiring resources.
	And we don't have the time to put the replacements in.
	You're shutting stuff down and we don't have any replacements and don't have the possibility of getting things in in time.
	And we don't have the kinks ironed out of this.
	This is deliberate. And where they work in the area around Washington and Loudoun, Virginia...
	This is another aspect of it.
	As I pointed out before, when we talk about CBDC, the Biden administration gave all of government agencies something to do.
	They broke it into four different areas.
	Let's redesign completely the financial system.
	Let's design how the technology is going to work on the CBDC thing.
	Let's talk to law enforcement about how we're going to force people to do it.
	But the fourth one was climate.
	Because they have to demonize cryptocurrency, because it uses too much energy.
	What PJM is saying is that they operate in an area where there are concentrated clusters of data centers.
	That'd be in and around Washington, right?
	That's where they collect and store all this information about you until they can come up with the artificial intelligence programs to data mine it and to make sense out of it.
	But you know, they're constantly watching you and storing all this information about you, and we don't need to be worried about the power that they are using.
	I was really surprised. I had to get another brick for my MacBook, and I was surprised to see how much power it used in terms of the charging brick.
	It's like 96 watts.
	Everybody's going around with these compact fluorescents and LED lights and all the rest of the stuff.
	We've got to save energy on the...
	Well, your computers use a lot of energy.
	They even use a lot of energy when they're in standby mode.
	You just got them plugged in so that you can immediately start them up.
	They're using a lot of energy.
	And these are big, big concentrated data centers being run by the government, by the security and surveillance state.
	They don't care about that.
	They're going to focus on crypto mining.
	Very selective. So they're saying it may be as much as they said right now.
	They're seeing demand growing in their area by overall, because it's a large area that they serve, 1.5% a year.
	China is growing 6% to 7% a year in demand.
	But they're outpacing demand, you know, as any rational government would.
	Any government that wasn't at war with its own people.
	Any government that wasn't suicidal.
	They're outpacing demand.
	They rise in demand by more supply, but not here.
	So it's actually going to decline, even though you've got a 1.5% growth a year.
	But they said in certain areas, like these areas around Washington and Loudon, Virginia, it's going to go up by about 7% a year.
	Because, you know, government is the only growth industry we're going to be allowed.
	How are we going to power all these spy computers?
	Well, they will find a way. They will put them up front.
	And furthermore, they said that when they go through these little projects, these 2,500 renewable energy projects, they said because of the nature of them, They said we have to have multiple megawatts of these kinds of resources to replace just one megawatt of thermal generation.
	That means where they're going to burn something.
	They're going to burn coal or they're going to burn natural gas or they're going to use a nuclear reactor.
	All those are thermal generation.
	That all has to stop.
	Can't have that.
	So they said the problem is the quantity of retirements.
	The policy objectives.
	And let's just understand, all this is coming from the EPA. The EPA that was created to look at toxic spill cleanups.
	And this guy, Michael Reagan, you saw him there, or Regan, whatever, how he pronounces his name.
	He's there with the governor and they pretend to drink, you know, take a little sip of the thing.
	You couldn't tell if anything had been drunk, didn't look like it.
	You know, I could take this cup here and I could just hold it up to my mouth for a long time.
	I could, you know, make my Adam's apple go up and down and tell you that I'm drinking.
	What's in the cup? Nah, you know.
	Anyway, the whole point of creating this unconstitutional entity in the first place, Nixon did it, was to protect the environment, do these toxic cleanups, and yet they don't even want to go there.
	They don't want to do any tests there at all.
	No, this organization, now it's number one, and pretty much the only thing that it cares about is shutting down transportation and energy.
	That's what the EPA is being used for.
	We've got to shut down the power plants.
	We've got to shut down the cars. Emissions?
	Can't have them. Can't even have thermal emissions from these power plants.
	And so they said, you know, again, talking about all the stuff that we all know about how Biden shut down the natural gas with sanctions and stuff like that.
	So that's put pressures on us here in America as well because companies like PGM have to compete with people who are desperate to buy this stuff.
	And so they said because of these shutdowns in 2022, international natural gas demand is a new competitor for domestic spot market consumers, resulting in significantly higher fuel costs for PGM's natural gas fleet.
	This is just one of these organizations.
	But again, they said, we're experiencing an increase in electrification resulting from state and federal policies and regulations, artificial demand to increase it, to put everything on the grid as they're shutting down the grid.
	So they said, so what does this mean for resource adequacy?
	Projected total capacity will not meet projected peak loads.
	Bottom line. See, the Chinese are going to add...
	Two million, more than two million, megawatts every year of capacity.
	Well, we shut down tens of thousands of megawatts because of the government demands.
	This is really kind of a form of cap and trade.
	We're going to cap our energy usage and we're going to trade off our economic leadership to China.
	That's what this is about.
	They're going to cap us and they're going to trade it off to China.
	Because the only thing we care about manufacturing here in the United States is going to be more fiat currency.
	That'll do it, right?
	That's one of the reasons why things are looking really bad for the United States.
	Because they think they can just buy their way out of everything.
	And people in Russia and China understand that, no, it's about your ability to manufacture stuff, not your financialization.
	You know, the bankers don't create anything.
	They are predators.
	Expect to pay much higher prices for electricity.
	Expect brownouts.
	Expect most of the thousands of project requests.
	Again, 2,500 project requests that are on hold, and that's going to be more than 1,200 of them.
	Expect those to be economically unviable when they finish looking at them.
	Expect many economically unviable projects, however, to continue anyway.
	Because it's going to be paid off by taxpayer subsidies.
	And because it was never about making economic sense or any kind of sense.
	It was about crony capitalism and corruption.
	Using your money... To make the billionaires and the foreign companies wealthier.
	And, of course, expect much higher inflation.
	And he said, this is Mish with Mishta.
	He says, finally, don't expect any of this to do a damn thing for the environment.
	Exactly. Because the EPA doesn't care.
	The EPA doesn't. Look at what is happening in Ireland.
	Man-made electricity emergency.
	Same thing you're seeing everywhere.
	To the point... That the organization there that does the same thing, you know, they have to provide the energy.
	They said, we don't have it.
	You've shut it down.
	And so the Telegraph reported that mobile turbines described as effectively jet engines are going to be installed in areas including Dublin, In nearby County Meath, the generators were ordered by the Environment Minister as a last resort due to expected energy shortfall from their policies.
	See, everywhere you go, you have these little energy czars.
	I think we ought to call them energy mandarins.
	Because this really is for the benefit of China, right?
	And a Mandarin is just like a czar, you know, some autocratic ruler who just sits there and dictates what you're going to do, whether or not there's any reality to it or not.
	Domestic fossil fuel energy generations being sunset.
	And the island has become reliant on gas imports.
	Well, isn't that interesting?
	To fulfill UN Agenda 2030.
	So they launched their climate action plan in 2021, and they want to get down to, you know, zero emissions, which means that you will own nothing, go anywhere.
	Why is it that we don't have any senators who are calling out this Paris Climate Accord, right?
	Mitch McConnell, we point to him and say he should have called a vote on this Paris Climate Treaty when Obama and Kerry said we're going to self-ratify it.
	He should have called a vote when Trump was waffling around, I don't know if I need to get rid of it or not.
	Is it a real treaty or not? Yeah, it's a real treaty.
	The way they're treating it is a real treaty, so you need to shut it down.
	Okay, I'll get rid of it the day after the election.
	And it does the day after the election.
	And then two months later, Biden brings it back.
	Again, all through that, Mitch McConnell could have called to shut it down.
	He had the majority. But of course, so could any senator.
	They may not be able to get this to the floor for a vote like Mitch McConnell could.
	But Rand Paul or Ted Cruz or Mike Lee or any of these people who pretend to be on our side, any of them could have called this out for what it is.
	They said, wait a minute, treaty?
	We get to vote on that.
	Let's have a vote or it's not a treaty.
	They are able to get on mainstream media all the time.
	They don't want to do that. They don't want to take this on.
	They don't want to take on the big green people any more than they want to take on the pharmaceutical industry with any of this stuff.
	So, again...
	This is a report from the New American, and they go into all the details, but you know all the details.
	You've seen this pattern everywhere.
	In a nutshell, they said, Ireland meeting the goals of their climate action plan is impossible.
	It will take decades at best to build the infrastructure needed to supply the needs of a net zero emission island.
	What they should do is drop the climate action plan and allow the free market to develop new clean energy sources.
	Stop right there. We have clean energy sources.
	This is a lie.
	And you can't win by playing along with their lie.
	You can't live by their lies and expect to win.
	I typically agree with the New American on pretty much everything.
	It's very rare that I disagree with him.
	But we've got to push back on this.
	We've got to stop pretending that any of this climate fantasy is real.
	We're going to be at the mercy of these czars and mandarins.
	We've got to point out that they've got no clothes.
	This is naked tyranny.
	And we're not going to play their fantasy games.
	Because if we don't do that, you know, and we've already seen people playing along with it with a pandemic emergency, but wait a minute, couldn't we just not have masks?
	No, it was a lie from the beginning.
	This bioweapon stuff at Wuhan lab was a lie.
	They're bringing that lie back.
	That lie was sold to you by the alternative press as Biden was shutting everything down.
	Now they're going to bring it back, and the mainstream press is going to bring that back.
	Well, we're going to take a quick break, and when we come back, we'll talk about electric vehicles a little bit more, just a couple more things I want to talk about with that.
	Show, we've got a problem.
	Who are you?
	It's the new mug they're selling at thedavidknightshow.com, right?
	So, basically, a mug is something that holds liquid, right?
	Right, 'cause basically you can't hold coffee with your hands, right?
	I'm a scat and leave, but anyone tries to mug me, I'm being ready for it, you dog-faced pony soldier.
	They say the mug can help patriots drink coffee, then save the world.
	This could be bad for us.
	Save the world?
	But we owe the world.
	These people, they're supporting free speech with every month they buy.
	Come on. These people, I tell you, well, anyway.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Let's take a quick glimpse at the future.
	We're not talking about the power generation and the impossibility of it and the fact that this is designed to fail deliberately.
	But let's talk about the surveillance aspect of it.
	Volkswagen, in an interesting case in Illinois, refused to help the police locate a boy who was kidnapped as part of a carjacking.
	Two-year-old boy was in the car.
	They stole the car. Ran over the mother and They said she had significant injuries to her extremities, but still managed to call the police.
	And because the model of the car...
	There is GPS tracking that is done by Volkswagen.
	And of course, you know, a lot of car companies do this now.
	GM has had for the longest time, you know, this capability.
	You could pay a subscription.
	And OnStar, I think it was called.
	And it would report if you had an accident or something like that.
	You were unable to report it.
	So the police call.
	So we need to get this information.
	A kid's been kidnapped in a Volkswagen.
	And, you know, carjacking.
	And the person online said, I'm sorry, they don't have a subscription paid up.
	And they went back and forth and back and forth.
	You know, and after six minutes of this, and the sheriff's department, the person who was speaking about this, the deputy chief, Christopher Covelli, was begging the representative.
	He said, these are extremely exigent circumstances.
	I'm sure he didn't use that formal language during the emergency, but that's the way they reported to the press.
	However, the representative refused, citing company policy.
	The detective had to work out getting a credit card number and then call the representative back to pay the $150 At that time, the representative provided the GPS location of the vehicle.
	Deputy Chief Covelli described the ordeal as, quote, 16 minutes of hell to try to find where this kid is.
	And, again, she is in a situation where she pulls up to her home, Yeah, this is Illinois.
	It's probably around Chicago, I guess.
	I don't know where it is exactly.
	But she had a 2021 Volkswagen Atlas.
	A man in a mask gets out of a white BMW, tried to steal her car.
	She went inside to get her other child.
	The woman fought to protect her two-year-old son.
	He knocked her down on the ground, stole her car, drove off, ran over her, and caused serious injuries to her.
	And again, do you think that these corporations, these big corporations, these stakeholders of the future who will own everything, Do you think they care about us?
	Do they care about our life? Do they care about our liberty?
	No. Give me the money.
	That's all I want. They don't care about our life.
	They don't care about our liberty. They don't care about our child.
	Luckily, the child was found safe after being dumped in a parking lot, rescued by a good Samaritan.
	Two-year-old child. The Volkswagen vehicle was also found abandoned, but there have been no arrests in the assault, the kidnapping, or the carjacking case so far.
	Volkswagen claimed that this was a serious breach of their procedure.
	They said, we normally would collaborate with law enforcement.
	Yeah, you believe that?
	Well, Ford, I'm sure that you've seen this.
	I'll give you the details on this.
	Ford has put out a patent for how they can repossess cars.
	You see, Ford no longer identifies themselves as a car company.
	They're not interested in selling cars.
	They're not interested in leasing cars.
	They're interested in renting new cars.
	They identify themselves as a mobility company, and now they've got some patents to immobilize your vehicle if you don't pay them.
	If you miss a car payment, they could shut off your air conditioning, They could lock your car. They could turn off your engine.
	This is all the different things that they're looking at in this patent that they put in.
	Ford knows exactly what is coming.
	All these car companies have made a lot of loans to people who cannot afford the cars.
	As Eric Peters and I have been talking about this for years, they add all kinds of government-mandated bells and whistles that you don't need, you don't want, And the cars have gotten more and more expensive.
	People are pushing out longer and longer term auto loans, seven years and so 84 months.
	And so as this is happening in this context, people are still having difficulty paying this because it's gotten so expensive.
	So Ford knows what's coming because they put a lot of these subprime loans out there.
	In other words, people who don't really qualify, but they look the other way because they want to make the sale and And they grab the money as long as they can, and then they'll take the car back and maybe find some way to do something with it.
	So they're looking at ways that they can focus on control and possession of these cars.
	They know hard times are coming, and how do we get our car back?
	And if you want to stop and think about this, not just in the sense of how this could be used by a particular company who made Bad loans for people who couldn't afford overpriced cars because of government mandates and other things like that.
	It's beyond that.
	Imagine that instead of just missing your payment to Ford, Let's say that the government says that you didn't pay your taxes or we got fines against you because, you know, you wrote an article about Ron DeSantis in Florida and you didn't pay them the required amount to write an article about their leader or some state legislator in Florida.
	And so we got these fines against you or whatever, right?
	The government says you owe them money.
	And so what will happen?
	Will Ford do the same thing for them?
	No. Of course they will because they've got one customer.
	All of these multinational corporations, the big Wall Street companies that were essential, as Trump said, why are they essential?
	Because they've got one customer.
	See, the small mom and pop businesses that Trump put his boot on their throat in 2020, all of those small mom and pop stores, they're not essential.
	The ones that are essential are the ones who are going to do the bidding of the government.
	They've got one customer.
	Mom and pop stores, they need to operate in a competitive environment.
	They need customers to come in.
	They've got to do what they can to give you the best products or services at the best price, but not so with these other people.
	They've got one customer, the government.
	They need to please the government.
	And the rest of us can go pound sand.
	Just look at what they do with their advertising campaigns.
	We get this Hershey campaign right now with a tranny guy talking about the International Day of Women.
	And so what does Hershey chocolate do?
	They grab a tranny to lecture us about misogyny.
	They just do this in our face because they've got one government, one customer, and that's the government.
	And so just imagine that this is not because you didn't make your car payment, because there's something else that the government alleges that you owe, whether you owe it or not.
	What is aggravating?
	What is that aggravating beep on your car?
	Well, maybe you missed a payment to somebody.
	So they're talking about remotely shutting down your radio, shutting down your air conditioning, locking you out of your vehicle.
	Prompting it to ceaselessly beep if you miss car payments, things like that.
	But by the way, if you haven't paid that $150, somebody kidnaps your baby, we don't care.
	Don't care. But you better not be $150 behind on your payment because we'll lock all this stuff away.
	It emerges at a troubling time for car owners.
	Loan delinquencies have been steadily ticking back up from their pandemic lull.
	Ford patent application for repossession linked technology focuses on all these things.
	You know, the car that won't stop beating, I guess, beeping.
	So I guess you'd call them up and say, please come take it.
	But it's also cruise control.
	Automated windows could be disabled.
	They could shut down your key fob, your door locks, the accelerator, the engine, the radio, the air conditioning, all these different things.
	This is what they're looking at. So, you know, we've been stretched to the breaking point by government regulation.
	This is the EPA again, right?
	Which, as I said before, energy prohibition agency.
	Well, how about everything prohibition agency?
	They're a large part of why cars are so ridiculously expensive.
	But it doesn't stop there.
	As soon as Ford is able to get this self-driving stuff figured out, The future Ford vehicles could repossess themselves.
	Not just shutting down vital systems or shutting down the engine itself.
	They could lock you out, disable your key fob, start the car up, and have the car drive back to the dealership or the manufacturer or wherever.
	That's what they're looking at, again.
	Now, what if government decides to retroactively ban your car?
	As the government, the EPA, has done.
	With these power plants, as we're all sleeping and watching the bread and circuses that they give us, they're shutting down our power.
	They say, yeah, you've got these existing power plants, they're working, but you're going to shut them down anyway.
	And we're going to, you know, confiscate different gun items as well.
	Well, how about if the EPA decides, you know, that car that you got that's paid off and it's working fine, and maybe, you know, it's 10 years old now, maybe it's just 5 years old.
	And it really, we don't like the fact, you've got a hybrid, we don't like hybrids anymore.
	You know, the Prius that was going to save the world, everybody was virtue signaling about how green they were with their Prius.
	No, they don't like hybrids anymore.
	They're banned in many cities already in Europe.
	They're going to ban them everywhere because they have some emissions.
	As well, the government just decides that that's going to be banned.
	And we're not just going to stop you from buying them.
	We're going to retroactively ban them.
	So we're going to confiscate them as well.
	That's how this will operate.
	Even if your car is completely paid off, they can effectively confiscate it.
	Just shut the thing down.
	If the lockout doesn't work, payments are missed, the vehicle could drive to a safe nearby location for a repo team to seize it and avoid any confrontation with the owner.
	Well, when we look at what is happening with, again, the hybrids, you know, they were the salvation of everything, but now they are bad.
	So you can't appease these people.
	You have to oppose their lie.
	You try to comply?
	No, no, no, no. Try to comply with the lie?
	No, you've got to oppose the lie.
	Hybrid cars are still incredibly popular, but are they good for the environment?
	This is NPR. The Prius was the first of a new category of cars, marrying an electric motor to gasoline engine to dramatically increase fuel economy and reduce emissions.
	It was a big bait and switch, wasn't it?
	They keep moving the goalposts.
	And so now this thing that was going to be our salvation is now going to be banned because, you know, science, the political science, changes.
	Now you can only have zero-emission cars, because they have to have the battery for central control of everything.
	Many say that it's time for hybrids to fade into history.
	At best, they were a detour.
	No, I would say they were a deception.
	They were a head fake.
	Toyota, talking about this, because again, they tried to comply with this.
	They said, well, I guess we're taking a pragmatic approach to this, said Toyota.
	Talking about battery electric vehicles, they've been one of the last ones to come to it, but they're not going to be able to appease these people.
	They need to attack this foundational lie.
	But the response of engineers and manufacturers are, well, okay, you say that's the problem.
	We'll try to fix it. So they come up with different ways that they can do electric cars even without emissions.
	It's like, no, no, no. We don't want any of that technology.
	We don't want fuel cells. We don't want a hydrogen thing.
	We don't want to develop that technology.
	We want to have everybody have to plug into the grid because that gives us the ultimate control.
	Even if all drivers were totally ready to leap into electric vehicles, Toyota argues that hybrids would still make sense.
	Because their batteries are so much smaller, a car company can build far, far more hybrids than EVs from the same battery resources because we're constrained by the minerals as well.
	As I pointed out yesterday, the lithium wars.
	They still don't understand what the issue is.
	The issue is not about emissions.
	The point is they don't want to have a lot of cars out there.
	They want to take cars away from people.
	So then this article from NPR gets to the bottom line.
	So how will the regulators regard hybrids?
	Because you see, you are not going to have a choice in this.
	You don't have a say in this. You're not a stakeholder.
	You don't have any freedom or liberty or dignity.
	And so they will decide what you have.
	It's not going to be a choice that's going to be made by the market.
	It's not going to be a choice that's made by the engineers or what is possible.
	It's going to be the regulators who regulate without representation.
	In the same way, you've got the EPA tracking down on the trucking industry, trying to push an all-electric fleet.
	Again, it's the EPA pushing this.
	Announce that it will enforce tighter pollution regulations on heavy-duty trucks, vans, and buses.
	Buses have already been tried all over the world.
	I mean, you've got Germany, France, places where they've burned down entire depots with battery fires.
	They have gone back and done the same thing in Canada.
	Let's get rid of these battery buses and go back to diesel.
	But the EPA rules us, you see.
	Congress sets there and, you know, contemplates their naval.
	While the EPA is shutting down power generation, shutting down transportation, telling truckers who are vital to moving supplies around our country, telling them, shut up, we don't care if this works or not, you're going to go electric.
	And if it doesn't work, all the better.
	The EPA's new regulations will impact vehicles manufactured after 2027, they say.
	Well, expect that number to come down.
	They aim to reduce nitrogen oxide emissions again.
	Same justification for shutting down farms and dairy and meat.
	But of course, they can do even better than that.
	They can shut down the distribution of dairy and meat.
	And again, they're back to this fine particulate matter stuff that they're looking at as well.
	So... As American Thinker talks about this, they said, The comrades in the bureaucracy want to force the entire diesel trucking industry to comply with the green agenda measures.
	And, of course, it's not just the trucking industry that delivers all the supplies for everything and delivers the finished products.
	It's going to also be anybody who is in construction, anybody who is in farming.
	All of them use diesel engines.
	Why? Because they work.
	Therefore, they must be destroyed.
	The EPA has set its site on 11,400,000 commercial trucking vehicles that make our world go round.
	Germany's Federal Network Agency has watched our group that regulates electricity and gas in the country.
	They said the plan would allow power grid operators to remotely limit people's use of heat pumps and electric car chargers next winter without the user's consent.
	You see, this is how it's working already.
	We know. Happened in California as well.
	This is the way they're going to roll it out.
	And so the question for us is, are we going to oppose the lie?
	Don't comply with this.
	Oppose this lie.
	Don't try to comply with them in any way, shape, or form.
	And we have to fight this at the local level because the federal level is already done.
	And as I pointed out, you just take a look at this censorship stuff coming from the freedom-loving Republican legislature in Florida to protect the governor from any reporting.
	I hope he says something about it, because quite frankly, if he doesn't, the guy is and should be toast.
	We'll be right back. Analyzing
	The Globalist Next Move.
	And now, The David Knight Show.
	And people seem to fade into a bad dream And the steel rail still ain't heard the news The conductor sings his songs again.
	The passengers will please refrain.
	This train got to disappear in railroad blue.
	Good night, America, how are you?
	Say, don't you know me?
	I'm your native son.
	I'm the train that calls the city of New Orleans.
	I'll be gone.
	Yeah, this is the...
	The city of...
	The disappearing train.
	And it's like everything else in our country that is disappearing, isn't it?
	Let's talk a little bit more about what is happening in Palestine, Ohio.
	They're demanding action, they said, after this toxic train derailment.
	I've been talking about the EPA. I've been talking about their role in shutting down our energy, you know, the Energy Prohibition Agency.
	Their role in shutting down our transportation, the Everything Prohibition Agency.
	And are they doing their job doing a toxic cleanup?
	No, no, no. They don't even want to look at it.
	As a matter of fact. So you have a local organization, non-profit, River Valley Organizing.
	They've gotten together. There's a lady there that's lived there all of her life.
	She's going door-to-door talking to people.
	What do you need? What should we be doing?
	They built up a consensus.
	They put out a list of demands, including relocation for concerned residents, independent environmental testing, because they don't trust the government and should not, medical testing and monitoring, the safe disposal of toxic waste, And for the railroad company, Norfolk Southern, to cover the total cost of cleanups.
	We heard the people of East Palestine loud and clear.
	What they want are safe homes and independent testing.
	They don't trust the EPA. The EPA is too busy trying to destroy the power grid and transportation.
	You had this guy, Michael Regan, who planned a trip to Africa.
	He really didn't want to come here, but...
	Somebody had to show the flag for the Biden administration, so he comes and he pretends to have a sip of a cup.
	So these people have demanded that the EPA conduct air, soil, and water testing for dioxins.
	How did the EPA respond to this?
	This is what they were created for, right?
	Well, the EPA Region 5 Administrator, Deborah Shore, said the agency will not currently test for dioxins because it does not, quote, have baseline information in this area to do a proper test, unquote.
	What do they need that for?
	A baseline says it's increased.
	Who cares if it's increased?
	What they want to know is, is it safe?
	Is there too much here?
	The only reason that you would care about the baseline is Is if you are talking about Norfolk Southern's complicity in this, that's not the responsibility of the EPA. The EPA should be looking at this and saying, is this stuff safe or not?
	And if it's not safe, how do we clean it up?
	Right? But no, no, they're only concerned about protecting the corporation, aren't they?
	They don't care about health.
	Where's Javier Becerra with HHS? They're demanding that HHS... Provide ongoing health monitoring.
	Do you trust Javier Becerra to do that?
	This is a guy who wants to kill babies in the womb.
	Do you trust him for that?
	Does Javier Becerra care about a real health emergency?
	This is a real health emergency that's there.
	There's other stuff that they were willing to take away your job, your ability to travel, do anything to you to force you to get an injection.
	That was based on a phony emergency.
	That's based on phony tests.
	But they don't want to do any tests here.
	Right? See no evil.
	Hear no evil. Speak no evil about what happened.
	But, oh, we got viruses going everywhere.
	You're going to catch the cooties.
	Get the vaccine for the cooties.
	So, again, it's irrelevant for these people's health whether or not you've got a baseline level there.
	The question is, how many dioxins are there?
	So, they said they're also concerned about what's going to be done with the toxic waste.
	They're shipping the toxic waste to a lot of different places, by the way.
	Maybe to a location near you.
	How's it going to be disposed of?
	Well, they said that this organization, the River Valley organization, RVO, voiced concerns about the toxic waste from the derailment being disposed of in the Heritage Thermal Toxic Incinerator in East Liverpool, Ohio, that's right next door to the village.
	They said the incinerator has already been polluting our communities for years and will only further spread the contaminants.
	So here's an idea.
	You know, we have a derailment.
	So let's burn it off, right?
	And you saw what happened with that.
	So here's another idea.
	Let's scoop it up, take it to the town next door, and we'll burn it off.
	And the EPA doesn't have anything to say about those emissions, does it?
	They're going to shut down our entire power grid because of, quote-unquote, emissions of carbon dioxide, emissions of nitrous oxide, things like that.
	They're going to shut down your transportation over the same type of stuff.
	When it comes to burning these toxic things, they don't care.
	Taxpayers should not foot this bill.
	Norfolk Southern made this mess.
	They should clean it up, they wrote. And a Texas A&M Superfund Research Center tweeted out, they said, compared to the EPA national air toxics data, some concentrations in East Palestine for 9 out of approximately 50 chemicals EPA reported are higher than normal.
	If these levels continue, they may be of health concern.
	But let's not do any testing about this, says the EPA. They don't want to bother with it.
	And so one scientist wrote an article really slamming the EPA for this.
	You're not testing for cancer-causing chemicals there?
	He said there is no doubt that they're there.
	The question is, how much?
	He said the EPA's decision not to test for the highly toxic chemical compound dioxins It is, quote, a lame excuse and wrong.
	Again, they don't want to test because they don't have any baseline.
	And so the EPA regulator in the area said dioxins are ubiquitous in the environment.
	They were here before the accident.
	They will be here after the accident.
	We don't have baseline information in this area to do a proper test.
	That's not the question, lady.
	The question is, is it too high?
	We don't care. How the dioxins got there.
	You shouldn't care how they got there.
	Except to assess blame.
	Let other people do that. That's not even something you should be involved with.
	That's something that's going to be happening in court.
	But you're there to protect the corporation that did this, aren't you?
	You're not there to protect the people, because if you were, you would look at it and you'd say, well, you know, this level is, this is what the level is, and if it's dangerous, we're going to do something about it.
	We'll clean it up. That's what you were created to do.
	But now you are nothing more than a prohibition agency.
	So this scientist said, his name's Lester, he said, I think they're reluctant to test because they know they'll find it.
	And then they'll be put in a place where they'll have to address it.
	They'll have to actually clean it up.
	They can't be bothered with that.
	They're in the process of shutting everything down for us.
	Unfortunately, we don't have any baseline information about the level of dioxins, she said.
	They're also put there, you know, not just by train derailments and then lighting all the toxic chemicals on fire.
	It can also happen with backyard grilling, she said, and a host of other things.
	What? Backyard grilling?
	That's right. You know, I always use...
	Don't you? Haven't you ever barbecued with vinyl chloride?
	It does a great job of adding a really tangy taste to your meat.
	So I would suggest that all of us, if you haven't tried it, go ahead and get some vinyl chloride and go grill with it.
	You'll be surprised at how it tastes.
	Now, Lester, the scientist, said, I've never heard anybody, any researcher, talk about cookouts when discussing dioxins.
	He says that would be an infinitesimal concentration, if at all, because he said dioxins form, not because there's burning, not because there's wildfire.
	You have to have a chlorine source.
	You have to burn a chlorine source.
	That's what we're talking about, you know, when the railroad set fire to it.
	They took a vinyl chloride source and they set fire to it.
	That's how you get dioxins, lady.
	He's a chemist. What's she doing?
	I don't know. Probably it's a guy who's...
	You probably have this EPA official, this female...
	It's probably a guy in lipstick who doesn't know anything about chemistry, but he knows all about genders, and he can recite every one of the imagined genders for you.
	We're going to come back, and when we do, I want to talk a little bit about what is the current state of the groomers.
	There was an excellent video that was put out by a comic out of the UK going after A very, very popular groomer.
	And she just eviscerated him.
	We'll be right back. You're
	listening to The David Knight Show.
	Before we get into this, I want to just respond to a couple of comments on Rockfin and tips.
	Thank you, Angus Mustang.
	Thank you for the tip on Rockfin.
	I appreciate that. He writes, DeSantis and Trump are the same person.
	Unfortunately, there's some really bad things from DeSantis that we can already see.
	And the similarity of the two of them is I think that both of them will stab you in the back.
	We already know that about Trump. We're like, We were with the 2016 election where Julian Assange says, well, we know that Hillary is a grifting criminal.
	We don't know what Trump is yet.
	Well, here we are, coming up to the 2024 election, we could say we know that Trump is a grifting criminal.
	We suspect that DeSantis is in so many different ways.
	Again, refusing to, he admits, more so than anybody else, he comes out and he says these things are really bad.
	He and his Surgeon General, these injections, these Trump shots, he doesn't call them Trump shots.
	These are really bad. They're dangerous.
	We're not going to recommend them.
	For kids who have no risk, nobody's got any risk of this stuff, folks.
	It's not just the kids.
	The risk is the vaccine.
	But they come out and they say, well, you know, we're doing our due diligence and we don't recommend it for these people.
	But of course, they're not going to stop it.
	They're not going to criminalize people injecting other people with poisons.
	Is that right? I mean, if you've got some kind of a cult and it's They're having people drink Kool-Aid and die?
	You wouldn't go in as the government to stop that?
	Anyway, there's a bill introduced in Idaho and a couple of other places at the state level to stop that stuff, but you're not going to see that stopped in Florida.
	He wants to go just far enough To establish, you know, to make the conservatives feel good.
	You're not going to have any of these drag queen storytime memoir stuff, and you're not going to be able to sexually groom the kids before the fourth grade.
	At that point, they're yours.
	You know, that's the kind of stuff that DeSantis is doing.
	And the conservatives, look, he stopped it from kindergarten to third grade.
	Okay, great. Guard Goldsmith.
	Thank you, Guard. Thank you for the tip.
	And thank you for doing so much to help and programs, Liberty Conspiracy and everything.
	He says that you are the source of energy every day as many of us hear you search for the stories and get even more enthusiastic to fight for freedom.
	Well, thank you, Guard.
	Guard is on the target all the time.
	And he's putting out, if you subscribe to his Liberty Conspiracy sub-stack, he is on top of the stories as well.
	A great source of information.
	Let's talk about what's going on with the training stuff.
	Because the mainstream media is so upset about Tennessee being the first state to ban sexual performances in front of minors.
	And I thought this was always banned.
	I thought we always had prohibitions against lewd displays with minors.
	This is what Libs of TikTok said.
	She said, the fastest way to silence me is to stop sexualizing kids.
	And she put this clip out.
	Pull the volume down a little bit so I can speak over it.
	And look at this. This is a bunch of kids there, and you got some guy, you know, these guys, look at this.
	This is just flaunting themselves, you know, getting dressed up very lasciviously, and flaunting themselves in front of a bunch of kids.
	It's absolutely disgusting.
	And of course, live some TikTok, Chaya Rakeshik, if I'm pronouncing her name correctly.
	She said in the, as she tweeted this out, she goes, oh yeah, look, this is innocent, beautiful family entertainment, isn't it?
	We should never ban this stuff being done.
	And it's all little kids there.
	The entire audience is little kids.
	And these are multiple performers there for this drag queen story time.
	I'm going to turn it off, it's disgusting.
	She said the left wants me silenced and censored so badly.
	Here's my response to that. She's now gone public.
	She was doxxed by that New York Times reporter who was crying because she said she'd been doxxed.
	She said, the fastest way to silence me is to stop giving me material.
	So as soon as there's no more drag shows for children, as soon as all the pornography is removed from every single school, as soon as all these activist teachers sexualizing kids are fired, as soon as DEI, I like to put it as D-I-E, diversity, inclusivity, equity, as soon as the die is eradicated, as soon as all these things are gone, then I'll have nothing left to do.
	And I'll close up my account and I'll move on with my life.
	I don't expect that to happen anytime soon, but I wish it would.
	She was making an appearance talking about her book that she put out.
	It was a book written for children to warn them about the dangers of anybody who comes to you and says, hey kid, don't tell your parents.
	This is just going to be between you and me.
	And starts talking to you about sex.
	We know what that is.
	That's a groomer, right?
	And so the book is called No More Secrets, The Candy Cavern.
	It's a children's book revealing the dangers of keeping secrets from parents.
	It's described as a kid's book for ages four through eight, reveals the dangers of keeping secrets from your parents.
	The conservative children's book is a modern twist to the familiar Grimm's style fairy tale, even including a big bad wolf.
	And so, again, her book, she says it's a need for children to be open with their parents to prevent harm, including sexual predation from occurring.
	And so, as we look at this, this is something that everybody needs to be involved in.
	Now, you know, Chaya Rachik, if I'm pronouncing her name correctly, she's Jewish.
	This is a Muslim comic.
	A female who has a very big following on TikTok.
	She's got a million people following her on TikTok.
	And she came directly after another very big personality on TikTok who is directly grooming kids and saying, Hey kids, don't tell your parents.
	If you can get on Patreon, we can have some special discussions.
	Just you and me.
	This Muslim hijab-wearing British comic, her name is Shumarun Nessa.
	She goes by the handle TheRealOverlordComedy.
	She has 7 million followers on TikTok.
	Her target was a self-styled, non-binary propagandist and social media personality, Jeffrey Marsh, who describes himself on his personal webpage as following, Jeffrey is a best-selling propagandist.
	Author, a viral TikTok and Instagram star, a non-binary activist, an LGBT keynote speaker, Jeffrey was the first non-binary public figure to appear on national TV. Being interviewed by Newsmax in 2016, Jeffrey was the first celebrity activist to use they-them pronouns.
	As WND writes, most social media stars with the following the size of this lady's would not dare to attempt a video takedown of a media-promoted trans celebrity like Marsh.
	But that's what she did.
	Look at this. This is great.
	Okay guys, this video is going to be a bit long.
	Stop telling trans people that we're inspirational.
	That's Jeffrey Marsh. Stop telling kids to go on your Patreon and chat to you privately without their parents knowing.
	And then a lot of people made stitches of me saying I'm transphobic, I've done a lot of bad stuff, they've even attacked my scarf, my religion, a lot of bad stuff, which I don't want to go into.
	And these people have also said they are not talking to the kids.
	Okay, so I did a little bit of digging.
	Hi kids! Hey kids!
	I want to talk to the kids.
	Hi kids! Hey kids!
	So yeah, there's a lot of videos of them addressing kids.
	Now, the main video I want to talk about.
	Your parents screwed up.
	It's okay to say so.
	That's why I made a Patreon.
	So you want to talk to kids whose parents have screwed up.
	Why? Why you want to talk to these particular kids?
	Why? That's why I made a Patreon.
	So that we could talk about it.
	So that we could connect in a way that has more privacy.
	So that we could talk to each other in a way that's more open and stuff that we wouldn't share in the comments of a video like this.
	I think you're worthy.
	So you want to talk to kids on a social media platform privately about topics that cannot be talked about in the video of TikTok's comments sections.
	Because why? Why you want to do that?
	Why you can't chat about these topics in these comments?
	Is it because it might get flagged or something?
	What could be the reason?
	Could this be one of the reasons?
	Going no contact with the kids' parents?
	Because you say in one of your videos how kids can go no contact with their parents.
	So you teach kids how to go no contact with their parents?
	Is that what you're teaching them on Patreon?
	Or is it this? You're teaching this?
	More on... Because this video might get flagged.
	That's why I don't want to say the word. And this is Geoffrey Marsh's Patreon.
	You talk about this topic with kids.
	Now here are just some of the signs of grooming.
	Literally one of the first ones.
	Gaining access and isolating the victim.
	Asking them privately to go on Patreon.
	And talking to them privately so you can connect.
	And then showing these kids that you trust them, you love them, you'll keep their secrets...
	And to keep them isolated from their parents.
	And then the icing on the cake is this video.
	Hi, beautiful. If you do not have a family that loves you, I'm going to be your family.
	No, you can't.
	You are a stranger on the internet.
	You are not their family.
	Oh, and another thing. You can turn off age restrictions on Patreon.
	So kids can go to Jeffrey Marsh's their Patreon.
	Did a great job of showing that they're groomers, aren't they?
	And so are the teachers in the schools.
	This is from Babylon Bee.
	Shocking study shows more kids identifying as members of the world's most celebrated and popular group.
	Oh, which one would that be?
	We're absolutely stunned by this as a sociologist.
	We can't explain why young, impressionable kids who are desperate for popularity and affirmation are suddenly choosing to become members of the most popular and affirmed group in history.
	Every single movie, every single TV show, every single corporation, every TikTok influencer, every public school teacher, every pop star, every Hollywood star in the country openly promotes and celebrates this group.
	Why on earth would teenagers want to be a part of that?
	Oh, must be biology, right?
	Gallup results indicate that almost 20% of Gen Z identify as members of this culturally beloved movement, with the other 80% being pathetic losers.
	It used to be that a kid had to be smart, good-looking, or athletic to be popular, but now you've just got to be a member of that group.
	I wonder why the number of LGBT kids is skyrocketing.
	Well, schools are pushing gender pronouns, and they are hiding it from kids, just like Jeffrey Marsh.
	Eight of the nation's 20 largest school districts allow students to use names and pronouns at school aligned with their ideal gender identity without parental knowledge and consent.
	Yet these same districts, including the New York City Department of Education, the LA Unified School District, the Chicago Public Schools, are failing in every other way.
	And they regard parental permission...
	To dispense over-the-counter medication to students at school, at least for the time being.
	But of course, you know, they can gender gaslight you, and Planned Parenthood is more than happy to begin their birth control and depopulation plan pre-puberty.
	So they said explicitly instructing teachers in these school districts to use students' preferred names and pronouns with or without Now, it was in Chicago where 30 schools had zero students who were literate at grade level.
	They had 53 schools where there were zero students who were at grade level in math.
	Why is that? What are they spending their time talking to them about?
	I wonder. School districts across the country are failing to represent the rights of parents to make decisions for their minor children.
	That's called in loco parentis, as they said.
	Once you drop, as the judge said, in one of these cases, going back to the early 90s, A parent who said, I don't want my 8-year-old girl going through your sex education class.
	And at the time, it was normal heterosexual sex.
	He said she's not mature for that.
	Oh, well, you have abandoned your child to the state when you drop them off at the front door of the school, said the judge.
	And loco parentis.
	So what they're really upset about is Tennessee Governor Lee signing a bill banning transgender treatment for children into law.
	The media has freaked out about this big time.
	The U.S. has seen an explosion in recent years in the number of children who identify as gender, as a gender different from what they were designed at birth.
	This is what the Daily Mail talks about.
	It's an international story that you would have a state, and Tennessee's not going to be the last one either.
	That would stop this kind of mutilation.
	But the question is, why is that happening?
	How did all the kids suddenly get into the wrong bodies?
	How is it that you've got a third of the girls who want to commit suicide?
	What happened? That's not the America that I grew up in.
	Well, we know what happened.
	It's very clear what happened with all this stuff.
	They say that it's to protect the kids because otherwise they'll commit suicide.
	No, they're driving them into suicide.
	And they project their hate on other people.
	Calling anybody who talks about protecting children, you're hateful.
	You hate us as adults.
	Look, what you do as an adult is your business.
	What you do to kids is a crime.
	Mississippi has banned, quote-unquote, gender-affirming care, unquote, for minors.
	No, they have banned mutilation and sterilization of minors, anyone under 18.
	You should not be able to do this to them.
	They're not mature enough to make that decision.
	Mississippi Governor Tate Reeves signed a bill known as the, quote, regulate Experimental Adolescent Procedures Act into law.
	Under the legislation, effective immediately, individuals at the state are banned from, quote, knowingly engaging in conduct that aids or abets the performance or the inducement of gender transition procedures under the age of 18.
	It allows for health care providers to be sued by their former patients via their parent or next friend within 30 years.
	Well, that's pretty good. - Right.
	One of the reasons you've got so many pedophiles getting away with so much crime is because they've got a very short statute of limitations on pedophilia, typically three years.
	Well, they don't have enough time to come to grips with that abuse, typically.
	So they get away with it.
	But, you know, as time goes on, it gets more and more difficult to approve these things.
	So by doing this for 30 years, that's an excellent move.
	We're going to take a quick break, and we're going to come back with our guest, Guy Relford.
	He has the Gun Guy podcast.
	And we're going to talk about what is happening on that side, on that issue of prohibition and anti-freedom.
	So stay with us.
	We will be right back.
	Thank you.
	Decoding the mainstream propaganda.
	It's the David Knight Show.
	Welcome back and joining us now is Guy Relford.
	He has a podcast, The Gun Guy.
	Tell us where your website is or other places where people can find you, Guy.
	Sure. Well, it's actually a live radio show on WIBC in Indianapolis, but then the show is then posted as a podcast.
	It's on the Gun Guy page on WIBC.com.
	It's also on iTunes and all the usual places for podcasts these days.
	But we broadcast live on Saturdays 5 to 7, and then the podcast is posted soon after that.
	That's great. That's great. Yeah, let's talk about what is happening in the overall picture because that's your specialty is what's happening with the Second Amendment and with guns.
	And we've had an interesting thing happen this week that a lot of us were surprised to see happen because it's very rare for a politician to get the boot in Chicago.
	But things got so bad there with crime that Lori Lightfoot came in a distant third.
	And so she immediately came out swinging.
	Bragging about what she had done to take guns off the street, but they didn't take off the crime off the street, did it?
	Well, exactly. But you're right.
	It's really noteworthy, David, because this is the first Chicago mayor to lose an election for re-election in 30 years.
	I mean, in a generation.
	And that tells you things had to be pretty severe for the political machinery there in Chicago to not protect Lori Lightfoot.
	But it actually, I think, provides some glimmer of hope to other cities around the country in that notwithstanding the firm grip that the Democrat Party has on that city and the progressive politics that overwhelm that city, The voters clearly looked at the situation in Chicago, and notably, and I think most importantly, the out-of-control crime, murder rate, robberies, carjackings, right down the line.
	And they said, this is not okay.
	We're going to set aside partisan politics, perhaps.
	And not that they'd ever elect a Republican in Chicago, but at least they were willing to boot an incumbent where the challengers there...
	Ran clearly on a law and order campaign and a support the police, as opposed to defund the police, a support the police platform.
	And that resonated with voters to the point where Lori Lightfoot did not even finish in the top two so as to participate in a runoff.
	She was a somewhat distant third.
	And I think, you know, other cities around, whether it's Baltimore or Newark, Philadelphia, right here in Indianapolis, even though Indiana is a very red state, solidly voted for Trump in the last two elections, Indianapolis, where I'm located on the north side, is very, very Democrat and Democrat-controlled.
	And we have a very liberal mayor and we have a very liberal prosecutor.
	And I did a show here this week talking about does the Chicago experience give us some hope that folks are willing to reject these liberal policies that just result in rampant crime and to say this is not okay.
	We're going to set aside politics and start looking for who's willing to lead a city in a way that makes the citizens safer.
	Yeah, that's right. She got so desperate at one point, she put out a call for people to loan her police from other jurisdictions because she'd gotten rid of so many police.
	And the guy who just edged her out of the runoff, some guy named Brandon...
	I said, oh, let's go Brandon.
	But what I've seen now, I didn't know anything about the two guys who came in ahead of her.
	But what I've heard from Brandon is he may be even more leftist radical than Lori Lightfoot.
	So they may be getting it.
	But he came in quite a bit behind the other individual.
	I don't know where that guy is. But it's not just the police either.
	It's not just getting rid of the police.
	It's the crazy courts.
	It's the zero bail stuff and letting people out.
	Here's an article from Bearing Arms.
	Fourth time is the charm for Chicago man busted for illegal gun possession.
	She's bragging about taking guns off the street guy, and yet the courts are turning people out over and over again for the same crime.
	The recidivism of these people getting out on zero bail because we've got these Soros district attorneys putting people out.
	It's designed to create chaos.
	And that, I guess, is one of the reasons why I was surprised that she lost, because this is really where the radical left is right now.
	They just want chaos and whether they can do it by defunding the police or by deconstructing the justice system and, you know, the courts and the rest of the stuff and letting the criminals out on the streets.
	Catch and release, you know?
	Yeah. Exactly what we refer to as the revolving door of the criminal justice system.
	And for instance, I had on my show here recently the head, the president of the Fraternal Order of Police here for central Indiana.
	And he talked about how frustrated his officers are that they actually put their lives on the line to find, confront, disarm and arrest violent criminals.
	That's right.
	And invariably repeat violent criminals, often out on bond for pending charges with a ridiculously low bond, even though they have a history of criminal convictions and violent criminal convictions.
	And so, you know, his officers put their lives on the line every day to find these people, to put them in jail.
	And then they find them right back out on the street the next day.
	Literally the next day.
	And all of a sudden, now, not only are they out of jail, but now they've got a beef.
	They've got a beef against who may have reported them to police, who may have cooperated with police.
	And they've got a beef against the officers involved.
	But they're very likely to see you in their neighborhoods again.
	So not only have you not taken a violent criminal ultimately off the street, you've incentivized him to go out and potentially take revenge on any number of people.
	And the statistics are amazing.
	We've seen numbers, something like over 80%.
	I'm just talking about the Indianapolis area, but I guarantee you this is true across the city, whether you're talking about Philadelphia or Chicago or Baltimore or Newark or LA. Something like 80%, not only of the suspects in murder cases, have a history of violent criminal convictions, but to almost an equal degree, over 80%, the victims.
	Have a history of violent criminal convictions as well.
	And so what you're doing is by spitting these people right back out of the criminal justice system, they're not only available to commit more violent crimes, they're also available to be victims of violent crimes because they're caught up in a gang dispute or a drug war or whatever it might be.
	And so by not keeping these people off the streets, you're simply increasing the problem sometimes exponentially.
	Yeah, that's right. It is truly amazing, and I think it was designed to create chaos.
	I think that's one of the reasons why you see this massive funding.
	It's amazing how much money was put into a lot of these local district attorney races.
	Millions of dollars given for a local race, and especially even for the state attorney general level, even more money put in by these organizations because they want to have chaos.
	They just want to burn everything down, tear everything down.
	They want people afraid.
	That type of fear can be used by these demagogues to do all kinds of illegal things that attack our liberties.
	As they have exploited this stuff in the past, and of course we've seen it began in the Obama administration talking about Operation Chokepoint where they were going to try to shut down the purchasing of guns and ammunition.
	Now we see that's about to roll out.
	Discover is going to start doing that next month using the tools that were Pushed in in New York by New York State to say we want to have a code that's going to identify these gun stores.
	I'm sure this has been on your radar and it looks like it's not just Discover, is it?
	No, that's exactly right.
	And what has happened is an international organization for standardization has created even a new credit card code.
	That will be used for purchases at gun stores.
	Historically, if you go in and use your debit card or credit card in a gun store, it comes up as general merchandise or sporting goods on the classification for that expense based on the current credit card codes.
	Under pressure from liberal politicians and anti-Second Amendment groups, and here we're talking about Moms Demand Action and the Brady Campaign and the Gifford Center and all the usual suspects, this International Organization for Standardization has created a new credit card code specifically for gun stores.
	And this is fascinating to me because they say, well, we want to track what are potentially suspicious purchases that might be able to help us identify and head off a mass shooting.
	And what makes no sense in that justification, David, is that what you buy at the gun store isn't identified.
	If I buy a $4,000 safe To keep my guns in at home.
	To be a safe, secure, responsible gun owner.
	That just shows $4,000 at a gun store.
	It doesn't say, tell anybody what I bought.
	So they're going to say, oh, look, Guy Relford spent $4,000 in a gun store.
	We better go investigate him because he might be the next mass shooter.
	Of course, I can buy $4,000 with the t-shirts that I want to go out and resell from a gun store.
	And it doesn't give any information that might legitimately be used.
	To track suspicious activity or to find a potential mass shooter.
	What it does is it gives credit card companies the ability to say, oh, wait, you're using your credit or your debit card at a gun store?
	We have an anti-gun policy here.
	We're going to start declining those authorizations and those purchases, and we're going to start and use the term Operation Chokepoint, and it was their term.
	We didn't create it.
	It was the Obama administration that said we can essentially destroy the firearms industry by going after them financially, by having banks decline to do business with them, close checking accounts, refuse to do credit card processing, and now they have a credit card code where they know anytime you use your credit card, if you're at a gun store, don't be at all surprised, because I think this is the ultimate objective, that you're going to see those purchases simply declined.
	Yeah. And we've already seen that in a couple of instances from the very beginning of it.
	Exactly. I had something I called a gun shop round table on my show here.
	It was probably over a year ago.
	And I had six local gun shop owners sitting around in the studio.
	Everybody had their own microphone.
	And we were talking about the challenges that they faced, and I said, well, I've got one for you.
	Who here has had a credit card processor or a bank refuse to do business with you simply because you're a gunshot?
	Every single one of them hand flew up in the air.
	Some of them multiple times.
	Some of them even received a certified check in the mail from their bank saying, we're closed to your account.
	Here are the balances.
	We no longer choose to do business with you.
	Have a nice day. And they called me and said, what, I got a perfect credit rating?
	You know, I don't have any suspicious transactions.
	Why are you doing this? We simply don't want to do business with you.
	It's all coming back to Operation Chokepoint.
	They can destroy the firearms industry if these people don't have the support, the assistance, the availability of financial institutions.
	And of course, they're doing the same thing to the First Amendment as well, not just the Second Amendment.
	They did this to me after my show was about five months old.
	PayPal cut me off.
	PayPal and Venmo the same day.
	I called them up. I said, so what's going on?
	What's the problem? There's no suspicious transactions.
	Well, we can't tell you.
	We won't tell you what's going on.
	And so this is the same type of thing.
	They're going to come after the source.
	They're going to come after the store. They're going to come after the speaker to try to purge you out, use that kind of corporate economic warfare against us.
	I've got a listener here on Rumble from Australia.
	He knows about... Gun control and gun confiscation harps.
	He says, don't let them make any firearm laws.
	Do not consent to any unlawful rulings.
	Fight them all the way. The Second Amendment is on your side.
	I think that's exactly right, Guy.
	You know, there's talk about here in Tennessee, there's been a bill that has been introduced.
	We don't know what the status is or whether or not it's going to pass.
	But what it would do is it would require...
	The state to examine any new law for constitutionality, any court ruling, any treaty, and any regulatory rules.
	So it covers everything, right?
	Because we know that most of the stuff is really coming after us with regulatory rules or with court decisions.
	Yes. They like to talk about the deep state.
	These people have been deputized by the government.
	They're doing the will and the bidding of the government, and it just gives them plausible deniability to use the corporations to do what they're specifically prohibited from doing, and they don't have to worry about it.
	They let the corporation do it.
	Exactly. And consider the two things that we've discussed already, David, just in this conversation.
	The fact that the left simply wants to create chaos.
	They want to have dangerous criminals on the street.
	They want as much disruption as they can possibly create.
	And at the same time, deprive the law-abiding citizen of their ability to defend themselves.
	Mm-hmm. I mean, look at those things together.
	So what is our alternative?
	If the Second Amendment is essentially nullified because the gun industry goes out of business, guns aren't available anymore.
	You know, I just turned 21, or in some states 18, I want to buy a gun.
	I can't buy a gun because they're not available.
	I mean, that's the ultimate goal when it comes to Operation Chokepoint.
	Then there's chaos in the street.
	There are violent criminals running around everywhere.
	I can't defend myself.
	What does that put me in the position of doing?
	It puts me in a position of being dependent on the government.
	That's right. The government will step in and save me.
	The government creates chaos.
	It deprives me of my ability to defend myself and then turns around and says, don't worry, we're here to help you.
	Yeah, like Lori Lightfoot. Exactly right.
	And that is as obvious as the nose on my face.
	As a matter of fact, there was a picture we showed yesterday.
	We talked about her losing. And she had her mask on, you know, pandemic stuff.
	She had on, like, some latex gloves that were yellow.
	And then, you know, for Halloween, she puts on, like, a little Robin mask.
	And I said, that whole crime-fighting superhero thing just didn't work out for her, did it?
	Well, you know, I think it's interesting.
	You know, one way to do this, again, I talked about Tennessee and how they are looking at nullifying anything that's a treaty, a regulation, a court decision, a law that's unconstitutional.
	But then, you know, when they come after us with these, the deputized state, the corporations, I think this is the correct approach.
	This is a Florida bill that would levy a $10,000 fine on any credit card companies who are acting as deputies for gun control.
	I think that's the way that you approach it for that.
	So I think we need to have nullification of things that are coming directly from the government.
	But when they start to use these corporations to take away our free speech, corporations to take away our Second Amendment rights, And again, they're not rights that come from the Second Amendment.
	They're rights that come from God that are specifically mentioned in the Second Amendment that you will protect those and not take them away.
	I think when it comes to that, you have to start using some kind of economic fines for the corporations that attack you.
	I think that's very important. We need to understand that for both the First Amendment and the Second Amendment.
	Don't you agree? I agree very much.
	As someone who believes in small government and the hands-off of the private sector when it comes to the government and laissez-faire economics, I'm conflicted a little bit on this subject because we've had bills here in Indiana that have said,
	okay, let's regulate these decisions that financial institutions can make And part of me says, yes, because I want that protection of the Second Amendment and I want that protection of the firearms industry.
	And part of me says, oh, wait a minute.
	We've got the government telling private industry how to operate and how do we navigate that?
	How do I pursue those kind of policies and not be a hypocrite when it comes to small government?
	And here's the compromise that we've reached on a couple of bills.
	Now, the banking lobby, I'll tell you, people talk about how strong the Second Amendment lobby is.
	Make no mistake, the banking lobby is a big, scary organization with a lot of resources and a lot of money, and they have a lot of influence at all levels, federal and state.
	But what we came up with the last couple of legislators, legislators, It is a bill that says, okay, if you have these discriminatory policies, discriminatory against Second Amendment-related businesses, you can have whatever policy you want, but the state of Indiana will not reward you by doing business with you as the state of Indiana.
	So we will not enter any contracts with you.
	We will not use your credit card processing services.
	And we're talking about billions and billions.
	We will not allow you to participate in the administration of our pension funds.
	There are billions of dollars involved.
	And so they've said, you can have whatever policy you want.
	You can do business with whomever you'd like, but so can we as the state of Indiana.
	We will cut you off financially, which could mean, again, millions and millions or tens or hundreds of millions of lost profits to these companies.
	I like that because that way I can walk that fine line between saying I'm small government, And let's not interfere with private industry.
	At the same time, make your own decision, financial institution, because we're going to financially punish you because just like your decisions have economic consequences for your customers or people you decline to do business with, well, your decision has economic consequences now for you to the extent you want to do business with the state of Indiana.
	I like that. I like that, Bill.
	The problem is we can't get it out of committee and get it to the floor of either the Senate or the House here in Indiana because the banking lobby has been very successful.
	Yeah, that's true. And then, of course, if you were...
	They could easily pull it back to the next administration.
	So the thing is, you know, I look at this and I've been there, you know, what we're looking at with the gun thing.
	I've been there for a long time with the censorship stuff.
	And for the longest time, even before we had the Twitter files released by Musk and everybody was going through and saying, look at this, here's the emails.
	They're telling everybody who to shut down.
	This was coming from the government.
	But for years, my wrestling with their censorship stuff goes back to 2018.
	So for five years, I've been in this fight.
	And actually before, I actually had, the first thing I got taken down on YouTube was talking about the Federal Reserve, the banking industry, right?
	Right. They took that video down.
	I had some clips from It's a Wonderful Life, and I did it on the 100th anniversary of the creation of the Federal Reserve, and it was called It's a Wonderful Lie.
	And so I used a couple little clips in fair use.
	It was a very small part of the video.
	I got those clips from the entire movie that had been up for years and had over a million views on it at the time back in 2013.
	And they said, well, you violated copyright on this.
	That's what they came back with. We knew what that was about.
	But when you look at this, and I've been fighting this free speech thing for quite a while, and I remember Reason and Libertarian Think Tank, as well as Cato Institute, another Libertarian, Heritage Foundation conservatives would say, no, we don't want to tell corporations what they can do.
	You would have people like John Stossel say, they're censoring me.
	I hate the fact that they're censoring me, but I don't want the government coming in and telling them what they must do.
	But the reality was that we knew that they were doing it at the behest of the government.
	We knew that the government was the hidden hand that was directing all of this stuff.
	But until the Twitter files came out, they would continue down that path.
	And that was the thing that got them to turn.
	And so when that came out, they said, yeah, that's right.
	They were just acting on behalf of the government.
	And I think the same thing is happening when we look at the Second Amendment stuff.
	I think the government has a duty to protect.
	You know, so Declaration of Independence says that, you know, we alter or we abolish the government when it attacks our rights.
	We create the government to protect our rights.
	And so if we've got corporations that are coming after us, and we need to understand that corporations are not a human.
	You know, we have these rights because they're given to us by God.
	Corporations are incorporated.
	They are an artificial creation.
	They have been given privileges and licenses by the state.
	They shouldn't have the equivalents of humans.
	And so when I look at it, I think that the government really does have a duty to protect.
	But the reality is, is that they see themselves as having one customer.
	And that's not you and I.
	That's the government.
	That's part of this ESG thing.
	And that's been going on for a long time.
	Whether you're talking about speech or the vaccines, the pandemic speech, or we're talking about gun control.
	It always comes back. They only want to please the government.
	They're only working for the government, I think.
	I think those are excellent, excellent points, David.
	And part of the rationale there is that, you know, I was talking about, hey, let's don't tell private industry how to operate if we're going to be true to small government principles.
	But your point is perfectly made in the sense that when private industry is no longer acting as private industry and they're acting as a tool of the government, then suddenly shouldn't they lose the protections we'd otherwise give them as private industry and Shouldn't constitutional principles and protections then apply as to them?
	So people can say, well, you know, Twitter can say whatever it wants or do business with whoever it wants.
	It can cut off ties with whatever industry it wants.
	And, you know, the Constitution doesn't apply.
	First Amendment doesn't apply because they're a private company, not the government.
	Second Amendment protections don't apply.
	Well, hold on. If you're merely acting as a tool of the government, That's right.
	You know, the banking industry is just doing this.
	Well, what the Twitter files did is it came out and it told us that we weren't paranoid all along, that we weren't, you know, part of a conspiracy theory as part of any of this.
	What we suspected all along was really true.
	That's right. And the government through the Democrat Party was essentially...
	How is that not, really to your point, how is that not a powerful, powerful argument for why Twitter should lose any protections that a private entity has if they're not acting as a private entity, they're acting as an arm of the government?
	I agree. Yeah, for the longest time, a lot of people say, well, you know, look, it's just these people in Silicon Valley.
	They're all Democrats, and they all think like that, and they genuinely believe in gun control.
	They genuinely believe that you're hateful speech and all this other kind of stuff.
	No, they were being given instructions.
	They were just active. They were the deputized state.
	Let's talk a little bit about permitless carry, because we have Nebraska is talking about, you know, they're debating this.
	It's gone a couple of days.
	I don't know what the current status of it is, but there's been some...
	Some laws had been introduced in other states.
	Do you have a sense of where we are at this point?
	I think it was like 25 or so states that had gone to permitless carry.
	Maybe more now. I don't really know what the status is.
	Do you have a current tally of where we are on that?
	I do. Indiana last year was the 24th state.
	I was very proud to be directly involved in that fight.
	My organization here on my pin is the 2A Project, and we were right out front fighting for constitutional carry.
	I actually assisted legislators in writing our bill It was the 10th year that we've been fighting for constitutional carry or permitless carry.
	We finally got it done.
	Then after Indiana passed it, Alabama passed it, which was the 25th state.
	We've not seen more join the ranks yet this legislative year, but hey, it's just the first week of March.
	So we're hopeful. We see it in Nebraska.
	We're hopeful we see it in Nebraska.
	Governor DeSantis in Florida keeps saying he'll sign it if they get it passed.
	They haven't convened their legislative session yet, so there's rumors that they might do it in Florida as well.
	They did it in Tennessee not too long ago, not too many years ago.
	That's where I live now. So we're at about 50%, which is right, because that really is a constitutional carry.
	And I think the Supreme Court has kind of lined up along that.
	But we have people...
	Still coming out saying, you have no right to carry.
	I don't know what they think the words actually mean, but they make all these arguments.
	We've got David Hogg coming out trying to tell us that it was just for the militia.
	I've heard that from kids for the longest time.
	I mean, we had a business at one point in time.
	We hired a... A really good kid, smart kid, and he was salutary, number two in his class.
	And he was telling me what they were teaching him in high school, and he was buying it at the time, you know, about the militia being the National Guard and all this other kind of stuff.
	And so now David Hogg is doing this.
	I mean, he's reverted back to a high school-level propaganda understanding of the Second Amendment.
	It's truly amazing to see it, isn't it?
	Well, exactly. And, you know, I don't even engage in those debates anymore, David.
	I'll call my radio show or I'll be on social media and somebody will make those arguments.
	And I do. I have kind of a running bibliography of now decisions and quotations from the U.S. Supreme Court.
	If somebody says, well, what militia are you in?
	Unless you're in the National Guard, the Second Amendment doesn't apply to you.
	I say you need to read the Heller decision from 2008, which very clearly spells out that you and I and the common man, the general citizen, is the militia in the 1791 sense when the Second Amendment was ratified.
	It was the common citizen.
	It was everyone. It was the body of the people, to put it in the words of George Washington.
	I don't have to debate that with you.
	The Supreme Court has determined that.
	It's right there in a decision.
	You want to say the Supreme Court's wrong?
	Awesome. But I'm not going to sit here and defend something that's now settled law in the United States.
	The idea that there's no right to carry a gun outside the home.
	And there were some federal circuits that had ruled that way.
	The Ninth Circuit, most famously, most recently, as well, just said, no, there's no right to carry a firearm outside the home.
	Well, New York State Rifle and Pistol Association versus Bruin, just last term of this Supreme Court, and I really, really like this Supreme Court, for reasons that are obvious, they came out and they said, no, what's bear mean?
	Bear means carry. Yeah.
	Clearly, that doesn't mean carry from your living room to your bathroom.
	That means carry where law-abiding citizens are going to be, which includes out in the public.
	And for that reason, set aside New York's incredibly restrictive licensing scheme that says, well, government officials get to decide who has a proper reason And a sufficient need, get that, sufficient need to exercise a constitutional freedom.
	And that was New York's system, that's been Hawaii's, it's been California's, and a number of other states.
	And the Supreme Court of the United States said no.
	If some government bureaucrat gets to scratch his chin and decide who does and doesn't have a constitutional right, that's not a right.
	That's a government-bestowed privilege.
	That's not how our Constitution works.
	That's not how our Bill of Rights works specifically.
	So they set that aside.
	And now all those what we call may-issue states are having to reexamine.
	But again, that's now settled law.
	We don't have to debate that.
	There's no split. Out there of authority, which there was until last year, there is a right to carry outside the home.
	And that's even where, you know, I love using the term constitutional carry.
	And it's funny because I was testifying for our bill for permitless carry last year.
	And the chairman of our Senate Judiciary Committee, one Senator, Liz Brown, even though she's a Republican, is very, very, very hostile to Second Amendment issues.
	She's very hostile to constitutional carry.
	And I was testifying, as I have for years, trying to get this thing passed until we finally did.
	And I referred to it two or three times as constitutional carry.
	And she said, well, excuse me.
	She goes, are you saying that any requirement for a license or a permit is unconstitutional?
	And I said, no. I said, a may issue system is unconstitutional, but a licensing system across the board has been upheld, including right here in Indiana, by our appellate courts, because it's a shall issue system.
	If you're eligible, you get your license.
	And she goes, well, if you're not making the argument that a licensing scheme is unconstitutional, then you shouldn't be calling this constitutional carry, because the system we have now is constitutional.
	And I sort of chuckled and I said, well, Senator, I understand your point, but the idea behind constitutional carry is that the Constitution, not only of the United States, but the state of Indiana, what our Constitution in Indiana says is the people shall have the right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and the state.
	Period. End of story. Very short, very sweet.
	I always say it's elegant in its simplicity.
	I said, if the Second Amendment says what it says, not that I have a right to bear arms, and our own Indiana Constitution says I have a right to bear arms, then the Constitution is my license.
	And while the state can impose a shall-issuing system if it wants to, I'm here to tell you that as a matter of policy, we shouldn't want to.
	And that's what constitutional carry is all about, because the Second Amendment should occupy the same status as every other constitutional right.
	I don't need a license to Or permit to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures or to post something on the internet.
	And so we simply raise the Second Amendment back up to a position of equal stature with the other constitutional freedoms.
	That's why it's called constitutional freedom because the Constitution is my license.
	I shouldn't have to beg the government for a license to do what the Constitution says I already have a right to do.
	That's right.
	And she didn't have much to say after that.
	But that's fundamentally what we're talking about.
	And that's why it's been so strong.
	People say, you know, we have a lifetime license here in Indiana.
	Well, Guy, don't you have a lifetime license?
	Yes.
	Why have you been fighting so hard for constitutional carry for 10 years?
	Why you put so much time and effort on your own nickel?
	And I said, because I want to live in a state that recognizes the Second Amendment on par as having equal status with every other constitutional freedom.
	That's where I want to live.
	And that's what we finally made happen.
	And I hope we see more and more states join the 25.
	You're right. And my problem is, is that the Democrats want to give it equal status with the other ones.
	They want to bring the other ones down to nothing, right?
	Good point. They want to level it all down to zero.
	They want zero emissions.
	They want zero rights. They want zero liberty.
	That's a really good point.
	I'm surprised someone sitting there didn't say, one of the Democrats sit there and say, you know what, we have to start issuing a license that you need in order for the police not to be able to kick your door in or have a warrant.
	Yeah, that's a great point.
	Well, I mean, they're talking about licenses for people to engage in journalism and all the rest of this stuff.
	The same people who are out there, you know, saying, well, we're going to tell you what you can and cannot carry.
	That's what I like about constitutional carry, about permitless carry, is that it really goes on offense in terms of taking things there.
	You know, most of the time we're on defense.
	And we say, well, you know, they come up with some proposal to gradually cut away our rights.
	It's always a, you know, a...
	It's an iterative process of infringement, and I think that's why they use that word in the Second Amendment, that, in my opinion, any regulation of our rights to keep and bear arms is going to be an infringement.
	So they keep coming up with these little niggling rules about stuff, and that's the way they replied to the Bruin decision.
	New York comes out and says, well, we've got these special areas that we have to protect, and, of course, you do have this in your previous court decisions, and so we can define all these places as sensitive areas, and you're not going to be allowed to carry, and we'll make everything a sensitive area.
	So they come up with these little workarounds with it to infringe on things.
	And so usually we're putting out these fires that the Democrats are setting fire to the Bill of Rights in various places, and we're stomping it out.
	But in this particular case, we take the Constitution and put it right in their face.
	And that's what I really like is the permitless carry and the constitutional carry.
	That's absolutely right.
	But, you know, we have people like Keith Overman.
	Now, just saying, well, there's absolutely nothing that allows you to own a gun.
	It's just absolutely insane and detached from reality.
	But that's the world that we live in, you know?
	There's this detachment from reality about everything.
	We can't explain to people what genders are.
	I don't know if we're going to explain to them what a Second Amendment is.
	Well, good point. But, you know, a lot of times when I link back the writing of the Second Amendment and the motivation, the incentive of the founders to enshrine the Second Amendment rights, the right to bear arms in the Constitution, You know, I go back. You mentioned the Declaration of Independence.
	I refer to that document so often because, you know, what is it?
	It's really, in my mind, the groundwork, the foundations, the principles that then were used to create the legal document, which forms our government, which is the Constitution.
	But to me, the Declaration of Independence throws out and defines very beautifully the theme of our government.
	And I think that's very important.
	And when it talks about unalienable rights, And that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, exactly as you referred to earlier.
	But where it talks about unalienable rights and it talks about life and liberty to start off and pursuit of happiness, obviously, after that.
	But where it says life and liberty, I always say on the Second Amendment issues, I said, if I have an unalienable right, first of all, what's unalienable mean?
	It means it can't be taken away from me, particularly by the government.
	Mm-hmm. But it can't be taken away from me generally.
	As you mentioned, it's something given to me by God as part of nature's laws and nature's God.
	But it's unalienable.
	How can I not have a right to protect it?
	If I'm denied the means to protect my life, then how do I ever have a right to life to begin with?
	If someone is simply bigger than me or stronger than me, Or armed when I'm not.
	Or there's more of them and less of me.
	If they, at their whim, can deny me of my life, then how did I ever have a right to life in the first place?
	And liberty.
	If I have an unalienable, inherent, given by God, right to liberty, Then how can the government deprive me of my liberty and also at the same time deny me any ability to secure it and to fight for it and to stand up for it with other like-minded people?
	I mean, if the government can deprive me of my liberty on a whim and I have no capacity to stand up and defend myself and defend my liberty...
	Mm-hmm.
	Mm-hmm. But when any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it and establish new government and goes on from there.
	And that all fits together so beautifully, to me, in terms of the theme of our government, the theme of the system of government created by our Constitution, and why they put the Second Amendment so high on the list.
	With a Bill of Rights, because you can't protect any of the things that we set our priorities for our way of life and our system of government if we can't stand up and defend them, and the Second Amendment is why that's there.
	Absolutely right. Yeah, you know, as you're talking about the Declaration of Independence, I remember when I was a student, And they had us memorize the opening of the Declaration of Independence, but it's only the first half of that first paragraph, right?
	And then they stop there.
	And they don't have you, you know, learn the second part that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men and so forth and so on, right?
	And when they become destructive, you alter or abolish those governments.
	They didn't have us memorize that.
	I was just happy as a student that I didn't have any more to memorize.
	Yeah.
	And it wasn't because they were trying to go easy on us.
	I mean, they made us memorize the entire Gettysburg Address, right?
	But for the Declaration of Independence, there's just that first introduction, the first half of it, and not the purpose of government.
	They didn't want you to see that part of it there.
	So, yeah, it was kind of interesting.
	I think I smell a rat.
	I just used it here recently, a big problem that I had.
	And this is in the context of constitutional carry.
	Not last year when we finally got it passed.
	But in previous years, we had a big problem with the Republican caucus in our Indiana Senate, who would go back behind closed doors in these caucus meetings that there's no public vote taken.
	there's no press coverage, no recordings, it's all completely secret.
	Well, the Republicans have a super majority in both the House and the Senate in Indiana.
	But they would go back into these caucus meetings where it's literally all secret, and the bill would be alive when it went back there behind closed doors, and it would be dead when it came out.
	But not one of us who had our senator in that room has any idea what they said or did or how they voted.
	We have no idea.
	And I was railing about this, and I still do on occasion, on the radio.
	And I got called out by a couple of senators and said, Guy, well, our discussions need to be secret because we have to protect our members and we can't have a frank discussion if it's all public.
	And I said... And I recited what you just did on the Declaration of Independence, and I said, consent of the governor.
	I said, if I don't like what you said or did or how you voted in that private caucus meeting, or I wouldn't like it if I knew what it was, How do I either grant or withhold my consent to you continuing to represent me by voting for or against you in the next election?
	How do I give you the consent of me, the governed, if I don't know what you did on my behalf?
	This private caucus meeting BS is completely inconsistent with the With the fundamental principles of this government, which is for me to be able to grant or withhold my consent, the consent of the government, I have to know what you're doing.
	And when you do it in private, behind closed doors, you deprive me of that, right?
	And I will never support that.
	I will oppose that with every breath in me.
	No, you're absolutely right. Yeah, they're just trying to spare you, though, Guy.
	They don't want you seeing the sausage being made, as Bismarck said, right?
	If you saw that sausage-making process, you would never eat what they're selling you anymore.
	No, yeah, well, exactly. But you and I both know what it is.
	It's avoiding accountability. That's right.
	I don't want this bill to pass, but I don't want to be held accountable.
	I don't want my NRA rating to go down.
	I don't want Guy or David saying bad things about us in the media.
	And so I want to kill it, but I don't want to be accountable for killing it.
	I know. We'll just kill it in a private caucus meeting.
	That way I can have my cake and eat it too.
	And it gives them the ability to lie.
	I think it can go right back to I guarantee you, every Republican in there at some point said, back to their constituents, oh, I supported constitutional care.
	Really? Well, if everybody behind those closed doors supported it, why the hell did it come out as a dead bill?
	So it gives them the ability to lie and it avoids accountability.
	And that's something that's fundamentally broken.
	And it's a downside of having a supermajority.
	That's right. Because things get decided behind those closed doors.
	I think that's one of the reasons why, you know, when we look at this, you were talking about, you know, being able to protect yourself.
	And we look at this trade-off always between liberty and safety, right?
	And I think they were coming for the Second Amendment first before they started coming for the First Amendment, you know, free speech.
	They were coming after the guns because it was so easy for them to try to scare people and make that argument, trade off your liberty for safety, right?
	But now they're doing the same thing with the First Amendment.
	They're saying, well, you know, Speech is really dangerous, and it can cost lives, and it can, you know, foment hatred and racism and all the rest of the stuff.
	So we've got to keep you safe from all those different things.
	We've got to keep you safe from any speech that you don't like or that somebody might be offended from.
	But they did it for that. It's very easy to do that and try to make the case, well, you know, guns could be dangerous, that type of thing, focusing on crimes that were committed by guns.
	But now we're seeing this everywhere.
	But it's always, isn't it, This trade-off of liberty versus safety.
	And I've said for the longest time, Guy, that to the extent that you give up your liberty, you're not safe.
	You become more and more of a prisoner.
	And of course, Franklin said, if you do that, you don't deserve to have them.
	And we've seen over history that you don't get either one of them, right?
	You give up your safety, you lose your liberty as well.
	Exactly. There isn't any way that we can buy our safety by giving up our liberty.
	And that is, I think, the essence of what they've done for the longest time with the Second Amendment, what they're now doing with the First Amendment as well.
	Well, exactly. And, you know, that Franklin quote you see so often, and it's so apropos, you know, those who would give up liberty for the sake of security deserve neither and will soon lose both.
	And I couldn't agree with that more.
	But it's a great setup.
	I don't know if you can see here over my left shoulder, and I'm sure you can't read the caption, but that's Thomas Jefferson back behind me.
	And the caption on this picture, which I come in every morning, I turn the light on above this picture, and I say, morning, TJ. And And then I read the passage, which is on that picture, which is, I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery.
	That's right. And that quote is really what drives me in doing so much of what I do, whether as a Second Amendment attorney As a radio host and as a gun rights advocate, that's what drives me because it's all about freedom and those that would take my freedom under the guise of security are really trying to deprive me of both at the end of the day.
	You're right. Yeah, you're not going to be safe in a cell, even if it's a padded cell, right?
	You're still going to be in danger with that.
	We were talking earlier about the militia argument, and I think this is kind of interesting.
	We've now had... The Pentagon come out to the military and say, we don't trust young men with guns.
	This is the headline of reason.
	Pentagon experts don't trust young men with guns or with Red Bull.
	Now, Red Bull's not protected, but the guns are.
	And if you can't trust the military with guns, they lock them all up for the military as it is anyway.
	That's why we've had some mass shootings and killings on military bases, because they don't allow the military to have guns.
	Weapons to protect themselves.
	And yet they make this argument all the time.
	We hear this all the time from the Democrats.
	Well, you know, you just can't have those military-style weapons because, oh, look at the velocity of that particular bullet and nonsense like that.
	But the military is one of the worst offenders in terms of people being allowed to protect themselves, isn't it?
	Yeah, well, no, exactly.
	And, you know, the pendulum was swinging the other way not so long ago because after you had the two Fort Hood mass shootings, then you had a shooting at the Recruitment Center, which I believe was Chattanooga, another one in Nashville.
	And you saw these mass shootings on bases where we're here.
	These are our military personnel trained with firearms, trained in the implementation of force and deadly force, but not be trusted with firearms on their own base.
	And to walk in where a military base is a gun-free zone.
	I mean, just get your mind around that for a minute.
	So much for the militia argument, right?
	Yeah.
	And so, like, for instance, our governor at the time here passed a resolution that said, no, if they pass a handgun safety program, our National Guard troops can carry on base.
	They can carry their personal sidearms.
	And so I was running around the state because I'm a firearms instructor as well and certified to teach exactly the course they were talking about.
	I ran around on my own dime.
	And train hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of National Guardsmen and women so that they had the right to carry a gun on post, you know, on base and while they're performing their duties at recruitment centers and otherwise.
	And that was a great leap forward.
	But man, now we see coming from DOD, they went up.
	Raise the age to buy a gun if you're part of DOD to 25.
	So I'm sorry, you're going to, with a stroke of a pen, you're going to deprive the constitutional rights of hundreds of thousands of people that aren't yet 25 just because they're in the military?
	They're out there putting their lives on the line for our constitutional rights and you're going to strip theirs?
	I mean, it's so offensive to me on so many different levels, but we see it over and over.
	Yeah, we saw it over the last couple of years with the mandates in the military over the vaccine.
	You're going to take away your religious freedom and your constitutional rights.
	And many soldiers that I've talked to over that period of time say, look, you know, we didn't sign up for this.
	We signed up to protect the Constitution.
	That's our fundamental thing.
	And that means we protect it even when it comes to our rights.
	So I hope they do push back against it.
	But it's just the most amazing...
	The thing to see somebody who has been vetted by the military, you know, they know these people, they've trained these people with firearms, as you pointed out.
	How would they then say, well, you're not allowed to have these firearms to protect yourself if you've been trained to use these firearms to protect the country, but you're not going to be allowed to have these things to protect yourself.
	It is absolutely insane, but, you know, that's the type of thing we see from them all the time, isn't it?
	Exactly. And consider the test now, the Bruin case that we've discussed.
	They've thrown out this balancing test that so many courts used for years on Second Amendment issues.
	You say, well, if there's a compelling state interest like safety, then a little bit of infringement is okay if it doesn't really go to the core of a constitutional freedom to a dramatic degree.
	And the Supreme Court said, no, that balancing is gone.
	It's text, history, and tradition.
	And that is the test now.
	And when that decision came out, I said, look, this is nice for carry rights and it's nice to define that, but where this is going to have the most impact is by redefining the test.
	Imagine this oral argument, whether in front of the Supreme Court or anywhere else.
	Someone who's part of a military base is denied the right to buy a gun because he's not 25, simply because he's in the military.
	I want to see an attorney general somewhere stand up and make the argument to a court or a lawyer before the U.S. Supreme Court, court stand up and make the argument that it is part of not only the text of the Second Amendment that says simply the people shall have the right to bear arms, but it's consistent with the history and tradition of the United States of America for our soldiers to not be able to have guns.
	I want to see that argument.
	Especially the age thing.
	I want to see somebody stand up with a straight face and make that argument because I'll be roaring with laughter.
	For the longest time, I remember people saying, okay, so you can draft kids at 18, send them off to kill and die, but they can't get liquor until they're 21, right?
	So now they're going to say, we're going to train you in the use of all firearms as well as weapons of mass destruction.
	You were trained and you were vetted as trustworthy, but you can't get a gun to protect yourself until you're 25.
	That's so insane, but that really is the world that we live in, isn't it?
	We ran up against that in the context of constitutional carry because our constitutional carry law in Indiana allows anyone from any state, by the way, so includes non-residents who's not a prohibited possessor to carry if they're above 18.
	They're 18 or above.
	And I was arguing that point in committee and I had several legislators push back and say, well, a lot of other states have said 21, we ought to make it 21.
	I said, hold on, you're going to tell a 19-year-old kid, a 20-year-old kid, who just came back from carrying an M4 select-fire automatic weapon in Iraq or Afghanistan, or who drove a tank, or who manned field artillery, We don't trust them to go to the store and buy their own handgun.
	They're going to look at you like you're crazy because you are.
	And that died pretty quickly.
	We got it done for 18 and up.
	I just pointed out to people that, you know, they were coming for the cannons at Lexington.
	If you look at the come and take it flag, that's a cannon on there.
	I like keeping the cannon on there.
	I've seen a lot of these things where they put an AR-15 on there and it's like, you know, let's keep the cannon on there because that gives people the real idea of what this is really about.
	It is crazy.
	You're talking about recognizing reciprocity of a carry for people coming into Indiana and how important that is.
	I think one of the worst offenders of that has been New Jersey.
	I've seen so many different cases of people...
	Getting caught, a guy going to jail because he was in the process of moving, and he's got all his possessions in his car.
	His family, he's running late.
	His family's concerned. They ask the police to be on the lookout for him, so they pull him over, and they start questioning him, and it's like, can you open up the trunk?
	We'd like to see what's in there. It's like, he's got nothing to hide, so he opens up the trunk, and underneath all this luggage and clothing and all this kind of stuff are some of his guns down at the bottom.
	He got busted and got jailed.
	We just had another case of this with...
	Somebody who is a female wrestler for the WWE. She's licensed in Florida.
	She goes to New Jersey. She parks the car there.
	She had the gun in her glove compartment because she's had people threaten her and stalk her and things like that.
	The people who are doing the parking for her look at it and they call the police.
	And now she's in big trouble.
	I mean, it's just insane to see how New Jersey is victimizing people who have been vetted, gone above and beyond what their constitutional right is, and tried to comply with this as a privilege.
	It's just amazing and disgusting to see it.
	I'll give you the worst example because I know exactly the cases you're talking about and agree a thousand percent.
	But the one I talk about in this context, which is mind boggling to me, is a gentleman was flying from Minnesota to Philadelphia and he was licensed to carry in Minnesota, which was recognized apparently in Pennsylvania.
	And he checked his lawfully possessed firearm at the airport in Minnesota for the flight, which you can do and I do it regularly.
	He checked his firearm, unloaded, secured in a locked case, the whole requirement.
	Was flying to Philadelphia because of weather, got diverted to Newark.
	So he lands in Newark.
	Because there was no flight out yet that night, so they said, well, we're going to put you up at the airport hotel and fly you out the next morning.
	So they gave everybody their luggage back.
	He goes, so you have your toiletries and a change of clothes or whatever.
	So he spends the night, he goes back and he says, by the way, I need to declare an unloaded firearm in my checked bag.
	And there's a cop standing right there who says, why didn't you see your New Jersey license to carry?
	And he goes, I don't have one, but it's just in my bag.
	And I'm on my way to Pennsylvania.
	And I'm just declaring it because it's in my bag.
	He said, well, I saw you carry that suitcase up here.
	If it's in your suitcase, you don't have a New Jersey license.
	You're going to jail. He goes, I didn't want to be in Newark.
	It wasn't my idea. Nobody wants to be in Newark.
	I'm here involuntarily.
	It's in my checked bag. And they didn't care.
	They took him to jail.
	He was looking at two years in prison.
	Eventually, the governor got involved.
	I think it was still Chris Christie then.
	And he got things dramatically reduced or dropped.
	But he spent thousands and thousands of dollars and spent weeks in jail because his flight got diverted.
	That's how ridiculous it is.
	Wow. And I believe him because nobody wants to go to Newark.
	That's totally believable.
	It's just, it is insane.
	Absolutely is insane. But thank you so much for joining us.
	Guy Relford, and again, you can find him, he's live on radio in Indiana, but it's the Gun Guy podcast.
	Is that correct, that you'll find everywhere?
	Yes, sir. Yep, it's on wabc.com, which is available from anywhere.
	And yeah, the Gun Guy podcast, which you can find on iTunes and any number of other places.
	Thank you so much for joining us.
	Thank you so much for what you're doing for freedom, because that really is key.
	And all of our freedoms are under attack.
	But again, they began with the Second Amendment, because they could start pushing this trade-off your liberty for safety thing, I think.
	But they're going for everything now.
	They want to take all of them down.
	So thank you for what you do, Guy.
	I really do appreciate it. Well, thank you, and it's an honor to be here.
	Thank you. All right, folks, before we end the program, I want to reply to some of the people who've left some comments here and tips on Rumble.
	We have Sprumford.
	Thank you very much for the tip on Rumble.
	He says, thanks for finding the good fight, Mr.
	Knight. God bless you and your family.
	Well, thank you. That is a blessing.
	Your support is. Rumble, North American house hippo.
	Thank you for the tip as well.
	I enjoy it when you reminisce on your early career.
	So, like the bank robber in Dirty Harry said, I gots to know, are your fingerprints on my TI-99-4A I had when I was 12?
	No, I didn't work on that project at all.
	I'm a former Stone and Webster Engineering alumnus.
	When they went out of business, I ended up driving a Toronto City bus.
	What can I tell you?
	At least it paid better.
	That's right. You'll make a lot more money if you get a technical education as an electrician right now than you will if you get an education as an electrical engineer.
	Just saying. There was a guy who does that.
	I've seen him talking about it.
	I'm trying to get him on because I think people need to understand...
	The importance not just for going in a different direction than the crowd is going, right?
	But learning something that is real, that is tangible.
	Everybody is getting subsumed into computers and into things that are one level abstract.
	And for the people who actually put stuff together, you can make a lot of money.
	As a matter of fact, the guy who is doing that, he does welding.
	And he was talking about how he said you're going to get a minimum of $80,000 a year after just a couple years training with him.
	Spend a small fraction of what you would spend on a college education.
	He said he's made as much as $300,000 a year in that.
	But you look at electricians as well, as I was pointing out yesterday.
	They want to electrify everything.
	But they don't have electricians to do that.
	So that's a key thing to take a look at.
	But even beyond that, if we get into a situation where the economy breaks down, I wonder why that would happen.
	Would it have anything to do with the Federal Reserve and the deficit and the debt and all the rest of the stuff and the designed plan to do that?
	If we get into a situation like that, if you've got real skills to do real stuff You can barter those skills with other people.
	That is as good as gold, and I would recommend that you get gold and silver, but you need skills as well to have that kind of independence.
	So, yeah, it is interesting how we all wind up doing different things, isn't it?
	Now, at Texas Instruments, I was working with the semi-custom, semi-conductor people.
	We were doing... We're taking board-level designs from companies like Apple was one of our customers, and it would be reduced into a semi-custom semiconductor.
	So you take something that's a full board level and reduce it down to a single component.
	That saved them money, but it also protected them from reverse engineering.
	Let's see. Also on Rumble, we have Little Johnny Boy.
	Thank you for the tip. He says, Michael Pomeroy replying to Handy.
	Michael, any updates on the C-section?
	Yes, we had a prayer request that was out there yesterday for Michael Pomeroy.
	I think it was put up by another listener.
	Thanks to all for their prayers.
	Mom delivered AJ one pound, 14 ounces, 14 inches.
	Both are doing well. AJ will be in the NICU for at least, so it's cut off so we don't know.
	But the child was very, very premature.
	So thank you everybody for praying.
	And it really does make a difference.
	It really does. And if you don't have that experience, you need to try to connect with God.
	You need to listen to what He has to say, listen to what the basis of that relationship is.
	Prayer is one of the ways that God shows us that He's real and that He's really there, that He loves us, that He cares for us, that He's always there.
	That's the beauty of it.
	And I can testify of it with my own life.
	And again, one of the best books I've ever seen is The Life of George Miller, where he goes through tens of thousands of cases, many of them very big, very miraculous, very immediate, of answered prayer.
	Thank you for joining us. Has your news been censored, banned, censored, banned over and over again?
	Has vital information been held prisoner by mainstream and anti-social media?
	It's the duty of every thinking person to make the great escape to TheDavidKnightShow.com.
	There you'll find links to live streams, videos, audio podcasts, and support links.
	Live stream the show at DLive and every Monday through Friday, 9 a.m.
	Eastern. Videos at Bitchute and Ugetube.
	New audio podcasts, The Real David Knight Show, at Podbean, iTunes, Stitcher, iHeart, and more.
	But even though there's a light at the end of the tunnel, without your support, the show will run out of gas.
	The links to support this show are at TheDavidKnightShow.com to donate via Subscribestar, donate via *, or donate via *, Cash App, Bitcoin, or P.O. Box.
	Our sincere thanks to all of you who have stood with us to get this call.

▲