Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 19, 2023 - The David Knight Show

03:01:24

The David Knight Show - 07/19/2023

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	The End Using free speech to free minds.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	As the clock strikes 13, it's Wednesday the 19th of July, year of our Lord 2023.
	3.
	Well, today we're going to begin with what everyone is talking about, and that is the information that was released yesterday that Trump is going to be indicted for something about January the 6th.
	But I think what most outlets are not talking about, on the conservative side, you've got several mainstream media outlets talking about what has happened to 16 people in Michigan.
	That are being prosecuted for felonies that total up to 85 years because they were quote-unquote fake electors.
	And the alternative right-wing press is so obsessed with Trump.
	They didn't even talk about these poor people being victimized with this.
	We're going to begin with all of that.
	Stay with us. Oh, and by the way, you know, Trump is now apparently the raider of the lost menorahs.
	Yeah, we'll explain what that is coming up here.
	We'll be right back. The news of this indictment being rolled out was like Christmas for the people on CNN, MSNBC, other places like that.
	As a matter of fact, I don't think they get that excited about celebrating Christmas as they do the indictment of Donald Trump.
	And they were just gushing all over themselves every little tiny detail.
	And the hero worship of Jack Smith was truly amazing.
	It is truly amazing how both the left and the right have their little idols, their little heroes, and they make them into little demigods, little idols.
	Take a look at this report from CNN about spotting Jack Smith, their hero, at a subway.
	And welcome back to our continuing special coverage.
	This is a new video that we have just been getting into CNN special counsels.
	That's Jack Smith getting lunch at Subway.
	Spotted on this historic day coming out of Washington, D.C. Subway.
	Earlier this morning, CNN confirmed Smith's team notified he's a target of the far-reaching investigation into the plot to steal the 2020 election.
	Mr. Smith did not answer questions that were asked of him as he was getting into his vehicle.
	Yeah, this is like the broadcast that you have...
	Christmas Eve, supposedly from NORAD, we're tracking Santa Claus, right?
	Santa Claus has just been spotted.
	Oh, and now he's stopped at Subway for some cookies and milk.
	Because this guy, Jack Smith, is like Santa Claus to the left.
	He's giving them everything they wished for.
	CNN self-parodied itself, says MRCTV. On Tuesday, as it tried to discern higher meanings behind special counsel Jack Smith's lunchtime trip to Subway.
	On the same day, it was revealed that he issued a target letter to former President Trump as part of his January the 6th investigation.
	Inside Politics host Dana Bash, talking about it, introduced senior justice correspondent Evan Perez.
	Led him with more of a statement than an actual question, says MRCTV. I won't ask you all the less important things about what he got and how he paid and all that, but what is important about the imagery here?
	You know, Subway, what does that say?
	Is this about Ocean Gate or something?
	Is he implying that Trump is imploding?
	Because certainly it couldn't be that the prosecution of Trump is imploding.
	Couldn't be that it is fatally flawed or cracked or whatever, or that Trump or Jack Smith, either or both of them, fatally flawed and cracked.
	Couldn't be that, could it? No, it was they clearly want us to see him and the image to be very different from what we saw in the former president's post of a deranged individual.
	You see, you have to see him as a normal man who is very humble, He goes to Subway for his lunch.
	And he's just, you know, Mr.
	Smith goes to Washington. He's like Jimmy Stewart.
	Just a common man.
	And then Perez began by fawning over Smith's alleged man of the people-like journey.
	See, Mr. Smith goes to Subway, Washington.
	Yeah, I mean, look, I can count probably five or six sandwich shops between his office and that location that he was at earlier today.
	He was. He stood in line like everybody else.
	Wow. How humble of him.
	He stood in line like everybody else.
	I mean, he didn't walk in and say, hey, hey, hey, security, clear these people out.
	I'm Jack Smith.
	Make me a sandwich right now.
	He didn't do that. Is that what Dana Bash and Anderson Cooper do when they go into Subway?
	Oh, I bet they go into Subway a lot, don't you think?
	Now, I couldn't tell whether he was a foot long or was he six inches long?
	Okay, we're not really sure.
	We'll find out later, I guess.
	He measures up.
	The next hour on CNN News Central.
	You had Caitlin Polance said, Jack Smith is tight lipped.
	He was spotted today by CNN going to Subway for lunch, picking up a sandwich, leaving and not saying a word.
	This is CNN.
	A few minutes later, chief national correspondent, John King.
	And just one last point.
	Jack Smith, remember when the classified documents target letter, which Trump announced that there's a lot of commentary, you know, is Jack Smith making a mistake here?
	Is he leaving this all to Donald Trump?
	And then they released the indictment, and we all said, wow, wow.
	And then King said, Jack Smith, going to Subway today, there's a message to Trump.
	Trump tries to intimidate people.
	He bullies people. He tries to scare you away.
	Well, there you go.
	Can't scare him away from Subway.
	What is going on with these people?
	And it truly is deranged on both sides.
	And when I saw this, I told Karen, I said, well, this is what I've been saying.
	You know, there's Trump derangement syndrome.
	The dividing line for the Civil War.
	And you've got lunatic, insane people on either side of that line who are just aching to fight each other.
	And every time that they do this, Trump's popularity goes up.
	It's just gone up to 51%.
	It's going to go higher with every indictment.
	There's more that are coming on other things as well.
	And we don't even know what the charges are with this.
	Will it be seditious conspiracy?
	I think so. I agree with Stuart Rhodes.
	I think that rather than coming after Trump, because Trump is between you and them, Trump threw his people under the bus.
	They came after his people first.
	And we'll see that with the Michigan electors as well.
	They're coming after his people first.
	And then they'll go after him. But guess what?
	You know, if they cut a deal, guess who they're going to cut it with?
	They're not going to cut it with Stuart Rhodes, Oath Keepers, or any of the Proud Boys, or any of the Michigan electors.
	Or any of the other people who just happen to go in and get caught up in this?
	And there's a story that I've got about an elderly pastor and his son and another elderly man.
	On January the 6th, they went to the Capitol.
	They went there to protest.
	I don't know what for. I'd like to ask some of these people, what do you think you're going to accomplish on that day?
	But they have a right to speak out if they're not happy with the election.
	But I don't know why...
	They ever believed any of the nonsense from Trump and Roger and Alex about how they're going to overturn this election or they're going to take it back or fix it somehow.
	There was absolutely no way that any of that stuff could happen.
	So I don't know. This is not just a protest that, you know, you've rushed this thing through.
	We have questions. You haven't given us an adequate hearing about the questions that we have.
	They really thought that they were going to go on January the 6th and pull this stuff all back because they were told that by a lot of people.
	Now, I don't think it was a crime for them to do that, a federal crime.
	I think it was fraud.
	I think it was reckless endangerment of these people who went on January 6th.
	I think they ought to sue the pants off of Trump.
	Alex is not an attractive defendant.
	He's probably not going to pay these judgments that he's already got against himself.
	But Trump, who stole $250 million from these people, they ought to take civil litigation against him.
	But in terms of criminal stuff, I don't see a crime there.
	And people understand this isn't a crime, and that's one of the reasons why his popularity keeps growing.
	But he is the dividing line.
	You know, people who absolutely hate him, people who absolutely love him, and they want to go after each other.
	The Laeus Rasmussen poll shows him crossing the 51% favorability line and is at 73% among Republicans.
	And 47% with independent voters.
	And they keep making him into a martyr, into a victim.
	And I saw this stuff coming up on social media.
	I saw John Edwards was trending on social media.
	John Edwards? Is that the John Edwards that I know from North Carolina?
	Yeah, it was. The Breck girl himself, as Rush Limbaugh used to call him, inappropriately.
	So, you know, they had that satellite video.
	When they had analog satellites, and I had a friend who worked with me in engineering, he put up one of these really big satellite dishes, and he had a garage door opener attached to it so he could rotate it to different birds, right? And he'd show me this stuff that was out there.
	And people would be picking up the feed that was going before the broadcast actually went live or, you know, in between commercial breaks or something like that.
	And these people are talking to themselves or doing certain things.
	I remember there was one that went viral about Dan Rather, you know, and it was before the first Iraq war.
	And he's like in a military vehicle and he's gazing out at the desert and the horizon and Very thought-provoking, right?
	Deep thoughts. And after a while, he turns around and says to somebody, how's my hair?
	That's what he's thinking. Anchorman.
	And so they had one of John Edwards, and he is there at a mirror, you know, combing his hair, you know, over and over again, you know, flipping it over to the side.
	And he's worried about his hair as well.
	I'm worried about my hair.
	Is it still going to be there? Yeah.
	It's nothing I can do about it.
	But anyway, this guy, you know, John Edwards was a thoroughly reprehensible character.
	He was, as his wife was dying of cancer, he's not only got, you know, hanging around with his mistress and getting rid of her, but he's also...
	Taking lots of campaign money, not reporting it properly and using it to support his mistress and her baby, their love child.
	And so the federal government came after them.
	And so a lot of people were saying, Republicans against Trump.
	Who wants to tell this moron?
	That Jack Smith prosecuted and convicted former Democrat vice presidential nominee John Edwards and Democratic Senator Bob Menendez for corruption.
	And what they were doing was they were responding to something that Marjorie Taylor Greene put up about how he was just this weak little servile and a bad lawyer and all the rest of this stuff.
	Well, she was half right about it.
	Well, probably 100% right.
	He is a weak servile lawyer.
	And he also is a very bad lawyer.
	And so Republicans against Trump put this up.
	And then everybody went, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, wait a minute, wait a minute.
	Yeah, he did come after some Democrats.
	He came after Bob Menendez.
	It was getting all kinds of kickback.
	I think it was from some doctor in Florida.
	And I don't remember the details of it, but I thought it was a pretty obvious case of corruption.
	And Jack Smith was in charge of public integrity.
	So he would come after people who were politicians that were corrupt.
	That was where he was.
	He came after Bob Menendez.
	He came after John Edwards.
	And he lost.
	And what should have been slam dunk wins.
	That's one of the key things to come out of this.
	Is he actually going to be able to seal the deal on Trump?
	But of course it doesn't really matter at this point in time whether he's a good lawyer or not.
	It really kind of matters as to where he gets the case heard.
	I've seen Democrats saying, he's awful.
	What in the world is he doing having this document case or something in Florida?
	He should have taken it to Washington, D.C. Well, he may not have been able to do that, but that's the whole point, is that depending on who the judges are, depending on where the jurisdiction is and the jury pool, that's what's going to determine this.
	It's not really going to be determined, again, on the facts of the case, like any of this other stuff.
	So going back to John Edwards' case, and this is back in 2012, The Breck girl.
	John Edwards was publicly exposed at his trial as a staggeringly selfish politician, a shameless liar, who cheated on his wife as she was suffering from incurable cancer.
	This is Politico at the time.
	Politico. I mean, the Democrats hated this guy as much as the Republicans did.
	And yet, Jack Smith couldn't get a conviction.
	Yet it was the Justice Department that wound up publicly being embarrassed on Thursday as federal prosecutors' attempt to turn Edwards' misdeeds into criminal convictions ran aground in the courtroom here.
	The outcome of the six-week trial was a high-profile blow to the Justice Department's beleaguered Public Integrity Section, which Jack Smith, the special prosecutor, was head of at the time.
	And it was a I told you so moment for many in the legal community who ridiculed the case from its outset.
	After nine days of deliberation, the jury deadlocked on five of the six felony counts the former senator faced.
	Jack Smith is known for being very aggressive, for overcharging, and for not winning cases.
	Jurors split 8-4 for Edwards on the unresolved campaign finance charges.
	Only one juror favored convicting Edwards on a charge that he caused the filing of false reports to the FEC. And this is a similar situation that's happening in Michigan.
	But of course, Jack Smith is not involved in that.
	That's the corrupt LGBT Attorney General of Gretchen Whitmer.
	She tried to push these charges for these Michigan electors to the federal government.
	They were not interested. So she's doing it herself.
	And again, she wants 85 years for each of these 16 Republicans.
	These are people who were leaders of the state Republican Party in Michigan, and many of them elected officials, like mayors.
	as electors.
	We'll talk about that coming up.
	Back to this particular case and what people were saying about Jack Smith's previous work.
	Bringing the case was a black eye for the Justice Department.
	They said this makes it much worse that the jury saw through it, said Ken Gross, a campaign finance lawyer who briefly served as a consultant to Edwards' defense team.
	The failure to get a criminal conviction on any count raises a serious question about whether it should have been brought as a criminal case, said a former North Carolina deputy attorney general who set through the trial as a legal analyst for NBC.
	He said it's just hard to see how they could have a better opportunity for conviction than they had.
	I do think it's a huge setback for the government.
	The decision to go ahead with an indictment of Edwards was made last year by Assistant Attorney General Lanny Brewer and so forth, but it was Jack Smith who headed the public integrity section from 2010-2015.
	The key question was, did the defendant intend to break the law?
	It was at the center of all this.
	When Edwards' lawyers complained to the judge that the case appeared to be politically motivated, the Justice Department noted that career prosecutors were involved in all the key decisions.
	The judge rejected a motion to toss the case out, and so they went to trial and the jury tossed the case out.
	Well, that's just part of his experience again.
	Again, I thought the case...
	Against New Jersey, Democrat Senator Bob Menendez was much stronger even than that.
	And that recently was done.
	And that was, you know, well, I say recently.
	It was a couple of years ago, a few years ago.
	That was initiated by him as well.
	And, you know, so he doesn't have too great a record.
	Meanwhile, the GOP, McCarthy, Kevin McCarthy...
	And all the Republicans, especially DeSantis, this time he's got to come out very hard in favor of Trump, right?
	And so all the candidates know what happened.
	Even if you have a weak...
	I'm not going to be involved in this.
	I think this is an over-prosecution, which is what DeSantis had previously said with a case out of Manhattan.
	And immediately Trump and his people pounce on DeSantis, using that as an opportunity to attack the guy...
	That they perceive as a threat.
	So nobody wants to get on Trump's bad side in the Republican Party.
	They're all afraid of him. So now you've got Kevin McCarthy saying, well, maybe what we'll do is impeach Merrick Garland.
	House Republicans are debating whether to focus impeachment efforts on Merrick Garland after Speaker Kevin McCarthy suggested an inquiry against him, taking some members by surprise after much of the GOP impeachment furor has been directed at other Biden officials.
	There are just so many. You have Homeland Security Director Alejandro Mayorkas, who's Part of the open border issue.
	People wanted to impeach him for that.
	McCarthy first elevated the topic with a tweet last month touting the testimony of an IRS whistleblower who has alleged mismanagement of the investigation into Hunter Biden, saying it could serve as a significant part of a larger impeachment inquiry.
	But Representative Daryl Issa from California, Republican, said, I don't know of a chargeable crime.
	Well, I don't know. Bribery, you know, covering up the crimes of Biden.
	The clear bribery, all the rest of this stuff that's revealed by Hunter's case, being the person who actually, you know, runs the investigation to, quote-unquote, investigation.
	They did a disinvestigation, I guess you could say, right?
	Where the FBI steps in and says, like they've done so many times on so many different things, whether you're talking about Flight 800 or you're talking about Hunter Biden's laptop, move along, there's nothing to see here.
	So they can dis-investigate him, protect him, and I think that's a crime, isn't it?
	Daryl Lyssa doesn't see that as a crime.
	If this guy is running it, shouldn't he be impeached?
	Certainly Biden should be as well, but that would also include Merrick Garland, Many others, you know, in the FBI. It's a target-rich environment, isn't it?
	You've got a lot of people in the FBI. But the reality is that if someone is faithfully executing the desires and orders of the president, said ISSA, then we're within the bounds of what cabinet officers can do.
	Okay, so this is like the Nuremberg defense, right?
	But you're going to impeach me?
	I was just covering up for Biden's son and the corrupt business dealings of the Biden family because he told me to.
	I'm just doing my job. How should I be impeached for that?
	I don't know. Maybe Daryl Lissa got some of those mushrooms from Janet Yellen or something.
	Yeah, I just love this guy Biden.
	Isn't he great? Look at him.
	He's just amazing.
	Andy Harris. A Republican congressman said, I was one of the original co-sponsors of the Secretary Blinken impeachment.
	We ought to take that up first for incredibly horribly done withdrawal from Afghanistan.
	They don't care about that.
	When a prosecutor shields his boss's son from investigators, it smells like a cover-up.
	Garland's Department of Justice did not aggressively follow the money.
	Why? Are they afraid about where that trail ends?
	And then, of course, we've got the cocaine stuff that just happened and other things.
	And that is relevant because Biden has been such a hypocrite on this.
	One of the biggest drug warriors of the 20th century, Biden has been.
	Among other things, the IRS whistleblower who says that Attorney Weiss was blocked from getting authority to bring charges outside of Delaware.
	Well, that would be Merrick Garland.
	Jim Jordan, who serves as the House Judiciary Committee chairman, serves as a clearinghouse for such inquiries.
	He backed up the idea of impeaching Merrick Garland.
	And, of course, that's going to be very popular with Trump's base and with Trump, and so that's a big win for them to do that.
	But I think it is justified.
	And... Jamie Raskin said, the Republicans need to recall the constitutional standard for impeachment is high crimes and misdemeanors, not doing stuff that Donald Trump disagrees with.
	Well, I think covering up crimes, I think that type of thing, and you cover up the crime, you're now an accessory to that crime, to that bribery, that corruption, and the rest of it.
	I think that that is clearly the case.
	But I also understand that they are doing this because they want to curry favor with Trump and his supporters as well.
	That's the reality of this.
	And so, when you look at, it's not just Kevin McCarthy, Jim Jordan, all the top Republicans are jumping to Trump's defense over this.
	And McCarthy said, this is not equal justice.
	They treat people differently and they go after their adversaries.
	And that's true. Steve Scalise.
	You know, we never did look up to see, we talked about that, Travis, you and I, about the Democrat who shot Steve Scalise and some of these other Republicans and, you know, shot at them and everything.
	I wonder what kind of ascendance he got.
	Is he going to jail for 85 years?
	Or did they let him off of probation?
	What was it? Look that up and let me know.
	Anyway, Jack Smith is a lousy attorney, says Marjorie Taylor Greene, and that's what the other person was responding to.
	Said he's just a political hack.
	Whoa, he got convictions with John Edwards said, no, he didn't.
	And you had Jim Jordan tweet out, well, you attacked the Portland Federal Courthouse, no problem.
	You intimidate SCOTUS justices to influence the court decision, no big deal.
	But if you're Trump and you do nothing wrong, prosecute.
	Well, I think that the real analogy would be to look at what they did not do to the Antifa people and what they are doing to the January 6th people.
	Who have been in jail, who have been tortured in jail and abused in jail, some of whom have committed suicide while Trump has been out there living the high life at Mar-a-Lago with his boxes of documents and Holding court and collecting, again, tens of millions of dollars from the people he already grifted over this election non-investigation that he was running.
	Got $250 million after the election.
	Raised more money after the election than he did before the election.
	The Department of Justice has become a political agency targeting Biden's political opponents while covering up Biden's crimes, said Representative Mary Miller.
	And that's the key part of this.
	But the people who are suffering from all of this politicization are the little people on the bottom, more so than Trump, far more so.
	Prosecutors in Georgia are conducting separate investigations and efforts by Trump to reverse his election law in that state.
	And let me just say that, you know, this whole deal where he calls up and he says, you've got to find this number of votes.
	Now, there's a Republican who complained about that.
	There's a lot of Republicans who hate Trump as much as they do the Democrats.
	I think that's nonsense.
	Yeah, he wasn't telling him to do something illegal.
	He's like, we've got to find this many votes.
	You've got to investigate this.
	I think it was awkwardly worded like he does many times.
	I don't think there was a crime there.
	There might be some perjury traps for Giuliani and even for Trump on all of that.
	But I don't think that was a crime.
	And then when we look at the way that Trump presented all this stuff, when he talked about his indictment, it truly is telling about this guy.
	I'll just read you the opening paragraph here.
	Wow! On Sunday night, while I was with my family, having just arrived from the Turning Point event in Florida where I won the straw poll against all of the Republican candidates with 85.7% with all polls showing me leading the Republican primary by very substantial numbers, almost everyone predicting I will be the Republican nominee for president, and as I am leading Democrat Joe Biden in the poll by a lot, horrifying news for our country was given to me by my attorneys.
	Deranged Jack Smith, the prosecutor with Biden's DOJ, sent a letter again.
	It was Sunday night. On Sunday night he sent this letter.
	Yeah, because you know how Trump likes to keep a day aside for worshiping God and everything.
	He gets this indictment on a Sunday night saying that I am a target of the January 6th grand jury investigation.
	And he says, so now Joe Biden's Attorney General Merrick Garland, who I turned down for U.S. Supreme Court.
	In retrospect, based on his corrupt and unethical actions, a very wise decision.
	Okay, let's talk about that.
	Scalia died on February the 13th, 2016.
	Trump didn't even win the election until November 2016.
	In February, he still wasn't even doing all that well, and there hadn't been any primaries done.
	And it was still an open question in February.
	He may have had New Hampshire and Iowa, but that was about it when Scalia died.
	And hours after his death, and this was reported at the time, multiple sources, hours after his death, Mitch McConnell said, afterwards, Mitch McConnell said, one of my most proudest moments was when I looked Obama right in the eye and I said, you will not fill that vacancy, right?
	But he publicly also said, the next Supreme Court justice should be chosen by the next president.
	The American people should have a say in the court's direction.
	And this is Mitch McConnell. I'm not making a hero out of Mitch McConnell.
	I don't like Mitch McConnell. But the decision to not have Merrick Garland become the Supreme Court justice, this was all done way before Trump won the presidency.
	It was done before he won primaries, really.
	And he's taking credit for this.
	It was Mitch McConnell.
	I mean, this is the kind of derangement that is everywhere today.
	So, a journalist, Julie Kelly, said, Smith knows this case is small potatoes compared to what he's about to inflict on Trump with several associates for January the 6th.
	The documents case is what she's talking about.
	It's very likely Smith will use the classified documents prosecution as leverage to seek pretrial detention for Trump When the special counsel indicts Trump for several J6-related offenses, which could include seditious conspiracy.
	You know it will.
	It's a foregone conclusion.
	We absolutely know that it will include that.
	So you have DeSantis and many others who are very careful about what they have to say.
	DeSantis says, it's wrong for the country to go down the road of criminalizing political differences.
	And we know that that is all part of this.
	Absolutely true. He said, Alvin Bragg stretched a statute in Manhattan to be able to try to target Trump.
	Most people, even people on the left, acknowledge that if it wasn't Trump, that case would not have likely been brought against a normal civilian, says DeSantis.
	And so you have a situation where the Department of Justice, the FBI, has been weaponized against people they don't like.
	And the number one example of that happened to be against Trump with Russia collusion.
	That was not a legitimate investigation that has been done to try to drive Trump out of office, he said.
	He said, I don't think it serves us to have a presidential election focused on what happened four years ago in January.
	I want to focus on looking forward.
	I don't want to look back. I do not want to see him.
	I hope he doesn't get charged.
	I don't think it'll be good for the country.
	But at the same time, I've got to focus on looking forward.
	And that's what we're going to do.
	You see, there is no, and he's absolutely right about that.
	Are we really talking, and he's talking about CBDC, and we should be talking about, if we're going to look backwards, we need to take a look at what Trump did, and we need to take a look at what the governors did, and the public health officials did, and we need to shut that down so they don't have the mechanism to do whatever the World Health Organization tells them to do in the future.
	You know, they prepared for this 20 years ago after doing their war game and then having their false flag attack with 9-11 the week after they had the anthrax attack.
	And then, you know, two months after that, they put out model legislation.
	You know, they prepared, oh, look, we did a war game simulation.
	Oh, look, we have 9-11.
	Now we got anthrax.
	And so now we got to worry about biowarfare attacks.
	And so here's model legislation for all of you to adopt.
	We've got to undo that.
	We've got all these tripwires and usurpations of powers all over the place.
	And if we don't do that, if we just keep focusing on Trump on January 6th, they're going to be able to pull this stuff off on us again.
	That's what they want. They want to put forward a guy who I don't believe is going to win the general election.
	He's incredibly popular with Republicans, and they keep making him more popular by these politicized attacks.
	But he is just as hated by independents, and especially Democrats, as he is loved by Republicans.
	I don't think it serves him well.
	It serves us well.
	I mean, they're pushing this guy forward.
	They think that they can beat him in the general election.
	That's why they keep coming up with these charges.
	Travis, you put up that guy who shot Escalina died of his wounds.
	I didn't even know they shot him.
	Well, there you go. So, yeah, got a life sentence.
	But, you know, if they hadn't killed him, they would have let him go.
	I'm sure that would have happened.
	Jake Tapper pressed DeSantis on possible charges against Trump, asking if he meant the former president shouldn't be charged regardless of whether he committed any crimes.
	He said, no, what I'm saying is, if you're stretching statutes to try to criminalize political disagreements, that is wrong, said DeSantis.
	And he said, we don't know what's going to happen, but I can tell you with Bragg, that was stretching criminal law.
	The evidence of criminality was very weak, and even if that existed, other people would not have been charged under those circumstances, and that is the problem, said DeSantis.
	Well, Chris Christie is not happy with that.
	He wants Trump's scalp over that.
	But in general, Trump is doing really well.
	He leads all 2024 contenders with $22.5 million cash on hand.
	And so, you know, he's flush with cash from the supporters who love him.
	Fueled by indictments, as Breitbart points out.
	Tim Scott actually is in second place.
	And Biden is in third place with cash raised.
	And they're about the same. They're both about, you know, Tim Scott's $21 million.
	Biden is $20 million. Trump's $22 million.
	DeSantis came in fourth place with $12 million.
	This is cash on hand.
	Again, you know, DeSantis had raised about $150 million, counting the pack.
	Very strong showing.
	What is happening now in terms of expenditures?
	Are they spending the money faster than they're bringing it in?
	Apparently, yes, with the Santas.
	Ramaswamy has $9 million.
	RFK Jr. and Nikki Haley, about $4.5 million.
	And by the way, Pence may not even be able to make the debate because of his lack of financial support.
	And I don't think he did himself any favors on Friday with what he said to Tucker Carlson.
	So when we look at all these different cases, where does this stand?
	Well, the Guardian doesn't like Trump put this up, and they talked about it.
	But just to review... You know, you've got the documents case, 31 counts of willful retention of national defense information.
	That, to me, seems like a really ironclad case.
	Because even Trump's favorite lawyer, Dershowitz, the only thing he could come up with, Well, maybe Trump thought they were still classified, but maybe somebody else had declassified him.
	That was the best excuse he could come up with.
	And I mean, this guy is a master excuse maker.
	Dershowitz. So even his devious mind could not come up with any explanation other than that.
	Well, maybe they really were declassified.
	He just thought that they were top secret documents.
	Then there's the Hush Money case in New York.
	34 felony charges of falsifying business records.
	I think that's an overcharge, but again, this is being tried in New York, so they may wind up getting that.
	That is... That is Cohen making the secret arrangements to Daniels, and Cohen has already been convicted on these charges.
	Then there is the January 6th case.
	We don't know what those charges are, but I'm certain it's going to be seditious conspiracy and other things like that.
	The House impeached Trump for inciting the insurrection, but he was acquitted by the Senate.
	Remember that. This is a jury of 100 senators who found Trump not guilty of any crimes or misdemeanors that Jack Smith may charge him with.
	This is, I think, going to be an interesting aspect of it.
	But I don't know. I mean, I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know how this is going to work out.
	Then there's the case in Georgia, which again, I think this is nonsense unless there's some kind of a perjury trap that's there.
	And then the lawsuit with E. Jean Carroll.
	And again, this is, I don't really know or care about that.
	It's a he said, she said type of thing, but there's actually two of them.
	She said that he had raped her many years after the fact in a book that she put out.
	He publicly attacked her, so she sued him for defamation.
	And then in New York, just like in California, they temporarily lifted the statute of limitations for people who had been sexually assaulted or for minors who had been...
	That's why you had the lawsuits against...
	Steven Tyler, he had the big lawsuit against Paramount that I thought was legitimate, was thrown out.
	I mean, it was a clear case that the director of Romeo and Juliet, Franco Zeffirelli, had coerced them into doing kiddie porn.
	They were underage at the time.
	He did nude shots of them and everything.
	And so they sued Paramount big time.
	But they did not win.
	The judge threw the case out.
	It was going to be too big a thing to take down an entire corporation, and it was like $500 million or something like that.
	But those cases that came up in California, where they said, well, we're going to temporarily suspend the statute of limitations for any of this stuff, and you can have a civil case against these people.
	We're not going to criminally prosecute them, but you can have a civil case.
	And so when that happened, She'd already sued him for defamation because he criticized what she said in the book.
	So then she sued him for the actual sexual assault.
	So that's going around as well.
	But I want to focus on what's going on in Michigan.
	Because I think this is the true outrage.
	And it's not really being picked up except by the left.
	The left is picking it up and saying, see, look at these criminal Republicans out there trying to get Trump in office.
	And I don't see the conservatives coming to the rescue or the defense of these people in Michigan.
	I think this is one of the most egregious things.
	This is like that case like I mentioned.
	You know, the elderly pastor and the other person, they were there on January 6th and they said, You know, it's super cold out here.
	We're getting numb and these elderly men have to use the bathroom.
	And they got there long after any violence was going on.
	And there were police standing there at the door.
	And they went up and said, is there some place we can use the bathroom?
	Sure, you can come on in here. It's right around there.
	And they went in there. They were in there for nine minutes.
	And they are looking at decades in prison now.
	They went in, used the bathroom, they came out, they said, you know, how do I find my, where should I go to get out of here?
	They said one female police officer tried to direct them onto the floor of the Capitol building, you know, the chamber, and they said, nah, she just seemed wrong about that.
	So they went in the opposite direction, and they found their way out.
	They ran for a total of nine minutes.
	And these guys are looking at decades, which for the elderly men will be life sentences.
	For asking some police officers, can I use the bathroom?
	Sure, it's right in here. Life sentence.
	Nobody's coming to their rescue.
	Nobody's talking about that.
	Everybody's talking about Trump. You understand how he is the focus?
	We don't care if they do CBDC. We don't care if they lock us down in smart cities or freedom cities that he puts out there.
	If they put down a 5G control grid, if they take our cars, if they destroy our food supply, if they geoengineer the planet, get rid of the CO2 and the sunlight and all the rest of this stuff.
	We don't care what they do to us.
	What are they doing to Trump?
	That's what I want to know. What are they doing to Trump?
	Well, here's what they did to these Michigan legislators.
	And I've got to find, here it is.
	Anybody else is not permitted to come in?
	Electors, not legislators.
	The electors are already here.
	They've been checked in.
	Not all.
	Not all the electors are inside.
	All 16 electors have been advised by the governor's staff that we're going to be here to vote.
	And electoral college have been checked in.
	They're already here.
	These are the rest of the electors.
	Captain, the electors are also, the GOP electors are also on the governor's certificate of answer.
	I'm not going to get into a political debate.
	I'm following orders. Political debate.
	It's the official sealed document.
	I understand.
	at 2 p.m. I understand they're not being permitted in.
	If you have a problem, you can contact the governor's office, the Speaker of the House, the Senate Majority Leader.
	I saw the governor's press release this morning.
	It said due to COVID.
	Is that the reason being given?
	No.
	All right, that was what the press release said.
	Is there another reason why? You'd have to ask the governor's office to answer my question.
	We have a copy of paperwork that was prepared as electors under their constitutional duty.
	Can I speak to the Sergeant of Arms of the Senate to deliver it to the chamber today?
	He's in the meeting right now with Electoral College.
	He's not available to me. Captain Green, is it Captain?
	First Lieutenant Green. First Lieutenant, can you deliver this?
	I cannot. Okay.
	Is there anyone here that's willing to allow us?
	I've got elected officials and electors to deliver this to the Senate today at 2 p.m.
	Okay. I can ask the Senate Majority Leader, the House Majority Leader.
	Senator Mike Scherke, would you deliver that to him?
	Tell him Ian Northam. You can contact his office directly and make reasons to drop that off to him.
	You're not letting this in the building.
	His office is inside. He's not here.
	What's that? He's not here.
	So are you telling me that the Senate chamber is in session and the Senate leader is not here?
	Yeah. So you'd have to contact his office to make arrangements to meet with him to turn around.
	Is somebody from the governor's team that's running this?
	You'd have to contact the governor's office with their team to make arrangements for them.
	Well, these people are really dangerous, aren't they?
	...statute MCL... Having a discussion?
	We've got some paperwork here we'd like to give it to.
	...the Senate chamber today at 2 p.m.
	They're trying. I'm telling you that they're not going to be allowed to amend the cap, sir.
	All right. Thank you, Lieutenant. You're welcome.
	Thank you. And then they turn around and quietly leave.
	What an outrageous mob this is.
	I don't know, they look mostly peaceful to me.
	They look just to speak for themselves, but the hope and plan is for them to follow their constitutional duty.
	Under the U.S. Constitution, not just the Michigan Constitution, but under the U.S. Constitution, the electors have a duty to vote for their chosen candidate.
	In this case, the GOP electors slate their chosen candidate, President Trump.
	The Democrat electors are inside, I'm told, slating their chosen candidate, Joseph Biden.
	There's actually Green Party and Libertarian Party electors selected before the election as well.
	So the statute says it has to be done at 2 p.m.
	That's why they're here trying to do it.
	That paperwork is signed, it's sealed, and it's trying to be delivered.
	Stevie Wonder in Motown, I think, said that a little better than I did.
	But the point is, is that's not being happened.
	They're being stopped from fulfilling their constitutional duty.
	Now, I would call upon the Michigan Legislature.
	In the People's House, this is the legislature building in the People's House, to finish their investigation so that we know which set of electors should ultimately be chosen before a rash decision is made, especially while that investigation is ongoing.
	Especially why a judge of Ben Antrim County, Judge Elsenheimer, issued just this morning, released a A previously sealed, or previously proprietary report, a forensic report that shows the voting machines used in Antrim County and in several other important counties throughout the state showed an error rate above 60% on the tabulation of the counting of votes.
	Under Michigan law and under federal law, under the Help America's Vote Act, that error rate is supposed to be less than 0.2%.
	But in Antrim County, based on those machines, the error rate was over 60%.
	And it would kick it into an adjudication by software, by code.
	It would kick it into an adjudication where the error rate was over 80%.
	That affected the race up in Antrim County.
	It was called user error and human error.
	That wasn't the case at all.
	That report released this morning, over the objections of the Attorney General's office and over the objections of the Secretary of State's office, they tried to prevent that report from being released.
	Okay, so understand that he's got some legitimate concerns about the integrity, the errors in the election, okay?
	They're not being heard.
	And they have not been heard by anybody.
	As a matter of fact, you know, the legislature has not heard it either.
	I don't agree with their tactic there.
	I mean, you cannot self-appoint yourself as an elector.
	As he pointed out, you heard him say, well, you got Green Party electors, we got Libertarian Party electors.
	I've been an elector for the Libertarian Party, you know, 40 years ago, whatever, when, you know, I was involved with him.
	Just in case the Libertarian candidate won the popular vote, I would have been declared An elector to the Electoral College.
	So they have a slate of electors for each party.
	It's not necessarily the way this is supposed to work under the Constitution, but this is the way that we've been doing this now for...
	This is the tradition.
	It's not the constitutional way to do it.
	State government should appoint these people.
	But we've made it flowing out of the elections.
	And so...
	The very fact that you get your name on the list for that particular party doesn't mean anything.
	The government, the state government, has to recognize your candidate as the winner in order for you to be an elector.
	So I disagreed with what they were doing, but look, there was absolutely nothing wrong with the way they were doing this.
	You saw that. You saw a crowd of people that showed up.
	Even that lawyer's name is Ian Northen.
	He's a private attorney.
	Representing the Amistad Project, he said, which is affiliated with the Thomas More Society.
	And so they were looking at the error issues, and they wanted to make their statement.
	They had grievances about the way the votes are counted.
	They have a right to publicly redress those grievances.
	Whether you agree with them or not is not the issue.
	That should not be criminalized.
	And that's what this Michigan Attorney General is doing.
	Criminalizing. People have the audacity to be an opponent to her politically.
	I think this is the most outrageous thing I've seen anywhere.
	This is far worse than anything they've done to Trump.
	Far worse. You know, that and the people that got caught up, oh yeah, come on in, walk around, it's like, okay, now you're going to jail.
	And so these people, again, they put on the mask to be polite, you know, and as he turned around, some of them were not wearing the mask, they were in the background.
	And as he turned around, can you deliver, will you take this?
	No, not doing it, not taking it.
	Will you give it to so-and-so?
	Will you tell the sergeant of arms to come here and take it?
	Nope, not doing anything. Nope, nope, you're not coming in.
	I'm not taking anything. You call these people.
	Well, they're all in there now, you said.
	Well, I'm not giving it to them.
	All that type of stuff. Stonewalling them on that.
	But... All of that aside, the fact that they would now criminally charge these people.
	I said that on December the 14th, as I've said before.
	That was the day that this happened.
	And that was the day where all the people who had been prior listed by the candidates who were on the ballot, you know, and if you're an independent, you would have, you know, a slate of electors in Michigan.
	They've got 16 congressmen, so they have 16 electors.
	And so you would have, you know, an equivalent number of congressmen, people that you are going to appoint, and then they meet in the states on that day.
	They don't go to a place, you know, they don't all travel to Washington or anything like that.
	They go into their state legislatures.
	And they have a little formal procedure there where they give their votes and then those votes are transmitted to Washington.
	That was December the 14th.
	And then on January the 6th, all this stuff is handed to the vice president who reads it.
	And that's what they tried to stop.
	And it was way, way, way too late.
	And I said, you can't do anything about that on January 6th.
	You know, they're taking the votes today.
	And since you don't have another slate of electors that are officially recognized, and if the governor didn't want to do it, it could have been done by the state legislature.
	And then there would have been a question.
	Well, who gets to appoint the legislators?
	Is it the governor and, you know, the executive branch underneath him, Secretary of State, the Board of Elections, and things like that?
	Are they the ones who get to appoint this?
	Traditionally, that's what we've done.
	But the Constitution actually says the legislature will decide the conditions and means and times and places and all the rest of the stuff about the election.
	And so you can make an argument about that, and that could have been argued in court, but they...
	You know, Giuliani and these people did not try to get in any state legislatures.
	As I pointed out on that December the 14th, I said that four state legislatures in areas where there was a razor-thin margin of victory for Biden, there were four state legislatures that were predominantly Republican.
	And two of those states had Republican governors.
	It was clear early on that nobody in any of these courts at any level It was going to give a hearing to any of this stuff.
	So I said, so take it to the legislature.
	Take that approach.
	But they didn't do it.
	And so now what are they doing?
	It's kind of interesting to see one of the persons charged, Michonne Maddock, former co-chair of the Michigan Republican Party, told Politico in November, November of 2020, right after the election, That she was conferring with constitutional lawyers about the options, what the options would be, and she says, what I might want to do can be completely different from what we are legally capable of doing, she said in an email at the time.
	Now, that's not incriminating.
	That's exculpatory.
	She's saying, well, there's a lot of stuff that I'd like to do, but we've got to follow the law.
	What are our legal options here?
	These people show up.
	And they say, we'd like to go in and do that.
	No, you can't do that. We hand this paper.
	No, you can't do that. All right, thank you.
	And they walk away. And now they're being charged criminally.
	And not just charged criminally.
	I mean, amazing how overcharged this is.
	Before I talk about their charges here, this article from Politico says, while no individuals beyond the signers of the slate were charged Thursday...
	This criminal attorney general in Michigan, Nessel is her name, this LGBT attorney general, said the investigations are ongoing.
	Our department has not ruled out potential charges against additional defendants.
	Oh, they're going to get even more people roped at.
	Anybody who said anything.
	Oh, you speak about this?
	You're going to go to jail. You see, this is not about, well, we don't want any fake information out there.
	We're going to criminalize it and literally criminalize it.
	Send people to jail. First Amendment, folks, is dead in this country.
	It's just a question of when they're going to start applying the penalties, and you can see it happening here.
	Republicans have long compared the GOP effort to a similar one that was undertaken by Democrats in Hawaii in 1960 when Nixon was declared the winner in the state by a margin of a few hundred votes.
	With a recount underway, And with John F. Kennedy gaining ground, when the state's presidential electors were due to meet that day while the certified Republican electors were meeting, Democrats convened and signed certificates declaring themselves to be the legitimate presidential electors for Hawaii.
	So were those people, they have the Attorney General of Hawaii come after them and try to send them away for 85 years?
	No. See, we're in a very dangerous time.
	What are they charging them with?
	Well, eight felonies each.
	Eight felonies each.
	And they range from five to 14 years in terms of the maximum penalty that could be given for these.
	And so you have, for example, two counts of forgery.
	In other words, signing your name saying that you are an elector.
	Well, that's forgery.
	And you did it twice.
	I'm going to get you two counts on that.
	And then you talk to other people about this.
	So we're going to add a conspiracy to commit forgery.
	You see how they're overcharging this?
	You see how they ramped this stuff up?
	Oh, and then committing...
	So not only do you sign your name on there, but now you're doing election law forgery as well.
	And you did two counts of that.
	And then you also conspired to do that.
	So now we're up to six, right?
	And then the other two charges...
	Uttering and publishing.
	Uttering and publishing.
	That sounds like a violation of the First Amendment, doesn't it?
	To come after people for uttering and publishing, as you just saw there.
	Oh, and then a conspiracy to utter and publish.
	The head of the 2022 midterm election, this criminal attorney general, Nessel, But she was.
	So after, and this is the way it is described by USA Today, she said there was no question that the Republicans acted illegally when they signed documents to give Trump's Michigan Electoral College votes and attempted to enter the Capitol and Lansing on the same day.
	Oh, you just saw how bad that was.
	They attempted to enter the Capitol.
	You know, they must have, you know, beaten back these police with barriers and all this kind of stuff.
	You saw how those people reacted.
	You've seen how the left reacted in the Tennessee Capitol, right?
	Pushing and shoving elected officials trying to make their way to the floor.
	Pushing and shoving the police officers who were not wearing body armor and they did not escalate it.
	They just used themselves to protect the electors.
	Oh, but these people, they need to go to jail.
	They actually showed up and talked to their masters.
	So, the peaceful redress of grievances.
	That's not covered anymore. You get 85 years for that.
	So, after the Fed said, no, we're not interested in this, Nessel, the Attorney General, announced her decision to reopen a criminal investigation into the fake electors after inaction from the federal government, says USA Today.
	Current Republican National Committee Chairwoman, Rona McDaniel, Also told the committee that Trump called her about the effort to seat Republican electors.
	And so maybe they'll come after her, too.
	Former Michigan GOP Chair Laura Cox, meanwhile, detailed to the Congressional Committee one plan that Trump allies discussed with her proposing an attempt to seat fake electors by entering the Capitol the night before the Electoral College vote.
	But they didn't do it.
	This is one person who said that nobody did that.
	But it is a juvenile desperate mindset, if it's true, of Trump and his people.
	Look, Republicans, you need to understand that you're nothing but pawns in this Game of Thrones competition between two globalist camps.
	Get that straight.
	And stop falling into these traps for these clowns.
	So, USA Today, again, without seeing that picture, they like to try to portray this as if these people were pushing their way in.
	Some Republican lawmakers joined the members of the group of fake Trump electors in an attempt to enter the Michigan State Capitol in December 2020.
	They were denied access.
	They showed up very respectfully, said, well, thank you, officer, for all your stonewalling.
	I mean, they weren't even... Sarcastic like that.
	Very respectful.
	Walked away. Peacefully left.
	Not allowed to speak.
	Not allowed to talk about their grievances.
	So yeah. Two counts of uttering and publishing false stuff.
	And a conspiracy to do that as well.
	And then you signed your name twice.
	And so we're going to get you on that as well.
	It truly, truly is amazing.
	Well... We're going to come back and we're talking about something else that was faked.
	You know, the New York Times is now, even the New York Times, is pointing out that the CDC and these other people under Trump were faking COVID deaths.
	Inflating them by as much as a third.
	And if they're admitting to that, it's far worse than that.
	But of course, nobody's going to go to jail for faking deaths, faking a pandemic, locking us down, destroying the Constitution, putting us in trillions of dollars worth of debt, killing people with financially incentivized malpractice death protocols, and then spending tens of billions of dollars channeling it over to the pharmaceutical industry so they could create toxic injections.
	Nobody's going to go to jail for that.
	Nobody. Nobody.
	Stop protecting these people.
	Stop protecting these people.
	Stop protecting these people.
	Stop protecting these people.
	Stop protecting these people.
	Making sense.
	common again.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	There's a woman being rolled in on a stretcher.
	Hospital.
	Hospital.
	Opens her eyes, looks around a little bit.
	Want to get your wait time?
	Upgrade to a FastPass.
	And the mechanized arm with the computer terminal comes in, offers her the ability to upgrade.
	Need a painless procedure?
	Pick your drug package now.
	She is sweating, trembling.
	Tired of waking up mid-surgery?
	Top up your anesthesia now.
	And there's people in suits all around her.
	Not people in... Insufficient funds.
	No. You can't get any more anesthesia.
	Not enough money.
	Insufficient funds.
	Insufficient funds.
	And all the people standing around her are in suits.
	They're not a medical crew.
	Well, that was a video that was put out by an organization that wants government-run health care.
	You shouldn't have to pay for anything.
	And I understand what the trade-offs are with this.
	Do you really want government-controlling access to health care after what we've seen the last three years?
	I mean, haven't we put that argument to bed?
	And yet, you know, when we look at this, who was financially incentivizing this criminal death protocol in the hospitals?
	Well, it was the Trump administration and then the Biden administration.
	Do you really want Biden or Trump running your health care after what you saw them do with these criminal protocols?
	Kidnapping people, keeping them away from their family so the family couldn't see what was being done to them?
	And, of course, the idea that you have to press that, well, that wasn't happening at all.
	The reality was that Trump was writing as many checks as needed.
	Hey, you tell me that this person's got COVID? Fine.
	$13,000. There's your bonus right there.
	Oh, and, you know, what they should do is remake this thing for the doctor.
	Would you like $13,000?
	Okay. Press this and say the person has COVID. Want some more money?
	Put them on a ventilator, I'll give you $39,000.
	And you can charge them on daily use until you kill them.
	And, oh, by the way, we'll also give you a 20% bonus on everything else that you do.
	You know, every charge in the hospital.
	We give you a 20% bonus.
	That was being done by the government.
	CMS, Medicare, Medicaid, all the rest of this stuff.
	Yeah, we already have the profit motive.
	We have the profit motive used by these corporate hospitals...
	And paid off by the Trump administration, the Biden administration.
	It was a Trump administration where these rules began, continued by the Biden administration.
	It is a fascist corporate hospital death protocol that we saw.
	And yet through all of that, And all the people that were killed with remdesivir and ventilators and all the rest of this stuff.
	Now the New York Times, and this is coming from John Nolte at Breitbart, New York Times reports coronavirus deaths overcounted by 30%.
	As he points out, they bury it on paragraph 17.
	It's not the headline for them.
	He pulled it up. He said, this is the most important thing about this article from the New York Times.
	It should be the headline. He made the headline of his article, but they don't talk about it.
	They just admit it. 17 paragraphs.
	End of the article. He says, The far-left New York Times quietly admitted this week that deaths from coronavirus were overcounted by 30%.
	Does this amazing revelation earn its own headline?
	No. Does this amazing revelation sit at the top of the story?
	No. Here's how the propagandists at the Times bury the truth.
	The headline, A Positive COVID Milestone.
	The sub-headline. And a sign that the pandemic really is over.
	The total number of Americans dying each day is no longer historically abnormal.
	It's only after reading 17 paragraphs in you'll finally find what they buried.
	Quote, this is from the New York Times.
	The official number is probably an exaggeration because it includes some people who had virus when they died, even though it was not the underlying cause of death.
	I've been talking about this since...
	January of 2020.
	Running these phony tests, magnifying the results by over a trillion times, 1.1 trillion times, and you can find anything, anything, if you magnify it that much.
	And so the interesting thing is they didn't find, 100% of the people had it.
	I guess they weren't expecting that.
	You know, Fauci had abuse and misuse.
	Kerry Mullis' PCR test, you know, to say there was a correlation between HIV and virus and AIDS and things.
	And so I guess he figured, you know, hey, if we ramp the cycle up to 40 cycles, well, we can show everybody's got it.
	That's how we create our pandemic.
	We just increase the sensitivity of the test.
	So people who are asymptomatic, people who are not sick, they have a trace amount of this which isn't going to be able to be passed along.
	It's not going to make them sick either.
	That's our basis of that.
	So, yeah, we know that.
	It's always died with, not died from, multiple comorbidities.
	Other CDC data suggests that almost one-third of official recent COVID deaths have fallen into this category, they said.
	And a study published by the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases came to similar conclusions.
	One-third. Says the New York Times.
	And this is happening everywhere.
	And that's the thing that really ought to scare you.
	As I've said over and over again, every country, it doesn't matter what the stated political philosophies were or the politicians, they all did it.
	They all marched in lockstep.
	You understand global government...
	Global governance, a corporate technocracy, that's already here.
	It manifested itself three and a half years ago, where everybody, including the anti-globalist Trump, all did the same thing.
	They all had the same lies, the same deceptive tactics.
	They all talk about nudging the population.
	The behavioral insights team of the UK, BIT, they put that bit in the mouth of the people.
	And then put a mask over them and said shut up and then turned their heads wherever they wanted it to go.
	One third of the people.
	And so John Nolte says, we shut down the country.
	We closed schools.
	We bankrupted people.
	We bankrupted small business.
	We destroyed our economy.
	Well, speak for yourself, pal.
	John Nolte at Breitbart took a lot of heat from the people who were commenting there.
	I mean, he just kept on with the vaccine, pushing and pushing and pushing, pushing the vaccine, pushing the pandemic.
	So I understand why he wants to say we.
	No, it was you, John.
	It was you. People like you.
	It was Trump. You're not going to talk about Trump doing this?
	No, as a matter of fact, he puts Trump in as a savior.
	He says, we shut down the country.
	We closed the schools. We bankrupted people and small businesses.
	Destroyed the economy. We transferred enormous wealth.
	It was Trump who did all of that.
	The Trump administration who did all of that.
	And you cheered him.
	John Nolte at Breitbart.
	I'm glad that he's not doing that anymore, but come on.
	What he's now doing, the next paragraph, he says, here's how the Times responded when Trump suggested the death count was overhyped.
	So now, this true believer in Trump and his shots says, oh, Trump tried to tell us.
	He tried to tell us?
	Did he really? No. No, Trump is out there saying, Maybe you could inject sunlight into your veins, and then you've got Fauci coming in.
	Oh, he's just, you know, this guy.
	You don't know what the science is.
	I'm the science guy. You listen to me.
	You know, this Trump, he's a chump, and so you don't listen to nothing, this guy says.
	He says anything about HCQ, it's instantly discredited, right?
	You know, the FDA didn't have to say, you know, y'all stop with the ivermectin.
	That's for horses. No, we had this jackass who was standing next to Fauci popping off a bunch of stuff, and immediately they used Fauci as a straight man for this clown, telling people that's not the way it is.
	And Trump elevated him, kept him there, you know, no matter...
	How many times Fauci humiliated Trump publicly?
	Trump kept Fauci on the pedestal.
	CNN. Centers for Disease Control.
	Yeah, right. Center for Diseases to Control You.
	That's what they are. Double down against rumors and spread mostly on social media suggesting that coronavirus deaths have been greatly exaggerated.
	Well, again, he goes through all the different things that they exaggerated about Trump after he tries to betray Trump as the person who tried to help us with all this stuff.
	He's still deceiving you, just like he deceived you about the vaccine and about the other aspects of it.
	And, I mean, he was literally trashed.
	John Nolte typically talks about entertainment in Hollywood as a film reviewer.
	I remember seeing the things, and I remember talking about it.
	You know, people were like, shut up.
	Focus on movies and shut up about COVID. You have absolutely no clue about what is happening with any of this stuff.
	It's all over your head, and you're just a Trump cheerleader, so shut up and talk about movies.
	It says all the government does is lie, lie, lie, lie, and then lie some more.
	And all the corporate media do is lie, lie, lie, lie, and then lie some more.
	Well, okay. But you can trust Trump and you can trust John Nolte at Breitbart.
	Yeah, who trusted the Trump shots.
	So, you know, another long piece, and I'm not going to go into it, but in Brownstone organization, you've got a guy who is actually an epidemiologist who And he begins by talking about some very well-documented cases where they've actually done autopsies in Germany and Korea and Japan and other places, finding the heart damage and saying that it was, without a doubt, brought on by the vaccine, by the mRNA, by the Trump shots.
	And yet, you know, he lives in Rhode Island, so he contacts the Rhode Island Department of Health and says, well, I saw this interesting thing on the VAERS database, and I'd like to get some more information about this 37-year-old woman who died suddenly with a heart attack shortly after having an mRNA injection.
	They not only stonewalled him and denied his requests, but But then, as he tried a subsequent legal appeal for these things, again, you know, it's typical that government agencies at all levels now will refuse to comply with freedom of information acts of every sort, whether it's a state act or the federal act or whatever.
	They all refuse to comply, and you've got to wind up suing them and so forth.
	So as part of their response, they even threatened him and said, well, you tweeted about this particular case And we think that you are purposely soliciting information from the public for the purpose of identifying this patient whose information has been redacted.
	Whoa! Oh, you keep asking?
	You're going to get the jail treatment like the electors in Michigan.
	Don't ask questions about this stuff.
	We're in charge here.
	I mean, the authoritarianism is just beyond belief how rapidly this is coming in.
	I'm telling you, it's going to accelerate from here on out.
	Because, why? We're not doing anything about it.
	We're focused on Trump. But what about Trump?
	What about Trump? Who do you want in the White House, David?
	Yeah. Anyone but Trump.
	Well, not anyone. I don't want Biden in there either.
	Anyway. And so he said their record has been not just one of indifference, but of active obfuscation.
	This is Andrew Boston, M.D., And he is a clinical trialist and an epidemiologist.
	He has a reason to be asking these questions.
	All of us need to be asking these questions.
	All of us have a reason that we want to get answers for this.
	And as I said, it's not over.
	Take a look at what is happening in the UK. I was absolutely blown away by this story from the Daily Skeptic out of the UK. More than 28,000 convicted of breaking COVID rules as the prosecutions are continuing in the UK, in England and Wales.
	And Wales, not Wales.
	Wales. England and Wales.
	More than 28,000 people in England and Wales have been convicted of breaches of COVID-19 regulations, despite the government's insistence that it never intended to criminalize people for minor infractions during the pandemic.
	And they said, look, yes, the Guardian.
	Yes, really, it's the Guardian has more.
	And they admit it at the very end.
	Yes, the Guardian is doing this because it was the conservative government That is doing this.
	The conservative government locked them down, and the conservative government is still convicting people of violating their lockdown and social distancing rules.
	Now, right now, they're still doing it.
	And so they want to criticize the conservatives.
	Well, the conservatives are due to be criticized for this, but they're doing it for political reasons.
	And as soon as I saw that, the Guardian, yes, really, the Guardian, it's like, yeah, that's what they're doing it for.
	And they do say that at the end of the story, that that's likely why they're doing it.
	But anyway, this is what is going on.
	Says the Guardian, the convictions are for COVID-related offenses, such as attendance of gatherings during lockdowns, or arriving at airports without the proper evidence of a coronavirus test.
	How dare you even show up at an airport without your coronavirus test in your hand?
	Almost 16,000 of the convictions, 55% of them, involved people under 30.
	The figures which were obtained by the Guardian through analysis of data from the Ministry of Justice are consistently higher than any previous estimate.
	So what are we finding out?
	We're finding out they criminalized it with over-the-top prosecutions.
	I mean, we're talking about massive fines and jail terms for some of these people.
	But the fines are incredibly massive.
	They have criminalized this, over-criminalized it, far more than has been reported.
	They faked the deaths, even the New York Times.
	The New York Times now is reporting that the deaths were faked, which I've been talking about for three and a half years.
	And now this criminalized prosecution, this authoritarian prosecution, is now being talked about by The Guardian.
	Kind of interesting. But we're all talking about Trump, right?
	As the tens of thousands, mostly young people, have been severely penalized for relatively minor infractions of COVID rules that have left them with damaging fines and, in many cases, criminal records, two years after restrictions were lifted.
	Magistrates are still continuing to work their way through a backlog of cases, with about 100 COVID-related cases being heard each month, ongoing.
	The average fine issued last year was £6,000.
	A lot of money. Although some people have been fined as much as 10,000 pounds.
	We saw this in our country, in America, with the FAA. Oh, you want to talk back to a flight attendant who tells you to wear your mask?
	Oh, well, $25,000 fine.
	And there's no appeal. Because this is the regulatory state.
	And because they're not enforcing quote-unquote laws, they're enforcing their rules.
	We have taxation without representation.
	We have regulation without representation.
	We have no right to appeal.
	No presumption of innocence.
	No due process. No appeal.
	The figures will add impetus to growing calls on the government to halt the criminal prosecutions.
	The director of the campaign group called Transform Justice said, quote, It is ridiculous that the courts are still prosecuting people for COVID offenses.
	All outstanding prosecutions should be canceled immediately, unquote.
	The government said it is intended to treat most breaches of COVID regulations as civil infractions, introducing fines to deter behavior that could spread the virus rather than criminalizing people.
	This is all just about behavior modification.
	Such an honorable motive, isn't it?
	We just want to, you know, get the message across, give them a small fine, and so they, you know, stop doing what we're telling everybody's going to kill everyone, right?
	Then Minister for Policing told the Justice Committee in 2021 that on-the-spot fines for COVID breaches were a, quote, psychological game.
	Oh, yes, they were.
	This is all a psychological game.
	The germ games, the CIA plans, it's all a psychological game.
	And they said it was a relatively light touch.
	Lord Bethel, then a minister at the health department, said the government was, quote, clamping down on but not criminalizing behavior.
	Two different people, right?
	Saying, yeah, it's a psychological game.
	We're clamping down on them, but we're not going to criminalize this.
	Those statements appear to be at odds with the 28,000 convictions, which were understood to largely stem from people who initially received fixed penalty notices.
	However, if a fine is contested, oh, well, I tell you, okay, here's your fine.
	I want to appeal that.
	Oh, really? Okay, well, we'll get you for that, right?
	If you contest the fine, or if you don't pay it, It can result in the magistrate judges ruling on a case without the defendant even being present under special new fast-track measures.
	Yeah, fast-tracking us straight to authoritarian hell.
	Every aspect of this stuff.
	Misunderstood or missed paperwork has led to people being found guilty and sentenced without their knowledge.
	Some say they had no idea that they had been convicted in absentia until the bailiffs arrived.
	So they don't send the bailiffs out there to say, you know, you got this charge against you?
	And, you know, we're going to do something.
	No, no, they wait until after they've convicted them in absentia.
	And so the final statement here from the Daily Skeptic says, well, the Guardian says, It's adopting an anti-lockdown tone here.
	Even though it is a dig at the conservative government, maybe there is hope for the left after all.
	No, there isn't. No, there isn't any hope for the left, and there's no hope for the right either, because it's the right that's doing it to people.
	I'm sorry, I'm not that optimistic.
	I'm glad the Daily Skeptic is daily optimistic about this thing, but I'm much more skeptical and pessimistic about this, because it's something done by...
	The Conservatives and the Liberals can't wait to get their chance at this.
	Then there's this story.
	And this has got three very important aspects to it.
	First of all, it shows you, this next story, shows you the hypocrisy about all this so-called public health.
	Number two. It shows you a double standard in America for Americans versus immigrants.
	And number three, it shows you about active child trafficking and sexual abuse of these illegal immigrants.
	And just one story.
	This is coming from the Washington Times.
	Illegal immigrant kids with tuberculosis infections are released into 44 states.
	So much for the pandemic, right?
	So much for the concerns about public health.
	And of course, it is a double standard for Americans as well, because there was recently a story, and I've referred to it a couple of times, an American woman in Washington State, it was actually in Tacoma, Washington, had tuberculosis, and they were fighting with her over a period of months.
	And finally, at the beginning of June, they arrested her.
	They wanted her to quarantine.
	Well, actually, they gave her, and that's one of the things when I saw it, that was the way it was reported, and I thought, well, okay, so you got tuberculosis, and you're going to go isolate yourself, and or we're going to arrest you, okay?
	Did they ever try that with Doc Holliday?
	I'm your huckleberry.
	No, they never did that with Doc Holliday, or anybody else, for that matter.
	And so I thought that was pretty outrageous.
	It turns out that the judge gave her an option.
	They said, we've got some big pharmaceutical tuberculosis medicine, and if you'll take that, we won't make you quarantine.
	If you refuse a medication, we're going to force you to quarantine.
	So it's your choice, right?
	You're going to have one of those two. You're going to take the big pharma stuff, or we're going to lock you up.
	But when illegal immigrant kids come in, They're being released into 44 different states.
	See, if you're an American, you get one kind of treatment.
	If you're an illegal alien, you get another kind of treatment.
	The government is releasing thousands, thousands of illegal immigrant children with latent tuberculosis infections into the American communities without assurances of treatment.
	Nearly 2,500 children with latent infections were released into 44 states over the past year by Health and Human Services.
	Almost 126,000 were released over a longer period of time, indicating an infection rate of 1 out of 50 migrant kids It has tuberculosis.
	And they're just releasing them into the city.
	That's how interested they are in public health.
	Oh, don't worry. They'll just force your children to get a vaccine to prevent this later.
	Yeah, that's right. That's the way they'll react to it.
	They're going to force them to get a vaccine?
	Probably not. But they will force you to get a vaccine for it.
	Let's add that to the list.
	We've only got like, what, 72 things that the kids are going to get at an early age.
	So let's just add one more here, if they haven't already.
	The government says that it can't treat the children because they're in custody for such a short time, and treatment requires three to nine months.
	So HHS just releases the infected kids to sponsors and notifies local health authorities in the hope that they can arrange for treatment before the latent infection becomes active.
	But these hopes, they said, are often dashed.
	So, 126,000 have been released, have been identified and released, and that's one out of every 50 migrant kids.
	But, you know, if you are an American woman in Tacoma, Washington, we're going to lock you up, send the police out, arrest you, and lock you up into quarantine.
	But, you know, 126,000 kids?
	Just release them. And then here's the third part about what it shows us about child trafficking.
	The children in the department's custody, known in government-speak as unaccompanied alien children, UACs, are a particularly tricky population.
	The system is fraught with problems, including crowded shelters and struggles to find capable and conscientious sponsors.
	In thousands of cases, government quickly loses track of these children.
	Oh, okay. We don't know who they are.
	We don't know where they are.
	Who cares about it, right?
	Somebody's going to grab them and do something with them.
	We don't know. We can't track them or hold them or do anything with them.
	It's just the way the system is.
	The system is just designed for child trafficking.
	You've got anonymous kids.
	Nobody knows who they are, where they went.
	There's no way to track them.
	It's like the billions, hundreds of billions of dollars that we're sending to Ukraine.
	Nobody knows how to track any of that stuff.
	We don't know where the weapons go.
	We don't know where the kids that come across the border go.
	Oh, it can't be child trafficking.
	No, they would never do anything like that, would they?
	The whole system is designed to facilitate that.
	And the whole system is designed to release sick kids into society when they locked everybody else down.
	No Zoom classes for these kids.
	Just release them. And we don't know to whom or where.
	It makes the government release of children with latent infections all the more complicated.
	Treatment requires knowing where the children are and having sponsors willing to follow through on the lengthy course of care.
	But tuberculosis isn't the only disease that's challenging these kids.
	They're suffering from all kinds of sexually transmitted diseases.
	Sexually transmitted diseases.
	Chlamydia. Gonorrhea.
	And others. HIV. All the rest of this stuff.
	CDC, which runs the notification portal about these diseases, didn't respond to any inquiry from the Washington Times.
	These UACs, unaccompanied children, do get routine dental care.
	Isn't that nice? And they give them pregnancy tests because, you know, they're sexually active.
	They're getting sexually transmitted diseases.
	They're getting pregnant.
	And so they will give them abortions.
	But they're not going to give them any health care for tuberculosis or for the sexually transmitted diseases, but they'll give them abortions.
	That's our evil government.
	That's the child trafficking that's going on.
	All of this, and contraceptives and stuff like that.
	Bringing in children, and then some of them, the older minors, they said, well, we don't really do anything to separate those who have criminal records or histories of violence.
	We just leave them there with the rest of the kids as sexual predators.
	I mean, who could invent a government any more evil than this?
	That's why I say you don't have to come up with stuff about QAnon theories and stuff.
	The reality of what our government is doing, Without elaborating it with false details to cover up the reality of what our government is doing.
	That tells you everything you need to know.
	And so then today, we had this morning, Linda Sanchez, who's a Democrat congresswoman from California, warns of a gray tsunami.
	What is that?
	She's very worried about baby boomers and aging Americans.
	Who have been taxed all their lives to pay into this welfare system and who have been given assurances about what they were going to get out of the back end of this.
	She's worried about having to pay these people what they were promised when they were taxed.
	We've got to do something to stop this.
	Absolutely no concern from Sanchez about the tsunami of foreign illegals who are coming in and getting free stuff all over the place about everything.
	Free education, free college, free this, free that.
	No concern about that welfare magnet that is the source of the open border issue.
	No concern at all.
	Somehow, Linda Sanchez, California Democrat, gets all fiscally conservative When you start talking about Americans getting back what they paid for, some of it, a little bit of what they paid for their entire lives, somehow she starts to care.
	Just like, oh, cutting taxes on Americans?
	No, no, we're not going to do that.
	We'd go bankrupt if we did that.
	We'll go bankrupt with this great tsunami.
	We've got plenty of money for every person in the world who wants to come across our border illegally, but we don't have enough money for the Americans who paid taxes all their lives.
	Democrats care nothing about deficits.
	But wouldn't you rather send more missiles to Ukraine?
	Yeah. Come on. Yeah.
	What's more fun, really? Yeah.
	They don't care about it. Send Ukrainians anything they want.
	Won't someone think of Raytheon?
	Corporate welfare. That's amazing.
	Yeah. Psychologists.
	Psychological tactics used for COVID began years before to foster the false climate change narrative.
	This is coming from Exposé News in the UK. And I'm glad to see this catching on.
	A lot of people are starting to understand, wait a minute, the...
	This climate thing, which is now ramping up, and they've now got, you know, the solutions that they've been talking about for decades, they're now on our doorstep.
	They're being introduced now not as goals from the World Economic Forum or the United Nations, but actually as legislation in all these different countries.
	Oh, wait a minute. This is looking a lot like this COVID lockdown.
	And so you see this article.
	This is almost one a day I'm seeing in the press talking about the MacGuffin.
	It's the same plant. They want the same thing, regardless of what they call the justification.
	You know, they got this MacGuffin to motivate people out there.
	And I had a listener who sent me a picture that he had put together.
	And I think it was a guy.
	I'll show this to you.
	And I tweeted it out here about MacGuffin.
	An inconvenient MacGuffin.
	The grift of climate change.
	There's a picture of Al Gore there with his Inconvenient Truth.
	I like that. I put that out.
	And then some guy came back and said, stop saying MacGuffin.
	M-A-C-G-U-F-F-I-N. Is it Mick or is it Mac?
	Well, you'll typically see it almost always when they're talking about what Hitchcock said as M-A-C. But I replied to him and I said, well, I won't be a grammar Nazi about a fantasy analogy, but MacGuffin is the preferred form, although MacGuffin is sometimes written.
	I think it's because Hitchcock explained it in the context of, quote, hunting lions in the Scottish Highlands.
	And if you go back and you look at what does Mac mean or MC mean, it means son of, right?
	And both of those forms, it's Gaelic.
	So, in Scotland, two-thirds of the time, it's written as MAC. And in Ireland, it's just the opposite.
	Two-thirds of the time, it's written as MC. But I said, maybe I should just say, son of a Guffin.
	I said, no, I'll stick with Mac Guffin, because if I didn't, I'd be a lion.
	L-I-O-N. But, yeah, I think it's great that people are starting to see the connection between these things.
	Wait a minute. They want the same thing regardless of whether it's going to be global ice age or global warming and the polar ice caps are going to melt or whether it's a pandemic.
	They always want the same thing.
	So blame it on the Maltese Falcon or blame it on Whatever it is.
	It's secret plans.
	It doesn't matter. They've got what they want to do.
	And for part of the narrative control, calling people climate deniers, I prefer the term actually climate infidel.
	I like to be referred to as a climate infidel.
	I've never seen them use that label, but I think they should.
	Because they have a religion.
	A religion of blind faith and experts who refuse to give them any scientific data Uh, to establish, to prove, uh, what they're saying.
	Uh, it is a religion of faith, a blind faith.
	And so I am a climate infidel, uh, if ever there was one, well, we're going to take a quick break and, uh, we will be right back.
	Let me just read, um, a couple of comments here.
	Um, yeah, Travis says, uh, they're bluffing with a guffin on rock fan.
	Max B. Thank you very much for the tip on rock fan.
	I appreciate that. It says, good morning.
	Rumble, Super Faye.
	Wow, thank you very much, Faye.
	I appreciate that. Super Faye.
	Let's make sure DK doesn't have insufficient funds.
	Well, thank you. And on Rockfin, Audi MRR. Thank you very much for the tip as well.
	He says, Hi, David and the DK family.
	Just a note to say how much I appreciate being among decent people.
	And on Rockfin, it's a good community.
	Rockfin and Rumble. That's Audi Modern Retro Radio.
	Well, thank you very much.
	And thank you for the tips.
	I really do appreciate that.
	And I think we've updated the gas gauge.
	Travis is nodding his head yes.
	We've updated the gas gauge so you can see where we are.
	And thank you so much, all of you, for your kind support.
	Every month we look at this.
	I don't have really a way that we can support this.
	I've never... I'm not really giving much thought to trying to do advertising because I know how that works.
	And when we get some advertising, and we turn that back on now after Pride Month is off on Spreaker, but when we do get advertising, If they find out who I am, they cut it off.
	So, you know, it's the sort of thing, it's hard to find anybody who has a national product and doesn't have a socialist, Marxist, globalist agenda.
	And, you know, since we have a national audience, I can't necessarily plug local businesses.
	It doesn't necessarily help.
	So, I really do appreciate the voluntary donations.
	That's how we've funded this program from the very beginning.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	And now, The David Knight Show.
	Oh, yeah.
	Trump's got a human horn in on Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. .
	Is that supposed to be a menorah there?
	We have top men working on it right now.
	Who? Top men.
	My boxes.
	Oh, top secret.
	Army intelligence.
	Did you see the guy rolling the crate through the giant warehouse of Mar-a-Lago?
	Yeah, Israel is trying to recover national treasures, they say, are being held at Mar-a-Lago.
	So now Trump has become raider of the lost lampstands.
	They sent a bunch of ancient menorahs to celebrate Hanukkah.
	Just before the phony pandemic in 2020, they said that these Hanukkah lamps were sent to the U.S. in 2019 for a festive event by Donald Trump and millionaire Saul Fox, a major donor to Israeli Antiquities Authority.
	But they said they've been trying to figure out where they are ever since.
	They're my boxes.
	They're my boxes! They tried to reclaim these historical artifacts from Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate for months after they lent them years ago for a Hanukkah party.
	The lamps were sent with approval from the Antiquities Authority on the provision that they were returned within weeks.
	They were intended to be displayed briefly at the White House.
	However, they were neither displayed nor returned.
	Four years later, Israeli sources told Haaretz they believed them to be stranded.
	Israel Hassan, the director of the government body at the time, told Retz, quote, we wanted our man to go bring it back.
	But you know, it's being taken care of.
	It's being taken care of by big guys.
	And then COVID broke out and everything got stuck.
	Saul Fox, who was supposed to keep the candles in his possession, he's the guy who donates a lot of money to the Israeli Antiquities Authority.
	Well, you know, you better call Saul.
	Call Saul and find out what's going on with this stuff.
	He's a longtime donor to them.
	He helped to establish a national center for antique coins.
	Oh, that'd be something Trump would probably be interested in as well.
	As well as an archaeological garden at the Knesset.
	A source told Heretz that they wouldn't be surprised if the items Israel seeks are also eventually found in some bathroom there.
	Ha! We're maybe in a giant warehouse.
	And so, as this is happening, I thought it was interesting.
	I was going to talk about this a couple of days ago.
	Maria Bartromo had talked to Trump over the weekend on Sunday and did an interview with him.
	One of the questions that she asked him was, she said, if there was anything that you could do differently, What do you think you would do differently?
	You know, would you have, you know, and she didn't offer any explanations, but I'm just thinking, you know, so Trump, he's sitting there.
	Let's see. Should I have complied with the request to send back the top secret documents that I kept?
	Should I have given them my boxes?
	Should I have given the ancient lampstands, the Hanukkah lampstands, the menorahs?
	You ought to give those back to the people.
	No, no, no. What would you have done differently?
	Well, He says, a mistake I think I made was people.
	I mean, I wouldn't have put a guy like Bill Barr.
	He was so weak and pathetic.
	Or I wouldn't have put in Jeff Sessions.
	And there were some people that I wouldn't have put in.
	You know, most people were good, but I had some people.
	We had Esper. I didn't like him.
	He was incompetent. I thought we had other people that I didn't like as well.
	So, you know, he goes back and he looks at it.
	It's not anything even that would have helped him personally.
	Like, you know, can I comply with the law here and there?
	Maybe I shouldn't have done the lockdown.
	Maybe I shouldn't have done masks.
	Maybe I shouldn't have put the American public trillions of dollars in debt and laid out the foundation for universal basic income.
	Maybe I shouldn't have given, you know, tens of billions of dollars to the pharmaceutical companies.
	Maybe I shouldn't have pushed along an injection that is killing and crippling people worldwide.
	No, I shouldn't have let those people I really hate, should never put them in office.
	Maybe I shouldn't have done gun control by executive order and set up a precedent for that.
	No, no, it's those people.
	And so then she asked a question, which I was kind of surprised that Maria Bartiromo would follow up on.
	I would expect that she was enough of a Trump sycophant.
	She wouldn't have said, well, why then did you put them in the job?
	Hmm, you put them in the job.
	Why'd you do it? And he said, well, you know, you put somebody in, you think they're good.
	He said, all of a sudden, I'm the President of the United States.
	I became President. I'm riding down Pennsylvania Avenue with our First Lady.
	I had 250 motorcycles.
	I had armies.
	I had everything.
	I said, do you believe it?
	We're President. Take a look at this.
	This is wild, right?
	This guy. It's like Jed Clampett, who somehow becomes president.
	Yee doggie. Look at this, Granny.
	I got 250 motorcycles here.
	You think they got a cement pond at the White House?
	Except I'd actually vote for Jed Clampett.
	I definitely would vote for Jed Clampett.
	I would vote for him in a heartbeat.
	I'd give him some money if he needed it, except he stumbled on that bubbling crude, and he doesn't need any money from anybody.
	But of course, neither does Trump, and people send him money.
	Yeah. Listen to how juvenile this guy is.
	You know, I just somehow, suddenly, I became president.
	I don't know. Next thing I know, I'm in a limousine with...
	That's the exact words.
	I'm in a limousine with Melania, and there's 250 motorcycles around here.
	I've got armies that I control.
	Yeah, but he can't control his cabinet.
	He doesn't know who these people are.
	He doesn't do due diligence.
	He doesn't do due diligence about the law or about secret documents, even though he hectored Hillary, and rightfully so, for what she did.
	I remember saying that at the time.
	I said, Hillary Clinton, she's Secretary of State, and she has no idea what the laws about classified documents are.
	She just puts this stuff up on a public server and calls it Clinton emails, come and get it.
	And all that stuff was said.
	He was saying that kind of stuff, but then he does it.
	Trump said, well, I didn't know the people.
	I know the people now better than anybody does.
	Well, people I know, the good ones, the bad ones, the dumb ones, the smart ones.
	But then Bart Romo says, but you didn't drain the swamp like you said you would.
	Ooh, she's going to get on his bad side.
	Trump said, I did.
	I fired Comey.
	I fired a lot of people.
	A lot of the people I had, I fired.
	I fired Comey very early.
	You know, there was a question as to whether or not you could, but I fired Comey.
	If I didn't fire Comey, I don't think I would have been able to serve out my term because that was a plot.
	So he fired Comey because, as his lawyer said, he's incapable of acting except out of his own perceived self-interest or revenge.
	A deeply wounded narcissist who doesn't care about you.
	He wouldn't fire Fauci. He wouldn't fire Birx.
	He gave them medals on his last day in office.
	For Operation Warp Speed.
	Yeah, I fired Comey.
	Yeah, got rid of Andrew McCabe also.
	And you still got people who are making that same excuse for him.
	They said, well, he can't fire people.
	He said, no, I did fire people.
	I fired a lot of people. But you didn't fire Fauci.
	Everyone wanted you to fire Fauci, but you didn't do it.
	So, yeah, kind of interesting, isn't it?
	Well, you know, while we're talking about Hollywood, there was a back and forth about what Disney's next box office blunder is going to be.
	And, of course, they have Snow White.
	They're going to do a live-action thing.
	They don't have the decency to do it as a computer animation and redo it.
	They've done so many of these other things shot by shot with 3D computer animation.
	They're not even going to do that. And so they leaked out pictures about Snow White.
	And when I saw these pictures...
	You know, it's this motley crew.
	They've got one guy who is a dwarf, but the rest of them are not dwarves.
	I think one of them is a woman.
	But, you know, they're all different ethnicities.
	One of them is really tall, as a matter of fact.
	Powering guy. And when I saw this, I immediately heard Chico from the Marx Brothers saying, It's an old white guy.
	It's a no white, this is Disney's Snow White and Seven Dwarfs.
	It's a no white, no white people anywhere in this.
	Just a motley crew.
	And so when these pictures are put out, Disney immediately, as everybody was saying, are you kidding me?
	This is what this thing is going to be?
	Travis, pull up the picture of Disney be clowns itself after calling the Snow White pictures fake.
	Did you get that? And Game of Thrones star, who is...
	Going to be in it.
	I think he is the dwarf there, I think.
	Isn't that Peter Dinklage?
	Is he the short guy, the dwarf guy there?
	They like to say little people, right?
	Is it now bad? I mean, look.
	Dwarfism, little people.
	What difference does it make, really?
	You know, it's...
	It's a situation. It's nothing you can do about it.
	We're not trying to make fun of people with that.
	But, you know, changing the name doesn't change what it is.
	We see that all the time.
	But he says, I was a little taken aback when Disney was very proud to cast a Latina actress as Snow White.
	Like I said, you know, it's Snow White.
	But you're telling the story of Snow White and the seven dwarfs, he said.
	It makes no sense to me.
	You're progressive in one way, and you're still making that effing backwards story about seven dwarfs living in a cave together?
	I think we can make pretty much that case about any of the European fairy tales that Disney has turned into things.
	They're all based on absurd premises.
	He says, what the F are you doing?
	I mean, have I done nothing to advance the cause from my soapbox?
	I guess I'm not loud enough.
	And so, he's standing on his soapbox, by the way.
	Anyway, meet the cast of Disney's new woke Snow White film.
	Tweeted out Robbie Starbuck.
	And he said, Snow White is Colombian now.
	And the seven dwarves look more like six normal-sized hipster pedos than one dwarf from Portland.
	Snow White is no longer has skin as white as snow.
	And so Disney got very angry and said, this is a lie.
	This is fake.
	The photos are fake.
	They are not from our productions.
	And we're currently trying to have the Daily Mail issue a correction because they saw that tweet there from Robbie Starbuck and they wrote an article about it.
	Problem is the photos were not fake.
	And so Disney came back and said, okay, okay, okay.
	They're real pictures of the production, but they're not our official PR pictures.
	Well, I bet they aren't.
	Because who wants to see something like that?
	I mean, it really does look like, you know, It's an old white and it's seven people from Antifa.
	That's what it looks like.
	The studio later said the photos were from production, not official photos.
	Added the Beast.
	Now, that's not Beauty and the Beast.
	That is the Daily Beast.
	And so, Zero Hedge says, once again, Disney comes up short.
	Even though Peter Dinklage is on his soapbox, they're still coming up short.
	Bloomberg, Sound of Freedom, hit piece written by a pro-peto contributor.
	Yeah, this guy who is, and they point out, there's all these different places are doing hit pieces on The Sound of Freedom.
	But again, you know, calling it a QAnon conspiracy flick.
	And as I said, it doesn't help for Jim Caviezel to then go on and deny this with Michael Flynn, who is a QAnon pusher from day one.
	He's been pushing that lie.
	And he's also been pushing Pride Month, and he's also pushed the Navy SEAL transgender on the second Pride Month that the Pentagon had.
	He's also leading people in churches and occultic prayers and all the rest of this stuff.
	Why are they doing this?
	They've got a legitimate true story about a legitimate true problem, as I talked about earlier with child trafficking.
	So why continue to push the QAnon dog whistle stuff?
	And it really is.
	But if you look at the guy in this one particular example, wrote this for Bloomberg, Noah Berlatsky.
	Not just your average liberal mainstream media news contributor, writes Zero Hedge, but he turned into the truly tired trope of accusing the movie of packaging together various QAnon conspiracy theories.
	However, the problem is this guy's got a long, sordid history of advocating for the normalization of pedophilia.
	In 2021, Berlasky, this guy who wrote the, you know...
	The review of Sound of Freedom for Bloomberg.
	He was named communications director at Prostasia, a nonprofit organization which dedicates itself to, quote, self-avowed mission of protecting children from sexual abuse.
	While on its face it sounds antithetical to advocating for the normalization of pedophilia, a deeper look into Prostasia's published content shows it merely masquerades under the guise of acting in the interest of protecting children from sexual abuse.
	They focus quite heavily on minor attracted persons.
	They have a MAP support club partnership.
	In 2018, a piece addressing a bill that was eventually signed into law that allows states and victims to fight Online Trafficking Act, Prostasia lamented the legislation's stigmatization of pedophiles.
	Yeah, they should be marked.
	Stigmata. Yeah, marked in multiple ways.
	Aside from his work with Prestasia since 2021, he has a long history of promoting the idea that children can consent to sex with adults.
	By the way, so does Trump's favorite lawyer, Alan Dershowitz.
	He's pushed for that for a long time.
	Yeah, think about that.
	In 2016, this guy, Berlatsky, published a piece titled Child Sex Workers' Biggest Threat, The police.
	They're not minors who are being, you know, statutorily raped at the very least.
	They're child sex workers.
	And the police are the bad people.
	But it's not just the police. The parents are the bad people as well.
	He wrote an article for The New Republic.
	He took aim at the 2012 film called Eden, which is another drama centered around exposing the grim realities of child sex abuse.
	Throughout the piece, he refers to parents Youth in the sex trade in a lexicon that alienates them from the idea that they are victims of human trafficking with a suggestion that they should be free to work in the sex trade.
	And if there's any doubt about where all this is, you take a look at his social media history, which they reproduced here.
	He tried to scrub it, but it was a little bit too late.
	Pedophiles, he said, are essentially a stigmatized group.
	Certain people get designated as deviants, and people hate them.
	Well, I think that's an appropriate designation for them.
	He also said young people of any gender who trade sex face arrest and abuse from police.
	No one is very interested in helping them.
	He said the issue isn't that people care about the victims.
	The issue is that pedophiles are loathed.
	Then he says parents are tyrants.
	Parent is an oppressive class like rich people or white people.
	He also said there are things that you can try to do to minimize the abuse that's endemic to the parent-child relationship, but it's always there.
	So understand, pedos are good, parents are bad.
	That's what you need to understand.
	And this is where we are right now.
	And this is why they focused on that.
	He also wrote, they said he's married, he's got a child, but his family is not What you would typically think.
	He wrote a piece. My wife is bisexual and non-binary, and my daughter is transgender.
	My queer family helped me to better understand myself and my masculinity.
	I think he's still in the dark, quite frankly.
	You know, let me show you this.
	This is what is happening in North Carolina.
	Ages for starting gender transitions in North Carolina.
	And they've got three university health systems there.
	Duke Health UNC, that's University of North Carolina Health, and ECU Health, that's Eastern Carolina University.
	Now, at Duke, you can begin your gender transitions at two years old.
	These kids are not even talking well, and they're going to start gender transitioning them at Duke.
	At UNC, three years old, and at ECU, you have to be a mature four years old.
	Yeah. This is sick, folks.
	This is absolutely sick.
	This is the other form of abuse that is there.
	My nephew-in-law thinks he's a dinosaur.
	Should we surgically graft a tail onto him?
	Yeah. Yeah, exactly.
	Eric Peters is going to be joining us at the top of the hour.
	Let me just follow up with something that I said yesterday when I talked about Tucker Carlson.
	And I made a statement about, you know, he said, I read the Bible and I was really amazed.
	He said, I've been Episcopalian all my life.
	I'm 54 years old. I never read it.
	And I said, yeah, that's a problem.
	A lot. A lot of people.
	And I mentioned my wife's experience as a Roman Catholic.
	A listener chimed in as I was talking about it, talked about their experience, said, you know, all the time I was growing up as a Roman Catholic, I never read the Bible.
	I've got a lot of friends who are still in that, and they don't read the Bible either.
	Angry Tiger got angry with me.
	So I would like to point out that us Catholics study the Bible.
	My church has a Bible study, and several other Catholic churches in my area have a Bible study.
	We have Bibles made specifically for that.
	We mark them up.
	We highlight them.
	We do the same things you guys do.
	We also have a thing called Catechism, where we study the Bible in depth, and people who run the Catechism class have studied the Bible in depth for years.
	So I would just like to point out it's not true that Catholics do not read the Bible.
	It's a huge part of our faith.
	I would also like to point out that if it wasn't for the Catholic religion, there would be no Bible when it was put together at the Council of Nicaea, put together for the Catholic Mass, so you can thank us for that.
	So, yeah.
	And let me just say, I pointed this out, and what I had to say in terms of Tucker and the Episcopalian Church and my wife's experience, listeners' experience as Roman Catholics, what I was talking about, and this happens in every kind of church, you know, go to a Baptist church, Methodist church, Presbyterian church, go to an independent church.
	We can all have a situation where the Bible is not the center of it, and that can happen anywhere at any time.
	And you can make a pope out of the pastor that's in that church.
	Or you can have a situation where you have, you know, you elevate the pope as superior to the Bible.
	And that's what we all need to think about.
	Regardless of what tradition or what denomination you are in, what is your standard?
	And we have different ways that you can look at things.
	You can say, well, we have the Bible, we've got tradition, and we've got a church leader.
	Which one are we going to pick?
	Well, it usually winds up to be the church leader because the church leader is going to be defining these types of things.
	And I look at it as the same type of thing when we're talking about science or scientism, right?
	If you don't keep people, if you have quote-unquote science where they don't have to show the data about COVID or about climate or whatever, Now you're just following the leader.
	You're following some authority figure.
	You're following Fauci, who is the science.
	And you can do the same thing in religion.
	You can just follow the pastor or the pope or whoever, because he's religion.
	And I'll follow him.
	Well, the reality is that there is an objective standard that stands above all this.
	And in the political realm...
	You see the same type of thing happening with the Constitution.
	The Constitution, we're told by the people who want to constantly alter it for their benefit, we're told that the Constitution is a living document.
	And it means whatever I say it means today.
	I don't really care what it actually is written there.
	And we can have people who will interpret that for us, you know, the judiciary, whatever, or politician.
	It's a living document.
	It means what I say. And we can fall into that trap in politics and science and religion and all these different things.
	We have to have objective facts.
	We have to have a standard.
	And if you're going to say that the Bible is a standard, it's kind of like what we're seeing with these LGBT churches.
	They say, well, I think that God and Jesus are transgenders or whatever.
	And it's like, well, if you just want to make it up, why bother to go back Why bother to pretend that we've got a constitution if you just want to rule as an authoritarian dictator?
	You have to have some standard, some basis in reality that's going to be there.
	Some objective standard that isn't going to change.
	The constitution, you've got a process for doing that, but they don't do anything about it.
	They just want to modify it.
	And it even goes to things like The Chosen.
	I've talked about this before. You know, all the editorializing that has to go into any of this stuff when you make a movie about it.
	What was his demeanor? Who was he looking at when he said these words, even if you have him saying the same words?
	But they go even further than that.
	I mean, you look at The Chosen. Do you want the Jesus of the Bible, or do you want the Jesus of Dallas Jenkins?
	You know, he's got Jesus.
	I've read. I haven't seen it.
	I read somebody had a review that said, yeah, he's sitting there practicing a sermon on the Mount with Mary or something.
	Like, seriously? That's Dallas Jenkins' Jesus?
	Not my Jesus. Not Jesus I see in the Bible.
	And so, again, you look at all this stuff.
	By the way, everybody was upset they were shutting down the fourth season of that because of the writer's strike and everything.
	And then they got a special exemption.
	And they're continuing on with it.
	But I was going to talk about that and say, you know, well, you know, Dallas Jenkins doesn't really need Hollywood writers to do The Chosen.
	You know, I've got some other writers that have chipped in on this.
	We've got Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.
	Maybe you might be interested in what they have to say.
	Or maybe not. I don't know.
	We're going to take a break and we're going to come back with Eric Peters.
	Stay with us. The common man.
	They created common core to dumb down our children.
	They created common past to track and control us.
	Their commons project to make sure the commoners own nothing.
	And the communist future.
	They see the common man as simple, unsophisticated, ordinary.
	But each of us has worth and dignity created in the image of God.
	That is what we have in common.
	That is what they want to take away.
	Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation.
	They desire to know everything about us while they hide everything from us.
	It's time to turn that around and expose what they want to hide.
	Please share the information and links you'll find at TheDavidKnightShow.com.
	Thank you for listening.
	Thank you for sharing.
	If you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers.
	The E-Day davidnightshow.com all right joining us now is eric peters of epautos.com And we got Eric here visually for the first time.
	Never had Eric on visually.
	And of course, he's kind of worried about the technology.
	So if anything fails, we'll just start over and we'll do a voiceover to start with.
	But glad to have you on, Eric.
	Good to see you. Well, thanks. Look, I'm not an AI bot.
	There you go. There you go.
	And you've got a special T-shirt you want to show us there, too, as well.
	Hopefully, you guys will be able to see that I stand with Ukraine.
	That's great. Key for the long, long E and a sheep.
	You must have loved that back and forth with Tucker and Pence over the last Friday.
	Wasn't that something? He's brilliant.
	He does such a good job of laying bear traps for these people that they just step right into it.
	And they do it unconsciously, and even after he did it, even after Pence said it's not his problem, he did not realize the magnitude of his own gaffe.
	It's just astounding how insular these people are, how tone-deaf they are.
	Yeah, and totally focused away from this country.
	Not my concern, what's going on in the U.S. Not my concern at all.
	I'm focused on Kyiv.
	Yeah, right. I mean, the contemptuousness, the callousness of that.
	You know, Americans are hurting badly, and we're supposed to be preoccupied, obsessed with, and willing to bear literally any burden, including potentially a draft, including possibly a nuclear conflagration over Ukraine?
	Yeah. Oh, yeah.
	It's astounding.
	Well, because it's not really about Ukraine.
	It's about their empire, isn't it?
	It's about the NATO empire.
	You know, they want to extend NATO to the Pacific Ocean.
	They want to extend their power everywhere.
	And it's really a hallmark of a decaying empire, isn't it?
	They're so focused on what is happening externally with their geopolitics that the country itself is just decaying internally.
	Yeah, it's like the United Kingdom trying to maintain the Raj long after it became evident that Britain could barely support itself anymore.
	Yeah. And also, you know, the deliberate things that are done.
	I mean, it's not just the massive amounts of money.
	It's not just the fact that we've sent them so much weaponry that, you know, Biden has to admit, well, we haven't got any more of this ammunition, so we've got to send them cluster bombs.
	It's like, what? You're out of ammunition?
	You know, you've had people say that you violated national security by telling people we're out of ammunition.
	You're not supposed to say that.
	And, you know, but they're going to sacrifice our defense is what really they're talking about.
	Sacrifice our defense for their program of offense.
	And it truly is amazing to see them continue to double down with this.
	But, you know, Pence and Nikki Haley, he could have done the same thing with her.
	She might have been smart enough to see the trap come in.
	She might have come on later on.
	He found her in some other ways.
	He outed her, but she is a huge neocon as well, but truly was amazing to see this tone-deaf Pence talking about that.
	And I think, by the way, that Tucker's audience for that interview was something on the order of 9 million, which is very...
	When you think about...
	They kicked him off of Fox News.
	My understanding is Fox viewership is down something like 30%.
	Is that right? Yeah.
	Since they got rid of him?
	Yeah. And he is in a kind of...
	Almost marginalized platform relative to having a major media presence, and he's still managing to draw in numbers like that, and it just gives you an idea of how thirsty people are for legitimate commentary, for people who are willing to call out these shibboleths and point fingers in the right direction.
	It was kind of interesting. I don't know if you saw this or not.
	I saw this one place. It hasn't been widely reported.
	I chose not to play it.
	But Jesse Waters, who took his place.
	And of course, they changed their lineup at Fox.
	And he's got the time slot that Tucker used to be in.
	And he took a call from his mom, who called into the show.
	And she was the most domineering, patronizing person, leftist Democrat, you can imagine.
	And it was one of the most cringeworthy things I have ever seen.
	Scolding him for his conservative views on his own program, and he's, you know, okay, Mom, let's go.
	Now, I've got one more thing I want to say to you.
	It was really funny. I don't know.
	I mean, they were really circling the drain at Fox.
	It's amazing. Yeah, well, you know, all this stuff would be funny if it weren't so tragic and weren't so dangerous.
	And there's so many things that we can get into.
	Did you catch the news that Ford has lowered the price of the F-150 electric lightning by $10,000?
	So now it only costs $10,000 more than it costs when they first introduced it.
	It sounds like Amazon Prime Day.
	You know, they raise the price and then drop it with a discount so that it's the same or more expensive.
	That's amazing. They're absolutely desperate.
	My understanding is they now have something on the order of nearly a three-month inventory of these things stacked up.
	They're sitting on dealership lots, you know, in depots outside of the manufacturing facilities waiting to be shipped that they can't unload.
	And, well, duh! You know, the entry price point of this thing is $60,000.
	And whether you like...
	EVs or not.
	The bottom line is there are only so many people who can afford to spend $60,000, or for that matter, $50,000 on a vehicle.
	It's not tenable purely as an economic proposition, and even the mainstream press is beginning to cover it.
	It's really starting to look like a freefall problem to have all these vehicles stacked up.
	And keep in mind that we're right now already on the cusp of the 2024 model year.
	2024 models are coming out.
	And in five months, it will be the calendar year 2024, at which point This inventory, this massive glut, I think it's something like 10,000, just in the case of Ford's Mach-E Mustang, I think the figure is 9,700 of them are sitting around waiting for people to buy them.
	So we get to the new year, and these new 2023 EVs are going to be old EVs, even though they've not been driven by anybody yet.
	They're now used cars, and they're going to have to be fire sales sold just to get rid of them.
	It's a fiasco. You don't want to use them.
	You don't want to use that term fire cell when you're talking about an EV, right?
	You probably shouldn't have.
	But, you know, Ford has upped what it has admitted to thus far in terms of how much it's lost on these things.
	The figure is now $3.7 billion on this electrified tulip craze.
	Maybe Disney can buy them, you know?
	Yeah. They can get the same ladies to run the franchises that they bought into the ground.
	Well, that's one of the ways they're going to try to prop this up, you know, particularly with regard to the lightning.
	A lot of government agencies have trucks, you know, and they'll use the buying power of the government, which means you're making you and me pay for it, you know, to buy these electric vehicles to create the illusion that there's a market for these things.
	But even the federal government, state governments can absorb only so many of these things.
	Mm-hmm. You know, it's going to come to a head pretty soon, I think.
	So they can make some illusory fiat currency, as much of it as they want, and then they can go out and buy as many of these electric vehicles as they want at whatever price they want to sell them for.
	And, you know, it's no problem.
	It's just one fantasy stacked on top of the other, you know?
	And meanwhile, Pence says, no, we've got to have wars everywhere.
	It's absolutely incredible.
	I saw that article, at least an article about the backlogs of the EVs.
	And the other aspect of that is that they have...
	The smaller than typical, considerably smaller than typical backlog of internal combustion engines, which they're pushing them out of the way.
	That's what people want. They don't want and can't afford, as you pointed out, the electric vehicles.
	They talked about a Genesis luxury EV car that was $80,000.
	They sold three of them this last year.
	Yeah, I test drove one.
	It's not a bad vehicle per se, but if you look at it relative to the non-electric version of the same thing, if I remember correctly, the price difference is about $20,000.
	Wow. $20,000 price difference.
	And the electrified version, again, I'm kind of freewheeling here a little bit, but I think its fully charged range is approximately, I think, 250-something miles.
	Fully charged. That's your best case...
	That you can travel in this thing, which is about half as far as the non-electric version can go.
	So who's going to sign up for that?
	You're going to pay $20,000 more for a vehicle that only goes half as far.
	And because of the fact that it only goes half as far, you're going to be planning your life around these recharging sessions, which you'll be doing more often precisely because you can't go very far in these things.
	Who wants to do that? And then we talk about recharging.
	I had an article a couple of days ago about how, and you had some amazing experiences trying to charge your EVs that you were reviewing when it was cold.
	And now it's even worse when it's really hot.
	They're telling people, yeah, they don't charge very well.
	And not only that, but if you charge them when it's really hot, you're going to reduce your battery life, and especially if you fast charge them when it's hot.
	And so we had all these situations.
	There's one guy, I remember when you did it around Christmas time, and it impacted your holiday trip, just like another guy who was reviewing one.
	He had to cancel his holiday trip because he could never get it.
	They said, we're waiting for the battery to warm up before we can charge it, and the battery never warmed up, so he could never charge it.
	He couldn't go anywhere. You had a similar situation like that, didn't you, as well?
	I did. It's a serially compounding problem.
	It's one thing creates another thing creates another thing.
	For example, when it's cold, many people don't realize that the vehicle is using the power to keep itself warm, because if the battery gets below a certain temperature, it can't accept charge.
	So it has an internal system that maintains temperature.
	Well, it maintains that by drawing electrical power from itself to keep itself warm.
	So you've got this circling the drain problem.
	You keep the thing plugged in so as it doesn't lose charge while it's sitting, but it's burning through charge just sitting, trying to keep itself warm.
	It's so Byzantine and perplexed.
	Sometimes I'm reduced to stumbling and not even being able to articulate it.
	It's just so ridiculous. I remember James May had his parked during really cold weather.
	James May was with Top Gear and stuff.
	And he loved it.
	he's all about it but then you know the thing lost all of its charge because as you're pointing out it's constantly leaking charge uh maintaining stuff and he couldn't just jump start it he had to take the all the battery uh the uh car body panels off so he could get to the battery it was amazing he did a video about it he said look i've got to completely deconstruct this car to get the battery and i was talking about and now they come up with this thing about hot stuff it turns out that really hot weather is actually worse for it than really cold weather i said
	so what these things are that we should start calling them goldilocks vehicles right sorry that yeah it's got to be just right in order to do this thing or you're not going to go anywhere And then they're telling people the same type of stuff they did, you know, when it's really cold.
	Don't use your heater, because it's going to use a lot of electricity.
	So now they're telling people when it's really hot, don't use your air conditioning.
	Car comes first.
	The car is first. Yeah.
	The home turf of the electric car is Southern California.
	That's where all of this began.
	And if you live in LA or San Francisco, a place where it's temperate, it doesn't generally get too very hot or too very cold.
	It's relatively temperate.
	Most of the driving is relatively flat.
	And your distances are relatively short.
	It creates this distorted impression of reality.
	We found out last winter, I personally found out, when you take one of these things out when it's 15 degrees outside, your range will drop by anywhere from 20-40%, depending on the situation.
	And then it takes significantly longer to recharge it, because batteries just aren't that efficient when it's very cold outside.
	It's just one thing after another thing after another thing.
	And they're not telling people.
	They're not leveling with them.
	I pointed out in an article that I did back in December about the Lightning.
	I like to read through the owner's manuals that come with the vehicles that I get because I often find revelatory things in there.
	And right there in the Ford manual, it tells, it advises people who own this vehicle to limit the amount of fast charging that they do.
	Because fast charging is hard on the battery.
	They use the word health. It's hard on the health of the battery.
	And what they mean is... That regular heavy discharging and fast charging is a good recipe for killing your battery quickly.
	And when that happens, you know, people don't realize just how much it costs to replace one of these electric car batteries.
	It's so much that it's not worth replacing it.
	Mm-hmm.
	Mm-hmm.
	And why is it that we are willing to accept?
	Here's another number. They will say that it's normal for a battery, an electric car battery, to suffer about a 1% to 2% loss of its charge capacity each year, even under optimal conditions.
	1% to 2%.
	So, let's see.
	After 10 years, you're going to have lost 10%.
	Mm-hmm.
	That's right. Yeah, and your fuel economy and all the rest of the stuff.
	Yeah. It is interesting, isn't it?
	And you talk about cost of replacement.
	There was a story this last week about somebody who had a Rivian vehicle that they paid $80,000 for.
	And they got a fender bender.
	And, you know, first the insurance adjuster for the other company says, eh, it'd be about $1,200.
	and they take it to a certified repair place and say, no, $42,000 or $41,000 or something like that, it's going to be half the price of the vehicle because they've got to take all this stuff apart to get to it, kind of like the James May thing.
	But then also there's these minor accidents where you've done something to compromise the battery, and you may or may not realize it.
	If they do realize it and they see the battery's compromised, it may be totaling the vehicle.
	Who knows?
	But you could have a situation where maybe it's damaged these batteries, And the thing becomes very, very dangerous.
	We're seeing this happening all the time.
	As a matter of fact, when I talked about the goalie lock stuff, I had a listener who said, why don't you call them time bombs?
	You've been calling them time bombs in the past.
	It's like, yeah, I know.
	I mean, you know, we talk about the the lithium battery electric scooters and how many fires and people have died in just in New York City from those types of things.
	We see the buses in Europe that have caught fire in France and in Germany.
	Germany burned down an entire bus station.
	So they said, all right, let's, you know, take these things away.
	We don't want to use them anymore.
	And in Canada, they were having problems with it.
	So they said, we're going to take the batteries out and put diesel engines back in them.
	So we have all these issues about the battery, and yet our government is so adamant about the battery.
	It's like Trump with the mRNA shot and Fauci and Biden.
	You know, you've got to have that mRNA.
	You can't have anything else.
	You've got to have the mRNA.
	And it's a very telling thing, isn't it, when they've got one solution to their crisis that they've created.
	We know that that was what they were trying to do in the first place, wasn't it?
	People need to understand that in the first case, there's that inherent fire risk, even if the battery case is not compromised.
	It's just built in.
	It's the nature of lithium ion batteries.
	Now, if you're in an impact, as in the case of that Rivian, how do you tell, how do you establish whether the case has been damaged, whether there's been any compromising of the structural integrity of it and the thousands of individual cells within that battery?
	And the answer is, realistically, you can't.
	What are you going to do? You're going to take this thing out of the vehicle after, as you say, disassembling the vehicle, and then you're going to have a very expensive technician disassemble this battery and examine each individual cell.
	Of course not. What you're going to do is, out of prudence and due diligence, you're going to throw the thing away and get a new battery.
	The problem is that the battery is $40,000.
	The really criminal thing about this is that you and I and everybody else who does not have an EV are going to be made to subsidize this because the insurance mafia...
	It's not going to allow just the people who bought EVs to pay this because then they wouldn't be able to afford to cover their vehicles.
	What they're going to do is spread the costs of all of these losses across everybody who's forced to buy insurance.
	Wait and see what happens. Oh, yeah.
	Oh, yeah, absolutely. And I think some of it is particular to the EVs.
	I think some of this is due to...
	Perhaps even maybe Rivian, being a new car company, they don't know or they don't care about what repairing the stuff is looking like, right?
	This is probably something that's being shared by everybody, kind of a planned obsolescence.
	You know, we're going to make it so that it's not really repairable, and we really don't care.
	You've seen that with really expensive cars in the past, you know, with some sports cars that have carbon fiber tubs, and, you know, they get hit from one side.
	Well, it's just total it, you know, because you've now cracked this thing.
	That's been true of specialty cars for some time, and it kind of goes from territory when you buy a specialty car.
	But what they really want, I believe, is to have everybody get on the treadmill of serial debt, serial payments.
	They do not want people to buy a car and pay it off and own it.
	And then potentially drive it for 15 or even 20 years.
	They don't want that. What they want is a vehicle that basically becomes functionally useless or compromised by about 8 years, and ideally before that.
	And then you have to go out and get another one.
	Remember, these EVs are not going to be on the used car market for all the reasons that we've talked about.
	A 4- or 5-year-old EV, let's say, used EV, with a battery that's lost 50% of its charge is essentially worthless.
	Who's going to buy that? Nobody. You know, the used car market is going to be greatly affected by this EV juggernaut if EVs become the only kinds of vehicles that people are allowed to buy anymore.
	And of course, that's one of the reasons why that is the only type of car that they want you to be able to get, because they don't want people to have cars, period.
	Going back to 1970, you know, the first Earth Day, you got all the hippies out there yelling, kill the car, kill the car.
	This has been, you know, their goal, regardless of whether they think we're going to go into global warming or global cooling or whatever, or there's a pandemic, we got to kill the car.
	And they got to kill the car for future pandemic lockdowns as well, because that was our escape hatch from their tyranny.
	Well, kill it and control it.
	Sorry? Kill it and control it.
	You know, electric cars, as we've discussed this before, they are particularly amenable to being controlled wirelessly because they are generally hooked up or connected, is the word, to the manufacturer through which they get these updates over the air.
	And, you know, it can be updated to just not accept charge or to not start or to not work.
	So let's say there's another pandemic and they decree another lockdown.
	Well, all they have to do is almost literally throw a switch, you know, and make it so that you're not able to drive the EV because even though it's in your garage, they're the ones who have control over it.
	Yeah, yeah. And it is a surveillance aspect where they're putting into the cars, not just EVs, but, you know, all the cars.
	and they will be doing it with EVs as well.
	They're putting facial recognition in.
	They're now talking about, and you've got several manufacturers who are talking about putting this in, we're not going to unlock the car unless the car recognizes you.
	We're not going to turn it on unless it recognizes you.
	All of this stuff is going to be incredibly expensive.
	It's not being driven by what consumers want.
	It's being driven by government demands because they want to make everything a government-granted privilege.
	Everything has to come with a biometric identification and so they can know where you are and control what you do and where you go That's a big part of it.
	And all of these automobile manufacturers are playing along with it.
	So they're allowed to do business.
	They're going to play along with all of this issue.
	But they've got to kill the car or they won't have the kind of 15-minute city and smart city controls that they want to have on people.
	Yeah, America was unique in all the world in that the average guy, average person, was able to afford a car from the time of the Model T all the way up to our time.
	And that's something that, generally speaking, people who lived in Europe, certainly people who lived in Asia, Africa, average people didn't get to drive their own personal car.
	They didn't have a garage. Most of them don't have a single-family home.
	Most of them live in an apartment, in an urban hive somewhere.
	so-called elites, these technocratic people, these overlords, would-be overlord people.
	That's what they want for us.
	Yes.
	You know, the sad thing is...
	Yes. And then to have a house and then to raise a family in their house because they've made the cost of all of these things so prohibitive that a lot of,
	you know, you talk to kids and they'll tell you, and they're not wrong, that they've given up on the idea of, you know, the American dream of having a home, a single family home and a car and all of these things.
	They just don't think it's something they'll ever be able to have because of the cost of it.
	So what do they do? They stay home and they live in their parents' house and they play video games.
	Mm-hmm. Not all of them, but a lot of them.
	Yeah, it is truly amazing.
	And I was going to put together a bunch of pictures.
	I went back and looked at what travel was like 60 years ago on planes versus what they're doing now.
	Because there was several stories that came out about how they were making the plane seats narrower and narrower and, you know, just cramping it more and more.
	And, you know, fitting three seats in the space of what you used to have two seats just a few years ago.
	Went back in the 1960s, found a bunch of shots of Scandinavian Airlines, and they had wide aisles.
	They were rolling out these massive plates of charcuterie and big cuts of meat.
	I mean, it looked like Fred Flintstone was eating this stuff.
	I mean, a gigantic leg that they're carving up for people, and everybody is there in a suit and tie instead of their pajamas.
	I look at it, and I say, Isn't it amazing how our society has rapidly declined and declined in the direction that we already see in China?
	You know, it used to be kind of a joke that people in China would wear pajamas everywhere because that's all they could afford.
	They were completely controlled.
	And when we look at the cities that they're living in, and when I was in China, what we saw were people being packed into high-rises.
	Those high-rises are essentially like your 15-minute city.
	It is like a smart city where they can control everything.
	They're living in factories in many cases, slave labor, slave factories like that.
	But even in the rural areas where we got out of the city...
	People are living in what was essentially storage sheds that we would have here.
	You know, three concrete walls and a metal roof, and you've got a garage door that opens up, and that's their entire house.
	And so the family, during the day, at least, to keep from being too hot, they didn't have any windows or doors.
	They would have to raise the entire garage door.
	So they've got a three-sided house, very tiny, all their stuff in there.
	And as you drive past them on the road, you just see everybody sitting in those little houses there.
	That's what they want for us.
	And they're getting there very rapidly.
	You know, when you look at Biden demanding that, what was it, 60% of the cars have to be EVs by 2030?
	We're looking at like six years away.
	What do you know about the cycle?
	Tell us a little bit about how that's going to affect the cycle plans of the automotive companies.
	I mean, they're already working on the cars, or will be soon, that they're going to be having on the market in six model years from now.
	What we're talking about is a reversion.
	America had achieved a degree of affluence for the average person.
	Working class people, unprecedented in the history of the world.
	Working class people could afford a home.
	Working class people could afford a car.
	Airplane travel used to be a really amazing experience.
	Now you've probably heard about the WEF. And I think even the British government has officially gone on board with this.
	But in our near future, you'll perhaps be allowed to take a plane trip once every maybe two or three years.
	Yeah, every three years of less than a thousand miles.
	And that's coming from C-40, which is...
	It began as 40 cities and it was like London and New York were starting this thing, you know, Bloomberg in New York and Sadiq Khan putting this up.
	But now they've got almost 100 cities that have signed on to this.
	And that's a radical thing, as you point out.
	One flight every three years, less than 1,000 miles.
	Yeah, now with regard to cars, it's a similar thing in that we're going back 100 years, more than 100 years.
	We're going back to the era when a car was a luxury item, an indulgence.
	It was something that the very rich could afford, but the average person could not afford it.
	I did an article a couple of weeks ago where I mentioned that TV show, which I liked a lot, Downton Abbey.
	Remember Downton Abbey? I never saw it, yeah.
	It came on after we stopped watching TV. We moved in 1996 to an area where we couldn't get TV reception, not PBS, not anything, no cable, nothing like that.
	It was great. It was a very liberating thing, but yeah, I missed Downton Abbey.
	It's about late Victorian England, and it focuses on the family of an earl, and they live in a castle.
	And of course, the earl has several cars.
	His servants drive them for him, but the servants get to walk.
	The average person does not get to have a car.
	And that's what's happening.
	And why it's happening, in my opinion, I think that there's this really sick element of sadism that's going on.
	And what I mean by that is it's not enough for these ultra-rich people to have very nice things, which nobody would begrudge somebody who hasn't worked hard and earned money.
	I don't care that somebody's got a Porsche.
	Let them have a Porsche. That's great if they bought it.
	But We're good to go.
	That's what is driving a lot of this.
	They want to reestablish the distinctions that were vitiated to a great extent in everyday meaningful ways by the prosperity that was engendered by when America was a free country and a working class guy could afford to buy a single family house and could afford to buy a car and to take care of his family without his wife having to go work in order to make it viable.
	That's right. I remember back in the 1970s when I was still in school, my dad used to subscribe to Business Week, and so I'd read the articles about what was happening with that.
	One thing that stuck with me more than anything I ever read in that magazine was the guy talking about the difference in terms of attitude in America versus Europe.
	He said, in Europe, if we see somebody who's got a Rolls Royce or Ferrari or whatever, they see that.
	And they get angry and they key it or they do something like that.
	They hate those people for having a car like that.
	Where he says, but in America, if you've got a really nice car like that, he said, the people look at that and it's like, wow, look at that.
	Someday I'm going to have a car like that.
	And it was that reason why class warfare did not work We're good to go.
	Spaces in the university, spaces in the corporations, based on your skin color and other things that are immutable, you know, your sex or your imagined sex or whatever.
	That's what we're going to base this on.
	It's not going to be based on merit.
	And so, you know, we've completely destroyed all of that.
	And as you're pointing out, people used to be able to afford a car.
	It was... Something that Ford wanted to happen.
	He said, I want my employees who work on the line, I want them to be able to afford one of these things.
	You look at the attitude that these guys have towards their employees today.
	They want to kill their employees.
	They want to spy on their employees.
	Amazon is watching every single move that a truck driver makes.
	They despise the people that work for them.
	They want to take everything from them, and they want to hoard everything for themselves.
	That's what we have. It's going to engender class warfare.
	They don't realize that, but they're also pushing race war at the same time.
	I think one of the great ironies of our era is the juxtaposition between our era, and if you go back 100 years, to the so-called robber baron era.
	Remember the robber barons?
	Yeah. And the accusation of the left at that time was that these titans of industry, the John D. Rockefellers, the J.P. Morgans, and the Henry Fords, they were oppressing the working man.
	When in fact, you know, whatever their motives were, maybe they were greed heads, but the point is that their activities actually elevated the lot of the average person substantially.
	You know, you can disparage Henry Ford all you want to.
	The fact of the matter is, he made the Model T, and he made it available at a price that practically anybody who had a job could afford to buy.
	Whereas now, you've got this complete inversion where the left...
	is the source of all of the functional and practical animosity toward the working person, the average guy, in favor of these elites.
	So I just find that to be an interesting juxtaposition.
	Yeah, you go back and look at Michael Bloomberg when he was running for president, and he wrote the thing, you know, trashing farmers, you know, and everybody said, wait a minute, farmers, they've got to do a lot of variety of things, and they've got to be a master of all trades, and it's technologically challenging today as well.
	But if you looked at what he was having to say, he wasn't just trashing the farmers, he was trashing all of us.
	He was saying, you know, we had the Industrial Revolution.
	We had the, you know, where people came off the farms, and we had people on the farms, and then we put people in the factories.
	You know, those farmers and factory workers, those of us who are smart right now, are working on how we're going to replace all of them with robots.
	And we just have to figure out how we're going to pacify people so they don't come after us with guillotines.
	That's what he said, guillotines.
	And so we're going to have universal basic income, which is going to pacify people.
	And we're going to own everything ourselves.
	And we just got to figure out how to control people that are alive and how to reduce the number of people who are alive.
	And that's their mindset with this.
	They are megalomaniacs.
	They are tyrants.
	They're authoritarians.
	It's very concerning. And you see that everybody's getting the same marching orders.
	When you go back and you look at the lockdowns, all the rest of the stuff, it didn't matter whether it was Trump or whether it was Biden.
	Boris Johnson or conservatives.
	It didn't matter if it was, you know, the so-called liberals, libertarians in Australia.
	It didn't matter what their political philosophy was.
	They were all authoritarian tyrants, and they were all doing exactly the same thing at exactly the same time, for which there was no rationale except for their power and control.
	That's the scary thing about it.
	They're all on the same page, and all these nations and political parties and politicians, they're just placekeepers, and everybody's going off of this central script of global governance with corporations and, you know, the UN and Davos.
	Psychologically, to get back to that topic, because I find this interesting, I hope you guys do too.
	People like Bloomberg, a lot of these people at that level, what is it that drives their animosity?
	And I think the answer to that question is, what have they ever done?
	A lot of these people are just suits.
	They're people who don't have any tangible, productive skills, who haven't actually done anything that has been received in the market with approbation by their fellow man without a gun behind it.
	These people naturally gravitate into government where their frustrations can be imposed on people because now they have power.
	They can't persuade.
	They can't convince.
	They like to use force.
	I used to work in Washington, and I remember thinking to myself, I've never seen such a concentrated concatenation of non-entities, arrogant non-entities, in my entire life.
	You know, if you took away their government job and their government power, what would these people be doing?
	Most of them couldn't qualify to be a broom pusher at a warehouse somewhere in terms of what they can do.
	That's right. And I think they know that.
	You know, you have people like Jared and Ivanka Kushner, right?
	Did they not know that they're trust fund kids?
	You know, most of these people have done, as you pointed out, They've not really done anything to get where they are except maybe, you know, bribe politicians or cut corners somewhere or come up with something and shut down the safety measures of it so they can make a killing literally with their drugs or whatever.
	But they're also, I think, Eric, I think they're very much like, you see the kind of paranoia with entertainers, right?
	Even the most phenomenally successful entertainers, I've watched this all my life, they're very, very paranoid About their latest project.
	Because they always perceive that they're only as good as their last film or whatever, their last review.
	And they're so concerned that they're going to lose it, right?
	And they're concerned that there's some new star that's coming up or some new director that's coming up and it's going to do everything and they're not going to have it.
	And so they get really incredibly paranoid and really hate their rivals.
	And I think these people that you're talking about, like Bloomberg, you know, they haven't done anything.
	They know that they don't...
	We need skills to do this stuff.
	And so they're very concerned that somebody's going to come along and take this stuff away from them.
	So we've got to kill these people before they, you know, if we have enough people out there, there's obviously going to be somebody who's going to come up from the masses.
	Well, if we're going to have freedom and a big population, you're going to have people who are going to rise up to these positions to challenge them.
	So they've got to protect themselves by reducing the number of people that are out there and then enforcing, you know, Yeah, I think the key to this, I try to harp on this because I do think it's important, is to understand that their motives are malicious.
	I think a lot of people, normal people, just the default position is when they encounter somebody who's advocating something, well, even if I disagree with that person, They're well intended.
	They may be wrong. They may not have the facts that they need to have.
	But they're not doing this out of a sense of malignancy.
	They're not, you know, trying really deliberately to impose harm or hurt other people.
	I think it's important to understand that that's exactly what's going on.
	Yes. I've said that many times.
	You know, look at Ted Bundy. Really smart guy, looked good.
	How many women did he rape and kill?
	And he raped and killed them because he was able to gain their trust.
	And because they were normal people, they couldn't imagine that somebody would do the kinds of stuff that he did, right?
	And we do that same thing with politicians.
	We project our values onto them.
	I said, the big mistake that we make all the time is failing to realize, A, how evil these people are, and B, how powerful the technology that they are accumulating is.
	Their ability to do it and their willingness to do it, we don't really understand the magnitude of those two things, and that's our biggest danger.
	Yes, exactly. And it becomes evident when you stop to examine a particular case of an individual who refuses to acknowledge much when they made a mistake, a really serious mistake that cost a lot of people harm.
	You know, the fact that a person can't do that, can't humble themselves, we all make mistakes.
	A normal person will say, you know, I messed up.
	I didn't mean to. I thought I was doing the right thing.
	I'm massively sorry about what I've done, and I'll make sure it doesn't happen again.
	No, instead, these people just, they continue to elaborate their lies, to defend their prior lies, so that they can sell us yet another lie, over and over and over again.
	That's right. Yeah, we see that with Trump.
	We see it with Biden. We see it with every one of these guys, right?
	They will never admit to doing anything wrong, as a matter of fact.
	It was those other people. I hired them, you know, as Maria Bartiromo said to him.
	I saw that. But you hired those people.
	Yeah, they were awful. I'll do a better job next time, or whatever.
	It's like, I'm sorry, you've had your turn.
	Next. It's amazing.
	It was amazing to see this guy.
	Well, you know, all of a sudden, I'm president.
	All of a sudden, I'm president, right?
	It's not like he ran for it for a couple of years.
	But all of a sudden, I'm president, and I find myself in this car with Melania, and we've got 250 motorcycles following us.
	I've got armies under my control.
	You know, it's just overwhelming.
	It's so juvenile!
	It's unbelievable! And so incapable of admitting that he did anything wrong.
	But of course, Biden's not going to admit it either.
	They know that that is a fatal weakness.
	They will always make two mistakes rather than admit to one.
	They will double down on that mistake, and they will use that mistake to gain more power.
	They'll use that mistake.
	If it's an agency, they'll use it to enlarge the agency.
	Well, you know, this happened because my agency's too small, so you've got to give me more people for my little empire.
	You know, it's always that failing up, you know?
	So we've got this really difficult problem of dealing with pathological narcissists and pathologically psychopathic people.
	How do you do that?
	How do you do that in the context of politics and society?
	It's one thing if you've got somebody who's in a mental facility and you've got a doctor there and you're trying to treat this person.
	But now you've got people out there who have offices in power and they control the press and they control the corporations.
	And we find ourselves, normal people, in this really just alarming and anxiety-inducing surreal world where standards, as you said earlier before we got on the air together, objective truth doesn't matter.
	Everything's fluid.
	Definitions are changing arbitrarily.
	And there's this miasma of just malevolence out there that has everybody on edge because it's real.
	And we're trying to figure out how do we grapple with this?
	How do we deal with it?
	That's right. If we don't have any values, we're just ships at sea without a rudder.
	And they want that kind of chaos because that allows them to control us.
	It's really key. And I think one of the things, what do we do about it?
	As you say, well, first of all, we've got to understand who these people are.
	Even if we can't do anything about it, we've got to not live by the lie, as Solzhenitsyn said, that these people mean well.
	Or that they know what they're doing, okay?
	Neither one of those things are true.
	We should understand that by now, and we should start trying to educate other people about that.
	And if we understand, and it was just kind of a very, very, very, very slow awakening that I saw throughout this lockdown.
	I was doing everything I could to try to tell people, this is a plan.
	They've been rehearsing this for two decades.
	This is exactly what they wanted to do with the germ games and all the rest of the stuff.
	But it took a while for people to understand that.
	And gradually, as they began to understand it, the response was, well, we're just not going to participate in that anymore.
	And they effectively nullified it by their non-participation.
	They nullified it by their non-fear.
	And so that's the key thing.
	We need to understand that even though these people are powerful, We still hold the balance of power in our numbers.
	And that's one of the reasons why they are so adamant about controlling and censoring speech and the narrative, because that is the high ground.
	If you can control the narrative, you can stop people from realizing what the real truth is and acting upon it.
	And that acting upon it could be just very...
	You know, it could be as simple as just walking away from these people and ignoring them and nullifying by that refusal to cower in fear before them and their imaginary problems, and you just cut the legs out from underneath them.
	And that's the key thing, I think, is that we've got to focus on information, getting around these control things, and we need to understand that the mass of humanity, and there's a tremendous...
	There's inertia involved in this.
	You know, it's like the Titanic.
	You know, we're heading for that iceberg, and you've got some guys on deck.
	It's iceberg, iceberg. And finally, when you realize that the iceberg is there, if you haven't started changing course, there really isn't anything that you can do about it.
	That inertia is, you can't turn that thing on a dime, and you're going to still crash into it.
	We've got to wake people up because we're getting really close to this.
	They want to have their new society in place within six years.
	I know. And it's not going to collapse everything and rebuild in six years.
	I think that it's a mistake to focus exclusively or even predominantly on externalities.
	You know, thinking about, well, who am I going to vote for in the next presidential election?
	How am I going to change my local school board's policies?
	Not that there's anything wrong with that.
	That's a good thing. But I think for Solzhenitsyn, the change is in here, in your mind, in your heart, and rejecting in your own soul the authority of these people.
	And just knowing that these people, they're bad people, and I reject their authority.
	And to the extent that it's possible, I'm going to defy it.
	I'm going to speak truth to it.
	When people ask me something about my opinion on a given topic, I'm going to be forthright and honest, and I'm going to tell them.
	And the more that we do that, the more illegitimate the authority of these people becomes, and it becomes harder and harder for illegitimate authority, or that which is perceived as legitimate, illegitimate, to maintain its hold on power.
	That's right. That's what I think the long-term strategy ought to be.
	That's right. The real power is to get us to live by their lies, even though we know they're not true.
	And to keep the truth from us.
	And so, as you point out, it really is an internal battle.
	And if we know what the truth is, and even if you kind of...
	Solzhenitsyn said, look, I understand.
	Some of you, if you push back against this and you oppose it, you're going to be kicked out of your home because they own all the homes.
	You're going to be living on the street. You're going to have no job, no food, and all that.
	I understand that. So, you know, if you're going to go along with this, at least...
	Don't tell yourself that it's true.
	Don't live by that lie.
	Don't internalize that lie.
	Because if you don't internalize that lie, eventually it will come out.
	And it'll eventually rub off on other people, even in a very slow process.
	And we've seen this happening through authoritarian societies.
	But what we don't want to have happen—it takes a very long time for that to happen—what we don't want to have happen in this fourth turning— Uh, we don't want to have this new technocracy, totalitarian technocracy imposed on us and have to go through 70 years of suffering in order to come out on the other side.
	You know, eventually the next, you know, 70 years from now, the people who are alive will say, all right, that's it.
	You know, we've seen this thing before.
	Uh, we're not going to have this anymore.
	We don't want to go through that.
	And we will go through it if we don't do something in the next five or six years.
	Absolutely right. And it's really about the, about what is happening.
	Yeah. Yeah. One thing that I like to do, or rather that I think it's imperative to do, I'm very committed to deconstructing language that's used and to not letting things pass.
	A good example of it is this term, fast, to describe these EV chargers.
	They're the opposite of fast.
	They're using this verbiage to try to get people to accept...
	Yeah, that's right.
	And it's really important to point that out.
	And of course, you know, if you speed it up, the more you speed it up, the faster your battery is going to die.
	The more likely it is going to be a fire, too.
	Yeah, I even had a listener who is an engineer, worked for Ford for many years, because there's even been discussions about...
	Tracking that internally, whether the car is being fast-charged or trickle-charged or whatever, and recording that and saying, if you do X number of fast charges, we're going to reduce your warranty or void your warranty or something like that.
	Sure. Those types of discussions.
	And so maybe they play games with words, Eric.
	So maybe what they mean by fast is the kind of fast where you don't eat anything.
	Yeah. They starve you of energy and time, you know?
	I did an article the other day about the closing of a loophole.
	You know, I always put that in air fingers, a loophole, you know, by which they're implying that any action that you take to avoid the government controlling you and sticking his hands in your pocket, you're taking advantage of loopholes.
	You're getting away with things.
	It's just vicious etymological warfare that they're waging on people to do that.
	And the loophole in this case, of course, was the state of Vermont would let people who didn't live in Vermont get license plates and register their vehicles, which enabled people in other states to...
	To avoid, you know, luxurious personal property taxes on vehicles, for example, or to keep a non-running or a vehicle that you're working on, a classic car.
	In some states, you're not allowed to have on your property a vehicle that isn't currently licensed and registered, in which case it has to be insured, it has to pass inspection.
	They will come and seize it.
	They will take it off your property.
	So a lot of people in the classic car hobby in particular would mail in for a set of tags and registration from Vermont so that they comply technically with the law.
	They're not doing anything that's quote-unquote illegal, but it still characterizes a loophole.
	And now that loophole has sadly been closed.
	I've got an article on the site if anybody's interested in reading more about that.
	Oh, yeah. I didn't even know about that loophole.
	That would have been great. Because it's not just the many cases that you, circumstances that you just talked about there.
	But I've also found that you're less likely, unless you're living somewhere where there's a bunch of tourists, you know, like where we are in Florida, you know, they don't worry about giving tourists tickets.
	They like to do that. Yeah. You know, if you're somewhere else, I've found, if you've got an out-of-state license plate, they don't hit you for a lot of little tiny stuff, right?
	And so even having an out-of-state license from Vermont would help you get out of some nuisance types of harassment tickets that you might get if they think that you're one of their subjects in that particular state.
	I know about that.
	Well, there's another aspect of this that you might find interesting, which is tragic.
	I put them in air fingers quotes.
	My colleagues in the car press are responsible for the closing of this loophole because they wrote a number of articles just moaning about the fact that people could get away with Getting tags and registering their vehicles in Vermont to get away with not paying personal property taxes, not complying with all of the various UKZs that exist in all of these other states.
	So as a result of that publicity, the state of Vermont has decided to change their policy, and now you have to be a resident of Vermont.
	Or you have to get a document from your state's DMV that says they're okay with you getting your tags and registration in Vermont, which of course no state can do.
	Wow. You know, you talk about the automotive press and what sellouts they've become.
	And we see this happening with mainstream media.
	You know, we've got to censor more.
	You're not censoring enough.
	You know, take this person down. You had people like Oliver Darcy at CNN and, you know...
	Pointing the finger at people. Censor this guy.
	Shut him down. But that's what it's become.
	You've got these journalists who don't like free speech.
	They don't like independent thought.
	And they like an authoritarian government.
	And they're always cheerleading for the government to shut people down.
	You see the same thing in the automotive press.
	I don't even look at any of the other sites anymore.
	I go to your site and look at what you're talking about with cars.
	Because you're talking about real cars.
	They talk about... These hypercars that cost several million dollars, they cheerlead for everything that the government wants in terms of electric vehicles and total surveillance and control of your vehicle.
	They have become completely captive to the government agenda.
	It's really disgusting. So I love your site, epautos.com.
	Because people can go there, they can get real reviews of real cars that are out there, and also the analysis of what is happening to our freedom, because mobility is a big part of freedom.
	The two things are very intricately linked, and you get that.
	These other people don't.
	It's amazing to see that.
	You got an article before we run out of time.
	Tell us a little bit about the Challenger Black Ghosts.
	Because that was really a nice-looking Challenger, one of the nicest-looking ones I've seen.
	Tell us a little bit about that car and what has happened to it.
	Well, it's the last hurrah.
	You know, as you probably know, the Challenger and its sister vehicle, the four-door Charger, as well as the Chrysler 300, are being forced off the market.
	Sorry, I was telling Travis.
	They're being forced off the market.
	So they're trying to go out with a bang.
	And this is a pretty big bang.
	The Black Ghost is a limited edition version of the Challenger.
	It has an 807 horsepower supercharged V8. I was privileged to get my hands on this thing and drive it for a week.
	Wow. And it was a very bittersweet thing for me because...
	I remember reading, when I was a kid, and this is back in the 70s, I read an article and it was called, It Shall Not Pass This Way Again.
	And it was kind of an encomium to the very last of the big engine Pontiac Trans Ams, which you'll probably remember.
	In 1979, that was the last year that Pontiac was able to offer the 400 cubic inch big V8 in that car, which had been effectively forced off the road by the same sorts of things that are forcing cars like the Challenger off the road.
	So I just wistfully remembered that article that I read when I was probably 12 or 13 years old and thought, here I am.
	You know, now I'm in the position of being able to get my hands on what is going to be, you know, the last of the line.
	We'll never see these things again.
	It shall not pass this way again.
	And it's very sad.
	You know, I saw your article there, and I read it, and I didn't realize that the Pontiac Trans Am had a bigger engine than the Corvette did at the time.
	I thought that was kind of the same corporation running the stuff, you know, and the Corvette's like supposedly their flagship sports car, but the Trans Am had the bigger engine in it.
	I didn't realize that. And that's one of the reasons why that car was just about the most popular car of its type back in the 70s, because it was special.
	It was something different. And it's the same thing.
	Today, the Challenger is extraordinarily popular because there's nothing else like it.
	You know, it's a big, hulking, wonderful car.
	It's got this gigantic engine.
	You can get it with the supercharger.
	You know, the Camaro and Mustang are fine cars, but they're just not the same thing as that.
	And now Dodge is going to get rid of this car that people love.
	You know, that they're lining up to buy.
	That they can't build fast enough to meet demand.
	They're going to get rid of it in favor of a battery-powered appliance next year to placate the government.
	Doesn't that tell us everything? You know, that's ESG in a nutshell there.
	And of course, you know, that's an appropriate name to call it the Black Ghost because they're going to ghost these cars.
	You know, they're, they're, you know, walking dead and, and they don't care at all what, uh, their, their, uh, people are looking for.
	And they've got one customer that they want to please.
	And that's the government.
	And it's the global government that they want to please.
	That's why you see all this stuff like, um, you know, Bud Light and all the rest of it.
	They have nothing but contempt for their customers, uh, let alone their employees.
	You know, we're talking about Henry Ford and how, well, I want to make sure that my employees can afford this car as well.
	No, they don't even care if their customers can afford the car or anything else.
	They've got one organization that they want to please.
	And it is just amazing because you see so much money that has been sucked into Washington.
	I was talking about when DeSantis had his report and he had, I think, $20 million that he had in donations or something like that over a period of time.
	And the same period of time, he got $130 million in a PAC that was supporting him.
	And so you think about that. That's $150 million.
	Going back to the 2000 election, Al Gore criticized George W. Bush for all of his combined spending of PACs and everything else was $100 million.
	And Al Gore said, I only spent $70 million.
	And here you have just one candidate.
	Who is almost there.
	To knock him, I mean, that's what this has happened.
	But when you look at how much money has come into this, that's why they've only got one customer.
	That's why you've got ESG, because they have sucked up everything.
	It's amazing. And a facet of this that speaks to the degree of the tragedy, this car, this Challenger, 807 horsepower.
	Think about that. That's a race car.
	That is 80-85% of what a Nextel Cup stock car has.
	I've driven Nextel Cup stock cars.
	This car has air conditioning.
	This car is a car you can drive to work every day.
	This car produces essentially no meaningfully harmful pollution, but it produces carbon dioxide that dread inert gas, right?
	So think about it.
	I mean, the engineers have managed to produce this work of art, really, this amazing thing that is more powerful than any car like it that has ever existed, that is environmentally innocuous by any objective standard.
	And they shut it down. And they shut it down.
	Because it wasn't even about the gas.
	That was just smoke and mirrors, you know, because as Toyota says, as soon as they say, we can do that, they say, well, no, we want you to do this.
	Thanks for joining us, Eric.
	Always great talking to you.
	EPAutos.com for freedom and mobility.
	Thank you, Eric. Appreciate it. Has your news been censored, banned, censored, banned over and over again?
	Has vital information been held prisoner by mainstream and anti-social media?
	It's the duty of every thinking person to make the great escape to TheDavidKnightShow.com.
	There you'll find links to live streams, videos, audio podcasts, and support links.
	Live stream the show at DLive and every Monday through Friday, 9 a.m.
	Eastern. Videos at Bitshoot and Ugetube.
	New audio podcasts, The Real David Knight Show, at Podbean, iTunes, Stitcher, iHeart, and more.
	But even though there's a light at the end of the tunnel, without your support, the show will run out of gas.
	The links to support this show are at TheDavidKnightShow.com to donate via Subscribestar, donate via *, or donate via *, Cash App, Bitcoin, or P.O. Box.
	Our sincere thanks to all of you who have stood with us to get this call.

▲