Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 8, 2023 - The David Knight Show

02:59:45

The David Knight Show - 03/08/2023

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	using free speech to free minds using free speech to free minds
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	I'm Gardner Goldsmith filling in for David on this day 1091 of the emergency.
	Everyone to be out from city.
	As the clock strikes 13 on airstrip one, we join each other for the three-hour excursion into truth and morality and kinship called the David Knight Program.
	I want to thank Tony Arterburn for helping so much on the backside of things here.
	And I want to thank you for joining us.
	Of course, if you're joining us in the Rockfin Chat or in Rumble, I'll check out some of your comments as we look at some of the big stories of the day and start to pair them apart to get some intellectual ammunition to take with us.
	You might know my work from MRCTV or my substack.
	It's Gardner Goldsmith Substack.
	You probably don't know my work from television.
	Ah, yes.
	Those days from Star Trek Voyager and The Outer Limits.
	I was never on camera.
	You didn't see my name.
	I was just in the back.
	Taking care of business.
	Good to have you here one and all.
	I'm LG Grande Gardner-Goldsmith and I am very pleased to be here with you on the program.
	We've got so much to discuss and I'm going to be joined at 9 45 today by none other than Eric Shiner.
	Eric is the director of MRCTV, and he is going to be on fire about some of the things that seem to be dominating the news right now.
	And if you have been watching the pop media news, you know that the dominant story is Tucker Carlson's presentation of the January 6 footage that has seen so many people start to remember that they are being gaslit you know that the dominant story is Tucker Carlson's presentation of the January 6 footage that has seen so many people start to remember that they Who did not engage in any violent insurrection.
	No one was charged with insurrection.
	And a lot of innocent people who simply wanted some sort of fairness in what they saw as a very unfair vote process, they wanted something done.
	And that footage from Tucker Carlson, so many Americans are appreciating it and yet the politicians They're not appreciating it at all.
	We've got some footage and I want to get your commentary.
	And I will go to the Rockfin chat right now and already thank a number of the folks who are there at Big Brains.
	Good to have you here. Jason Barker is in the house.
	And please remember Jason Barker's own show, The Tiger's Den as well.
	Jason Barker is part of the Knights of the Storm.
	And he and Angry Tiger do a terrific job together as Knights of the Storm and separately.
	Good to have you here, everybody.
	We're going to get started, but again, like I said, at 945, we're going to be joined by none other than Eric Shiner, who will offer us his thoughts on some of the big stories of the day.
	And one of the big stories, as I mentioned, you'll see it, the way that some of these politicians are reacting to some of the footage that Tucker Carlson offered to people.
	In fact, let's take a look at what we're going to be discussing on the program today, give you a quick overview of some of this information.
	First, the January 6th information, Tucker Carlson.
	We'll be looking at a quick news flash and talking about energy in the United States and elsewhere, especially a new story about Germany and what the climate cultists seem to be pushing onto their people And how much worse many people anticipate it's going to be.
	Eric will join us and we'll talk about media censorship and I'll get your opinions about a couple other big items that are coming from the Biden administration.
	In fact, let's go to our newsflash right now and see what's happening out there.
	First of all, here's this.
	This from Zero Hedge.
	Solar energy production could require most of the global silver reserves by 2050.
	Enlarge that for you, everybody.
	Tyler Durden, this actually comes to us via Michael Meharry, who does great work for Schiffgold most of the time and also splits off some of his time to work with the 10th Amendment Center, who did a fantastic job, by the way, remembering the anniversary a couple days ago of the Boston Massacre.
	Very interesting.
	That that conflict between the British soldiers and the American colonialists in Boston should pop up in its anniversary from 1770 going back to the days of British colonialism and the conflict in Boston near the harbor at about the same time that Tucker Carlson should put out this video footage That
	actually has helped rectify the image of how those people who went into the Capitol were depicted.
	So here is a little bit from Michael Meharry.
	He says, An Australian study projects solar cells may use most of the world's silver reserves by 2050.
	Due to its outstanding electrical conductivity, silver is an important element in the production of solar panels.
	Yeah, a lot of people, if you're aware of precious metals, you know that copper is, of course, conductive, but silver is even more conductive.
	It's just that it's more expensive.
	It's not in its plentiful supply.
	Harder to get. It is used to conduct electrical charges out of the solar cell and into the system.
	Each solar panel only uses a small amount of silver, but with the demand for solar panels growing exponentially every year, gee, why could that be?
	Those small amounts of silver add up.
	According to a research paper by scientists at the University of New South Wales, solar manufacturing...
	Now, wait a second.
	How can scientists at the University of New South Wales have put out new research papers?
	This is very dubious, because everybody knows Australia was locked down.
	How could they even get together?
	And of course, using energy, if they were doing it by video or doing research on those awful, evil computer things, well, that uses energy, and that spills out carbon.
	It's going to kill all the dingoes in Australia.
	They're going to burn to death.
	We can't have that. Obviously, this University of South Wales study has been put out by the energy sector as propaganda.
	How can we possibly believe this?
	I think John Kerry should fact-check this, don't you?
	Or maybe King Charles with his new, what is it, Terra Carta instead of the Magna Carta.
	Ha ha ha ha! And he presented his terra carta, which is the law of the earth.
	He presented it in Athens.
	It's serious.
	He presented it in Greece.
	Because, of course, he's, you know, referencing the pagans.
	Why not? Unbelievable.
	Anyway, here's a little bit more.
	Solar manufacturers will likely require over 20% of the current annual silver supply by 2027.
	And by that wonderful date of 2050, when in some states they want to make sure that everybody is on an electric grid, like they want to do that in New Jersey, solar panel production will use approximately 85-98% of the current global silver reserves.
	Which sort of reminds me of this story that I got to write for MRCTV last week.
	Study reiterates, there's not enough mineral matter on Earth to run climate cult renewables.
	And you see the little thumbnail there.
	It says, both Counterpunch.org and The New American offer valuable coverage of an important study detailing not just the self-defeating power and resource requirements pervading every level of the inefficient green energy chain, but which also reminds interested parties that there is not enough mineral matter So perhaps
	the mission on which David Knight has gone over the past couple days to the Capitol in Tennessee to work with people to try to recognize what the U.S. Constitution demands that Dues that are payable to the state must only be paid in gold or silver coin.
	To recognize that the U.S. Constitution stipulates that the federal government can coin money, not print money.
	It also doesn't allow the federal treasury to offhand, to just toss out that power to be able to coin money.
	But it also, the Constitution, does not Just give, solely give the power to coin money to the federal government.
	It doesn't say to coin the only money.
	It allows them to coin their money if people want to get it.
	But so many generations of Americans have lived under this absurd, going back to the 1800s, have lived under this absurd idea that The government's choice of money is the official money and everybody has to use this.
	Otherwise, you get beaten and thrown into jail or you'll have your stuff taken away from you.
	Well, I think we've become sort of like beaten dogs, right?
	Crypto has opened that up.
	Things like Bitcoin have allowed people to circumvent some of that mandate, some of that mindset.
	David Knight is in the state capitol today, and he was there yesterday, testifying in favor of the idea of recognizing gold and silver as a means of exchange, as real currency in the state of Tennessee, opening up perhaps a state connection to the gold and silver coinage opening up perhaps a state connection to the gold and silver coinage with stores of gold
	This is something that, and as I mentioned, if you go to the 10th Amendment Center, almost every month they have a piece about how different state legislators are trying to get that done in various states.
	Not all the states, but in various states.
	So check out the 10th Amendment Center and they'll have reports on that a lot.
	And of course, I know David will be back tomorrow and I can't wait to see what David has to say about his testimony and about what kinds of responses he might have gotten.
	But one thing's for sure, it might be a good time to go to davidknight.gold, to go to Wise Wolf Gold and Silver Exchange and become a member of the Wolf Pack.
	And again, this is not done as sort of some lead-in to an advertisement or anything like that.
	But I think we can see the writing on the wall, at least in particular with the demand for precious metals and in particular for silver.
	So if you are interested, please go to the David Knight website.
	And if you get the opportunity, You can go to Knights of the Storm and you'll see David's website is listed right there among friends.
	There's the David Knight website where you can shop and get great items.
	I just got the coffee mug and I've gotten a t-shirt.
	I've got my pen right here.
	I was preparing for the show using my David Knight pen and it's a great site not only for supporters of the show but for supporters of good products and from there you can also Check out some of the great stuff that David Knight has connected with Wise Wolf Gold and Silver Exchange.
	So I want to thank the people at the Knights of the Storm.
	And you can see how they list everybody, including Tony's great output.
	Tony Arterburn, of course, in the back room earlier this morning working with me.
	And he's got all his connections right there, thanks to them.
	And there's Wise Wolf Gold and Silver.
	So get over there and check out the Wolf Pack.
	Or if you just want to buy...
	On its own, you don't want to do a regular monthly plan to buy and put aside gold or silver.
	Thanks to them being able to do this in a lot larger, almost bulk way to be able to get discounts on their purchases and then pass on the savings.
	You can just buy separate things too.
	So it's great. And they're located just in the Branson, Missouri area.
	Really good stuff. So with that said, I want to go back to The update on the news very quickly.
	And here is the latest from Legal Insurrection.
	Man of the people, Pete Buttigieg, is slamming Tucker Carlson.
	And he doesn't think that Tucker Carlson is a man of the people.
	He doesn't know the difference between TJ Maxx and Coles.
	This Tucker Carlson, who had people with torches...
	Screaming at his wife and child in their house simply because he put information on the news.
	Antifa people going around doing stuff like that.
	This coming from Pete Buttigieg, who almost his entire life has been an artifice.
	Don't even mention the fact that this guy who's promoting the climate cult that will drive all these prices higher...
	And make the price of energy even higher than it already is.
	Don't even mention the fact that this guy to promote bicycles was caught getting out of a giant Chevy Suburban or something like that.
	With the bike in the back and his assistance running.
	Driving him in to the outskirts of the Washington, D.C. area where he could take his bicycle out of the back and then make it look like he rode to work.
	That's Pete Buttigieg being critical of Tucker Carlson.
	We'll get into the Tucker Carlson a little bit more in just a bit.
	Growing number of January 6th defendants are asking judges to delay trials in light of the newly released Tucker Carlson new release of footage.
	This originally came from the Epoch Times, but Zero Hedge has it.
	Great job, Zero Hedge.
	A growing number of people charged with crimes related to the January 6, 2021 breach of the U.S. Capitol are requesting trial delays so they can review newly disclosed footage.
	Now, these people have been in jail for two years, some of them.
	I mentioned Joe Biggs on my program last night on Rockfin.
	You know, Joe Biggs formerly with Infowars.
	I mentioned how so many people don't even have any idea of the people who are being held, how they have been held, and the absolutely shameless way in which the US politicians, especially the RINOs and Democrats, have put up basically these kangaroo courts and held these people, contrary to the very document they swear to uphold, the US Constitution.
	And so many of these people are falling into the same pattern.
	So many of these politicians are falling into the same pattern.
	Intentionally so, I think.
	So I can't say falling.
	They're diving into it.
	That we saw in New Hampshire and Massachusetts and New England back in 2018.
	As I mentioned last night on my program, to give you an idea of the mindset of some of the people who just want to blackball, broad brush the January 6th people.
	Throw them all into this bucket of so-called insurrectionists to give you an idea of how thoughtless some of those people are.
	And I can't say all of them because then I'd be guilty of doing exactly what I'm saying many of these people are doing.
	I'm very, very good friends or was very good friends with a number of very left-wing writers in New England.
	And if you saw my interview with Tom Monteleone, the science fiction and horror writer who has won three Bram Stoker Awards, But now is being made persona non grata by the Bram Stoker people.
	He's being shut out of the Bram Stoker awards.
	They don't want him to come to conventions.
	They tried to revoke his Bram Stoker simply because he ironically tried to nominate As he said, a smart, dead white guy for a Lifetime Achievement Award.
	And he was showing the people at the Bram Stoker Awards how ridiculous it was that they intentionally were giving preferential treatment to women.
	And he has the document where they actually admit to a person in email, yeah, well, to make up for past wrongs, we're giving preferential treatment to women for X, Y, or Z award.
	In other words, to make up for past wrongs that we can't make up for, we're now creating injustice, we're engaging injustice against other people.
	So just for that, they tried to push him out.
	Those types of people, when Joe Biggs and a number of other people were organizing a free speech rally on the Boston Common a couple years ago, actually many years ago, four years ago now, at least Three to four years ago now.
	Nobody even knew what they were doing, and nobody within these left-wing circles, they didn't know anything about them.
	And to show you the mindset of some of the politicians who play up this sort of stuff, to pander, to make themselves look virtuous, the mayor of Boston, Marty Walsh, at that time, he then went to work for the Biden administration, And the governor of Massachusetts, Charlie Baker, whom Joe Biden calls Charlie Parker, as if he's some jazz saxophonist, as the Brits might say.
	Charlie Baker and the mayor, they got together at a news conference a couple days before this free speech rally was to be held.
	This free speech rally was in response to the way that Antifa and other left-wingers had attacked people like Mylonopoulos, Laura Loomer, and others.
	And how they had, you know, thrown stuff at people, you know, hardening cement inside small plastic bottles, urine inside bottles and feces, screaming at people, clubbing people.
	And then, of course, the conservatives rose up and came back at them.
	So you saw the rise of the Proud Boys.
	But this was strictly for free speech.
	What did at this news conference, what did the two politicians from Massachusetts say?
	And Charlie Baker is a Republican, by the way.
	They said, Literally, the mayor of Boston said, we don't know who these people are, but their hate is not welcomed here in Boston.
	Now, not one reporter in that room ever mentioned, you know, the first phrase of what you said does not comport with the second phrase there, mayor.
	How can you claim you don't know who they are if they You then say their hate is not welcomed here.
	And then, oh no, that was the governor who said that.
	It was Governor Baker who said their hate is not welcomed in Massachusetts.
	Then the mayor came on and said, oh, and they don't even have a permit.
	So as I've mentioned before, so please pardon me if you've heard me talk about this before, but I literally was on streaming the news about this.
	I got into Facebook as I was streaming it.
	Got into Facebook, found the Facebook page for the free speech group, and found days before they had posted the photograph of their permit.
	So not only were they lying about not knowing who these people were, they were trying to portray it as if they didn't, that these people were hateful.
	And they were trying to portray it as if those people didn't have permission to be there.
	So what does that do?
	That inspires left-wing people to feel righteous, to say, oh, they're hateful.
	They don't even have a permit to come into our city.
	And we're going to go down and protest them.
	So I knew guys who were taking the train down and literally snapping pictures about how excited they were to join other people, to stand up against these hate mongers.
	And not one of those people could tell you any of the people who organized it.
	They couldn't tell you that Joe Biggs is married to a woman from the Philippines, that Dr.
	Shiva Ivarude, or whatever his name is, was one of the organizers, a dude from India.
	And, you know, people have varying opinions about Dr.
	Shiva. The idea that these people are racist.
	Oh, I get it. So an Indian dude and a guy who's married to a Filipino woman who also covered a lot of what was happening down there with the riots in Ferguson and was trying to be in favor of the people who were trying to speak up about police brutality.
	They're racists.
	I get it.
	And don't forget, at that time, Infowars was the group That actually exposed the fact that the cops in Ferguson were targeting people with lasers.
	Right? Then we have the heroism of a guy like David Knight who goes down to the Bundy Ranch to defend those people and their property against the government.
	What's the common theme in all of this?
	Perfidy of government people.
	And so we turn to...
	Let's see...
	I'm going to skip over the rest of the news stuff and go into that in the next hour.
	Now let's turn to what some of the politicians have said about Tucker Carlson.
	and then in about 20 minutes, we'll be joined by Eric Scheiner of MRCTV, the director of MRCTV, and I'd like to get your thoughts inside the Rockfin chat, and don't forget, if you want to donate everything, if you want to tip, anything like that, it will all go to David if you want to donate everything, if you want to tip, anything like that, it will all go to David and the family, if you want to tip over at Rumble, if you want to tip at Rockfin, that will be absolutely terrific, that's great, and I
	Thank you so much for being there with me, everybody.
	And... Brian and Deb McCartney say, Joe Biggs had ties to Oath Keepers long before January 6th.
	I'd love to get your opinion on Oath Keepers because I generally looked at Oath Keepers as being pretty decent people for quite a while.
	And unfortunately, I think a lot of this has given people a lot of second thought about Oath Keepers and so on and so forth.
	So let me know what you think about that.
	And that's true. That's absolutely correct.
	Lori Light says, let's just go back to what Lori Light said just moved in.
	Wondered who was focusing on right-hand actions while egregiously growing.
	Yeah, I'm not quite sure what that is.
	But I know that Patrick S. is there.
	Brian and Deb. Angry Tiger is there.
	Harps, greetings from Australia, man.
	Give my regards to the study people in New South Wales who are figuring out that maybe it's not a good idea to adopt the practices of the climate cult and sacrifice people to the demigod of Gaia.
	But... Let's go with some of this video footage.
	First of all, I think we're going to see Mitch McConnell.
	Let's watch Mitch McConnell first and see what Mitch McConnell has to say.
	He's asked a question about whether he thought it was wise for Tucker Carlson, whether he agrees with people who are criticizing Tucker Carlson.
	Angry Tiger says almost everything is infiltrated.
	That's interesting. I think Joe Biggs is straight up honest about his thoughts and everything like that.
	And I know that David knows Joe.
	And I feel real bad for Joe.
	And who's that guy? Sam from Infowars.
	I don't see a lot of support coming from Alex Jones for those guys.
	So tough stuff.
	All right, here's a little bit of Mitch McConnell.
	The mistake by Speaker McCarthy to give access to personal policy.
	So they say it wasn't a mistake.
	It wasn't a mistake.
	It wasn't a mistake. It wasn't a mistake of the Speaker to give this footage to Tucker Carlson.
	Oh boy.
	...is how it was depicted, which is a different issue.
	Clearly, the Chief of the Capitol Police, in my view, correctly describes What most of us witnessed firsthand on January 6th.
	So that's my reaction to it.
	It was a mistake in my view for Fox News to depict this in a way that's completely at variance with what our chief law enforcement official here at the Capitol thinks.
	All right, I'm going to pause it right there.
	Anybody, any person who is honest, and I'm sorry to color it and prejudice it this way, I'll just say this.
	I believe that if one is an honest person and one compares the footage that we were shown by the pop media for two years now, the footage that was allowed out by the so-called January 6th commission,
	And the footage that Tucker Carlson showed and that information that Mitch McConnell is holding up saying, well, it's a complete variance to what the law enforcement authorities said at the time and what we saw.
	What did you see, Mitch?
	You weren't even there. You were walked out, even if you were there.
	You didn't see any of that stuff.
	I mean, that's almost as bad as AOC's claiming that she was hiding in her office and quivering for her life.
	Give me a break.
	The other part about this is, if it is at variance, tell us how it's at variance.
	Because if it is at variance and there's important stuff that is at variance, then maybe it's a very important thing to note why it's at variance.
	And perhaps reconsider some of the narrative that those police officers...
	Who, as we can see, allowed people into the building and escorted people who then later were convicted of doing terrible things.
	How could they have been convicted like this shaman guy, the Q shaman guy, QAnon shaman?
	And I know people have differing opinions about that guy.
	As to whether or not he's a plant, whether or not even he might end up having to spend time in prison or if it's all a show or whatever.
	I don't know about that.
	I don't know. But one thing's for sure.
	You know, they say, oh, he was last night.
	We had some good comments on my show last night on Rockland.
	Well, you know, he was in photographs with Giuliani and earlier before things.
	I was like, you know, then there's the question.
	Chris Graves was mentioning that.
	It was good thoughts. And then there's a question of, well, you know, was he doing that?
	Because he wanted to be in the pictures with them, because he thought that they were defending the election and the integrity of the elections.
	He was there with Bernie Carrick, I think, and Rudy Giuliani.
	Was he himself duped, or was he part of a larger setup to make it look crazy and to somehow come out looking like he's a martyr?
	I don't know. If you see the footage, and we've got it coming up, if you see this footage that Tucker Carlson has, then it's important to know that the footage that Tucker Carlson put out was at variance with the narrative we were told.
	That's the point, Mitch.
	And you're not addressing how upset people are And you're not saying how that could be at such variance.
	How is it possible that guys who are being escorted into the building and walked around, brought to the Senate chambers, and at times surrounded by nine Capitol Police officers, how is it that later they can be put in jail for almost three years and then have to plead out and then get four years of prison time?
	How is that possible, Mitch?
	It's not up to Tucker Carlson to explain that variance.
	It's up to Tucker Carlson to show what was not shown to people, which is exactly what he did.
	It's up to you to shut up about how you think it was irresponsible of Tucker Carlson to show what we weren't shown.
	How is that irresponsible?
	What's irresponsible is you people holding on to all that footage and claiming somehow that it's protecting anything.
	What it's protecting is your narrative.
	That's what it's protecting.
	It's protecting holding these people contrary to most of the Bill of Rights, to the Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments.
	Or have you forgotten about those, Mr.
	Lawyer Mitch McConnell, Mr.
	Senator for decades? Now let's hear what Chuck Schumer's got to say.
	By the way, there's a little bit more here, and you'll hear stuff in the background, but it's essentially the same thing.
	They ask him to sort of amplify on that, and he says, well, you know me, I'm not going to give you any answer other than what I want to give you.
	If that's the case, following up on what you said, Tucker Carlson has already teased another round of videos that are going to be released today.
	I understand that you're upset with the way that Fox is depicting it, but he's been forecasting this for months, asking for this access to this footage to have a presentation just like this.
	What's in a mistake for the speaker to hand that – SECRETARY KERRY: You guys know I have many faults, but one of them is not answering the question in a way that I don't want to answer it.
	I've given you the answer.
	Unbelievable. Okay, yeah.
	Now, here's Schumer. Here's Schumer.
	Schumer, check it out.
	Rupert Murdoch, who has admitted they were lies and said he regretted it, has a special obligation to stop Tucker Carlson from going on tonight.
	Now that he's seen how he is perverted and slimed the truth.
	So Schumer is calling for the censorship of Tucker Carlson.
	They are after Tucker Carlson's head.
	Where is the rest of the Fox News team on this?
	Where is Laura Ingraham?
	Where are the people in the morning?
	Where's Sean Hannity?
	Right? How come those people aren't putting out some of this, getting Tucker Carlson to chat with them?
	I mean, of all things, anybody who's familiar with media knows that cross promotion is a big deal.
	So why wouldn't they be getting Tucker Carlson on with these other hosts to say, Yeah, so you've run into a lot of controversy.
	Hey, everybody, watch Tucker's show tonight at such and such a time.
	Where are they on that stuff?
	Chuck Schumer, literally one of the most powerful senators in the United States, one of the people who's responsible, by the way, for proposing a bill that would make it a punishable offense to criticize Israel online.
	He is upset.
	That Tucker Carlson actually showed people stuff that they censored.
	That's Chuck Schumer.
	That's the gall of this man.
	And when we think about this, let's not forget that this isn't just politics.
	This isn't just partisan back and forth.
	We're talking about a woman, Ashley Babbitt, who was shot in the neck and killed.
	We're talking about people whose lives have been destroyed by these people, by Chuck Schumer, who did this intentionally, brought up this January 6th committee to specifically make sure that Donald Trump would not be able to run again.
	That they would somehow be able to indict Donald Trump on inciting an insurrection, inviting an insurrection.
	Now, there's some very powerful footage from Tucker that we've got.
	Let's show just a little bit of this and we'll finish off with Chuck Schumer.
	From letting him go on again and again and again.
	Not because their views deserve such a program, but because our democracy depends on it.
	These lies... And by the way, hold on, let me just...
	Our democracy depends on it.
	Again, they will always refer to the populist notion of democracy Not mentioning that, as the founders understood, democracy was one of the things Aristotle warned people not to adopt.
	Because democracy, as he says, is majority rule, it's gang rule, or as they said in the colonial era, and as James Bovard has reiterated beautifully, it's two wolves and a sheep boating over what they're going to have for lunch, right?
	This idea of democracy also, if you're talking about it within the context of January 6th, then it's made even more absurd that Chuck Schumer should use that.
	But of course, we know he's trying to pander to what every child is told in the ABC after-school specials and in their public schools.
	America is a democracy, which of course we know is false because they wrote the Constitution to try to check the power of rampant democracy, as Aristotle said.
	Aristotle said, if you're going to have a polis, you've got to have some form of written document that sets out the parameters under which that polis is going to operate.
	So he had three things.
	If you had rule by one, you could have a monarchy, as long as you had a constitution.
	If you had rule by a small group, the aristory, the property owners, that would be an aristocracy, and that had to have a constitution.
	This is under the constitutional system.
	And If you had a rule by a group, you'd have a republic under a constitutional system.
	If you didn't have a constitutional system, and as a libertarian anarchist, Christian anarchist, I would mention that all constitutions still are foist on people.
	They're not choices. They're not contracts.
	There's no such thing as a social contract.
	But at least those people, as I often mention, Who swear owes to uphold the Constitution could abide by that document.
	And as Aristotle said, if you don't have a Constitution and you have rule by one, that's called tyranny.
	If you have no Constitution and rule by a group, you have an oligarchy.
	And if you have no Constitution and rule by the plurality of people, you have democracy.
	And he said none of those are acceptable.
	So it's not as if this is some new notion there, Chuck.
	You don't need to go too far back Here is the opening of what Tucker had to say.
	...of that election continue to lie about what is now obvious.
	The real crime, they will tell you again and again, is not what happened on Election Day 2020.
	The real crime is what happened two months later on January 6th when Donald Trump led an insurrection against the duly elected American government.
	To prove that claim and to divert attention from the details of the presidential election itself, Democrats in Congress impaneled what they called the House Select Committee on the January 6th attack.
	The point of that committee was to prevent Donald Trump from running for president again.
	In December of last year, committee members voted unanimously to refer Trump to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution.
	Mission accomplished. But what the committee did not do was explain what happened inside the Capitol on January 6th.
	Three weeks ago, thanks to the new Republican Speaker's Office, we gained access to thousands of hours of surveillance video that helped answer that question.
	The January 6th committee had access to this very same tape and watched much of it.
	Now, as we're about to show you, committee members lied about January 6th criminal defendants and their lawyers.
	Now, before I go any further, just to make sure that I open things up to all of you in the chat, and I tried to do this last night on my program on Rockfin from 6 to, I think we went to 8, just saw some great comments.
	From Lori Light, for Tucker to finally reveal some truth, old truth, yet withhold the truths, is deception to hide the truths we should be attending to now.
	And up above that, I believe, let's see, someone else had a great comment.
	Aaron Moss noted January 6th was 100% set up by Trump, in my opinion.
	There's... Stephen Casper says, no weather balloons invading the U.S. lately.
	They have to have a distraction for us to talk about.
	Very good points, you all.
	I'll continue with some of this stuff.
	Please continue to put your comments into the Rockfin chat because it's just awesome to get your thoughts, one and all.
	And remember, if you do want to donate or anything like that on tips on Rumble or Rockfin, it all goes to David, who today, again, is continuing his work And the State House in Tennessee to try to promote the idea of hard currency as a means of exchange.
	It's unforgivable. Whatever you think of Speaker Kevin McCarthy, he rectified that crime, and we are grateful that he did.
	Before we show you the tape, a few words on the process.
	Our producers had unfettered access to the Capitol surveillance video.
	Neither the speaker's office nor our bosses at Fox News interfered in any way with our investigation.
	Of the 40,000 or so hours of tape, most of it turned out to be irrelevant.
	Static shots of empty rooms, in some cases far from the Capitol itself.
	To find relevant videotape, our producers were given use of Capitol computers with advanced mapping software.
	That made it easy to find what we were looking for.
	What we didn't have was access to facial recognition software, and that was significant.
	For more than two years, we have wondered why some in the crowd that day who seemed to be inciting violence were never indicted for it.
	We assumed these were federal agents of some sort.
	We still assume that.
	And in fact, there were many examples of behavior we saw in those tapes that didn't seem to make sense.
	Men in civilian clothes holding doors open for protesters, escorting others through the Capitol, etc.
	We would love to know who these people were.
	But as of tonight, we don't know.
	And because we don't know, we're not going to put their faces on the screen and suggest they were federal agents.
	That would be irresponsible. So there were many mysteries we could not solve.
	Among them, unfortunately, is the shooting of Ashley Babbitt.
	From the evidence we have, the publicly available evidence, it seems clear that Babbitt was murdered by a Capitol Hill police officer called Michael Byrd.
	Ashley Babbitt was unarmed.
	She was shorter in stature than average.
	She posed no conceivable threat to anyone.
	But beyond that, we can only speculate about what happened.
	There were no security cameras near the speaker's lobby where Ashley Babbitt was killed.
	Okay, now we've got another cut coming up here that I just want to roll right into.
	So I want you to be able to check it out.
	And a little more thing.
	Oh yeah, here's a little more.
	And then we'll probably speak with Eric in about five minutes from MRCTV. Recent weeks, the usual hyenas in Congress and on cable news have been howling about we are putting lives at risk by showing this tape to the public.
	Given that these are the very same people who support open borders and defunding the police, it is hard to take their complaints seriously.
	But we do take security seriously.
	So before airing any of this video, we checked first with the Capitol Police.
	We're happy to say their reservations were minor, and for the most part, they were reasonable.
	Okay, so you might have heard people, Whoopi Goldberg's complaining, Anderson Cooper is complaining.
	They're calling for him to be fired.
	Also, not they in specific, but they're mocking him.
	Anderson Cooper's been mocking him.
	And some of the politicians are saying this is reckless.
	It puts people at risk. Well, you can just see Tucker there checked with, they said they checked with the Capitol Police.
	They've blotted out some identities of police officers and so on and so forth.
	And one of the things I do dispute just a little bit there, I do want to bring it up.
	It sort of broad brushes People who might be involved with the defund the police movement.
	I think it's easy to assume that they don't really care about criminality, but many of them believe that the police are engaged in criminal behavior.
	Many of them might be anarchists, like I am, who say it's immoral to have a gangland group called the police because they support the state, and it's a fraud to think As many good police that are out there,
	it's a fraud to think that police work for the state in general, for the polis in general, is supportable logically or philosophically to claim that you have a right to be left alone and to be able to retain the fruits of your labor and that the government is there to protect the fruits of your labor and make sure you're not ripped off.
	But that agency which is going to protect you also claims to be able to take your stuff at any time and point police guns at you if you don't give it up.
	That's a tautology.
	It's logically insupportable.
	It's philosophically immoral.
	And so that is one of the reasons why, both philosophically and practically, I am an anarchist, and I don't believe that there is any moral support for government whatsoever.
	I will use as a fallback To say, well, if at least the government would get back closer to the Constitution, or I could even accept a monarchy if they were to uphold something like the Magna Carta.
	I could live comfortably under that, even though I morally might have a problem with it.
	I might try to escape and live in the jungle or something like that.
	But those types of explorations aren't really pertinent here.
	I did want to bring up that Tucker goes a little bit far in claiming Making claims about people who are in favor of open borders and maybe in favor of defunding the police.
	But I think his point generally stands.
	I think there is a lot of hypocrisy on the part of those people.
	And I think we understand, or at least I understand, the point he was trying to make there.
	What we made was in blurring the details of a single interior door in the Capitol building.
	You're unlikely even to notice it when we show you, and we are confident it does not affect our reporting.
	With that, here's the video.
	It doesn't answer every question from January 6th.
	Far from it. But it does prove beyond doubt that Democrats in Congress, assisted by Adam...
	You know what? Let's go right now to MRCTV's Eric Scheiner.
	Eric is on the line with us from Washington, just outside of Washington.
	Eric, thanks for joining the David Knight Show.
	Thank you very much.
	I know this is on the fly, man, and I really appreciate you doing yeoman's work down there.
	I really hope that you pay a lot more attention to Chuck Schumer and to Mitch McConnell to make sure that only what they approve is something that you put out, okay?
	When Schumer and McConnell are in agreement that you shouldn't see something, you probably definitely want to see more of it.
	I mean, you get a more ringing endorsement than that.
	I know, I know. I just keep thinking of them as the Penguins in the beginning of Madagascar.
	You didn't see anything, right?
	Yeah. Hey, great to have you here, Eric.
	Let's just tell people a little bit about how they can find you and your work.
	And, of course, my work is over there, thanks to all you great people at MRCTV. Well, of course, you can go to mrctv.org, and that is our homepage.
	We have a Facebook page.
	We have a YouTube channel.
	We have a TikTok channel.
	We have stuff going on all the time.
	Rumble especially is like the only place that has never censored us.
	That's the only social media channel we can talk about that.
	But MRC TV Rumble channel, you can find our videos there.
	But again, the homepage for all the information is MRC TV dot org.
	Great, great, Eric.
	Thanks so much.
	And it's good to have you here.
	I'm scrolling through on the screen right now, scrolling through some of the latest stories, titles like Snow White and Cinderella.
	Cancelled by sensitivity readers.
	We've got Gavin Newsom.
	Newsom, California won't be doing business with Walgreens after change stops selling abortion pills by mail in red states.
	Brittany Hughes, of course, the editor working right under you.
	Then another pregnancy center attacked.
	DOJ and FBI remain silent.
	So many good things for people who are pro-life and pro-constitutional government.
	And, of course, there's my recent piece, the new Twitter files reveal the DOD, CIA, DARPA, and more in a massive network to silence conservatives.
	And hats off to Matt Taibbi for doing the good work going through all that nonsense.
	Boy, there's so much to cover.
	Of course, now the FTC wants to get his correspondence with Elon Musk.
	Are you serious? Yeah, FTC has made a request.
	They're cracking down.
	They want to, you know, they made an information request.
	They want to see what Elon has been talking to with reporters.
	Yes, yes. Yeah, that's right.
	I forgot. Yeah. Yeah, I forgot about that.
	No, sorry. I'm talking over.
	Sorry. Yeah, I forgot about that.
	That was the FCC, not the FEC. That's right.
	I did see that. Yes.
	No, it's the FTC, I believe.
	It's the FTC, I believe, with Elon Musk.
	Federal Trade Commission? Yep.
	Oh, geez. Unbelievable.
	Unbelievable. Eric, tell me your thoughts on what we're seeing most recently with these politicians, and in particular Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell, and the very idea, and Anderson Cooper, People in the media, Whoopi Goldberg, Anderson Cooper, not only mocking Tucker Carlson as if Anderson Cooper, you know, didn't come from some, you know, very privileged background.
	And Tucker Carlson didn't have people with torches outside his house while his wife and child were inside, you know, Antifa people screaming at his house.
	Somehow he's portraying Tucker Carlson as being some fluffy turnover of a stuffed animal.
	And just because he put this footage out, they spent all this time to go through this stuff.
	They check with the Capitol Police and Mitch McConnell being critical of Tucker as well as Chuck Schumer.
	Tell me your thoughts on some of that.
	Well, I think, you know, everything about where Mitch McConnell stands.
	You know, just by his statement.
	You know, Chuck Schumer made a speech on the Senate floor yesterday asking Fox not to, you know, to cancel Tucker's show, to silence, you know, a show, First Amendment.
	It's interesting to see an anti-First Amendment speech being put on the floor by the Senate Majority Leader.
	You know, his voice echoed off the walls and it sounded kind of Germanic, in my particular opinion.
	Yeah. To call for censorship on the Senate floor, to call for Fox not to air the show, it's amazing.
	And you almost get the impression with both the media and these leftist leaders, they doff protest too much.
	What is in there that they are that terrified of?
	The reaction, to me anyways, doesn't warrant what I saw on Tucker's show.
	No, and you know, there's something else too, Eric.
	The fact that none of these defendants or their attorneys were given access to this footage, that to me is a massive red flag that puts the lie to everything that Chuck Schumer or Mitch McConnell might say because they already pre-selected What could be available to the defense people for legal proceedings for these people regarding...
	And now, obviously, the defenders are going to be asking for this footage and to be able to use it.
	It's going to rest on the judges in the upcoming cases.
	But, I mean, you have the case of, you know, the Kualon buffalo shaman, you know, that they call him.
	And he was, it seems, pressured in some way to plead guilty to, what was it, obstruction of a government proceeding or something of that nature was the title of the charge.
	And then you see the fact that they let him in and they were with him.
	And you're like, wow, four years for that?
	Yeah, that's exactly what I was mentioning earlier.
	I mean, I think most people see that footage.
	And then on the other hand, to have the media have this reaction – you've heard this over and over again – Tucker is showing selective footage, selective footage.
	Where was the selective footage comment in the January 6th committee coverage, which was produced by an ABC News producer and shown live?
	They never said – the January 6th committee just showed some selectively edited footage.
	You know, to push their narrative.
	No, this is a false narrative with Tucker immediately.
	It's been selectively edited to push a false narrative.
	How did they jump to the conclusion it's false?
	I mean, the fact is, nobody's seen it before.
	That's an excellent point.
	You know, Eric, it reminds me, we've been given false narratives so much that some of them were very obvious, whether it's mostly peaceful protest narrative while they're standing in front of burning buildings.
	Or it's the narrative that the United States energy production is not being affected by the Biden administration.
	Or even political.
	We had the Trump-Russia narrative that the media pushed.
	I mean, the media has a horrible track record.
	We have the whole Hunter Biden laptop that they work to suppress.
	Yes, yes.
	They work to suppress and dismiss his Russian disinformation.
	Oh, we were proven wrong.
	So for the media to go and say something has been selectively edited to push a false narrative is almost humorous at this point.
	In fact, the National Desk right now has a poll on their website.
	I think they have just under 8,000 people that have participated.
	Do you trust the conclusions or believe the conclusions of the January 6th committee?
	And it's like over 70% false.
	People say, no, I don't trust this at all.
	And it's not surprising.
	And again, this comes from the left.
	This is a left where you can take a male, selectively edit his body parts, call him a female, and if that's what he wants to be called, then he is a woman.
	And you have to accept that.
	That's not a false narrative being pushed.
	That's the truth. Their instincts on how to handle and call things truth have been proven so...
	Absolutely. And especially over the last six years, that for them to sit and react the way that they have done to Tucker, like I said, I keep thinking there's got to be something even bigger in there.
	Because from what I've seen, okay, this presents a different story.
	Yeah, yeah, I mean, I'm seeing this video of the buffalo wearing shaman, you know, being led around by police and they're trying to open doors for him.
	That definitely tells me a story that I did not know from watching the January 6th committee hearing.
	And this hasn't been released before.
	But to react so, like, this is false, he's pushing a false narrative.
	He's pushing a different narrative.
	Yeah, exactly. And the very fact that they're claiming it's false, again, the fact that they did not include all of that for people to decide for themselves And now this other information is coming out.
	That puts the lie to their very claim that it's false.
	Because the only way that you can tell something is false is if you're given everything in the entirety and you can find out how it was selectively edited.
	All we can tell now is that there was some massive stuff that has information in it that runs counter to what they told us.
	And that is what's really bothering them.
	And it's going to have legal ramifications.
	You know, I've got on the screen right now, Eric, we have Eric Scheiner with us.
	He is the director of MRCTV. Find it, mrctv.org.
	And it's just a wonderful set of circumstances that allows me to be able to welcome Eric on the David Knight program right now.
	So if you get the opportunity, check out the website, everybody.
	Go to the Facebook page.
	Check him out on Twitter. There's already news from the Epoch Times that a number of people charged with crimes in relation to the January 6th so-called insurrection.
	Nobody was charged with insurrection, but charged with various things like trespass or damage to property, that sort of thing.
	They're asking for delays in the trial, and they've been sitting for three years or two years now with no trials, completely contrary to the Bill of Rights.
	So the fact that they're asking for delays so they can actually get this information is legally significant.
	And it's something that I don't think Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell want to touch.
	Right.
	No, because they're terrified of this.
	I mean, to make the statements that they did, the reaction has been overwhelming.
	I watched a CBS News Anchor clip yesterday after the first day of the Tucker video release.
	And, you know, the anchor was just like, I have never seen anything like this.
	This is unbelievable that Tucker Carlson would do this with this selective entity.
	I mean, the reaction was so visceral.
	You know, if they came out and they said, you know, hey, well, this is putting out a different narrative.
	We don't believe it. We don't think it's a good thing.
	And they made a statement like that, I think.
	You know, everyone would be like, okay, but the fact that their reaction is just so over the top, they're so upset about this.
	Absolutely, yeah.
	You know, it makes me think like, well, what else is going to come out as they scan the footage?
	They must know what's in there.
	They've had access to it.
	Well, it reminds me, Eric, it reminds me almost of the over-the-top reaction to, I can't believe that Hillary Clinton's emails, which she tried to hide, Have been made available.
	Pay no attention to what's actually on those emails.
	I can't believe that the DNC emails that reveal how the DNC worked with CNN to try to give Hillary Clinton an advantage in debates against Bernie Sanders.
	I can't believe, but we won't talk about the actual content of those things.
	I can't believe that they were somehow released, likely by Seth Ritz.
	The release of this is unprecedented.
	This is beyond the norm.
	And that's how they paint it.
	Yeah, it's because the left has had information dominance for so long that if you get a moment where someone is not singing from their choir sheet music and starts humming a different tune, they don't know how to handle it.
	Yeah, exactly.
	That is clear.
	Yeah.
	And their reaction and what's going on right now.
	And again, you know, one does one need not be a supporter of Donald Trump to recognize that there were massive irregularities in that election.
	And of course, that was facilitated by Donald Trump issuing an unconstitutional executive emergency order on March 13th, 2020, which laid all this down the down the pike.
	And he could have stopped it at any time, but obviously either felt political pressure not to stop it, not to revoke his emergency order.
	But that was the trigger that laid all of this out for, oh, you can't go to the voting place.
	The virus is so terrible.
	And of course, his administration helped push up the bogus numbers about the virus to inculcate people with the idea that it was even more dangerous than it was.
	So he's not blameless here, clearly.
	And like I said, one need not be a supporter of Donald Trump to recognize that, first, the narrative about an insurrection is utterly bogus, as you allowed me to write right at the start when they were going to call in an insurrection.
	You at MRCTV allowed me to note that nobody was charged with that in any way whatsoever.
	But that's not a false narrative.
	You notice that's not the false narrative.
	Yeah, yeah, exactly. Calling something an insurrection that's not an insurrection, well, that's not a false narrative.
	But showing footage of people walking through Congress being led by security and police officers around and having doors open for them, that's the false narrative, even though the video evidence is right in front of your eyes.
	Yeah. What you'll also notice is they're outraged at the release, but they don't take on the content.
	Exactly. That video is false because of XYZ. This information is true.
	It's just, this is horrible that it was released.
	Right.
	The closest I saw.
	And Tucker's awful and it's a false narrative, but he never explains why he believes it to be a false narrative.
	Exactly.
	What was false in that video?
	Right.
	Name me any of the media anchors or Chuck Schumer or Mitch McConnell or any of the people that are being outspoken, critical about the video's release that are taking on the video itself.
	Yes.
	Other than their claim it's selectively edited.
	Well, that's fine.
	It's 44,000 hours of footage.
	Tucker has a two-hour show.
	It's going to be edited.
	He's not going to go on the air for 44,000 hours straight.
	And you didn't have this complaint when the January 6th committee was playing selectively edited videos produced by an ABC producer.
	Yeah, and that's a very important point.
	I'm glad you brought it up again.
	And let's just remind people how that went down, Eric, as they put together that presentation to make it so dramatic and so terrible.
	And some people have compared it to 9-11 or Pearl Harbor.
	I mean, it's just Rachel Maddow has been one of the worst people on this.
	But as far as that ABC producer, how come when Tucker Carlson simply shows material that was not shown to the defense teams and was not shown to Americans and could give people maybe some different information at least, we don't hear Mitch McConnell complaining about the House pulling in An ABC producer to put a show together.
	We don't hear Chuck Schumer talking about that.
	We hear Chuck Schumer, as I mentioned to the audience, a guy who literally proposed legislation to punish people for criticizing Israel I mean, this is the guy who's that in favor of the First Amendment that he's going to be...
	He's not in favor of the First Amendment.
	I mean, again, yesterday he went on the Senate floor and called for censorship of Tucker's show.
	Yeah, it's incredible. I mean, think about that.
	Someone in the halls of the U.S. Senate calling for a network to suspend...
	calling for the suspension of the First Amendment for a network because they don't like what's being said.
	And again, if they just wanted to say, hey, I disagree with it, boom, I think people would be a lot more accepting.
	But their reaction has been so extreme, the gall to do that.
	But the thing is, I think the Democrats and the liberals have not supported the First Amendment for so long that this isn't shocking.
	Yes, yes, I agree with you.
	Imagine if Donald Trump, when he was president from the White House, declared that MSNBC – all their shows should be censored.
	Imagine the outcry that would have happened.
	He's against free speech.
	Look what happened. Look what happened when he got the mic taken away from Jim Acosta.
	Oh yeah, yeah.
	And merely for using the terms that they used and recycling them against them, calling what they were doing fake news or claiming they were the enemies of the American people.
	Just rhetoric on his part with that soft sort of language coming after Barack Obama and Joe Biden tried to use the Espionage Act against more whistleblowers and journalists We're
	good to go.
	Right, and of course they're never going to let that, you know, they don't make that point.
	That's not the point they want to make.
	They would rather see censorship than see the parts of the video that you didn't get to see before because they cut them out.
	Yeah, so let's recap this very quickly, Eric.
	We've got Matt Taibbi and the Twitter files first, the Twitter files revealing very clearly That federal officials, including the FBI, weren't just involved with Twitter to try to silence people, but were giving Twitter millions of dollars while they were trying to get Twitter to silence people.
	We've got organizations like the GEC that is composed of things like DARPA, the DOD and others, which helped get funding from Portman Murphy, which, as you know, I've gotten to write for you guys about this, going back with Rob Portman.
	And Chris Murphy, two senators that shelled out hundreds of millions of dollars since 2016-2017 on media outlets that are friendly to the government narrative.
	They were involved with trying to shut down We've got thousands of Twitter accounts.
	so-called pandemic.
	Well, not even trying in some cases, succeeding.
	Yes, yes, absolutely right.
	And then we have these extra governmental sources, which are tied to things like the University of Texas at Austin that Microsoft connected with, and they recently just pulled away from, to try to stifle conservative voices like MRCTV, like the New York Post.
	We've got the Google blacklist.
	Now we've got Chuck Schumer criticizing Tucker Carlson, and we've got the FTC, as you Does anybody need any more evidence to see which side is the side that is censorious?
	Is it the federalist, constitutionalist, small government people and the parents who are going to school board meetings?
	Or is it the people like Merrick Garland and others who are trying to depict them Yeah, I mean,
	I think the conclusions, you know, the evidence laid out is obvious.
	And especially the methods that the government is doing are so – for example, last night, Tucker played the clip of Schumer calling for his show not to air, and Tucker laughed about it.
	He's like, oh, because this is so dangerous.
	You know, to show this for you, he basically laughed it off.
	They're so over the top, you almost have to laugh in their methods.
	I mean, take the Federal Trade Commission, demanding that Twitter turns over its internal communications related to Elon Musk.
	They're saying, well, we need detailed information about layoffs because we have concerns about staff reductions and how that could compromise the company's ability to protect users.
	Yeah, sure. And that's why 12 letters sent to Twitter, they also asked the company to identify all journalists that were granted access to company records.
	Does that have anything to do with the layoffs that you're supposedly investigating?
	Right, right. They want to know.
	They want to know what else is in there.
	To be able to do work for you.
	And just the amazing things you do on Fridays.
	Occasionally on my show on Rockfin, I'll play clips from your Wacky Mole on Fridays.
	Because you go through the week and you show over and over again.
	They do not learn their lessons.
	They do this all the time.
	Whether it's Morning Joe.
	Or it's Jory Reid.
	Or it's Rachel Maddow.
	Or it's people from the old line networks like CBS, NBC, ABC. You're there and you're collecting this material.
	And this isn't to play up MRCTV because I do work for you all.
	But because I'm part of this team, I know how hard you guys work and the kinds of pressures you experience.
	I hope people understand who's on the side of good.
	And I know the David Knight audience does.
	But I hope that we can continue.
	Thanks to your work, I think more and more people get to see this rampant hypocrisy.
	Yeah, you've got to get it out there.
	And again, I don't think you can eliminate media bias, but people really need to be aware of it.
	They need to know what's going on, and you can fight it.
	Will it ever completely go away?
	No. I mean, there are some people that will say, well, Fox is biased.
	They're just biased towards the right.
	And they have a point.
	The best thing is try to get as much information as you can.
	I.e., like the video you never saw anyone has seen before, except on Tucker, and make a decision for yourself.
	But you need to know where the biases lie, and again, because the information dominance on the left, the big tech dominance and suppression that we see from the left, that's where it's like getting out anything that defends the right or furthers the I kind of look at MRCTV as we're the storytellers of the movement.
	We're telling the stories that the media is not.
	And we're trying to get the message out there.
	We're going to show you, hey, this is where they're wrong.
	This is where they're being deceitful towards you.
	This is where they're keeping you in the dark.
	Bias by omission, I think, is far worse on the left than the bias by admission.
	What they won't tell you, what they won't cover, is striking.
	I mean, perfect example, a week ago, two weeks ago, Hunter Biden was due to have his records delivered, you know, to the congressional committee.
	They wanted transcripts of some of his business records.
	He defied them.
	He didn't deliver it.
	That's right.
	It didn't get covered anywhere.
	I remember that.
	Other than Fox and other than, you know, the Newsmax and those.
	But, you know, ABC, NBC, CBS Nightly News, they didn't cover it.
	So when the president's son defies a congressional investigation, that's not national news.
	Right, right. Yeah, it is amazing.
	Shocking. Shocking. But that's what I mean by omission.
	You know, they're willing to ignore stuff.
	Yeah. Not cover it whatsoever because it goes against their narrative.
	They can't have their narrative be the false one.
	Yeah, we're speaking with Eric.
	They can't take that challenge.
	Eric Shiner is the director of MRCTV.org.
	It's MRCTV.org online.
	And check him out and check out the YouTube and the Rumble channel.
	The Rumble channel where they don't censor us.
	And Eric, you know, sort of wrap things up because I know you're a really busy guy.
	And I know because...
	This isn't something where I'm like outside.
	I get to actually see what you guys do.
	But one of the things I did want to mention is this is sort of the appeal to authority, trust the science approach to the January 6th information, to what happened.
	They've constructed a narrative.
	You should trust it.
	And before you came onto the phone, Eric, I was talking about Aristotle.
	And this is one of the great Aristotelian points about fallacies.
	This is the appeal to authority fallacy.
	They want people to view the federal government as the all-powerful, all-trusting, it-represents-democracy sort of machine where its spokespeople, its magicians like Chuck Schumer or Mitch McConnell or its media mouthpieces like the folks at CNN, MSNBC and others will give you the information and you should just trust them.
	They are the Anthony Fauci's of news.
	Yes, they're the gatekeepers.
	Don't question it. Yeah, that's exactly it.
	And it's always been this way.
	As you and I know, when we were kids, they would tell us that Walter Cronkite was the be-all and end-all of news.
	I never trusted Walter Cronkite.
	I was just like, well, he's not telling me certain things.
	My parents had subscriptions to Human Events, Reason Magazine, National Review, other conservative publications or libertarian publications.
	And of course, National Review, actually, you find out later on that William F. Buckley Jr. was pretty closely tied to the CIA.
	But at least with some of those publications, particularly Human Events, they would get information out that I'd be watching the news saying, Walter Cronkite's not mentioning this.
	And so you become skeptical.
	And then later you find out, oh yeah, he's an avowed socialist.
	He just never mentioned it during the nightly news broadcast.
	He didn't say, and that's the news tonight from this socialist, you know?
	Well, of course not. And again, like we said, it's the bias by omission.
	And gosh, you know, wouldn't it be great to even go back to the days of Walter Cronkite when it comes to media bias?
	Talk about something that would be easy to expose and talk about rather than just the complete volume that we see each and every dime.
	That was one of the things I wanted to bring up to you, Eric.
	I think when news went into its 24-hour period and they had to fill more time and then talk radio came in and then Fox News came in, I think that there was a combination of them needing to fill time.
	So they started to fill it with more biased reports and more opinion.
	But they started to take their so-called news and just mix it in with opinion.
	And they still call it the news, at least with people like Rush Limbaugh and talk radio and so on.
	They would tell you, I'm just offering you my opinions.
	But that's not what they do on the news, not even on Rachel Maddow's show.
	They portray themselves as journalists.
	Don Lemon.
	Yeah, no.
	Yeah, he's a journalist if you look up his bio on the pages.
	Or even what I think is probably the largest crime against humanity is The View.
	It's an ABC News product.
	That is a product. The View, Whoopi Goldberg and Joey Behar spreading their racist hate.
	That's an ABC News product?
	Really? Yeah. Really?
	That's a news product? I mean, if you want to call it a talk show and put it under your talk show division, okay, I'd be a little more accepting of that.
	But that's why I often include them.
	You talk about Wacky Mole, people often go, why do you include The View?
	That's not news.
	And I'm like, I agree that it's not, but that's not what they consider it.
	No. Yeah, right.
	That's an ABC News product.
	It's produced under the auspices of ABC News.
	Now, if they moved it over and treated it, I don't know, like the Drew Barrymore show, then I wouldn't say it has as much weight.
	Yeah. But that's not the weight that the actual news organization gives it.
	Maybe they should just put it on Cartoon Network because it is sort of full of like a cartoon.
	Yeah. Hey, Eric, thanks.
	I think there's laws against what you can show to kids.
	Well, I don't know.
	Might give them nightmares.
	Yeah, that's true. That's true.
	But if it could be accepted by a local school board that's heavily tied to left-wing organizations, then we can't question it.
	It's got to happen. Absolutely.
	Hey, Eric, thanks, man.
	This is great. I really appreciate it.
	You know, it's... David Knight is at the state legislature today in Tennessee testifying in favor of gold and silver as a means of real exchange.
	And, you know, telling them what the Constitution says and so on.
	And it's so comfortable.
	And, you know, I've said this to you in private as well, but it's just so great to be able to talk to people like you.
	You feel comfortable with the solidity of you guys and your principles.
	And, you know, you're doing the right thing.
	And you're super busy, I know.
	So I... It's just awesome.
	I appreciate you calling. This is great.
	Alrighty, man. Well, I appreciate you having me on.
	I'll talk to you again soon. You got it.
	And hey, you know, keep making sure that you use all that digital stuff to rework the January 6th guys to make them look like...
	I think they were just field mice.
	And that's what Tucker Carlson is doing.
	And we know that Chuck Schumer is working in our best interest.
	We know how evil Tucker Carlson and you are.
	Absolutely, I guess. All right.
	Just keep... Keep rubbing down those horns in your head, you demon.
	And we'll talk to you again soon, Eric.
	Thank you so much. All right.
	Talk to you later, guys. Okay. Thanks, Eric.
	Eric Scheiner. Eric Scheiner of MRCTV. He is the director of MRCTV. And he is a very, very good guy.
	And, of course, he is the man who employs me along with Brent Bozell for part of my salary.
	So I do want to mention that.
	But I was really happy.
	I texted him this morning.
	And said, hey, you know, I'm really starting to see some crazy stuff here from some of these politicians like Schumer and like McConnell about Tucker Carlson actually just showing people stuff that Americans were not allowed to see.
	So he said, yeah, let's get in there and do it.
	So thank you, Eric Scheiner.
	And again, folks, if you want to find what the MRCTV team does, just head on over to MRCTV.org.
	MRCTV.org.
	They're great people.
	Eric Shiner, Brittany Hughes, Nick Kingadis.
	And by the way, Nick has a talk show that he, it's a video show he puts out on YouTube called Nick's America.
	And Nick is a really, really good guy from Chicago.
	He's been covering Lori Lightfoot so much, the crime in Chicago, the ridiculousness of the gun laws, the gun statutes.
	And so Nick Kingadis, look for Nick's America.
	On YouTube and of course MRCTV on Rumble first and on YouTube as well.
	Gotta get a drink of water here real quick.
	You might have noticed I'm a I'm pretty parched today.
	Hopefully it's not making me frown or anything like that because I had such a great time.
	This is awesome. I want to check in on the chat in Rockman and see what's happening there.
	We've got a lot of people watching.
	I really appreciate it. And don't forget, you can watch us over on Rumble.
	And if you want to donate on Rumble, that's great.
	And David Knight, they're able to get a written-off check there.
	They have been able to work out the crypto-technical stuff.
	Through Rockfin, because that's how Rockfin does it.
	They translate your tips over into crypto, and then you have to go from crypto to your bank account to deliver it over there.
	But what an amazing paradigm to see David Knight and you and MRCTV and perhaps you and other people, because that's how MRCTV exists.
	Brent Bozell started this when it was really just the dominant major networks, ABC, NBC, CBS, and of course, government propaganda television, PBS. And it was interesting because, you know, Brent is probably about a generation ahead of me, maybe. And maybe 10 years, 15 years ahead.
	So maybe not a generation, but pretty close.
	And, you know, he was sensitized to a lot of the things that we're sensitive to.
	And I met him. He's a great guy.
	And the work of the MRCTV team is all supported just through donations.
	And we're getting attacked all the time.
	I can't even tell you the number of times, the number of conversations I've had with Eric as we get hit by some censor group.
	Google puts us on the censor list.
	I know these people.
	You know these people. You watch Eric's videos.
	What you see is what you get.
	He's a guy with a family.
	He's into good music.
	And he likes truth.
	It's incredible stuff.
	Let me just grab a drink of water.
	Actually, this is my little vitamin water.
	It rips apart my dry lips already.
	I'll have to get Susie Chapstick to take care of things.
	Harp says, Guard, you want to be a bit warmer?
	Come to Oz. Yeah, man.
	That would be good stuff.
	I remember when I flew into Australia, not only was it weird being on the plane for like 27 hours flying from New England over to California and then from California over to New Zealand and then from Auckland over to Brisbane, but After we stayed in Brisbane for one night, they flew us out to Charleville Harps.
	And if people aren't familiar with Australia, Brisbane, of course, is on the East Coast.
	And so we flew from New Zealand into Brisbane.
	And then I stayed in Brisbane for a day.
	And then they took us out in a Cessna to to Charleville.
	And Charleville is in the middle of the outback.
	And it's mostly ranchers and people like that.
	And it was at that time was very, very sparsely populated.
	And some of the ranchers owned swaths of land that were almost the size of Rhode Island.
	That's how much land they had.
	It was crazy.
	And they would rustle their cattle with helicopters and stuff rather than, you know, doing it by horses.
	And but it was very interesting because you're on the other side of the planet.
	And then when I got when I got out of the plane, that little plane in Charleville Harps, it was it must have been close to 100 degrees Fahrenheit out there.
	It was like 96 that day.
	And it was dry.
	And I had come from the wintertime.
	It was February in New Hampshire.
	So I got off the plane.
	We got on the plane in New Hampshire.
	There was snow on the ground.
	I'm on the plane for 27 hours.
	I had a torn gluteal muscle and I couldn't get up because I was trapped amongst these people on the plane.
	So I was dry swallowing ibuprofen to stop, to cut the pain.
	That's how bad it was.
	It was such a nightmare.
	And then we got over there.
	I'm on the other side of the planet.
	It was just bizarre.
	And as I mentioned to some people on a program previously, Where I have the camera right now, the camera's on the north side of me, and this is the south pretty much this way.
	And if you're in the northern hemisphere, everybody, when you're looking at the sun, you know you're generally looking south.
	So east is that way and west is that way, right?
	But when I got to Australia, it was really hard.
	For the first, I don't know how many days, I was there for six weeks, but for the first couple days, It was difficult to reorient myself and remember where east and west and north and south were.
	Because there, when you're looking at the sun in Australia, you're actually looking north.
	So east is that way and west is that way.
	So I would go running and I'd have my Walkman with me and I'd get lost because, you know, you've got sort of basic instincts about north and south based on the sun is here.
	And it's just, it was really, really weird.
	And I asked people from Australia if they had the reciprocal problem when they came up here and they said, oh yeah, definitely.
	It was so confusing.
	I mean, for a while, for the first two days, we were traveling east from Charleville.
	I thought we were traveling west.
	And I was like, how did we end up here on the map?
	People must have thought I was a dummy.
	Like, dude, what's wrong with you?
	But hey, what can you do?
	I should be showed up by Chuck Schumer.
	Let's go back to some of that video footage and I want to get some more of your opinions.
	Lori Light says, so true card.
	One time I flew from Tucson, Arizona to Montana and there was...
	Yeah, the temperature difference is crazy.
	Yeah, and thumbs up, everybody.
	Big thumbs up. I'm over in the chat myself.
	I'm going to give it a thumbs up. I just increased the thumbs up.
	There you go. So, Aaron, thank you so much.
	Oh, let's see, by the way, I know that people have tipped over at Rockfin and I want to thank...
	Eugene, Alexis, thank you, David Knight, and all affiliates for fighting for all of us and bringing us so much needed information.
	Awesome. Thank you so much, Eugene.
	Really appreciate it. Okay, so we'll go back to live chat.
	Open that up again. See Jason Barker is rocking the house again.
	And yeah, Tucker is ruffling a lot of feathers.
	And yeah, so thank you, everybody.
	I'll get back to this. Take another drink.
	And we'll give you some of this footage. If you haven't seen it, you can make up your own mind.
	You can consider the QAnon shaman.
	You can find out whether you think this is all just a giant put-up thing and Tucker's coordinating with it.
	I think Tucker's earnest about this.
	And, you know, it remains to be seen about the QAnon shaman thing, but the footage speaks for itself.
	So here we go. And Liz Cheney lied about what happened that day.
	They are liars.
	That is conclusive.
	And that fact should prevent them from ever being taken seriously again.
	We're going to get inside with footage that shows you what was actually happening inside the Capitol.
	The footage does not show an insurrection or a riot in progress.
	Instead, it shows police escorting protesters through the building, including the now infamous QAnon shaman.
	Watch.
	...phrase 6th.
	They're familiar because they've been playing on a loop on every media outlet in America for the last two years.
	There's a reason for that.
	But it turns out there's quite a bit of video you haven't seen.
	And that video tells a very different story about what happened on January 6th.
	More than 40,000 hours of surveillance footage from in and around the Capitol have been withheld from the public.
	And once you see the video, you'll understand why.
	Taken as a whole, the video record does not support the claim that January 6th was an insurrection.
	In fact, it demolishes that claim.
	And that's exactly why the Democratic Party and its allies in the media prevented you from seeing it.
	By controlling the images you were allowed to view from January 6th, they controlled how the public understood that day.
	They could lie about what happened and you would never know the difference.
	Those lies had a purpose.
	They created a pretext for a federal crackdown on opponents of the Uniparty in Washington.
	Our office wanted to ensure that there was shock and awe that we could charge as many people as possible.
	The first thing you notice from viewing the full video record of January 6th is just how many people entered the Capitol building that day.
	Hundreds and hundreds of people, possibly thousands, over the course of about two hours.
	The crowd was enormous.
	A small percentage of them were hooligans.
	They committed vandalism.
	You've seen the years. All right, so a little pause there, and we'll get back to more of the footage.
	Do want to mention again, you know, as you guys know, this is all narrative news.
	But at least, you know, everybody's biased.
	There's no such thing as an objective reporter, but at least they can try to be fair.
	And I think that one of the things that really hits people in the gut right now as they start to see this footage is that they weren't being treated fairly by the U.S. government.
	And the other thing that I mentioned on my program last night on Rockfin is that I think as time has gone by, even people who were supporters of small government, Whether they supported Donald Trump or they didn't support Donald Trump, after having that narrative constant,
	that constant barrage of the pop networks and the government shills feeding people only those select images, I think many people felt perhaps a certain resistance in their energy levels to be able to continue to support the folks who were being held so unjustly.
	Under the January 6 charges that they've thrown at them.
	And I know that, you know, personally, as I mentioned on my Rockfin program last night, I tried to start the show around six o'clock by mentioning that I felt like I hadn't given enough time to the people who are being unjustly held under the January 6 so-called charges.
	And they're very numerous, but none of them have been charged with insurrection.
	And So it's not merely a semantics argument.
	It's not merely a party versus party argument because I'm not a member of any party myself.
	It's a moral argument.
	And I think that after a while, many people who would have been standing very strongly on the moral argument still have had to work on other things.
	And they might have felt a little bit of fatigue in saying, well, I don't know how much more I can fight against this as this narrative has been so built up.
	What can I do?
	And I think one of the things that the Tucker Carlson revelations of this video show us is that there is still something that can be done.
	And that is to reveal the massive hypocrisy and deceptiveness of these people in yet another example of how deceptive they are.
	And perhaps to do justice to some of these people still by saying, you know what, some people are still speaking up.
	And again, I don't agree with Tucker Carlson on all sorts of things.
	He's nowhere near being a voluntarist anarchist.
	But, you know, consistently I've seen him, and I do believe he's earnest, trying to, it looks to me, do the right thing.
	So here's some more.
	Footage from inside the Capitol overturns the story you've heard about January 6th.
	Protesters queue up in neat little lines.
	They give each other tours outside the Speaker's office.
	They take cheerful selfies and they smile.
	They're not destroying the Capitol.
	They obviously revere the Capitol.
	They're there because they believe the election was stolen from them.
	They believe in the system.
	Here's the man you've heard referred to as the QAnon shaman outside the Senate chamber.
	These are not rioters.
	These are people who wandered over from a political rally.
	We will not let them silence your voices.
	After the rally, they walked down Pennsylvania Avenue, where organizers had secured a federal permit to hold a legal rally on the grounds of the Capitol.
	Now, this is the key where I want to stop here very, very briefly, and I did this last night on my Rockfin show, because I can see that an argument can be made, and I wonder if you think this is a valid argument, everybody, that...
	The people like Mitch McConnell, people like Nancy Pelosi, who were in charge of the Capitol Hill Police, I can see that they were aware not only that the Trump people had organized and gotten a permit to be down on the mall for the speeches, but that they also had gotten a permit to be on the Capitol lawn.
	Given that, I can see how they, and this might sound, again, Machiavellian, it might sound like the narrative of a spy novel or something, but I can see that the speculation that those people who were in charge of it knew that they would be moving onto the Capitol grounds and perhaps recognized that there was an opportunity to put in agent provocateurs to make it look like that group was filled with violent people.
	However it might turn out, Whether they got into the building or they just caused damage to it or whatever, that was a ripe opportunity to be able to paint the opposition as bad guys, the closer they got to those buildings.
	So they were aware of it.
	They were in charge of the police.
	And as you can see in this footage, the police escorted people around.
	The very fact that we had seen some of this that day, I remember putting out tweets and gathering footage Of the police moving the gates to allow people in to one of the entrances of the Capitol.
	So whether they felt pressure and they thought, oh, I've got to do this or I'm going to be in trouble, it didn't look like it to me.
	It looked like they were just freely letting people in.
	And there are so many different figures, so many different arguments to be made here about whether people were grifting.
	You see Alex Jones there, clearly There were a lot of people making money on the Stop the Steal thing.
	But at the same time, Alex Jones did get up there and say, don't go over there.
	This is bad mojo.
	Look what they're trying to do to Owen Schroyer.
	Owen never went into the building and yet they're trying to prosecute him for breaching an agreement for his prior problems inside the Capitol.
	So there's a lot to be said here all over the place.
	But I'll continue with some of the video And just sort of lay this out that what Tucker had to offer again.
	So we get these visuals out there.
	And I think the key thing that I know that is solid is that the political figures who have engaged in this January 6 hearing circus intentionally made sure that people did not see this footage.
	And now on the flip side, now that the footage is being shown by Tucker Carlson to use the passive voice, now that Tucker Carlson is showing the footage, They're after Tucker Carlson.
	And they're not addressing. Even Mitch McConnell is not addressing.
	Nobody asked him, well, you're saying the police are right.
	How does that jibe with what we're actually seeing here?
	Where is Tucker Carlson pulling this out of context?
	How is he shaping things in some false way when previously, by us not seeing this, that was the truth?
	How is it we were seeing the truth before and now, with more footage, we're seeing falsity?
	I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.
	Once at the Capitol building, things began to get chaotic.
	Capitol police officers fired tear gas into the crowd.
	A few at the front of the herd broke windows.
	Someone opened the doors and many hundreds of others just walked in.
	We're going to make that story!
	Of course they did make it the story.
	And at the center of it, the single most famous person arrested that day was a Navy veteran from Arizona called Jacob Chansley, often referred to as the QAnon Shaman.
	The so-called QAnon Shaman.
	QAnon Shaman. So...
	Is the focus on the QAnon shaman the major part of the story?
	Maybe not.
	What did Jacob Chansley do to receive this punishment?
	To this day, there is dispute over how Chansley got into the Capitol building.
	But according to our review of the internal surveillance video, it is very clear what happened once he got inside.
	Virtually every moment of his time inside the Capitol was caught on tape.
	The tapes show that Capitol Police never stopped Jacob Chansley.
	They helped him. They acted as his tour guides.
	Here's video of Chansley in the Senate chamber.
	Capitol Police officers take him to multiple entrances and even try to open locked doors for him.
	We counted at least nine officers who were within touching distance of unarmed Jacob Chansley.
	Not one of them even tried to slow him down.
	Chansley understood that Capitol Police were his allies.
	Video shows him giving thanks for them in a prayer on the floor of the Senate.
	Watch. Thank you, Heavenly Father, for taking the inspiration needed to these police officers to allow us in this building.
	Contrast the reality of what Jacob Chansley did in the Capitol building on January 6th, the indisputable facts recorded on video, some of which has never before been seen, with the depiction of Jacob Chansley.
	So my question that I know that some people might be asking, you know, sort of conspiracy-minded folks, would be, okay, if I'm imagining...
	How to really set up a mega macro narrative, then perhaps somebody slides in this Jacob Chanley guy, makes him look like he's being persecuted.
	He's the face of persecution here on Tucker Carlson.
	This is the narrative they're putting forward when actually he was working with them all the time.
	He's not actually going to go to jail.
	That sort of argument, you know?
	Yeah. So from what I'm seeing, this all looks pretty manifestly for real.
	And, you know, Chris Gray has brought up some good points last night on my program.
	And he's like, hey, you know, he was in photographs with some of the real close to Trump people earlier, the Giuliani people, the Stop the Steal people and so on.
	And that was bogus. Yeah, you know, that is a good point.
	But, you know, maybe he was earnest about it and he thought he was working with people that were honest about their intentions, too.
	Maybe he believed Rudy Giuliani and Bernard Carrick, even though I don't know why anybody would believe Bernard Carrick after Bernard Carrick's background.
	Not only that, I mean, the guy was, I believe he was caught fooling around on his wife.
	So there's a lot to mix in here.
	But again, I want to continue with this.
	Get some more of your thoughts, y'all.
	Oh, let's see. Oh, I want to read this.
	Rick, I hope you don't mind this.
	Love you, Gar, but sad to see you fall for the circus.
	This is no different than a TV drama or a comedy.
	Take your pick. Yeah, this is the kind of thing that if you've got that thought, please let me know.
	Because again, you know, I have this view, but I'm open to hearing other possibilities, other arguments about this.
	A lot of people are claiming, you know, there's a large macro narrative that's being spun here.
	So, yeah, continue on.
	You know, I want to be as honest as possible with the limited amount of information that I've got.
	Shoot him. Shoot him.
	Like, if you burst into the United States, if he was dressed like bin Laden, would he have shot him?
	Shoot him. Shoot him.
	It makes you wonder, who are the violent extremists here?
	Not Jacob Chansley.
	And the video proves that.
	But you would never have known from the media coverage.
	All right, so I want to turn back to this piece from Zero Hedge.
	Growing number of January 6th defendants asked for judges.
	This originally came from the Epoch Times.
	They want delays, okay?
	So here is some more information just to give us more context.
	And then there are a couple other very big stories.
	That I really would love to discuss with you all, if you're interested as well, here on The David Knight Show.
	So here it is. Republicans, having taken control of the U.S. House of Representatives in January, have disclosed the footage to Fox News and have said they were granting access to any defendants who want to view the video.
	So right there, that's a very big deal.
	So that tells me, first, I'd like to compliment the speaker, and I didn't think that I would do this, But I want to compliment the speaker for making that available and also showing people what was done to the defendants and their defense teams.
	The tranche includes some 25,000 hours of footage that Jenkins has not been able to review according to the new filing.
	So we'll go back into here.
	This is one of the attorneys for one of the defendants.
	Shane Jenkins became one of the latest defendants when he filed a motion through an attorney to delay the trial due to the disclosure of some 41,000 hours of security footage from January 6th.
	Dennis Boyle, his attorney, wrote, quote, Mr.
	Jenkins requests that his trial, currently set to begin on March 21st, 2023, be moved so defense counsel can review the additional discovery.
	So this is a very, very big deal.
	It's having a direct effect on people's lives.
	So, you know, there's a lot to be considered here if we think that this is part of a larger set-up narrative thing.
	This is hopefully going to help some people.
	And whether or not that's all part of some larger complex of considerations, I don't know.
	But here is some more.
	The request for additional time is necessary in order to adequately and diligently review all discovery pertaining to Mr.
	Jenkins and to determine whether any video contains relevant and material information that would pertain to Mr.
	Jenkins' defense. Video evidence depicting Mr.
	Jenkins would constitute both exculpatory and material evidence, which would require disclosure from the government, Boyle said.
	Due to the large amount of video being released, And because Mr.
	Jenkins is currently incarcerated, we request additional time to review the information and prepare for trial.
	U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, the Obama appointee overseeing the case, has not yet ruled in the motion.
	That's a bad sign.
	Jenkins has been charged with physical violence in the Capitol grounds or building and disorderly conduct, among other things, other charges.
	William Pope, another defendant, told the court in a separate filing that he lacks access to, quote, more than 99% of discovery, even though more than two years have elapsed since he was arrested.
	So much for the Bill of Rights protecting the right to a timely trial.
	Stuart Rhodes, Julian Assange thrown under the bus, actually set up.
	Yep, but Trump AJ are the victims.
	Great point, says Clara in the Rockfin chat.
	Absolutely right.
	Here's some more from Epoch Times via Zero Hedge.
	If the government continues to deny Pope access to discovery necessary for his defense, the case should be dismissed, Pope argued.
	He has been charged with civil disorder and other charges.
	U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras, another Obama appointee, is overseeing the Pope case.
	During a status hearing after the filing was lodged, Contreras delayed a trial in order to give the government time to respond to a different motion, which asks the judge to unseal footage from three undercover officers on January 6th.
	Ryan Nichols, a third defendant, recently asked a court to delay his trial Until his attorneys and crowdsourced helpers review the newly disclosed footage.
	Quote, defendant's position is simple and straightforward.
	There is no justifiable reason why this newly available evidence had not been made available before today.
	Thus, any possible prejudice to the prosecution from a continuance is dwarfed by defendant's constitutional right to defend himself, Nichols said through his lawyer's He's been charged with physical violence, obstruction, and other charges.
	U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth, a Reagan appointee overseeing the case, has not yet ruled in the matter.
	And one final one.
	Another defendant, Sarah Carpenter, saw her request to delay her trial in light of recent developments denied.
	U.S. District Judge James Bosberg, the Obama appointee overseeing the case, rejected the motion during a March 3rd hearing.
	Ms. Carpenter's lawyers had argued that the surveillance disclosed by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, quote, is far in excess of what was previously disclosed by the government and known to exist.
	Just that there.
	That there is enough.
	What else do you need?
	Just incredible.
	But at the same time, you get people like Chuck Schumer claiming that this sort of thing is irresponsible.
	You've got Mitch McConnell reserving his opinion but implying that he doesn't like the fact that the House Speaker released this information.
	This is Star Chamber level stuff.
	This is kangaroo court level stuff.
	This is the sort of thing, and the reason they called it kangaroo court, of course, is back in the revolutionary era.
	If people were smugglers, according to the traditions of common law trials, you're supposed to be able to be tried in front of a jury of your peers.
	They removed many of the people who were smugglers, and the British brought them to Nova Scotia from New England to be tried there, not amongst their peers, but given these, as they say, jumping like kangaroos to Nova Scotia, kangaroo courts.
	So this is the same sort of mentality.
	They're removing information from these people, and they're not allowing them to defend themselves properly.
	In any sort of proper Judas Prudential system, This would see not only these cases being tossed out, but the delays would allow for lawsuits and for these people to actually ask for some sort of compensation from the government, which of course would claim sovereign immunity and would probably not give it.
	But I want to turn away now from that big, big story and give you a couple other items, one of which I covered last night on my program and has to do with the fact that I don't like the fact, and I'll say this, it I think is important to bring and I'll say this, it I think is important to bring up the fact that this is being depicted as a plus or
	There's no in-between. You either are supportive of Donald Trump and the so-called insurrectionists and the stop the stealists and things like that, or you are a person who recognizes how evil all those people were.
	The fact that they were trying to overthrow the so-called government and reverse the election.
	You either are a person who is a supporter of Donald Trump and is going to be buying Mike Lindell's products, as nice a guy as Mike Lindell seems to be, because he's been so integral in trying to Expose the election.
	Or you're a person who's like Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer and the pop media.
	And you're going to portray all those people as evil anti-democracy people.
	Now, as a person who doesn't fit in in any of those ways, I want to point out that the person who was at the center of all that, Donald Trump, is so far afield from the U.S. Constitution, it's almost laughable.
	And I'll give you a beautiful example of it.
	As Donald Trump was at CPAC offering this, and you got to hear this on Monday on David's show, and I want to reiterate just to show you how, as you probably are very well aware of this, this constant barrage of arguing about all these types of things,
	as we've seen in the chat, is a distraction from other very, very core fundamental issues, like exposing the COVID, so-called COVID pandemic narrative, exposing the jabs for what they are, exposing The rampant, unconstitutional manner in which those people who swear oaths to the Constitution are operating.
	And not just their amazing Tower of Babel ignorance of it, but the way that they appeal to people and they actually get people applauding their absolutely stunning anti-constitutional vitriol and stupidity.
	So here is Donald Trump.
	I believe that's the next cut.
	Pushing his wonderful one-worldist globalist concept of having the federal government subsidize the cities of the future.
	Unbelievable. Here he is.
	You know, it's not something I really...
	I'd like to get back to building our country and making our country great again.
	But it's time to start talking about greatness for our country.
	Our objective will be a quantum leap in the American standard of living, especially for our young people.
	As I announced yesterday, we will hold a competition to build new freedom cities on the frontier to give countless Americans a new shot at home ownership and the American dream.
	It's such a wonderful, beautiful dream.
	So I'm curious if you guys are thinking the same thing I am.
	How are you going to really increase people's standards of living by doing what Donald Trump did and what all these other presidents have done, continually inflating the money supply and decreasing the buying power of the Federal Reserve note while you pump money out to special interests from a command and control central authority mindset That building cities in the so-called frontier,
	wherever that is, maybe it's space, the final frontier, and Captain Kirk is going to open up a Deep Space Nine.
	I don't know. Benjamin Sisko will be there and the Ferengi will be bedding.
	But how is it that you're going to be...
	Adding to people's standard of living by sucking away their buying power and diverting their money into resource allocations that we've already seen in the past with the 2008 to 2012 depression and it was not a recession.
	It lasted through 2011 and that number of quarters of economic downturn in GDP It's technically a depression, but of course, nobody wanted to mention that.
	Paul Krugman did not want to talk about that.
	No way. You didn't hear Robert Reich talking about a depression under Obama.
	Obama and the word depression, never the two shall meet, right?
	So, Donald Trump is responsible for a lot of that spending.
	What is it? 80% of the dollars printed Have been printed over the past four years in circulation?
	I mean, come on. You can't kid us.
	And so this man is at CPAC, which is supposed to be a conservative organization, and they're literally applauding Chinese-style city building.
	Anybody seen the documentary China's Ghost Cities?
	Because that's exactly what they did.
	They have empty malls.
	They have empty apartment and condominium complexes.
	Thousands of these things.
	They've taken over people's property.
	People living in little shanty huts.
	Cooking over little fire pits.
	And they've taken their property to build these buildings that they then are tearing down.
	This is what Donald Trump is supporting and he's being applauded at CPAC for it.
	And I'll challenge the governors of all 50 states to join me in a great beautification campaign.
	We will rename our schools and boulevards, not after communists, but after great American patriots.
	Okay. He's going to rename them after Great American Patriots.
	So using the collectivist concept, we're going to make sure that, again, we come up with a wonderful rhetorical narrative.
	And on these collectivist concept cities that we want to build through central command and control, like the Chinese, rather than putting names like Mao Zedong on there or anything like that, we'll do, oh, I don't know, we'll put on the name of Thomas Jefferson Collectivist City.
	We'll put on other founding fathers.
	We'll put on Sam Adams.
	We'll recognize our collectivism by putting the names of great American patriots on there.
	And this sort of rhetoric appeals to people.
	They're applauding it. I mean, come on, you guys.
	Please. Maybe we can get more people to sort of talk about these things and say, really, I don't want to be super hypercritical of Donald Trump fans, but let's pull this apart a little bit and see if we can come to some agreement about learning about what he's actually saying,
	what he's proposing, what is constitutionally provided for those people who like the document, which that is not constitutionally provided, and what is ethical and what is economic, right?
	So the way that you're going to improve people's lives and their living standards is by stopping the production of dollars over and over again, Federal Reserve notes, which takes away an average of 2% compounded every year in their buying power.
	Second, you want to reduce the regulations, so-called, the threats against businesses.
	You want to reduce taxes and you want to decentralize.
	And one of the things here is when he says, I want to challenge the states, the state governors, state legislators to this.
	Well, that is another way, as you all know, that's another way that the federal government takes their central bank money that they're given, and then they dangle it over to the states, which never can balance their own budgets because they have politicians who are constantly pandering to people and handing stuff out.
	So the local politicians on the city and state level can't balance things themselves.
	They become reliant on federal handouts for things like Medicare and Medicaid, and highway funds and the parks and all that stuff, and special grants like Donald Trump might propose.
	And they're just part of the giant corporate fascist thing.
	They're just state corporations rather than so-called So-called business corporations.
	It's the same sort of thing.
	So that really was amazing to me.
	And last night on my Rockman program, I brought up something that the good folks at the Tenth Amendment Center brought up.
	And it was James Madison.
	Just around... Yeah, it was around this time in 1817 that James Madison could have taught...
	Donald Trump a little lesson about something.
	And this is James Madison, who was more of a centralist and actually, in theory, favored these central plan ideas.
	As they called it back in the Alexander Hamilton days or the Henry Clay days from the late 18th century going into the 19th century, they called them internal improvements.
	We would call them pork, right?
	And that was the legacy of Alexander Hamilton led to Henry Clay, led to Abraham Lincoln, the high tariffs, and trying to keep the South trapped in a situation where the North was dominant and that interest could control Congress.
	That was all part of it. That was all part going all the way back to Alexander Hamilton, the big banking interests and so on, and the big business interests of the industrial cities versus Thomas Jefferson's agrarian concept.
	So here's a great piece by Dave Benner from the Tenth Amendment Center.
	Hey, we got Mike McHarry. We've got Dave Benner now.
	And I talked about this on Rockfin on my show last night.
	On March 3rd, today in history, March 3rd, 1817, President James Madison vetoed the Bonus Bill of 1817, a plan that called for the federal construction of various roads, bridges, and canals throughout the country.
	In a letter to Congress, the president explained his rationale.
	Out of all historical writings on constitutional interpretation, I believe, says Benner, it stands today as one of the most important.
	Madison's reasoning was simple.
	Although he personally favored the idea of infrastructure construction, writing that he was, quote, not unaware of the great importance of such things.
	I'm sorry to skip the last quotation.
	Not unaware of the great importance, end quote.
	He denied the policy's constitutionality on a federal level.
	Instead of upholding his own personal proclivities and allowing the Constitution to be undermined, he maintained that the Constitution was one of specific enumerated powers and that the document contained no express power for the federal government to do such a thing.
	Quote, The legislative powers vested in Congress are specified and enumerated in the eighth section of the first article of the Constitution, end quote, he said, continuing, quote, and it does not appear that the power proposed to be exercised by the bill is among the enumerated powers,
	end quote. According to Madison, Using the Commerce Clause, General Welfare Clause, and Necessary and Proper Clause as justification for this new set of proposals, he said, for the law, quote, would be contrary to the established and consistent rules of interpretation as rendering the special and careful enumeration of powers which follow the clause nugatory and improper.
	So rendering those nugatory and improper.
	Adding, he wrote, that an alternative view would have the effect of giving to Congress a general power of legislation instead of the defined and limited one hitherto understood to belong to them.
	So, good stuff.
	And that's all over at the Tenth Amendment Center, if you want to check it out.
	Just slide down here a little bit further with some more good history and good thoughts from the writer, Mr.
	Benner. Madison's gesture clearly demonstrates that the original Southern understanding of the Constitution was a pivotal part of the American tradition.
	Although Madison was not always a friend to decentralized federal government, he deserves due credit for adhering to the accurate version of the Constitution rather than that which he initially favored.
	And he closed in his letter, he wrote, I have no option but to withhold my signature from this.
	I'm continuing just a little more here.
	This attitude reflected the same genuine theory of constitutional interpretation that was continually espoused by Madison's friend and presidential predecessor, Thomas Jefferson, as well as that of legal scholar St.
	George Tucker, whose commentaries on the Constitution framed the original understanding of the document.
	Truly, the veto of the infrastructure bill was a groundbreaking episode in the entire history of Western civilization.
	In retrospect, this juncture demonstrates the extent to which the federal government has abandoned the Constitution, making it effectively dead.
	To come to the same position as Madison on the federal construction of roads in the contemporary world would brand one a lunatic This is despite the fact that such an opinion would align exactly with the so-called father of the Constitution.
	Good stuff! Tenth Amendment Center from Dave Benner.
	Thank you, Mr. Benner.
	Good job. And I hope you'll check that out.
	I think that's some pretty valuable stuff.
	So, excellent stuff. I mean, not to mention what they're trying to do with sending all this aid out to all these different countries.
	Just the very idea of even the plandemic stuff, the jabs, all of it.
	None of it is constitutional.
	And of course, as they do this, we see just massive amounts of corruption.
	And let's hop over here.
	DHS. DHS agency appears to be burying evidence of involvement with domestic censorship activities.
	And then I'll go over to the British stuff about the jabs.
	And then we'll talk a little bit about Ukraine.
	We'll discuss Ukraine. The over $100 billion that have been given to the corrupt Ukrainian government that was put in by the United States as a replacement to the elected Yanukovych, who was overthrown, whom they overthrew in late 2013.
	But here it is, this story, and it comes to us Via, let me see, Fox News, but via Microsoft.
	A federal agency in the Department of Homeland Security, where is that in the Constitution, has been scrutinized for what critics argue is suppression of dissenting political views under the guise of combating so-called disinformation, and it now appears to be burying evidence of its alleged censorship, experts and watchdog groups say.
	The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, or CISA, has come under fire for working with big tech companies to flag and take down social media posts related to elections, to COVID vaccines, so-called, and a range of other issues that were deemed mis-, dis-, and mal-information.
	They actually have that as a term, MDM. Now it appears the agency may be concealing its efforts to monitor domestic content posted by regular Americans and focusing exclusively on its campaign to combat foreign actors in what some observers say is a move designed to hide government overreach,
	according to research compiled by Mike Benz, the Foundation for Freedom Online's executive director.
	CISA's current webpage on its MDM mission discusses, quote, foreign influence operations and disinformation targeting election infrastructure, end quote, and makes no mention of domestic activity.
	However, this new page has a short web archive history, only having a record of existing since last month.
	The old CISA webpage on MDM discusses both, quote, Foreign and domestic threat actors.
	Interesting. Using MDM campaigns to cause chaos, confusion, and division, describing them as malign.
	Similar to what Eric and I mentioned, the pieces that I've gotten to write about Merrick Garland and the so-called Justice Department and the FBI working with the National School Boards Association To actually generate out of nowhere a letter from the National School Boards Association that was then sent to the Biden administration as if the members of the National School Boards Association were extremely worried about the terrible,
	terrible threat of parents going to local school board meetings.
	Now, I think the greater lesson to get out of that, in addition to the government using and working with that group to coordinate This sort of narrative, just as we see with the CISA webpage.
	But in addition to that, I think the greater lesson there is the tragedy of the commons that is created by public funding, by taking people's tax money to input it into a school system, and then claiming on the fundamentally erroneous philosophical level that there is a right to education.
	Rights are negative in nature.
	It's negative reciprocity.
	You have a right to be left alone by me.
	I have a right to be left alone by you.
	Now, under the supposed government paradigm, under the John Locke concept that is the foundation for most of what we have in the United States as far as statutes and the argument for government, the idea is that people come together to form the government to protect their lives and property against encroachments by others.
	Now, I already mentioned the tautology of that regarding police, but The idea of a right to education within that context is completely verbatim.
	That does not exist. You don't have a claim to the fruits of somebody else's labor.
	And I brought this up in the past.
	Many people argue that since a child cannot necessarily educate himself or herself, that there is somehow a right to for that child to be able to receive an education.
	And they miss a lot of things in that argument, which as you start to analyze it in a philosophy class or just amongst friends talking about it, if people are willing to get down to the root of it, to get radical, like radius or radish, to get to the root of it, they'll discover that as uncomfortable as it might make some people feel, they have to admit there is no right to the fruits of someone else's labor for education.
	Now, the contemporary argument is that, well, a child can't educate himself.
	So therefore, the town, the locality, or if people don't trust the locality, they don't trust the family to educate the child, it gets bigger and bigger and bigger.
	You've got to have central control, the Department of Education in Washington, D.C., the state and the Department of Education.
	They have to have some hand in helping that child receive what he has a right to receive, an education.
	So they tax Person A, to provide money, he will have to work for X number of hours to provide money to the education system to pay for the teacher to teach the child.
	So I often say, if the person, that child, has a right to the fruits of that person's labor and that person will be forced to pay to the state, why don't we just remove the middleman and remove that payer and claim that the child has a right to the fruits of the teacher's labor?
	And then we'll enslave all the teachers.
	Make them work. There's no moral difference.
	And of course, people recognize then, well, that would be enslavement.
	Yeah, it would be enslavement.
	And that's what taxation is.
	It's enslavement through threats of violence.
	And if you happen to want to be left out of the plantation, not just even walk off the plantation, just say, look, my being here doesn't mean that I accept it.
	You are encroaching on me.
	You are invading my space.
	You are the invader. I want to be left alone.
	I'm not invading anybody.
	Leave me alone. They'll say, well, it's a public good.
	You benefit from it. Oh, really?
	So then let's talk about the practical outcome of education.
	Let's talk about the quantitative and qualitative differences that we see in grades and the actual materials that children could read back before they started getting government involved in public education back in the 1800s.
	Back when, oh, say, Thomas Paine released Common Sense and the Rights of Man, when he said, now is the time for all good men to come to the rise of the struggle, to come to the aid of their countrymen.
	This is the sort of thing that his writing was massively popular.
	People were very literate, as Alexei de Tocqueville noted when he came to the United States in the early 1800s.
	He originally was going to write a document about the American penal system.
	But in the time that Alexei de Tocqueville spent in the United States, he recognized, as he said, and I'm paraphrasing, the indigent were taken care of privately, education was being done privately, and people were literate.
	Virtually everybody could read.
	He said, how is it that they could get this done without government?
	So he wrote Democracy in America.
	He wasn't planning on writing Democracy in America, but he was so blown away By the private way that it was done.
	And then through the years, through Fabian socialists, through people like John Dewey and people like Robert Owen, they established, and universalists in the church and Harvard, they worked very hard to make sure that first it started, public education was done in order to stop Catholic families who were coming over, especially from Ireland in the late 1800s, to stop them from Remaining within their Catholic church schools.
	They wanted them to become good citizens of the state, not good Catholics.
	That was a big deal for them.
	And then it grew and grew and grew as the unions came in.
	And then politicians realized that if they could shower money on so-called rights to education, they would have ready constituency groups.
	And it just metastasized from there.
	Then you got the Marxist postmodernist ideology that was always mixed in with that, with the Fabian socialists.
	We can get the kids, we can make them into good cogs inside the machine, and it just went off from there.
	You know, the Prussian system of marching from class to class totally, totally misshaped and reworked and transformed what originally had been a non-government education system.
	So you see in that Merrick Garland thing, you can see the fruits of some very poisonous trees that go back over a century Back to the 19th century in the United States where these parents are protesting terrible stuff that's being done in their local schools.
	Typical conservatives would argue it should all be done locally.
	Get the federal government out of it.
	My father worked with Charlotte Iserby and both of them left.
	They were brought in by Reagan to try to shut down the education department, which has just been started by Jimmy Carter.
	My father, Paul Goldsmith, I put his picture on the back of my book, Live Free or Die.
	My father went down at the same time as Charlotte.
	They became friends. That's where my father got to know Ron Paul.
	That's where my father got to know Sam Blumenfeld, who was very, very influential on a lot of people, including Charlotte.
	They would have to have meetings in restaurants.
	They couldn't even meet in their offices because many of them thought their offices were bugged.
	My father had files with a code that was supposed to go to Reagan only, and they would get waylaid by Carter holdovers at the education department.
	So after being there for a couple years, he said, you know what, we're not going to be able to stop this.
	We can't stop this federal leviathan from being involved with education.
	There's too much incentive for the localities to do this, and they have this front of caring for people.
	So he left.
	He said, I'm wasting people's money.
	I'm taking people's tax money.
	It was an incredible move on his part.
	He dropped his livelihood.
	I was still going to college at Boston University.
	In fact, the reason I was able to pay for the last year at Boston University was because I was taking the trash to the dump for my parents my freshman year.
	I was back for Christmas and a lady ran a red light And she smashed into me.
	And I hadn't put my seatbelt together.
	And my head went through the windshield.
	That's where I got this scar on the side of my head.
	I was knocked out. So I don't really remember.
	I woke up in the ambulance.
	And a buddy of mine who was a volunteer was there.
	Peter Wells. God bless you, Peter.
	Thank you for being there. And I guess they thought I was dead.
	There was blood all over the place.
	My head had gone through. So it was a lot of blood.
	And we got a settlement from that woman.
	Because she was looking down at a road map.
	And she didn't see the light.
	And we got $16,000.
	That was exactly what my senior year at BU cost when my dad left and came back home.
	And Charlotte Elizabeth did the same thing.
	She left because, and God rest her soul, died last year.
	She left because they weren't going to be able to get anything done.
	And she wrote the dumbing down of America.
	You can go to her website. So, you know, It's kind of nice because I get to carry on the legacy of these people who are fighting in the generation.
	Actually, my dad is really two generations beyond because he was a World War II generation, not a baby boomer.
	And Charlotte, same sort of thing.
	So it's nice to be able to work in that regard and to see what David has done and how he admires people like Charlotte and others.
	And when I met Rand Paul, Rand was...
	Just as a quick aside, Rand was doing some canvassing for Ron in 2007, 2008.
	He came into a radio show I was doing, and we started to chat, and then we kept talking as we went out to the parking lot.
	Rand said, hey, did your dad know my dad?
	I was like, oh, I don't know.
	He goes, your dad was Paul Goldsmith, right?
	I was like, yeah.
	Yeah, he was. He goes, oh yeah, they were friends.
	I was like, I didn't know that.
	He goes, oh yeah, yeah, I remember my dad talking about your dad.
	I was like, oh wow, that's kind of nice.
	That's really cool. I wish I had known.
	I didn't know that at all.
	So, very nice.
	And Rand and I would talk on the phone occasionally and stuff.
	I haven't spoken with Rand since he ran for Senate.
	But we were actually at the Green Dragon Inn in, what was it, 2008?
	And he actually pulled me aside.
	That's where the Sons of Liberty...
	I did their work and we were at a tea party gathering.
	It was the first one, actually, in Boston to commemorate the Boston Tea Party.
	And then the other tea parties formed after that.
	But he pulled me aside and he said, hey, do you think I should run for Senate?
	And maybe he was just feeling me out or mentally trying to see if I would support him in New Hampshire and try to help him out somehow or whatever.
	I don't know. But that was interesting.
	And then, of course, he ended up running.
	So that's just part of that.
	But I think I did want to bring it up now.
	I want to turn very quickly over to my MRCTV piece because this ties to the Matt Taibbi stuff from the Twitter files.
	So I want to go over to the Matt Taibbi material.
	Has that been published?
	It should have been published.
	Let me see here.
	Yeah, here it is.
	So, I'm going to go through this just a little bit.
	I went through some of this last night, and also on Friday I gave some people some information on this.
	But you can see the headline, New Twitter files reveal DOD, CIA, DARPA, and more in massive network to silence conservatives.
	So this is what Eric was mentioning.
	It looks like the Federal Trade Commission It's getting its fingers into Matt Taibbi's work and trying to get Twitter to reveal information to the FTC or at least trying to mess them up and cost them a lot of money, which is one of the great things that they have the power to do.
	They think it's great. I think it's demonic to cost people money when they're just trying to do their work.
	Journalist Matt Taibbi runs three tracks and ties them together in what could be one of the most stunning releases of internal Twitter communications to date.
	This 17th tranche of so-called Twitter files exposing censorship and corruption at the company pre-Elon Musk's takeover sees Taibbi not only expose shocking Atlantic Council's attempts to silence tens of thousands of Twitter users.
	It should be the shocking Atlantic Council's attempts to silence tens of thousands of Twitter users.
	It sees him shed light on federal government attempts to shut down hundreds of conservative and libertarian Twitter handles as he, Taibbi, correctly follows the corrupt anti-constitutional origins of these federal gnats, origins that personally touch a nerve because I've been writing about these origins that personally touch a nerve because I've been writing about these origins First, there are Taibbi's potent tweets about the Atlantic Council.
	The internationalist so-called non-governmental organization that actually has many big government ties.
	It also has connections to CrowdStrike.
	This is very important. I'm glad I get to talk about this on David's show.
	And Tony, thanks for bringing me in.
	David, thanks for bringing me in.
	I want to mention this.
	I really want to stress this to everybody.
	It also has connections to CrowdStrike founder Dmitry Alperovitch.
	He's originally ethnically Russian, moved to the United States.
	CrowdStrike, I said in parentheses, CrowdStrike being the computer security firm.
	This is where I do a little divergence, but I think it's really key.
	They are the computer security firm that got the DNC computers instead of the FBI getting them after the DNC email leak in 2016, upon which the firm recklessly claimed that the data was hacked.
	A claim that former NSA technical director William Binney easily refuted by noting the data transfer speed required an internal connection, meaning that the data most likely was leaked by an internal source, most likely Seth Rich.
	And even, and by the way, I mentioned that CrowdStrike has ties to Burisma, the state-established Ukrainian energy corporation that employed Hunter Biden.
	Now, before I go any further, everybody, This is where I want to inject something that, if you read my articles about this in 2016, I was writing about this for MRCTV. And I mentioned this on my Rockfin program last, let me see, Monday night.
	Monday night when we did a three-hour show, a three-hour tour.
	I wish Marianne were there.
	The CrowdStrike story is actually bigger than what I wrote here.
	And in 2016 for MRCTV, I brought this up.
	So check this out, everybody.
	Rather than the DNC giving the FBI the hard drives, the DNC gives it to Alperovitch, the Atlantic Council board member, and his company CrowdStrike.
	The Atlantic Council was intimately involved with the overthrow of the Ukrainian government in late 2013.
	They are intimately involved with what is going on with NATO and Ukraine now and what has been going on with Ukraine all throughout the 2013 Maidan coup, 2014 placement for Burisma, for Hunter Biden, the attack on Crimea that they then tried to portray as Russian aggression.
	When Putin was merely trying to defend the Crimean area against central Kiev aggression, but there's something else which involves the Washington Post, then and still owned by Amazon's Jeff Bezos, and Amazon at that time had just gotten its CIA contract for data.
	CrowdStrike released a so-called report And it was basically its made-up story that it was a hack, which, as William Benny notes, is impossible because the data transfer speed, it couldn't have been done through phone lines.
	It had to have been done on-site.
	The key thing about this that I want to mention, and how it involves the Washington Post, is that their tech reporter, she's an Asian woman, I can't remember her name, like Jen or Wen or something like that, The CrowdStrike people came out with their report at 9 in the morning, on a particular morning in 2016.
	She had a 2,000-word report for the Washington Post two hours later at 11 in the morning.
	That's not possible.
	You can't take the CrowdStrike report and write, and as you know, anybody who writes journalism, you don't write a 2,000-word piece and get it edited, get it to the editor, have the editor look at it, then get it to the legal department and have the legal department look at it, and then get it formatted and get it out in two hours.
	Not possible. Now, it's maybe possible to get a 2,000-word piece written But you're not going to get...
	I mean, that might be possible if you're really, really efficient in two hours.
	But you're going to have hyperlinks and checking and all sorts of stuff.
	So very clearly, she didn't get that at 9 o'clock and then write that piece in two hours.
	The Washington Post got it first and they got it before...
	Anybody else before CrowdStrike actually issued their report, but they portrayed it as if they were just doing this spontaneously.
	CrowdStrike's issued the report.
	No, they worked with each other.
	They worked with each other to push this narrative.
	That's what the Washington Post did in 2016.
	And it was all part of a much larger narrative that, as Taibbi notes, It involves the Portman Murphy Countering Foreign Propaganda Act, which was introduced in March of 2016, around the same time that Barack Obama got involved with issuing very, very detrimental and dangerous executive orders that portrayed Russia as the bad guy.
	It was all part of this giant narrative that throughout the summer was then leveraged to continue portraying Russia as the bad guy, About the DNC, about Podesta, and about Hillary.
	All throughout that year until December when the Portman-Murphy bill was passed and the funding for what Barack Obama started in March of 2016 through executive order, this thing called the GEC, which we'll get into in a minute, the funding for it started.
	That lasted two years until 2018 and then it went defunct for a little while because Trump wouldn't renew it.
	But it funneled $150 million into the pockets of dinosaur news media through these organizations that we'll list.
	And so all of what we're seeing now, it's all part and parcel to the larger narrative-shaped censorship ideas that came about even before 2016.
	They actually came about in 2011 under Barack Obama.
	So here's a little bit more.
	First, I say there are those tweets about CrowdStrike.
	Then we have, as I mentioned here, that the Atlantic Council has financial ties to Burisma, a state-established Ukrainian energy corporation that employed Hunter Biden.
	It's all connected.
	And as I said, and I've mentioned this many times, no wonder my friend who formerly worked for the Obama Justice Department and Eric Holder He came up to me when I was reporting about Ukraine in late 2013 and the coup that was being enacted or being conducted at that time.
	He approached me and said, where are you getting your information card?
	And I said, well, and he had left the Obama administration in disgust.
	I said, I'm doing research.
	He goes, well, you're right, and there's a lot more.
	Here we are. Taibbi's second tweet in the thread on Tranch17 from Twitter comes with an attached screenshot of This is the Atlantic Council now, but remember, they're all connected.
	DNC, Atlantic Council, all these guys.
	Burisma, they're all connected.
	NATO, NATO. He wrote to them to say, hi guys, attached to a find around 40,000 Twitter accounts that our researchers suspect are engaged in inauthentic behavior and Hindu nationalism more broadly.
	So I wrote, that's 40,000 And in his next tweet, Taibbi reveals that these targets of, quote, inauthentic behavior, whatever that means, were found to be full of conservative Americans.
	Quote, So what?
	But the list was full, actually, of ordinary Americans with no connection to India and no clue about Indian politics.
	So I write, Some of those targeted in this internationalist behemoth offered some choice words, which Mr. Taibbi also provided in his Twitter thread.
	Quote, I have no connection to any Hindu folks.
	Just a Reagan Republican here in CT, replied Bobby Hailstone.
	Hindu nationalists?
	I've never even been out of this country, let alone the state of New Jersey, said Lady DI-816.
	And then a final one. These people are insane, said Crystal Woods.
	Taimi notes that, to their credit, Twitter's Yoel Roth and others communicated with each other about how sketchy this Atlantic Council claim was.
	But the organization's move is an indication of just how intense was the big government attack on conservative speech.
	And that was just one facet of the attacks.
	Now we get into some other stuff.
	In Taibbi's March 2nd substack piece, entitled The Original Sin of We have been in the...
	I can't...
	I can't tell you.
	It's just crazy. Not like it's like privy information, but you don't even forget.
	I'll just keep going. But if you could just imagine some of the conversations I've had to have with Eric over these years, since that time, how we got targeted.
	I mean, shoot. YouTube pulled us down a week and a half ago because of one of my videos.
	They went back to October and nailed it.
	And everything I said was right.
	I was quoting the CDC. Anyway.
	In fact, it would be wise to start with some of what we have been discussing here at MRCTV. Recall that I often have written about the Portman Murphy Countering Foreign Propaganda Act, a bill introduced in March of 2016 and used in tandem with salacious and baseless claims of Russian hacking of the DNC and Russian hacking of Hillary and Russian collusion with Trump that government operatics and media propagandists chanted throughout that summer and into the winter.
	The act claimed the power to shovel $150 million over two years into the coffers of U.S. media that helped the government fight out the foreign propaganda.
	In other words, it helped fund U.S. propaganda.
	And it was a particular kind of propaganda.
	The kind that typical deep state figures who already had displayed a predilection for creating anti-Russian pro-Trump fiction really, really liked.
	Matt Taibbi shows readers how the Portman Murphy Act was connected to an almost simultaneously issued March 2016 Obama executive order, establishing what was called the Global Engagement Center.
	And a bit of digging shows us that this itself was an Obama spin on something he started in 2011 with an earlier executive order.
	So first, we'll go to the official GEC Global Engagement Center website, as I did on my show on Monday in the three-hour show.
	But hopefully you won't mind if you watch that show on Rockfin.
	I think we went pretty much the whole show covering, well, maybe half the show covering this.
	GEC's founder, I wrote, as they say, sorry, GEC's founder, Tracy's Back Founding, Traces back to 2011 and Executive Order 13584, which established within the Department of State the Center for Strategic Counterterrorism Communications,
	CSCC, for the purpose of, quote, supporting agencies in government-wide public communications activities targeted against violent extremism and terrorist organizations, end quote.
	Executive Order 13721 in 2016, Then transformed the CSCC into, yeah, you got it, repo man, the Global Engagement Center, but left its counterterrorism mission largely unchanged.
	So, how did Portman Murphy fold into this?
	I said, this isn't really true at all.
	As Taibbi notes, when Portman Murphy was rolled into the 2016 National Defense Authorization Act, The bankroll permitting the GEC to begin a two-year propaganda campaign against innocent Americans and others worldwide was laid out.
	Obama signed the original executive order in March 2016, but it wasn't until after Donald Trump's election that a bipartisan pair of senators, Ohio's Rob Portman and Connecticut's Chris Murphy, put the GEC into the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act through the Portman-Murphy bill.
	And I believe that that should be quoted.
	I believe that that's Matt Taibbi's stuff.
	I mentioned that on my show Monday night.
	I think that should have a quote around it.
	I'll have to get to the editor and ask her to put that in there.
	So here it is.
	Section 1287 Global Engagement Center of the NDAA said the Secretary of State shall establish within the Department of State a global engagement center that would integrate interagency efforts to track and evaluate counterfactual narratives abroad that threaten national security interests.
	The careful language about a center within state obscured a key truth about GEC, which is that it's not a sub-agency of state at all, but an interagency group whose original partners included the FBI, DHS,
	CIA, the Office of the President, and multiple DOD entities, including DARPA, Special Operations Command, SOCOM, and STRATCOM. So as I wrote, I repeatedly have written about Portman Murphy, noting that after its initial two-year funding run, it fell into disfavor with the Trump administration, but was revived in 2019, something Senator Chris Murphy proudly explains on his own tax-funded website.
	And by the way, as I mentioned on my show Monday night, if you connect at my pieces here, Those are just two, I think, of like probably the six or seven I've written about Portman Murphy since 2016.
	But my hyperlinks there to Rob Portman's website now don't work.
	Inside those articles because Portman has retired from the Senate.
	He was the senator from Ohio, I mentioned numerous times, who helped push Trump to impose those ridiculously stupid tariffs against Chinese made washing machines so that a lot of people had to pay a lot more just to get washing machines in their houses.
	And that's money they could have spent on other stuff.
	It's utterly ridiculous.
	And of course, yeah, as Reason Magazine has pointed out, it was a big boon to those special interests around Portman's area.
	So, you know, it's just the way they use tariffs to play favorites with people.
	It's genius. Anyway, as I said, it was revived in 2019, something Senator Chris Murphy proudly explains.
	So here is Murphy's website.
	Murphy and Portman introduced the Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act, which was signed into law in December of 2016.
	The law improved the ability of the United States to so-called counter-foreign propaganda and disinformation by establishing the Global Engagement Center.
	Yes, and of course promoting their own propaganda and disinformation.
	So, as I mentioned here, so as I tried to warn people at the time, the Feds literally used hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars to quote study and fight What they simply called disinformation.
	And then to create propaganda and attempt to silence civilians from all over the planet.
	And it's still happening thanks to former Senator Rob Portman and Senator Murphy.
	As Taibbi notes at Twitter, quote, GEC's Chinese list included multiple, this is to Twitter, multiple Western government accounts and at least three CNN employees based abroad.
	Not exactly Anderson Cooper's besties, but CNN assets, if you will, quip Twitter's Patrick Conlon.
	a total crock, added Trust and Safety Chief Yoel Roth.
	And as I wrote here, and now we can think about how it might feel to have many of the United States government's most powerful spy agencies focused on portraying innocent people as malefactors and trying to censor them.
	It's an age-old problem going back to the Sedition Act of 1798 when President John Adams got pals in Congress to write a statute allowing the feds to punish people who criticize Adams while allowing criticism of his nemesis, then-Vice President Thomas Jefferson.
	And of course, as I mentioned, Jefferson, in response, wrote the Kentucky Resolutions in response to the Sedition Act and the Alien Act, which were separate things.
	And in the Alien Act, in Kentucky Resolution No.
	4, he noted that, as is correct, the handling of immigration is a state purview.
	So continuing here, sorry to slip that in.
	I try to do that often because I try to educate people on that issue.
	It's a decentralized federalism issue if people want to support the Constitution and call themselves constitutional conservatives or constitutional libertarians.
	And it's something that maybe Donald Trump might want to wake up to rather than having the federal government build a wall around us.
	So as I write here, as Taibbi writes at Substack, it permeates the entire disinformation studies complex, which is constantly discussing the impact, so-called, of disinformation on, say, the 2016 election, but often stops short of quantifying that impact or even identifying what but often stops short of quantifying that impact or even identifying what that
	The notion that people voted for Donald Trump because they were misinformed or manipulated by Russians is a fantasy, a mental self-defense mechanism for people who are unable to face the more obvious real-world reasons.
	I think it's more than self-defense.
	I think it's offense. I think it was always offense.
	It was used to manipulate things, to silence people, and to change the outcome of the election and give them the power to be able to go after people and claim that they were working with Russia and, of course, to portray Russia as the bad guy as they continued their machinations to expand NATO into Ukraine.
	So, with that said, we go back once more to...
	Where is it? This piece from Fox.
	DHS Agency appears to be burying evidence of involvement with domestic censorship activities.
	Department of Homeland Security.
	They changed the website for their Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency.
	It now appears the agency may be concealing its efforts to monitor domestic content.
	Where's the Fourth Amendment?
	Where is that?
	I don't know. Very interesting.
	So, some powerful information coming from Tucker, however one feels about this.
	And I want to turn now to this one, which I brought up on my show last night.
	Again, dealing with people's privacy and bringing in, at the end of the piece, as I mentioned on my show last night, bringing in what I have hopefully...
	Provided sufficient information to people about, which is HIPAA, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996.
	So we'll go through this and I'll tell you how HIPAA folds into it.
	As I mentioned on the program last night, the FBI secretly working with hospitals to strip U.S. citizens' gun rights, documents show.
	Don't forget, the Second Amendment, very clear.
	The fourth, fifth, sixth, and eighth amendments of the Bill of Rights assuring due process, no punishment unless you've been tried, and no punishment that's out of the pale.
	And these people haven't been tried at all.
	And when we get into the documents and the sharing of medical information, you'll see how the Fourth Amendment was breached and how HIPAA allows the Fourth Amendment to be breached and how The reporters trying to report on this ran into it.
	You'll see. Here it is.
	This is an exclusive to the Washington Examiner, published yesterday, yesterday afternoon.
	The FBI coordinated secretly with hospitals and medical centers to strip U.S. citizens of their rights to own, buy, or use firearms, according to a trove of internal documents obtained by the Washington Examiner.
	Behind closed doors and without congressional approval, the FBI has worked hand-in-hand with Secret Service and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to strip over two dozen people of their gun rights with internal forms, Sorry, let me reread that for you.
	To strip over two dozen people of their gun rights with internal forms, records show.
	So they used internal forms to strip them of their guns.
	On the heels of this revelation by the Washington Examiner in December 2022, so remember that, they already had the revelation.
	Now they've got newly obtained documents and the emails that shed light on how the Bureau apparently received a helping hand from medical facilities to waive gun rights from at least five people.
	Quote, anytime you have evidence of private entities coordinating with federal agents to strip Americans of their rights, the public should be alarmed and demanding answers and action, said Aidan Johnson.
	Federal Affairs Director for Gun Owners of America, Way to go, GOA! So, in a way, this is similar to what the Bush administration and others did with Verizon phone records, and a lawsuit was brought against the government for collecting people's data.
	As Edward Snowden revealed, and as Michael Hayden admitted in front of Senator Wyden.
	Actually, he didn't admit it.
	He denied it. He perjured himself.
	Sorry to say that. Yes, that's right.
	He said, no, not wittingly are they collecting.
	It was a bald-faced lie.
	And then what they did was they gave the phone companies the power of To have immunity from lawsuits and they asked, now it's just the phone companies collected and they give it to the feds.
	Now here is more information here because this does have to do with HIPAA and I'll give you the info in just a moment.
	Federal Affairs Director Aiden Johnson said this, this is just the latest terrifying new instance of the illegal NICS self submission form being used in nefarious ways and those who used it to violate the public's trust All right.
	Between 2016 and 2019, the FBI presented forms to U.S. citizens at their homes and in other undisclosed locations that registered them with the Bureau's National Instant Criminal Background Check System.
	So that, of course, is the NICS system.
	And if you want to be a licensed firearm holder, you better get connected with the NICS system or you're going to be in trouble.
	You want to be a firearm dealer.
	The Washington Examiner previously reported.
	Newly obtained records, however, date the FBI's usage of the form back to 2011.
	Signatories of the internal forms were asked to voluntarily identify as a, quote, danger, end quote, to themselves or others, as well as lacking the, quote, mental capacity adequately to contract their lives.
	The very existence of the FBI's forms has raised significant concerns among First Amendment lawyers and members of Congress, including Senator Marsha Blackburn, Republican of Tennessee, House Majority Chairman Jim Jordan, Republican of Ohio, and Representatives Dan Bishop, Republican of North Carolina, and Andrew Clyde, Republican of Georgia.
	As I said, they're just chock full of Democrats here.
	They're all very much...
	It really speaks to the rogue nature of the deep state mentality.
	Ken Cuccinelli, an ex-Department of Homeland Security officer under the Trump administration and former Virginia Attorney General, told the Washington Examiner, which, as I mentioned last night on my program, makes me wonder why he actually joined the Department of Homeland Security if he's an attorney,
	and the former Attorney General of Virginia should recognize the unconstitutional nature of the DHS. But continuing, New documents shared with the Washington Examiner, which gun owners of America obtained, and they only got them through FOIA, Freedom of Information,
	shed light on how facilities in New Hampshire, Delaware, Massachusetts, and Oklahoma used the gun forms and supplied signatory records to the FBI. What are we talking about here?
	We're talking about medical records.
	Okay? Medical records.
	And you'll see how all this is confirmed in just a minute and how HIPAA is involved.
	The forms are from, and I try to tell people this, I told students, I told parents and students that I've been teaching, don't get coded.
	Don't get coded with a learning disability because that will be on your permanent record and they will use it with red flag laws later.
	This is a similar thing.
	It's not that minute, but it's a similar thing.
	The forms are from 2011 and 2019, the year the FBI has said it discontinued their usage.
	The document from 2011, which dates the FBI's actions to five years earlier than has previously been reported, that's the Obama administration, was shared with Oklahoma's Northwest Center for Behavioral Health, a mental health clinic.
	Like other forms, the signatory's name has been redacted by the FBI. The form was filled out in November 2011 and the clinic later sent it to the FBI, documents show.
	A medical professional, whose name was also redacted by the FBI, signed the form and disclosed their state license number.
	There are no investigative records accompanying the Oklahoma-related forms, making it unclear why the person forfeited his or her gun rights.
	There's the form.
	In April of 2017, one signatory signed a form following coordination between Rockford Center, a private mental health group in Newark, Delaware, and the FBI. The signatory identified as, quote, a danger to himself or others, end quote, and was neither involuntarily committed for treatment nor adjudicated as a mental defective, end quote, documents show.
	Which brings up, as I did last night in my thinking, brings up in my pattern of thinking, makes me think again to remind folks, don't forget, that this is a question that's being adjudicated right now in the courts and could go to the Supreme Court all about whether or not people who are that this is a question that's being adjudicated right now in the courts and could go to the Supreme Court all about whether or not people who are released from jail but are deemed to be
	Again, it brings to question the entire paradigm of state-run jurisprudential systems that for some reason allow people to go out, deem them safe enough to go out into the public, but then say that they're not really safe enough to go out into the public.
	There's a problem there.
	And if you had a private organization that actually had liability that was supposed to be handling jurisprudential problems and protection, then you wouldn't have this.
	People wouldn't sit for it.
	But anyway, we'll continue.
	However, the Gun Control Act, and I'm talking about getting rid of the polis altogether, not having We're good to go.
	Does not say a U.S. citizen may label himself or herself unfit to own guns and outlines that a person could be prohibited that if they are adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to a mental institution.
	That is what's being questioned right now in the courts, that aspect of the 1968 Gun Control Act.
	And the whole act should be tossed, but they won't do that.
	These new revelations From Clyde, told the Washington Examiner, provide additional proof that the FBI has used deeply disturbing tactics to erode American Second Amendment freedoms.
	Make no mistake, the FBI is weaponizing Nick's forms to advance the left's dangerous agenda of dismantling our Second Amendment liberties and disarming our nation.
	It should be liberties that are supposedly protected by the Second Amendment.
	Congress must thoroughly investigate this troubling matter, he continues.
	Now, here is this, because we're getting down to the HIPAA-oriented part of it.
	Another medical center that coordinated with the FBI is New Hampshire Hospital, which is state-backed and provides inpatient psychiatric services, documents show.
	In September 2019, the hospital filled out a sheet detailing how a patient signed the FBI form.
	The two-page hospital sheet, which does not list the patient's name, was forwarded to the Bureau.
	Now, check this out.
	Quote, The documents you reference are documents used to release medical records to another entity at a patient's request, Kathy Romillard, a spokeswoman for the New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services, told the Washington Examiner.
	Quote, the patient or guardian must request and approve the sharing of information for the hospital to send records to another entity.
	The department does not take a position on the purpose of or reasoning behind the patient's request.
	So she says there, the patient or guardian must request and approve the sharing of information for the hospital to send records to another.
	They already did send them to another entity.
	They sent them to the FBI. They sent them to Nick's.
	They work with NICS, I should say.
	They sent them to the FBI. And that is where HIPAA comes in.
	And again, I want to stress this.
	1996, page 75 to 94 of HIPAA. You can look at the PDF. It assigns the head of the Department of Health and Human Services the responsibility of giving every person who visits any medical center that deals with the federal government a unique health identifier.
	UHI, I think they call it.
	And with that unique health identifier, the government can call up all of your medical records anytime they want them.
	That's how they do it.
	That's how they do contact tracing.
	It's all part and parcel.
	They breach the Fourth Amendment with HIPAA for medical records.
	And as I mentioned for years with Democrats, I would say, yeah, it was wrong that George W. Bush was collecting people's cell phone records through Verizon, right?
	Yeah, that was wrong.
	Absolutely. That was terrible.
	So how do you feel about Barack Obama collecting people's medical records through HIPAA? What?
	Yeah, he's doing that.
	Oh, well, yeah, but that's okay because it's Obamacare.
	Amazing. Stunning hypocrisy.
	Amazing hypocrisy.
	And then, of course, we've got the government not only misreading the Fourth Amendment, but the government misreading all sorts of other things in order to shape their narratives.
	Whether it be parents going to local school board meetings, or it be things like, oh, I don't know, data about...
	Vaccine deaths.
	Here's Australia.
	Omission of children's COVID-19 vaccine deaths in Australia raises concerns.
	This is from the Epoch Times.
	An Australian senator has said he is concerned about the country's therapeutic authorities' delayed approach to updating Australia's database of adverse events notifications.
	D-A-E-N. After it was revealed the government body had neglected to include a number of deaths attributed to the vaccine, including that of two children aged seven and nine.
	I'm sure their parents must feel wonderful about losing their kids and then having the government cover it up.
	That's awesome.
	But hey, you gotta count on people being just wonderful when it comes to manipulating messages.
	Like, oh, you know, Matthew Hancock, the head of the British National Health Response to COVID, whom, as David mentioned on Monday, text messages reveal, and that's over 100,000 text messages revealed by The Telegraph,
	journalist Isabel Oakeshott, that Cabinet Secretary Simon Case and others, like you-know-who, Matt Hancock, We're plotting with each other about ways to frighten the pants off everyone.
	The text messages are very revealing, as you can see.
	In December 2020, the exchanges show concern that London Mayor Sadiq Khan could follow the example of Mayor of Greater Manchester, Andy Burnham, who had clashed with the government over the decision to impose stringent lockdown restrictions on the region.
	Hancock's advisor said, quote, rather than doing too much forward signaling, we can roll pitch with the new strain.
	So this is Hancock's advisor speaking with Hancock.
	We frighten the pants off everyone with the new strain, Hancock responded.
	But the complication with that Brexit is taking the top lines.
	They were talking about a story that was in the news.
	He said in an apparent reference to media coverage of the UK's EU exit.
	Yep, that's what will get proper behavior change, the advisor said.
	Then when do we deploy the new variant, Hancock said.
	And they have the photos of their text exchanges.
	The conversation on December 13th came amid concerns about the rapid spread of the virus in Southeast England.
	And of course, those numbers were utterly bogus.
	There he is. The man who was caught groping his girlfriend in an elevator.
	The man who cried crocodile tears when they came up with the government-subsidized, non-workable Pfizer vaccine.
	Who was that woman? Janet Whatserface testified in front of the EU when she was asked whether Pfizer actually had any data.
	That showed that it would be efficacious.
	She said, oh no, of course not.
	As if you should expect otherwise.
	We had to move at the speed of science.
	Amazing, huh? Just incredible.
	But hey, one last bit.
	This little kudos to the Independent Institute, everybody.
	And then I want to hop into the chat.
	Thank you for the tips. I want to thank everybody for joining me.
	It's just been excellent.
	Really great. Great.
	I get so pumped up talking to you guys and hearing from you guys.
	And so I want to go back because I want to hear more.
	But don't forget, visit davidknightshow.com.
	Go to the store, please.
	And compliment David.
	Compliments to David for doing what he's doing in Tennessee right now.
	Maybe you'll see Glenn Jacobs there.
	I wonder if he'll see him. So this is from the Independent Institute talking about bureaucrats.
	Is Biden's pick Julie Su suited to be U.S. Labor Secretary?
	How about a larger question to Kay Lloyd Billingsley?
	Should there be a position called U.S. Labor Secretary?
	Morally, no. Constitutionally, no.
	Julie Su, President Biden's nominee for Secretary of Labor, as the Brits might say, is a, quote, tested and experienced leader.
	Claims a February 28th statement from the White House.
	It contained no word about Sue's experience leading California's Employment Development Department, EDD, which handles unemployment claims.
	On Sue's watch, the EDD sent more than $31 billion in unemployment claims to prison inmates in California, out of state, and even out of the country.
	Sue confirmed that in 2020 alone, fraudsters stole at least $11.4 billion in California unemployment benefits.
	Holy moly.
	Yeah, as it happens, fraud was not a new problem at EDD. California State Auditor reported that EDD had, quote, no comprehensive plan for how it would respond if California experienced a recession and unemployment insurance claims increased accordingly.
	In the days of the so-called pandemic, Sue suspended eligibility requirements for EDD claims.
	After more than $11 billion in confirmed fraud, with the possibility of $20 billion more, Sue told reporters, get this, quote, There is no sugarcoating the reality.
	California did not have sufficient security measures in place to prevent this level of fraud.
	Sue did not explain her own responsibility for the failure, which came on a massive scale.
	The state approved more than $140 million for at least 20,000 prisoners.
	Convicts who made fraudulent claims included convicted murderers Scott Peterson and Carrie Stainer.
	Death row inmates, murderers, rapists, and child molesters among them accounted for at least 158 claims, landing more than $420,000 in benefits.
	One inmate, get this, one inmate filed a claim under the name Poopy Britches.
	The criminals marveled at how easy it was to get paid.
	Hey, didn't somebody in chat mention Poopy Britches?
	I want to go to the Rockfin chat.
	We have a couple minutes left as we wrap up the David Knight Show.
	Thanks for joining me, everybody.
	Remember, you can find David Knight Show live on Rumble and pieces of it on Odyssey, streaming live on Odyssey as well, and find pieces on Bitchute and, of course, the DavidKnightShow.com.
	Let's go into the chat. I want to thank those who donated and tipped.
	So, Utopian Lobotomy...
	Thank you for your generous $5 tip.
	Patrick S., $50.
	I started reading Rising Sun by Michael Crichton yesterday.
	Wow! He was so ahead of his time and so many of his books.
	Always appreciate the literary references.
	Thank you so much!
	And Tony Arterburn is here with us.
	Tony, it's good to have you along for the ride, my friend.
	And I'm glad you're here as we roll out tonight, this afternoon.
	I want to thank everybody and hopefully they'll join me tonight.
	On my Rockfin program.
	We're getting up towards 600 likers or something on Rockfin, which is cool.
	Scribers, yeah. Yeah, yeah.
	I'm really happy about that.
	That's cool. Tony, I want to thank you for your technical assistance today and just being an all-around awesome guy.
	You gave me the power, man. Great show.
	It flew by.
	Oh, thanks. You make everything look so easy.
	I said that yesterday about you, but let's see, I've got five seconds to hit the outro.
	I'm going to do that now.
	All right. Go ahead and close her out, guard.
	Great show. Thanks, Tony.
	And God bless everyone.
	Tony, God bless you, man. I wish I were there to give you the high five, man.
	You're awesome. Everyone have a great afternoon.
	Don't forget, join us in Rockland tonight, not to promote my stuff, but it's called Liberty Conspiracy.
	Look it up. You can find me on Twitter, at Guard Goldsmith.

▲