Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Sept. 15, 2023 - The David Knight Show

03:28:16

The David Knight Show - 09/15/2023

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	Using free speech to free minds.
	Music.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	As the clock strikes 13, it's Friday the 15th of September.
	Year of our Lord, 2023.
	Well, today we're going to take a short break from politics and we're going to talk about the implications of technology.
	But, actually, technology has now become political, hasn't it?
	It has now become a political weapon.
	Of course, technology is just a tool, but it depends on who wields it and for what purpose.
	And so we're going to take a look at some of the tools that they're creating.
	We can imagine how it can be abused.
	And based on who is creating it and who will control it, we can get a glimpse as to where these people are going.
	We always misunderstand, as Bush would say, the evil in men's hearts and the technology in their hands.
	hands.
	We'll be right back.
	Well, we'll begin with we'll begin with an example of what is happening.
	As artificial intelligence is taking over journalism, if you will, for profit.
	This is one of the reasons this is being put in.
	And we had an amazing example of this.
	And unfortunately, it was part of an obituary.
	And so this is not to make fun of the person who died, Brandon Hunter, the former professional basketball player.
	But it's to show what artificial intelligence is doing.
	As you have Microsoft turning over their sports section to AI, I just want you to remember that it was Microsoft that came out with NewsGuard, right?
	They're going to guard us against disinformation, misinformation, you know, it's going to be very truthy.
	And then, of course, they also came out with ElectionGuard.
	ElectionGuard is operated on a $10 million grant from DARPA. So you have the intelligence community, the Pentagon, running our elections, if you hadn't noticed by now.
	But it is, so in order to, I wonder how NewsGuard is going to rate this Microsoft site.
	It's actually called Racetrack.
	But of course, there's no human identified in this.
	The byline says, story is by editor.
	Just call him Ed for short, I guess.
	And so here's the title, About the Death of Brandon Hunter.
	Brandon Hunter, useless at 42.
	What? Now, they took this down, but of course, you can always find the archive of these things.
	And that's why they're going to take down the Internet Archive.
	They want to memory hole everything.
	I'll just read it for you.
	It's very brief here. Former NBA participant, participant, Brandon Hunter, who beforehand performed for the...
	Boston Celtics and for Orlando Magic has handed away.
	Handed away. I guess it meant passed away.
	On the age of 42.
	I mean, the English is just...
	It's like a non-English speaking person.
	I remember years ago.
	Karen's brother is an artist, and he would participate in Photoshop contests and stuff like this.
	Very creative stuff that was done.
	And this is about a decade ago.
	Actually, it's even longer than that.
	So maybe about 15, 20 years ago.
	And it would never be allowed today, but they would have different themes and they would have people do joke Photoshop stuff.
	And one of the themes that they did over and over again was English.
	You know, when you get these instructions for something's made in China and they don't quite get the instructions correct.
	And that's what this reminds me of.
	The one I'll never forget was somebody made a tombstone or something like that.
	It said, many saddenings for this extinguished gentleman.
	And that's the way this thing reads.
	So he was handed away.
	On the age of 42, as introduced by Ohio Males basketball coach, M-A-L-E-S, Jeff Bowles on Tuesday, Hunter, initially a extremely regarded high school basketball participant, and again, a highly regarded basketball Not an extremely, but a extremely highly regarded.
	High school is one word that they put in there.
	Not two words.
	He achieved vital success as a ahead for the Bobcaps.
	Uh... I don't know what they're trying to get at.
	We'll show you what the original one was that it copied.
	Because that's another key part of this.
	Not only is it that the corporations don't really care about anything.
	You know, here's Microsoft that created NewsGuard.
	They don't care about any of that stuff.
	And they also don't care about plagiarism.
	Because this is what this is.
	This is outright theft. And all that artificial intelligence did, it stole the story, and it sprinkled its misconceptions about the English language throughout it.
	He earned three first-team all-MAC convention alternatives and led the NCAA in rebounding throughout his senior season.
	Hunter's expertise led to his choice.
	Because the 56th general decide within the 2003 NBA draft.
	Throughout his NBA profession, he performed in 67 video games over two seasons and achieved a career high of 17 factors.
	17 factors in a recreation in opposition to Milwaukee Bucks in 2004.
	Well, so what did this originally come from?
	Not only is it incredibly stupid, sloppy work, but it's actually plagiarism.
	Microsoft's MSN News Portal for Sports racetrack.
	Uh-huh, yeah, kind of like a warp speed version of the news.
	A garbled, seemingly AI-generated article, yeah, right, that derided Hunter as useless in its headline.
	One person said, AI should not be writing obituaries.
	Pay your writers, MSN. And one person said, the most dystopian part of this is that AI, which replaces us, will be as obtuse and stupid as this translation.
	Yeah, maybe AI should stand for autonomous idiocracy.
	But for the money men, they said, they don't care.
	It's enough. It's enough to have something like this, just to put the content out.
	And Futurism comments and says it's not the first time that Microsoft, a major backer of ChatGBT and OpenAI, Has embarrassed itself with AI-generated content on MSN. It made headlines last month after publishing a similarly incoherent AI-generated travel guide for Ottawa, Canada that bizarrely recommended that tourists visit a local food bank.
	And then they deleted that article as well.
	The article was not published by an unsupervised AI, said the senior director at Microsoft at the time.
	In this case, the content was generated through a combination of algorithmic techniques with human review.
	Really? Well, it's hard to believe that a human would not see something like that.
	The full story is that back in 2020, MSN fired the team of human journalists responsible for vetting content published on its platform.
	As a result, as Futurism reported last year, the platform ended up syndicating a large number of sloppy articles about topics as dubious as Bigfoot and mermaids, which it then deleted after we pointed them out.
	On their About Us page, it ensures the content that we show aligns with our values through human oversight.
	Futurism said that strains credibility.
	Take the original publisher of the piece on Hunter's death, a publication going by the name of Racetrack.
	Red flags abound, starting with the fact that its articles are bylined simply by the anonymous editor.
	And despite having almost 100,000 followers on Facebook, the site's content gets almost zero engagement there.
	Probably just people going for a laugh.
	One particularly ridiculous article profiles a, quote, corridor of fame.
	See, it's been told it's going to copy this stuff.
	From other people and plagiarize it, but it's got to make a few changes.
	So instead of calling it a Hall of Fame, it calls it a Corridor of Fame.
	And so in this article about Corridor of Fame, they profiled a football player that they called Pleasure Taylor.
	Which is actually the NFL Hall of Famer Joy Taylor.
	So you change Hall to Corridor and you change Joy to Pleasure.
	That makes perfectly good sense.
	You know, we went to China, what was it, about 15, 16 years ago?
	I don't know. But we went there to adopt our daughter.
	They had, you know, piracy is the name of the game there, and plagiarism and copyright stuff.
	And I actually had to, I bought this thing.
	I thought it was so hilarious. It was a pair of pants for a little girl, and it had Mickey and Disney on there.
	It was clearly a copyright violation.
	And they called it the Disney Bird Sanctuary, was what it was supposed to be about.
	But, you know, it's an excuse for you to buy some merchandise with Mickey and Minnie on it.
	And whoever put that stuff on there for them in English had a wicked sense of humor.
	Because underneath Disney Bird Sanctuary, they put a manifestation of ignorance and greed.
	And that's what this is.
	Microsoft and their Racetrack articles are a manifestation of ignorance and greed.
	Upon closer examination, the articles aren't just visibly low quality, but they're also plagiarized.
	Take the article about Hunter's death.
	It follows the exact same structure as a TMZ sports story about his death.
	Here's the first line of TMZ's write-up.
	They say...
	Former Boston Celtics, or Celtics, I guess it is.
	And that's the other thing, too.
	You never know exactly how to kind of the Americanized way to say it, or do you say it the way that the other people do in the native land?
	Anyway, the Boston team, the Orlando team player, Brandon Hunter has died.
	Ohio men's basketball coach, Jeff Bowles, said Tuesday.
	He was just 42 years old.
	Now, this is the way, as it went through and made some crucial changes so that it didn't look like plagiarism.
	Former NBA participant, right, instead of player, Brandon Hunter, who beforehand performed for the Boston Celtics and Orlando Magic, has handed away, again, not passed away, but they had said died, On the age of 42, as introduced by Ohio males basketball coach Jeff Bowles on Tuesday instead of Ohio men's basketball coach.
	Males a basketball coach.
	And then here's the next two paragraphs of the TMZ story.
	Hunter, a standout high school hoops player in Cincinnati, was a star forward for the Bobcats.
	Earning three first-team All-Mac Conference or MAC Conference selections, leading the NCAA and rebounding his senior year, before being taken with the 56th overall pick in the 2003 NBA Draft.
	He played 67 games over two seasons in the association, scoring a career-high 17 points against the Milwaukee Bucks in 2004.
	But then when you run it through the autonomous idiocracy machine...
	It comes out, Hunter, initially an extremely regarded high school student.
	In other words, instead of a standout high school hoops player.
	Basketball participant in Cincinnati.
	So he was a standout high school hoops player in Cincinnati.
	Achieved vital success as a head for the Bobcats.
	They say was a star forward.
	I guess that's what ahead, right?
	Instead of forward, they translated as ahead.
	And then they say, he earned three first-team all MAC convention alternatives, which they just copied directly.
	And then led the NCAA in rebounding throughout his senior season.
	Hunter's expertise led to his choice because the 56th general decide within the 2003 NBA draft.
	Which means that before being taken as a 56th overall pick.
	When you think about this, think about Intelligence involved here.
	And this is a perfect illustration of what people have been saying.
	It's just kind of like grabbing this stuff and rehashing it.
	Plagiarizing it and reorganizing it.
	And then changing words that are synonyms, but has no sense of the overall context in which these words are used.
	So instead of a forward, I say an ahead.
	Instead of men, I say males.
	Right? Except it comes in total gibberish.
	They said everywhere else we looked on other racetrack articles on MSN, clearly ripped off from other publishers.
	The pleasure tailor item is evidently a mangled version of a blog by Cold War.
	Cold Wire, rather.
	A story about potholes in the UK is a butchered version of a piece in Auto Car.
	And a post about tennis star Novak Djokovic is lifted from Tennis World.
	So, again, that's one aspect of it.
	But you know what? Neither the human nor the AI will talk about or investigate is why he died suddenly.
	See, that's the elephant in the room as well.
	And we can get distracted with this fake stuff out there.
	But they don't want to ask why he died suddenly, why so many athletes are dying suddenly who don't realize that Trump's shot has damaged their heart like a major heart attack.
	And so we have artificial intelligence.
	So how's it going to be used? Well, the IRS says it's going to use it to bust tax cheaters.
	Oh, isn't that a pleasant thought?
	As if the IRS were not insolent enough and apathetic enough and coming up with nonsense over and over again, the mind-numbing nonsense.
	They take your tax return and they essentially change it into something like artificial intelligence does in the first place.
	And now they're going to have the AI do a deep dive on people's tax returns.
	All these imagined infractions that they're going to find.
	And that's a big part of it.
	You know, it's not just the army of people.
	80,000 new IRS agents.
	But it's also the fact that Biden wanted $80 billion, which is, I think, something like seven times what the current entire budget of the IRS is.
	Increase it with an amount that is seven times what the current budget is.
	Make it eight times bigger. The Republicans, being small government people themselves, said, no, we'll only make it five times bigger.
	And patted themselves on the back for that.
	Or give it an increase that is five times bigger.
	So it'll be six times as big as it is, instead of eight times.
	That's your difference between Democrats and Republicans.
	And so when this is looked at in this article by Maggie Harrison, she's not concerned about this.
	She actually kind of is excited.
	Oh, these really super rich people are finally going to get their comeuppance, right?
	She has no understanding of the way this whole thing is set up and no understanding of the history of the income tax code.
	The income tax, when it first came out, was about income.
	It wasn't about work.
	It wasn't about wages. It was about income.
	It was about investments only.
	And it was targeting the 1% of the 1% only.
	And then in World War II, they said, well, we're going to make it a temporary wage tax for the duration of the war.
	And at the end of the war, they didn't take it away.
	Instead, what they did was they started putting out on their annual instruction sheet that they would mail to you.
	So thank you for voluntarily participating in this thing.
	If you don't voluntarily participate in it, they send the men with guns at you, right?
	So the whole thing has been, and as we all know, they come after everybody at every level.
	And that's the way these government programs metastasize.
	But she doesn't think that's going to happen with this.
	No, not at all. You thought AI was only being used to eliminate the jobs of the working class?
	Well, it sounds like maybe it's going to be used against the wealthy for a change.
	There we go. Yeah, that envy.
	They can always use envy.
	To push their socialism and their Marxism.
	In a Monday press release, the IRS announced that part of the renewed effort to ensure fairness and to crack down on the filthy rich cheaters.
	And that's the headline that she has here.
	The IRS says it's using AI to bust zillionaire tax cheats.
	And the subtitle is, Honestly?
	Go off, IRS. In other words, go for it.
	Yeah, I want to see these rich people squirm.
	Lest you're worried about the tech being aimed at the poor, she said the release says, this is what the IRS and the government says, you can trust this, quote, the groundbreaking collaboration among experts in data science and tax enforcement will focus primarily on taxpayers with annual income of over a million dollars and more than $250,000 in tax debt in addition to large corporate bodies.
	Wow, isn't that nice?
	So, instead of artificial intelligence, it goes out and plagiarizes articles that have been written by somebody else.
	Traditional journalism has gone out and repackaged government press releases.
	And press releases from other people.
	I'm serious. I used to write the press releases for the Libertarian Party back in the early 90s.
	And was involved with the campaigns of some of the candidates.
	And we'd put the stuff out.
	If it was ever picked up by the press...
	They would pick it up and they would never call us.
	We'd make statements about what was happening.
	This tax has this history and it's this big and it's equivalent to that.
	We'd make all kinds of statements like that and they would never call us to question us about any of this stuff or to verify any of the details that we were expecting they would.
	Instead, they would print it or they wouldn't.
	And if they did print it, they would just plagiarize it.
	And that's what she did with this IRS press release.
	She just repackages that into an article and wraps her envy around it, is what she did.
	The IRS will open examinations of, quote, 75 of the largest partnerships in the U.S., unquote.
	And according to the IRS, she says, again, she's just quoting the IRS. She's just...
	It's no wonder the suits in the corporate offices say, we can get rid of these people.
	I can find AI that can regurgitate press releases from the government if that's the way we're going to write stories, right?
	On average, according to the IRS, these partnerships retain more than $10 billion in assets.
	Okay, so here's a question for her.
	You believe this.
	You believe the story that the IRS is giving you.
	So let me just ask you this.
	If they're going to go after 75 of the largest partnerships in the U.S., why do they need artificial intelligence?
	Why do they need so much computing power?
	Why do they need so many people?
	Well, here's the answer, lady.
	Because it isn't about the rich, you know, the zillionaires, as you put it.
	It's about all of us.
	This is going to be used against Americans.
	They need all of these people and they need all this artificial intelligence because they've got a lot of tax returns to look at.
	And they got a lot of money to steal.
	Another example, the plagiarism of The AV Club's AI-generated articles are copying directly from IMDB. It was a site, the AV Club, and they said it used to be a benchmark.
	I've never noticed this before.
	It used to be a benchmark for pop culture writing on the net.
	Now it is a private equity ghost town pumping out AI-generated listicles instead of articles, listicles.
	The company that bought it, GO Media, with the fallout, the GO editorial director, Merrill Brown, sent out an internal memo instructing staff to ignore the criticism.
	Was this a memo that was sent to artificial intelligence?
	By the way, just ignore this criticism.
	Don't bring it back into some of your articles.
	To calibrate your expectations, they said, here's a disclaimer that a company's articles by the AV Club bought.
	They even say, quote, That it was copied directly from IMDB. And it wasn't...
	I won't give you any examples of this.
	There's plenty of them in this article.
	But the actuality is that they didn't begin with that information.
	They didn't add anything to it.
	They didn't even rewrite it in this particular case.
	Like Microsoft did when they turned it into English.
	They just put it back out exactly as it was.
	Which brings us to the alien mummies in Mexico.
	When I saw that, I thought it was hilarious.
	I said, look at this.
	It looks just like E.T. How could that be?
	Did Steven Spielberg know something?
	Even to the, you know, E.T. had three very long fingers, if you remember, and a thumb.
	This one had a thumb and two very long fingers.
	I guess it was too difficult for them to make that third finger.
	But this is something that was a dog and pony show for the Mexican Congress.
	But I think it's a perfect metaphor for both the artificial intelligence and the UFO stuff that is floating around now in the media.
	It really is, I think.
	And these people who have been doing, you know, I don't know if this guy was purposely trolling.
	He's done this type of thing before.
	I don't know if he was purposely trolling The people in Washington, the UFO people in Washington.
	But if he wasn't doing it on purpose, he sure did a great job, inadvertently.
	And they were very upset about this.
	And I said, look, he's discrediting what we're doing here.
	No, he's showing what you're doing here.
	You were just a little smarter.
	You didn't produce a model.
	He said, well, you know, I got to tell you, we found bodies, but I can't tell anything else about it.
	He actually produced a little, literally produced a couple little bodies that looked like ET and came up with some stories about DNA testing and things like that.
	But he's been caught doing fraud before.
	But again, he was allowed to do this with the Mexican Congress.
	And I'm just imagining that Senator John Kennedy from L.A. just can't wait for this guy to come on to his committee.
	Because he's always doing stuff like this.
	Or Jim Jordan. You know, he's getting a lot of attention for this if he hasn't come on.
	These are non-human beings who are not part of our terrestrial evolution, they'd said.
	Former U.S. Navy fighter pilot Ryan Graves, who's been pushing the UFO stuff, Said, this is a huge step backwards for this issue.
	Yeah, they've done a great deal to try to make this look serious.
	Even calling it UAP instead of UFO. Because now it's very different, right?
	If you talk about UFOs, this type of thing that we just saw with the Mexican Congress is typically what people want.
	So they've got to rebrand it, relabel it.
	And this guy's stunt has set them back.
	It truly has.
	Well, we're going to take a quick break, and we'll be right back.
	Thank you.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Wow.
	Well, I want to continue a little bit longer with the tech stuff.
	And by the way, in the third hour, we'll have Dr.
	Shivaya Dure, who will be joining us.
	And he'll be doing a joint stream, I think, of the program when he joins us.
	But... Again, going back to the new textiles that have been designed by the National Intelligence Agency, the Intelligence Community, the Director of National Intelligence, funded by IARPA, which is the intelligence equivalent to DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Projects.
	And, of course, there's another one about biology, and that's BARDA. So, you know, they've got...
	That's why I say, just as Eisenhower warned us about the military-industrial complex, he also warned us about the research and academic part of that.
	You know, people typically drop that off.
	But that was the other part of it.
	And how they were going to take over all research.
	And weaponize it against us.
	And this article from Children's Health Defense actually goes into a little bit more detail, showing some of the slides that they were putting out.
	I think it is interesting that their cover story is that it's about better health monitoring.
	Is that what the intelligence agencies are really about?
	I mean, it's like, you know, looking at this Boston Dynamics thing.
	When you look at it, you know what they're doing with that.
	But no, it's there to help little old ladies across the street, right?
	Because we just don't have enough Boy Scouts anymore.
	So this is not about better health monitoring.
	It's a ludicrous cover story.
	That's not their mission.
	And when you look at their slides, and pull this up, Travis, and show this slide they have, they talk about integrated audio, video, and geolocation sensor systems.
	There's no biometric sensors in this.
	Instead, what you see with their thing, and this is almost like a satire, smart e-pants.
	Perhaps it is a satire, except that they've said that they've had $22 million, they've awarded research contracts, and they've got companies like Nautilus Defense and others.
	If it wasn't for all of this, and the fact that it didn't come out of the Pentagon, I think they're pulling our legs.
	But actually, they're monitoring our legs and everything else.
	And they do call it EPANTS and SMART. Self-monitoring and reporting technology.
	Smart EPANTS. But they say that it's sensing events.
	And they're specific about this.
	Again, I'm assuming that this is true.
	I mean, these people have done stranger stuff in the past.
	60 minutes of verbal conversation that it can record.
	A 55 degree field of view, 360 monochromatic photographs in terms of looking, so it does listening, looking, and locating.
	Doesn't sound to me like it's about health, does it?
	Sounds like it's something produced by the spies.
	It can also do optical character recognition, OCR reading, of 12 point text, and it's a 2 minute monochromatic video.
	And then determining location over the course of one hour without reliance on satellite navigation.
	SRI International, MIT, ARITA have received undisclosed amounts to develop this technology.
	And this is from an article in The Intercept.
	So multiple people have talked about this at this official government release.
	It does sound like a satire, especially with the name Smarty Pants.
	But it appears to be real.
	And what is fake is any cover story.
	Smarty Pants program director, Dawson Cagle, traced the inspiration for the program to a desire for better health monitoring options for his diabetic father.
	Yeah. Talking about how they're going to put the products into diapers.
	This is why Judge Napolitano said CIA wants to get into your pants.
	Into diapers, into masks, and I can definitely see that.
	You know, you want video, you want audio, and you want to trace people, put it in the mask.
	Even to the extent that other people are looking at, of course, this kind of surveillance is something that is being done without people's consent, privacy, and the age of big data, and the Internet of Things.
	And we're going to see a lot of this type of stuff because 5G, that Trump was so manic about getting out, if you remember that, the only thing they were concerned about was not our health, not about surveillance.
	But it is the infrastructure for surveillance.
	And it's one of the reasons why the U.S. government was so concerned about 5G being based on top of Chinese technology and companies and chips.
	They want to be in control of all the spying in this country, not the Chinese.
	So they're spending billions of dollars for this.
	And of course, who knows how much they're spending.
	Because when you look at the intelligence agency, the CIA, they've got a big black budget.
	They make lots and lots of money from selling drugs, from human trafficking, from blackmail and all the rest of this stuff.
	I mean, who knows how much money they really have, and you're not going to see any of that.
	They don't report it on their IRS tax forms, I think.
	We need to have an electronic privacy bill of rights as the bottom line, regardless of what this is or when they're going to rule it out, according to John Whitehead.
	And he's exactly right.
	He said, most judges don't understand this.
	Most are either so pro-government or pro-police that they're going to do anything to get around it and to say that it is constitutional.
	He said, realistically, there is no way to escape it.
	So the only hope that we have, says John Whitehead, Is if enough people will get vigilant for freedom and we can establish some kind of electronic privacy bill of rights that will limit what these people can do or have some real penalties to it because they don't pay any attention to the Constitution.
	But I think it's important, if you had an electronic bill of rights, you would at least identify this for people, what the issues are.
	But there's no interest at all in Congress.
	This is going to have to happen, as John Whitehead pointed out from the bottom up, from the grassroots up, from UNI up.
	He said, education precedes action.
	So I'm telling people to get educated about what's going on and to understand this.
	And that is why we covered it.
	And as all of that is happening, Wall Street Journal says, well, it's now finally time to add some smart tech to your dumb home.
	Really? Yeah, you see, smart technology is for dumb people.
	Not for dumb homes, but for dumb people.
	Smart lights, smart locks, smart thermostats are ready for prime time thanks to a new era.
	Just spelled that E-R-R-O-R. Of cooperation among tech giants and a new software standard.
	They're cooperating. The new standard is called MATTER. MATTER. The matter of the universe.
	The matter of their artificial universe that they are creating.
	Well, you might want to think twice about that.
	If you look at what happened in Las Vegas this last week, Over a dozen MGM hotels and casino properties have halted their back-end computer systems due to an ongoing and severe cyber attack that was initially reported on Sunday, but it's much, much bigger than that.
	Nothing is working in these hotels.
	Guests are, if they can check in, and people are still trying to check in with all this chaos that's going on.
	You've got guests who are already there who are locked out of their room because everything has been smartified.
	We've been smartified and we've got everything under computer control.
	So when somebody hacks in and takes this system over, they own everything.
	And so as Wall Street Journal is saying, now is the time.
	Go out and buy those smart appliances and all that, you know, the ring cameras so the government can constantly watch you and all the rest of this stuff.
	Now is the time to get all that stuff.
	So every single subsystem with MGM hotels and casinos, every single subsystem, their payments were offline.
	And I didn't realize just how many hotels are owned by MGM. I knew about the big green one that's there.
	And we were there once.
	We used to go to Vegas for business conventions and stuff like that back when we had the video stores.
	It was horrible.
	I said, we must be pretty low down on the list because the convention every year was in August.
	Go to Vegas for an August with the heat.
	But computer systems at all MGM properties have been shut down for the immediate future until this issue is resolved.
	The gaming tables are not working.
	The slot machines are not working.
	The ATMs are not working.
	The doors are not working on the motel rooms.
	So restaurants are cash only.
	See? When the system goes down, and this is one of the reasons I'm talking about this, I don't really care about the casinos in Vegas, and you probably don't either.
	But when the system goes down, and it will go down, I mean, when you look at this, it's going to be an act of war, whether it's from the outside or whether it's an inside job.
	They are going to take down the digital infrastructure that we have.
	Because you look at how dependent everybody is on it.
	Right now, it's being done for ransomware by criminals.
	But once the state actors start getting involved in this, it's going to be really big.
	You don't necessarily even have to have an EMP to do that kind of damage.
	And if it's done by a state actor, they're not interested in restoring anything if they get the money back.
	MGM's hotels were the Aria, the Cosmo, the Bellagio, the MGM, and the Mandalay Bay.
	They have all of those, and they are all shut down.
	At the MGM Grand, 80% of slot machines were down because of a network era.
	We can spell it there as E-R-A instead of E-R-R-O-R. Many reports of a ransomware attack.
	One person says, I wonder how long they can hold out before they pay, commenting on this.
	Another one says, it's chaos at MGM. Ordinary keys are opening all rooms as if they were master keys.
	So first they get locked out.
	Then now the keys work and they work on everybody's room.
	But look, for the homeowner, the big threat is government.
	And there may be eventually robbers.
	Maybe if somebody's really, really wealthy, the robbers will work on their smart stuff to get in.
	But anyway, they still have long, long lines for people trying to check in, which is really amazing.
	No matter how many times, you can see these types of problems, and that's why it's so difficult to get people to care about surveillance and what the government is doing, is because even when you see it breaking down, People still want to believe in this system.
	And so they want to believe in this so badly that they're still checking in to the Vegas hotels.
	And they can't check in because computers are down.
	What do they think they're going to do when they get in?
	It's clear published reports have only scratched the surface.
	Reported 10.7 million people affected.
	And sources say that the data breach actually contained records of 200 million people.
	Financial records, apparently, of people who had bought stuff.
	They now have that.
	So that's the MGM Hotels in Vegas.
	Toyota. Toyota production grinds to a halt due to an epic IT failure.
	Or was it a hack?
	It's hard to tell.
	You know, they may have tried to cover this up because they don't want to make it look like their fair game and that they had to pay blackmail.
	But their story about how this happened doesn't really help them too much.
	Their story about what happened, if true, if it wasn't a hack, if it was what Toyota says happened with their supply lines, that's even more ridiculous, even more incompetent.
	One of the world's leading automakers recently had to suspend operations in 12 of its 14 Japan-based factories due to a massive IT failure resulting in daily production loss of approximately 13,000 cars per day.
	So 12 out of 14 shut down.
	So again, when you look at this, when are foreign hackers going to attack our infrastructure?
	Or when will it be something like this?
	They said this happened because of planned maintenance.
	They said the company has confirmed that the root cause of the problem was its database servers running out of storage space.
	Seriously? You didn't see that happening?
	And they said that because it was based on that, they said we would like to reiterate that this system malfunction was not due to a cyber attack.
	It was due to our overwhelming stupidity.
	The malfunction, they said, had a domino effect on the production ordering system, rendering it incapable of planning and executing any production tasks.
	Then what exacerbated the situation was that both the main and the backup servers operated on the same system.
	Oh, okay.
	Well, then it's not a backup, is it?
	They're not independent of each other.
	And they ran out of this space.
	Yeah, that doesn't really help, does it?
	And then finally, when you take a look at where these people want to go, they want to hack not just our homes and our cars or our factories or our infrastructure.
	They want to hack our bodies.
	And that is the key thing.
	And so this is a CNET article that was a couple of months ago.
	They were talking about bionic eyes.
	And the subtitle of it was, We Could Be Able to Manipulate Our Own Reality.
	So let's have some bionic eyes.
	They talk about two different ways that they would do it.
	Now, of course, Neuralink is looking at this and saying, well, if we can hack into your brain...
	Then what we can do is we can give you some visor that you wear, and then that can transmit this information to your brain.
	But then, of course, that means the Neuralink's approach to get into your brain, they actually have to, you know, open up your head, your skull, and put this chip literally on top of your brain.
	These people have a different approach.
	Instead of opening up your brain, they want to open up your eye and put a chip in your eye.
	And so they call this the science eye.
	They said it will be implanted on top of your eye and or inside the eyeballs of human patients who are suffering from diseases.
	One of the reasons that they talked about this and they liked it so much was because it involves a couple of different things.
	It involves this Neuralink type of technology and electronics along with some genetic modification of you.
	Isn't that great? Isn't technology wonderful?
	So they showed off a brief demo to these reporters of a kind of vision that someone with Science Eye might have.
	And it was just kind of red pixels dancing around a screen.
	A view of a street and of humans waving their hands.
	And they said, so to make sense of this, we first need to deliver a gene.
	To a specific region of the eye and demonstrate that it can generate electrical signals in regions of the brain responsible for controlling sight.
	And then to explain their idea of the eye, the writers of this CNET article say, Your eye and your brain are involved in a frantic dance.
	Enlivened by a storm of light and electrical signals.
	Isn't that nice? It's science for arts and lovers.
	Poets. Very poetic.
	This dance has been honed by millions of years of evolution.
	What absolute nonsense.
	I mean, how can you look at something so detailed as the human brain and the human eye?
	Even Darwin, with his crude, primitive understanding and his crude, primitive tools.
	Remember when we went to the British Museum, Travis, and we went to the Darwin exhibit?
	They had a shrine, a little shrine to Darwin.
	And he didn't even have a good microscope.
	He had like a Sherlock Holmes magnifying glass that he's looking at stuff with.
	It's like, no wonder. He thought that life was spontaneously generating out of ponds, out of stagnant water.
	All he had was this little microscope.
	He had very primitive tools, and he had a very primitive understanding.
	But even Darwin referred to the eye, and he said, that's complicated enough.
	Without really understanding all the inner workings of the eye like we do today, he said, that is so complicated enough.
	It'd be hard for that to evolve.
	He thought that was a real problem with his theory of evolution.
	But these people have swallowed it whole.
	They don't think it's a problem at all.
	And so, you know, they talk about the fact they have these different cells which are shaped like rods and cones.
	They contain molecules known as opsins.
	And this is something that took me a very long time to understand.
	I had a 7th grade science teacher.
	And, you know, she was...
	How do I describe her? I won't go into that.
	But she was very, very proud of what she did.
	And she taught an advanced science class.
	And I got put into that because when I was in elementary school, I was all about science.
	I was trying to get everything I could.
	I'm writing off to the Oak Ridge Nuclear Labs and everything.
	All these different things.
	Getting my sister's science books from college and stuff and reading through them.
	And my teachers in 5th and 6th grade.
	Thought that was something that should put me in the advanced science class.
	And she got me completely out of science.
	She turned me off of science completely.
	And one of the first things that happened, and it was a real surprising thing, she said, you know, so, and she was coming at this as an ardent evolutionist.
	So we kept hitting heads with it because I was an ardent creationist.
	And it took me a while to really understand why she said what she did.
	She asked people, she said, so why do nocturnal animals see better at night than they do in the day, or see so well at night?
	And I knew, because I'd read my sister's textbooks about, you know, what is in the eye, the rods and the cones, and how our eyes are different from animals, especially nocturnal animals.
	And I said, well, they have more rods than they do cones.
	And she said, what?
	What? What are you talking about?
	And just did her best to try to humiliate me in front of the class.
	Her answer was, Which I couldn't even understand the circular logic of it.
	Her answer was, they see better at night because they come out at night.
	That was her evolutionary mindset.
	The fact that they wanted to go out at night meant that they generated eyes that could see at night.
	I thought, wow. First, I thought it was the dumbest answer I could ever see.
	And then, as I got older, I started to understand where she was coming from.
	And it got even dumber.
	You know, because if you understand the details of this, you see the creator.
	Again, like I said, even Darwin said it was a black box.
	He didn't know anything about rods and cones.
	Now, we have a situation where the cones allow you to see things in greater detail, and they allow you to see color.
	The rods are typically not focused on color, they're not focused on detail, but they do movement better.
	And so we have, and they talk about this because they're using, in their experiments, they're using eyes from rabbits.
	And they said, well, in the rabbit's eyes, the cones that they have are in a few strips here and there.
	Whereas for our eyes, the cones are in a pit that is directly behind the center of the eye.
	So when you look directly on something, you're going to see it in detail.
	We pick up movement from the side because we have cones on the side.
	And it's one of the reasons why when you are out and it's in low-light conditions, you don't want to try to look directly at whatever it is.
	You want to look off to the side a little bit.
	And you can see it a little bit better.
	Anyway, because she was an evolutionist, it was determined by what they could see better at night because they wanted to see better at night.
	They could see better at night because they went out at night.
	And because they went out at night, somehow their eyes just changed like that.
	Completely dismissing the detail of it.
	The amazing detail of it.
	Look, the best scientists, Christian scientists, people like Francis Bacon, people like Isaac Newton, people like John Clerk Maxwell, they saw science as discovering what God had done.
	The great engineer, the great designer, the great scientist.
	They were looking for the intelligence in it.
	And, you know, one of the reasons that we have evolved as a society is because we don't want to see that intelligence, and so we become fools.
	In genetic diseases, they said abnormalities in the photoreceptors in the retina lead to their death, and so what they're trying to do is to, they said, but, you know, you still have the processing ability of the brain.
	Of course, you know, the brain just happened as well.
	You know, we don't really understand how that happened.
	And so, again, trying to genetically manipulate and get some of these signals there using electronics to somehow feed this into the brain.
	And that's what they're doing. Different approaches to it, depending on whether you are taking the Elon Musk approach or the approach that these people are doing.
	The vision restoration for early patients will not be a miraculous return to 2020.
	2020 vision, not the year 2020.
	Don't want to go back there again.
	If we're going to set the Wayback Machine or the DeLorean, we don't want to go back to 2020.
	But it will help them make sense of their world.
	The sensation will be akin to sight, but with much less fidelity.
	In order to get a high-resolution image, the human retina contains more than 100 million photoreceptors in each eye, but this will only have maybe about a million, so one one-hundredth of what it has there.
	Isn't that interesting? You know, the amazing design and construction of our eyes, of our brains.
	You know, when they try to mimic the human brain, they talk about the computing capacity.
	How can it operate so fast?
	How can it have so much capacity, so much density?
	And not generate a lot of heat and all the rest of it, which is going to be a big issue, I think, with that chip sitting directly on your brain.
	I won't be signing up for that.
	I don't know who's going to sign up for that.
	Anyway, they continue to just look the other way, just like they look the other way with DNA. And they go in and start messing with it.
	They discover this thing and then jump in.
	A number of companies are experimenting with different techniques besides Neuralink and besides this company.
	So that's what we have to look forward to.
	But the key thing is that, as this article points out, instead of restoring vision, perhaps imagine a science eye that is implanted in a person who has perfect vision.
	And it might stimulate the brain in such a way the person sees specific images or places that really are not there.
	It is an idea exemplified by the posters that line the hallways of Science Corps.
	Artwork jokingly referred to as propaganda.
	They said they have an abstract piece, so one of them called My Eye.
	It's an abstract piece featuring a series of colored nodes in the shape of a brain, and underneath it, it reads...
	Alter the brain. Alter the reality.
	You see, this is fundamentally...
	About transhumanism and about virtual reality.
	The guy at Science Core, who gave his presentation, signed off with CU in the Matrix.
	So what they're pushing us into is transhumanism, virtual reality.
	And as you look at this article from Technocracy News, scientists re-engineered the brain to alter human addiction.
	And his comment on this article that he published there, he published it with a comment.
	Re-engineering the brain to try to alter human behavior has begun to emerge as a new frontier in medicine, they said.
	And then his comment is, beware.
	This knife cuts in both directions.
	You know, all technology does.
	All technology can be used for good or evil.
	It depends on who wields it, who controls it, who develops it.
	And guess who wields, controls, and develops technology now?
	The military-industrial-academic complex that Eisenhower talked about.
	And that's what we should be concerned about.
	As they go through this particular one, they say, well, you know, things that you get addicted to.
	And it can be a lot of different things.
	You know, of course, sex, drinking, drugs, gambling.
	Pornography. So they all flood the brain with surges of dopamine.
	And so people like the way that that makes them feel.
	So they do that behavior again.
	But then what happens is the brain starts to produce less and less dopamine each time.
	So that's why you keep pushing things on and on.
	It's what Oliver Anthony was trying to explain.
	And Joe Rogan kept shutting him down.
	You know, about pornography, about alcohol, about Adderall.
	Joe Rogan foolishly saying, Well, it happens to some people.
	It happened to me, of course.
	You know, I can handle this stuff.
	I can handle, you know, sex, drugs, and rock and roll, and all that.
	You know, I don't have a problem with any of that stuff.
	And, you know, some people do.
	But, you know, if you're listening to me, you can probably handle it as well.
	Oliver Anthony said, no, you know, it just gets you and then you're looking for something else that's bigger, you know, whether you're looking for harder drugs or you're looking for harder pornography or something like that.
	It's an iterative thing.
	And so their observation, the scientists said, well, here's a mechanism that we see there.
	Parkinson's disease, dopamine, which is used not just to produce pleasure, but it can be used to help the body function.
	And so they had identified a gene that produces a protein that encourages dopamine production.
	So this guy said, I wonder if, because dopamine is there with this addiction stuff, If I could use that same approach, and we've got some animals, some monkeys, and stuff like that that we've gotten addicted to alcohol.
	Evidently, they're kind of sitting around listening to the Joe Rogan podcast or something.
	And they're addicted to alcohol.
	So they gave them this genetic modification.
	Their body produced more dopamine, and that stopped their addiction.
	So what do we have to be careful about with this?
	Well, obviously... The government or people who want to control you some way or the other, corporations, government, you name it, they could basically use this dopamine as some kind of a Pavlovian response, right?
	You know, we can turn off the dopamine for you or we can turn it back on.
	You just do what we say, that type of thing.
	That's a really dangerous, dangerous thing.
	And so as we look at technology, remember we began with the artificial intelligence, writing, well actually not writing, but just copying and making stupid substitutions, you know, plagiarizing with stupid substitutions, an obituary.
	Now we have senators who are calling for government to hand out licenses to artificial companies.
	Because, you know, we've got to control this stuff.
	We've got to make sure it's not harmful, especially in elections.
	And so we will hand out licenses for this.
	And you know how this is going to turn out.
	It's going to turn out the same way as big pharmaceutical companies and big agricultural, big agri, big pharma.
	It will be regulatory capture.
	And they will also capture our elections.
	They want to create a new government agency.
	And this is coming from Josh Hawley and a bunch of Democrats.
	And Josh Hawley and the Democrat-leaning Susan Collins in Maine, along with Chris Coons, Amy Klobuchar, Richard Blumenthal.
	And so these people want to create a new government agency.
	To control artificial intelligence and to license it.
	The newly minted legislation that has been called Protect Elections from Deceptive AI Act.
	So the question is, when you create this new bureaucracy, what's going to keep these Solons, who are set there as the guardians of truth in elections, what's going to keep them from manipulating elections?
	Who watches the watchers?
	The age-old question. You give these people this kind of control over artificial intelligence, and the corporations become the deputized state for election control and propaganda and the rest of this stuff.
	We know that's what's going to happen.
	They say that the legislation maintains safeguards for satire, parody, and news broadcasts.
	Oh, really? It'll be used to shut down any news, any opinions.
	And it will push out its own propaganda.
	We know exactly what is going to happen with this.
	They'll require government licensing for firms that develop artificial technologies.
	And they will be regulated, quote-unquote, just like the FDA regulates Pfizer-Moderna.
	That's the really scary thing about this.
	One last thing.
	Rise of the robo-umps.
	Robotic umpires. This is something that's happening in minor league baseball.
	They don't want to talk about it, but some people have noticed what is happening.
	And I think it's an interesting metaphor for what the government wants to do with artificial intelligence, because they do want to make artificial intelligence the umpires for everything.
	AI will be the umpire for your speech.
	AI will be the umpire for your conduct.
	AI will be the umpire for religion and for politics.
	It's that a minor league baseball's AAA level, an experiment took place this year that Major League Baseball apparently doesn't want reporters writing about.
	And the key question is why not?
	Major League Baseball has tested an automated ball strike calling system.
	Yeah, the AI is going to call the balls and strikes in this game, but they want the AI to call the balls and strikes in everything.
	So I said, this season, at all 30 ballparks in AAA Minor League Baseball's highest level, in most weeks during the season, 15 of those ballparks hosted six-game series.
	In the first three games, the ABS, the Automated Ball Strike System, supposedly determined balls and strikes...
	With the home plate umpire receiving the Hawkeye tracking system's rulings via a tiny earpiece and relaying them to everyone in the stadium via traditional hand signals.
	The whole idea of ABS, they said, is that a fan would not even notice that it was being used.
	Do you understand? This is how they maintain the pretense of human control.
	They would just have this human down there feeding him the stuff in his ear.
	It's the same way they've been running the news media too, right?
	I think of broadcast news, Holly Hunter.
	I can't remember the actor's name.
	Great film. I really enjoyed that.
	Before I got into the business, I thought it was a great film.
	It got even better after I got into the business.
	But yeah, somebody feeding them information instead of them, you know, it's not enough that they got a teleprompter, but they're also feeding them information.
	Look, that's it. And it's going to be the pretense.
	They'll have a pretense of human control.
	Just as we began this and said, you know, we've got human editors who are looking at this stuff.
	No, you don't. No.
	It's obvious that the AI is just copying it and making really stupid substitutions to make it look like it's not just pure plagiarism.
	So that is what we have to look forward to.
	Well, when we come back, we're going to talk about immigration and ID.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right
	back. . .
	Making sense.
	common again.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	I just saw this comment on Rockfin from Audi MRR and Modern Retro Radio.
	Thank you very much. That was very generous.
	He left a tip. Thank you. I appreciate that.
	He had a comment about what is happening in New Mexico.
	So I'm going to switch over before we go to immigration and IDs.
	I'm going to switch over to Second Amendment update.
	And his comment, the silver lining in New Mexico governor's tyrannical overreach Is that she inadvertently woke up her whole state, if not the whole nation.
	People are finally starting to remind politicians who they work for.
	Absolutely. And that's Audi with Modern Retro Radio.
	Thank you very much. I appreciate that.
	Also on Rockfin, thank you for the tip.
	Truck Driver Ron, I appreciate that.
	Thank you. And on Rumble, thank you for the tip.
	Damnage says, if I got hit with a ransomware attack...
	I tell the ransomware to just keep the information because I'm broke.
	They'd take one look at my bank information.
	It'd feel bad for me and just grant my access back.
	Yeah. Yeah, what we have to be concerned about is our own government.
	I think that's the thing that we need to be concerned about.
	And we'll talk about that, as a matter of fact, in this Second Amendment thing here.
	But again... Smackdown.
	This is A.W.R. Hawkins who writes on Breitbart.
	Smackdown. Temporary restraining order has now been issued against the New Mexico governor's concealed carry ban.
	She's getting slapped back by everybody.
	Again, you know, the Democrat mayor, the Democrat district attorney there, where she tried to impose these things and say, well, we're not going to honor even your concealed carry permits.
	Not going to let it happen. Just arbitrarily.
	And the absurd idea that's going to be based on protecting public health.
	Hey, if I can say that this is about health, I can do whatever I want to.
	The police chief.
	There, appointed by the Democrat mayor.
	So the mayor said no.
	District attorney said no.
	The police chief appointed by the mayor and so forth that's working for the mayor said no.
	The sheriff who's elected there and who has also gotten money from every town, a big gun control thing run by Bloomberg, even he said no.
	Even David Hogg said no.
	And now the courts have said no.
	It's going to blow back big time.
	And this is what I think is even more important.
	You know, I talked to a guy, Relford, yesterday.
	He has the program, Gun Guy.
	And I think what's even more important is that by standing up for our rights in one area, we start to stand up for our rights in other areas.
	People are sick and tired of this public health emergency order.
	They need to be worried about the other MacGuffins, like the climate, the other things like that.
	But, you know, they've seen through this and they're sick of this public health executive order stuff and how broadly it's been used.
	Gun Owners of America, one of two organizations, you had National Association for Gun Rights, then Gun Owners of America.
	Gun Owners of America has secured a temporary restraining order with their lawsuit.
	Right now, the temporary restraining order is an oral order, so there's no written decision from the judge.
	It's just, no, you can't do that.
	She's not going to win.
	And just let me show you this, because as I've said from the very beginning, I said, you know, she's...
	And they've got a bit of a Napoleon complex.
	A lot of these women do.
	You know, it's something we talk about, somebody who's extremely short, like Napoleon, and they want to show people who's boss, right?
	So they get really authoritarian.
	And I've seen this a lot with these women, especially these Democrat women.
	The Democrats have an authoritarian bent to begin with.
	But especially the women, and especially a woman who is as short as she is.
	I kind of thought that I had heard somewhere that she was pretty short.
	And it turns out she's only 4'10".
	Here she is standing next to a police officer who is 7 feet tall.
	Now, first of all, public health emergency.
	They're both wearing masks.
	So, you know, this has taken some time in the last three years, recently.
	But the police officer there is 7 feet tall.
	And she's 4'10".
	So she comes up to about his elbow.
	Maybe we need to exile her to Elba with Napoleon.
	So we've had the Ninth Circuit Court has now rebuked lawmakers there in California and granted an injunction against a California law that wanted to target gun marketing.
	Gun marketing.
	And what they said was, a California law ostensibly aimed at restricting the marketing of firearms to minors, The law forbidding the marketing and advertising of firearms that, quote, is likely to infringe on the First Amendment.
	Given that the statute is so broadly written that advertisements aimed at adults who can lawfully purchase a firearm would be swept up in its provisions.
	So in other words, they were trying to kill the First Amendment so they could kill the Second Amendment.
	So they could kill the people who manufacture the weapons, I should say.
	Right? And he saw through it.
	He said this, he said, there is no evidence in the record that a minor in California has ever unlawfully bought a gun, let alone because of an ad.
	We should do that.
	We should have, just like Christmas Story, have Ralphie go in.
	I'd like to buy a Red Ryder rifle.
	The real thing, you know? Sure, kid.
	What do you want? I think the elves would kick him out the door.
	Nor has the state produced any evidence that truthful ads about lawful uses of guns, like an ad about hunting rifles and junior sports magazines' junior shooters.
	They haven't offered any evidence that that encourages illegal or violent gun use among minors.
	Simply put, California cannot lean on gossamers of speculation to weave an evidence-free narrative that its law curbing the First Amendment, quote, significantly, unquote.
	Demands more than good intentions, I'm sorry, significantly decreases unlawful gun use among minors.
	The First Amendment demands more than good intentions and wishful thinking to warrant the government's muzzling of speech.
	So far, so good from this decision.
	But listen to what else he had to say.
	He said the state has many tools at its disposal to address juvenile crime involving guns, but it, quote, cannot ban truthful ads about lawful firearm use among adults and minors unless, here's that caveat,
	Unless it can show that such an intrusion into the First Amendment will significantly further the state's interest in curtailing unlawful and violent use of firearms by minors.
	So if they produce lies by somebody like Fauci, for example, you know, you get the firearm equivalent of Fauci and you produce a bunch of slick lies and you got a guy who's really slick.
	Every time you call him out on it, you know, he pivots and he says, well, you know, I wasn't talking about, uh, Public health and group health, I was talking about individual health, you know, that type of thing, like we just saw him do.
	If you've got somebody who's really good in terms of lying, if you can show that it's going to work with somebody like Fauci, well, then you can destroy people's natural God-given rights.
	Because he puts that, unless, unless you can show that an intrusion into the First Amendment is We'll significantly further the state's interest in curtailing unlawful, violent use of firearms by minors.
	Now, here's what the state was created to do, according to our founding documents.
	Constitution, Declaration of Independence, these people swore to uphold.
	The state was created, first and foremost, not to keep us safe, but to keep our God-given rights safe.
	To protect our individual liberty.
	It's a big problem.
	Now, I said, you know, we'll get to how they're going to...
	Some of the danger in terms of labeling people.
	Here's a very dangerous thing.
	A New Jersey city is going to expand their controversial gunshot detection system with a $1 million grant.
	Oh, yeah. That's how it all comes, right?
	You know, just like we had the public health emergency.
	And... Trump was granting everybody money for this and that, you know?
	Well, here's what Fauci says, and here's the money to do it.
	Fauci says this, here's the money to do it, right?
	Simon says, and Trump pays for it.
	Well, so the federal government gives them a million-dollar grant.
	In Newark, New Jersey, City Council has approved expanding the city's shot spotter system.
	Critics question the value of the detection system like that.
	They said it occasionally mistakes car backfires or other booms for gunshots, saying they can lead to over-policing of neighborhoods.
	Well, the real issue is that it's kind of like swatting, isn't it?
	You know, people, for a prank, they call up and say, hey, there's a crime going on here.
	And, you know, they describe the crime in a way that they're going to get the SWAT team called on that location.
	And so the police show up with the SWAT team.
	People have been killed on both sides of this thing.
	It's a very dangerous thing to flag something that is a serious crime that is happening.
	And as they say, the critics say, when shot spotter generates a false alert, police are deployed to an area and may treat everyone there as a suspect shooter, even when no shooting has even taken place.
	And that's the real issue.
	Now, in response, the company says these things are 97% accurate.
	But I've seen that, you know, when you look at speech transcription programs, 97% accuracy is garbage.
	You better be better than 97% accurate.
	You know, so, you know, if you look at things like, let's just go back to the Boeing 737 MAX, right?
	It was 99.9% accurate in terms of not crashing.
	They had 8,200 flights and only two of them crashed.
	But you had, in each of those, 250 people lost their life.
	But hey, it's rare, you know.
	And its accuracy rate is actually pretty high in terms of not failing.
	You know, its non-failure rate.
	And so when you're talking about something like this, it could get people shot because if they hear that there's gunshots going on, And this is something that is done, automated, and they give it to humans who review this, you know, just like you got human editors and human umpires who are second-guessing the AI on all these different things.
	And, you know, they look at this and they say, well, yeah, it looks like that's for real.
	So these guys go out, locked and loaded, ready to shoot.
	They see some kid playing, and, you know, this is not a theory.
	This has already happened even without it being called in as a shot.
	By some shot spotter, you know, police pull up and there's a kid playing with a toy gun and they jump out of the car and execute him because somebody called it in.
	What do you think they're going to do if somebody called in with a shot spotter and the kid's just walking around and he's got a stick and he's going pew, pew, pew, right?
	And so then that brings us, when we're talking about firearms, brings us to Hunter Biden.
	Indicted on federal firearms charge.
	Isn't that interesting? They went full Ken Star on this.
	I've talked about this for a long time.
	Ken Star. Oh, this guy's so conservative.
	You know, this strong Christian prosecutor that's out there.
	We're going to get him on that sleazy Bill Clinton.
	He's got all these allegations, credible allegations from many, many women about violent sexual assault and rape.
	He's got very, very credible allegations about financial crimes and corruption.
	And then there's this consensual affair that he's got with Monica Lewinsky.
	And that's not a crime.
	But they found that he committed perjury when he was talking about that.
	So we'll go after him for perjury. We'll forget all the rapes and violence, sexual assault.
	We'll forget massive corruption.
	Criminal actions done by the Clintons.
	No, Ken Starr said, I'm going to take a look at that perjury that he committed.
	Lying under oath. Same thing is happening here.
	The Biden administration needs to be seen to be doing something.
	And so, you know, by coming after him with these gun charges, they can stay away from any of this financial corruption that would implicate the big guy.
	The big guy.
	And that level of corruption.
	So this is actually the safe thing for them to do.
	And remember, this is a federal charge, so his papa could excuse him for any of this stuff.
	Maybe he won't, because I think one aspect of this may be one of the advantages for Biden...
	Is that Mr. Gun Control, Joe Biden, could be seen by the Democrats.
	We've got to control guns so much, I'm even going to control it when my son illegally buys a gun and lies on his form.
	That's what we're talking about. It's very similar to Bill Clinton.
	Bill Clinton committed perjury.
	About something that was consensual.
	And so Hunter Biden committed perjury on his form there, his gun form.
	Hunter Biden knowingly made a false statement certifying that he was not an unlawful user of or addicted to any stimulant, narcotic, or drug.
	He said he's pretty much an unlawful user and addicted to all.
	He said any, he said all.
	Yes, I am addicted to all of these things.
	And when you look at the overarching hypocrisy of all this, The big guy, Joe Biden, is the daddy of some of the most harsh criminal aspects of the drug war.
	Civil asset forfeiture and the rest of those types of mandatory minimums, things like that, that came after end users.
	So Biden has destroyed our legal system, corrupted the police, and imprisoned a lot of people by going after the end user, which is something they never did during alcohol prohibition.
	You know, they went after the people who were making it and selling it, not the end users, really.
	And so they changed that around, and that was Joe Biden who did that, and he's proud of it.
	Joe Biden, who's been there always on gun control and pushing it everywhere.
	And so here's a guy, his son, who violates the gun laws, who violates the drug laws that his father has put in there.
	He flaunts both of these things.
	He does it for years.
	And only as they are beginning an impeachment process do they get serious about indicting him.
	But the millions and unpaid taxes...
	Not going to pay any attention to that.
	Even as Biden is exploding the size of the IRS, they don't care about the millions in unpaid taxes by Hunter, by Biden, about the corrupt foreign involvement and the bribery and the corruption with foreign governments.
	They don't care about any of that stuff.
	No, they're going to weaponize the IRS just like they weaponized the war on drugs.
	Just like they weaponized their war on the Second Amendment.
	And he is going to continue to accelerate and explode the IRS as they get a complete pass on all this stuff.
	I mean, that crime is as obvious as the way he purchased this firearm.
	It's just a fact.
	Where did this money come from?
	And you didn't pay taxes on this.
	This is why you have so many IRS whistleblowers who have come out.
	Make tens of millions of dollars and you don't pay any taxes on it.
	That's an objective fact.
	Every bit as much as this form that he lied on.
	But they're going to give that a pass.
	Well, we're going to take a quick break, and when we come back, we will take a look at immigration and NID. We'll be right back.
	Let the seed in our homeland, boys, let it grow where all can see.
	Feed it with our devotion, boys, call it the Liberty Tree.
	It's a tall old tree and a strong old tree.
	And we are the sons, yes we are the sons, the sons of liberty.
	The End
	Liberty, it's your move.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Well, we have a judge that has ruled the DACA program created by Obama is illegal.
	When you have an executive order that actually came from his Attorney General, Janet Napolitano, when you have an order coming from the executive branch saying we're not going to enforce the law, who knew that that would be illegal?
	These people took an oath as a condition of their being in office.
	They took an oath to defend and protect the Constitution, but also to enforce the laws.
	And then they come out and say, well, I've decided I'm not going to enforce the law.
	But the interesting thing about this is how this hot potato keeps getting passed around.
	From politicians to courts to politicians to courts, nobody wants to do anything about DACA. A ruling from a federal court has concluded that Obama's program to protect illegal aliens, the deferred action...
	For childhood arrivals is illegal.
	They never took action.
	They don't plan on taking any action.
	These are, you know, you come into the country.
	This is the next step.
	And of course, you know, we had the anchor baby thing.
	If people who are not citizens of the United States, if they come in and they're not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, the legal fiction that if they have a child here, because that's the way it's defined in the 14th Amendment, you know, But they were very clear about that because they wanted to give citizenship to the newly freed slaves.
	They said if you were subject to the jurisdiction, but then they also pointed out that if you're here legally as a representative of a foreign country or something like that, your children don't become American citizens because they're born here while you are here legally.
	These are people who are here illegally.
	And their children should not become citizens either.
	But then they extended it.
	They said, okay, so if you come over here illegally before the age, not just being born here, but, you know, you come here before the age of whatever, and I don't remember what the age was, 17 maybe or something like that, then you can stay.
	That was what Obama said.
	We're not going to enforce the immigration laws against anybody who comes here illegally below a certain age as a child.
	And then they added, they got away with that.
	They said, alright, it's worked for babies that are born here.
	It's worked for kids who come here, you know, up to just under high school age.
	So now let's try the adults.
	And when they did that, finally the Republicans pushed back.
	And then, you know, we have Obama's rule there.
	Trump campaigns against that, against DACA and against the open borders and all the rest of the stuff.
	But when Trump becomes president, what does he do?
	Nothing. Nothing.
	He doesn't say, well, that was Obama's executive order.
	Now here's my executive order, countermanding that.
	Then do it. Just pretended that that was now the new law of the land.
	You know, like a Supreme Court decision about when you can kill a baby.
	So he just pretended that was the new law of the land.
	And so that he wouldn't have to actually take any responsibility for it.
	He sent it to the courts.
	And the courts said, yeah, you can't do anything about that.
	Well, see, folks, I tried, but I can't do anything, said Trump.
	And so, pretended he couldn't do anything about it.
	So now you've got a judge who says, well, it's not legal, of course.
	Because the Department of Justice has come out flagrantly saying they're not going to obey the law.
	But now this judge says, but I'm not going to do anything to deport anybody.
	That's the hot potato.
	That's why they keep passing this thing back and forth.
	And this is how we wound up.
	With having judicial supremacy, with having a regulation without representation, a bureaucracy that rules supreme.
	Congress doesn't want to take the heat for doing certain things, so they kick it over to the bureaucracy.
	If the bureaucracy gets it wrong, then they come in like they're heroes and say, no, we'll fix that, we'll fix that.
	But they don't want to take the heat for it.
	And, of course, the other aspect of it is that by creating these bureaucracies, they can grow the government so quickly.
	They couldn't grow the government that quickly if you actually had to go through a parliamentary process with your elected representatives.
	By the way, that's why.
	That's why the founders said laws will be passed by legislature and we'll have these rules and so forth.
	Because you don't want somebody just going out and writing up rules over and over again and, you know, all they do is post it.
	And they take comments. And it doesn't matter if most of the comments don't like their rules.
	They go through a commenting period and that's it.
	Now we're going to do what we want because we're the experts.
	And so we have taxation without representation.
	We have regulation without representation because nobody wants to take responsibility for it.
	Just like this judge. He says DACA is clearly illegal, but I'm not going to do anything about it.
	Same judge ruled in 2021 that the program could continue, but at that time...
	Banned new applicants from joining.
	And so he found that the Biden administration's scheme to codify the program through the writing of new regulations, that is illegal, he said.
	But this is now expected to go to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
	The appeals judge said at that point in time, last year, he said, DACA creates a new class of otherwise removable aliens...
	Who may obtain lawful presence, work authorization, and associated benefits.
	And he said Congress determined which aliens can receive those benefits.
	And it did not include DACA recipients among them.
	And so this is something that goes back 11 years.
	2012. And then Trump, according to this article from WND, Trump tried to take it down starting in 2017.
	Ha ha. Just another example of people who will push this Trump fakery.
	Nothing but fakery.
	Well, I can't do anything about it.
	I tried. The deep state is just so difficult to deal with.
	But you elect me again.
	I'll fix it the next time.
	Then even more dangerous and crazy is this idea about the border where you have Eyepatch McCain, Dan Crenshaw, and several Republican candidates who want to invade Mexico.
	Maybe that's the only way we'll get our border protected, right?
	But just stop these wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Trump, like you said you're going to do.
	Bring the troops home. Just set them on the border.
	You don't have to attack anybody.
	They can just be there. It's like, no, it can't come across.
	You know, that type of thing. We'll guard everybody's borders but our own.
	But maybe if we start a war with Mexico, maybe then we'll guard our borders.
	Who knows? The hawkish wing of the Republican Party isn't backing down on its hopes of involving the U.S. in a new long-term foreign military conflict, writes the New American.
	Heightened emotion surrounding the two of the hottest button issues, immigration and drug crisis.
	Some in the GOP see an opening for directing the electorate's desire for action into a military foray.
	And, of course, that would include candidates like DeSantis and Ramaswamy and a bunch of others.
	Crenshaw is chairman of the House Task Force to Combat Mexican Drug Cartels.
	And he is trying to make this a bipartisan support for his new war.
	The eyepatch McCain.
	The immediate reaction from Democrats has been, you can't just go invading Mexico, he said.
	And it's like, stop being an ignoramus.
	That's not what anybody is talking about, said Crenshaw.
	I envision the same kind of military intervention we use all over the world.
	Isn't that what we do all over the world, Dan?
	Don't we just go in and invade these places, you know, like Syria?
	Were we invited into Syria?
	Are we working with the government of Syria?
	No. Where it's entirely led by the host nation.
	You know, that's the kind of military intervention we use all over the world.
	It's entirely led by the host nation.
	Did you realize that? Did you realize that our intervention in Afghanistan was entirely led by the host nation?
	They have an Afghan government that, you know, they install.
	It says, yeah, we're running this thing.
	It's kind of like the human umpire with the robot calling the balls and strikes.
	Or the same thing in Iraq.
	Oh, look, we've got an Iraqi government that we put in here.
	After we invaded, after we took the government out.
	Or Syria. And so in the mind of Crenshaw, says the new American, U.S. involvement in Mexico would be similar to the operations that have been conducted in Colombia.
	That the American troops going on joint missions.
	He also wants the U.S. to provide Mexico with close air support if they're operating in isolated regions.
	But despite assurances and overtures to the Democrats, Crenshaw would not take unilateral American military action, something that several other well-known Republicans have already been pushing for.
	And he says, I'm not going to take that off the table.
	And you have this, as Politico points out, the New American Quote Center said, we've had a lot of senators and presidential candidates who said, we want to take unilateral measures here.
	And whether or not the Mexican government likes it, we're going to come in there for their own good.
	And for our own good.
	And Crenshaw said, yeah, and I'm not going to take that off the table.
	So we got DeSantis.
	He says he's open to using drone strikes against Mexican drug cartels.
	We got Senator Tom Cotton, who has proposed sending in special operation forces, and he said if Mexico doesn't want to help, quote, so be it, unquote.
	We don't care, with or without them.
	Vivek Ramaswamy envisions launching a, quote, shock and awe military campaign against drug cartels.
	Asa Hutchinson pushing for the deployment of American forces south of the border.
	Lindsey Graham, of course, Lindsey Graham.
	Never saw a war that he didn't want to send people to or start.
	Lindsey Graham and John Kennedy, Louisiana, who just got all of his attention for reading pornography books in the Senate and that type of thing.
	How many times does that have to be done, right, before we do anything about it?
	At this point, that's just grandstanding for attention, really, to read that.
	But anyway, John Kennedy, he pulls stunts like that.
	You know, when they had their UFO hearings, said, y'all better lock your doors!
	I can't tell you what we said inside, but I just tell you this.
	You better lock your doors.
	Anyway, he introduced, along with Lindsey Graham, a bill to declare nine cartels as foreign terrorist organizations and to authorize the use of military force against them.
	And of course, you know, this authorization for the use of military force they pass in the wake of the inside job of 9-11, that's been used for, you know, at least seven wars that we know of.
	And who knows how many Secret wars that we don't know.
	The unknown, unknown wars of Rumsfeld.
	The cartels are at war with us, poisoning more than 80,000 Americans with fentanyl every year, said Crenshaw.
	What about those poppy fields in Afghanistan, Crenshaw?
	What about that? Should we be concerned about the fact that when the American government went into Afghanistan, that drug production there exploded?
	And you had, the entire time we were there, record crops of opioids coming out of Afghanistan.
	And always more than 90% of the world's supply coming out of that one country while we were there.
	Not before and not after they took it down.
	Should we be concerned about the use of crack cocaine that the military and intelligence agencies inflicted on Americans because they needed some money for their secret wars?
	You want to talk to me about fentanyl?
	You want to talk to me about any of this stuff?
	Your corrupt war on drugs?
	This is not the way to handle these addiction things.
	Again, I've had people on, retired law enforcement, retired judges and prosecutors and everything that were a part of this.
	They don't want to talk about it until they retire because it's just like this stuff with the corruption in our medical profession.
	You talk about it, you'll get retired one way or the other.
	So they wait until they retire on their own terms, and then they talk about it.
	But they all know that this is a spiritual issue, it's a medical issue, it is not a law enforcement issue.
	And they've been proven that that's right, because for over 50 years now, we have failed.
	Was it 52 years?
	I think, was it 1971 that the war on drugs began, I think?
	It's been 52 years now of failure.
	And what it has produced are things like fentanyl.
	You get more and more concentrated forms of whatever it is that you're trying to prohibit.
	It's produced things like fentanyl.
	It's produced things like crack cocaine.
	And of course, so has our criminal government.
	And so when Dan Crenshaw wants to address what happened with the poppy fields in Afghanistan, then we can talk about going into Mexico.
	My concern would be That this government, going into Mexico, might have the same kind of results as they did in Afghanistan.
	Of course, you know, start manufacturing it on a much bigger scale than it is now.
	Whatever synthetic drugs they're making in Mexico.
	Yeah, let's talk about the military's war of drugs on Americans.
	Let's talk about the intelligence community's war of drugs on Americans.
	Oh, no, the Mexicans are the problem.
	The Mexicans are just trying to make money out of this war on drugs that we've done.
	I'm not excusing anything they do.
	I'm just saying that you're always going to have the Al Capones and the Mexican drug cartels are going to take advantage of a policy that is doomed to failure.
	Prohibition is doomed to failure.
	In the same way that if they're ever successful in terms of prohibiting the Second Amendment and prohibiting guns, you're going to see the same thing happen with guns.
	You're going to have an explosion in gun violence.
	You're going to have an explosion in development of guns and innovation in guns because there's not going to be any controls whatsoever on it.
	New American says, policy makers must consider the danger that invading Mexico would turn out like America's recent incursions into the Middle East, particularly Afghanistan.
	I would say like Syria, for example.
	After all, it wouldn't just be traditional warfare.
	It would be guerrilla warfare.
	Yeah, they would come in. You know, this is something when Ramaswamy says this.
	What naivete?
	Shock and awe? You mean like we did in Iraq?
	That's the easy part.
	The difficult part is the asymmetric warfare that comes after that.
	You know, we have a kind of asymmetric warfare where we got all the planes and we got the smart bombs and all the rest of the stuff.
	And we can do shock and awe.
	That's easy. But then you got to put boots on the ground.
	And then the shock and awe starts that, oh, wait a minute.
	You know, this is going to be this long war of attrition and ambush and guerrilla fighting and all the rest of this stuff.
	And we have lost every one of those asymmetric wars.
	Every one of them. But nobody wants to learn about it.
	And Ramaswamy hasn't learned anything from it either.
	Just as in Afghanistan, American troops would be subject to regular attacks and bombings, and the American public would regularly be tuning in to news to learn of more servicemen and women being killed in a potentially decades-long conflict with no end in sight.
	Just like in Afghanistan, until you get thrown out.
	And so with all that happening, all right, These people who don't want to have any ID for the people who cross over the borders.
	They don't want to have any ID for the people who go into the voting booths.
	But they want all of us to have IDs for everything.
	And especially just like with DSA, Europe is positioning itself as in a lead position To push the boundaries of world government.
	And this is what's happened with Ursula von der Leiden, the European Union president, giving a speech at the G20 in New Delhi, India.
	That was the last week or so.
	And so she's all about universal, worldwide digital identities and tracking and controlling everybody.
	The future will be digital, she said.
	Today I want to focus on AI and digital infrastructure.
	And she doesn't mean internet for you.
	That's going to be a part of it.
	But when she talks about digital infrastructure, she talks about the vaccine passports and things like that.
	And crucial question is how to harness a rapidly changing technology, she said.
	AI has risks, but it also offers tremendous opportunities.
	It's got tremendous opportunities for them for surveillance, tremendous opportunities for propaganda, tremendous opportunities for control.
	And they want to control the AI. As I said, in the U.S., we've got to have this stuff licensed.
	You've got to have a license to use this stuff.
	We can't just have anybody out there coming up with AI. We're going to use AI to tell everybody that this is authoritative.
	This is coming from the computer.
	I've got a printout here. You just do what it says, and we'll build in the biases as we wish.
	She said, I believe that Europe and its partners should develop a new global framework for AI risks.
	You see, here comes the AI MacGuffin.
	Oh, we've got a threat. We've got trouble right here in River City.
	We've got a virus that's coming, and we've got climate change that's going to kill us all, just like the virus.
	You've still got Trump. He falls back into that every time somebody questions him.
	Don't question me. The entire world is going to die.
	Whatever I did was to save the entire world.
	No, you killed people, Trump.
	Nobody was dying.
	This wasn't a pandemic. It's your medical rules.
	You kill businesses with your lockdowns.
	You kill people with your medical rules and your bribery in the hospitals.
	And you kill people with your shot.
	You and Biden. Everybody says, well, is Biden to mandate these things?
	Don't tell me that Trump wouldn't mandate.
	This is what I see all the time.
	I look at comments from people.
	Well, don't you realize that Trump didn't mandate?
	No, he just produced the poison.
	And let Biden stick it in everybody's arms.
	No, Trump had already said.
	That's why I play that all the time on the show.
	Going back to May of 2019.
	Measles. Gotta get the shot.
	Gotta get that shot.
	That's going around. It's really bad.
	Gotta get the shot. Measles.
	Measles. And I've said so many times that that weasel is old enough that, like me, he had measles.
	Got over it. It was extremely rare, as Fauci would say.
	And it truly was extremely rare that somebody would have any serious reaction to measles.
	People like Trump, people like me, we've got natural immunity to measles.
	We had it. And it ain't going around.
	And you don't need to take away people's medical decisions about their bodies or their religious objections to measles.
	But he was perfectly willing to do that for measles.
	Do you think that when Trump talks about this virus...
	He's selling this idea that this virus was the worst thing since the 1918 flu.
	You think that if he's going to take that narrative, we've got a pandemic here, and it's going to kill everybody like in 1918?
	If he's willing to take away people's medical choice and their religious objections over measles, you don't think that he would have done it for this thing that he continues to say?
	The greatest plague that mankind has ever faced and he saved us from it?
	How did he save us? With his vaccine.
	He wouldn't mandate that like he did for measles in 2019?
	Come on. So we got the AI MacGuffin that's coming.
	We're going to have a UFO MacGuffin that they will use as well.
	So think about how many different existential...
	We're only three years into this 2020 decade, and they're just throwing one so-called existential threat at us after the other.
	You know, from a pandemic to the climate to artificial intelligence, and then they're going to come with UFOs as well.
	And so Ursula von der Leiden says we would need to have a similar body to the IPCC for climate.
	That's the UN body, the International Panel for Climate Change or Climate Control.
	I forget what it says. But that's the lying bureaucracy of the UN that has been the font of lies about climate change for decades.
	And so we want to have something that lies to us today.
	To make this a global panic situation.
	We need to have a global panic situation like we do for climate, she says, and make it about artificial intelligence.
	And here we need additional outreach to the scientists and the entrepreneurs and the innovators.
	They need to provide the knowledge on the risks posed by AI as well as the potential benefits for humanity.
	And they've already done that in the United States.
	That's why you had Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, and also, coincidentally, Pushing what she wants.
	You know, problem, solution.
	Look at this. I have this wonderful AI. Oh, it can just solve everything.
	It can cure cancer and all the rest of it.
	But it can also be very dangerous.
	And so to make sure that it doesn't get dangerous, we're all going to have to get an ID and identify ourselves.
	And all of our activity has to be monitored by the government.
	That's the bottom line. Oh, and by the way, says Sam Altman, only people like me should be able to do artificial intelligence.
	And so that's what she's saying as well.
	We have to have all you technical people come and we'll have dog and pony shows where you can scare us about AI. And then we can give you a monopoly on it because you'll work hand in glove with us, our deputized state.
	She said also we need a digital public infrastructure.
	And again, she's not talking about people having internet access.
	India, she says, has achieved remarkable success in rolling out its digital public infrastructure.
	What did they do? Well, Bill Gates wanted everybody to have an ID. And they had their Adhar system, and they came in with the poor people who were dependent on the government for welfare and dependent on the government for medical care.
	Well, you're not going to get anything from us unless you take that number.
	You'll not buy or sell or get welfare or universal basic income unless you take the number, the mark of the beast.
	That's the Gates system.
	That's what they did in India.
	And that's what she is saying they want to do worldwide.
	She said the trick is to build public digital infrastructure that is interoperable and trusted.
	Let me give you one example, she said.
	You're all familiar with the COVID-19 digital certificate.
	Well, the EU developed it for itself.
	And actually its origin, as I point out when I have that, I play that commercial that we got about the common man.
	I talk about the commons project.
	That common project and the common past, that was a creature of the world economic form.
	They laid that out there and other people created, the European Union created their version of it.
	But essentially they put that together for people as a blueprint.
	Other people implemented their own version of it.
	And so she said, the EU developed this, and the model was so functional and so trusted that 51 countries on four different continents adopted it for free.
	They won't charge you for your chains yet.
	Today, the WHO uses it as a global standard to, listen to this cynical thing, they use it as a global standard to facilitate mobility.
	They use it to block mobility.
	Just the opposite. These people, such liars.
	Yeah, yeah, we use it to facilitate like protection racket, you know?
	From the mafia, I'm here to protect you, you know, from me.
	I'm going to facilitate your mobility here.
	You get the ID, you get the mobility.
	Otherwise, we're going to block you.
	You know, just in the same way that they didn't mandate these vaccines for anybody.
	No, no. It's your choice, you know?
	And so she calls all this the one future.
	So is the one future, is the single global government, is that a conspiracy theory?
	When they keep telling us that's exactly what they want to do.
	And so, as the Epoch Times pointed out, the group of 20 nations agreed on a plan in India to impose digital currencies, CBDCs, and digital IDs on their respective populations, because that's what the CBDC is.
	You know, just like Sam Altman, the AI guy, going around, you know, taking screenshots of people's eyes to get a biometric, you know, retinal scan or whatever it is that he's scanning with the eye.
	And then tying that in to the currency, and the currency is your global ID. When Mark Zuckerberg was trying to do that with his Libra project and his white paper, he said in the middle of it, this will become a de facto global ID. You know, give me the power and I'll do this.
	You give me the money, I'll deliver these people on a silver platter to you.
	So the group said the discussions are already underway to create international regulations for cryptocurrencies.
	But of course, that's not to ban cryptocurrencies.
	We just want to regulate them.
	Yeah, you do it from the inside.
	You do it with chaos and you do it iteratively.
	And that's what they're doing. They're doing it from the inside.
	It's a global ID system, a mark of the beast system.
	Who would have thought 2,000 years ago?
	Who would imagine that people would be able to globally stop you from buying or selling anything?
	And, you know, who could imagine such a thing 2,000 years ago?
	I couldn't even imagine it, you know, 55 years ago as a kid.
	We didn't have satellites yet.
	Oh, this has got to be metaphorical.
	It's symbolic. No.
	It keeps becoming more and more literal, doesn't it?
	Let me catch up on some of the comments that are here.
	Thank you from so many people.
	On RockFan, Greg Funt, thank you so much for the tip.
	He says, my brother's been a big fan for a long time.
	I agree. Well, thank you. That's really kind.
	On Rumble, Mr.
	Kishan G, thank you for the tip.
	He says, Good morning, David Knight and crew.
	I know your dislike for Trump, but I don't see any other candidates that are capable of doing the leadership, except for RFK. Thanks, and get Eric back on the show.
	I will. We went a period of time there because we were gone.
	I think it was a little bit longer than usual.
	We'll get him on a regular basis.
	Well, again, I'll just say that it's a big mistake to put hope in Washington for your future.
	And it's an even bigger mistake to put the hope in the presidency for the future.
	So we need to put hope in local government.
	We need to build the mechanisms for our survival.
	Locally. And that means pay more attention to whoever your local sheriff and your local city council and your local mayor and all these elections are far, far, far more important than who's in the White House.
	Just look at 2020. We had Trump in the White House.
	And the people who protected us from Trump and his policies, in many cases, were at the local level.
	And also at the local level and the state level, People could make Trump's policies even worse.
	So you better focus there.
	That's where your focus should be.
	Not on Washington.
	Not on the presidency.
	On Rockfin. Angry Tiger.
	Thank you very much. Good to see you there.
	He said the drug war turned a lot of normal people into felons.
	Yes. Taking away their Second Amendment rights.
	The apparatus to remove a gun felony federally exists, but it is not funded.
	Therefore, you cannot get your Second Amendment rights back if you were convicted federally.
	Well, that's important to know.
	Again, Knights of the Storm, Angry Tiger, Jason Barker, who I've also seen a comment and a tip from earlier today.
	Take a look at the Knights of the Storm.
	You'll get their schedule as well as Guard's schedule and many other schedules of a lot of people that do a lot of good work that you can trust.
	Rockfin, Angus Mustang, thank you very much for the tip.
	He says, the inmates are running the asylum.
	Yep. On Rockfin James S., thank you for the tip.
	And I see a note that Dr.
	Shiva is delayed until 11.15.
	So we won't be doing that at the top of the hour.
	I'm going to take a break, though.
	And when we come back, we're going to take a look at some additional information.
	Financial issues.
	I thought it was kind of interesting that Tucker Carlson went down to Argentina and interviewed the guy that has made a lot of, and I've got some things to say, not about the Tucker interview, I haven't seen that, but about Javier Malay and also about what it looks like to live in a country that has rampant runaway inflation.
	So we will be right back.
	��
	��
	�� Liberty.
	It's your move.
	And now, The David Knight Show.
	Well, let's talk about 124% inflation, or that's the official story.
	It's actually worse than that, than they tell you.
	It's highest level since 1991 in Argentina.
	Soaring prices, which rose more than expected, are forcing hard-hit shoppers to run a daily gauntlet to find deals and cheaper options as price hikes are leaving big differences from one shop to the next.
	With scattered discounts to lure shoppers.
	Yeah, the shoppers have become hoppers, hopping from one place to the other.
	In August, monthly inflation readings of 12.4%.
	That's just month-over-month increase in prices.
	A figure that would be eye-watering, even as an annual figure in most countries worldwide, but that is happening on a month-to-month basis, pushing poverty levels past 40%.
	That's the key. You see that kind of inflation?
	People get poor. And I know what that was like.
	Again, we didn't come anywhere close to this, but I was in college when the 1970s inflation hit, but it was still going strong and hitting with the high interest rates and the rest of this stuff.
	It had not stopped for a couple of years after I got out of college.
	Um, so pushing poverty levels past 40%, stoking anger at the traditional political elite ahead of October's elections.
	And again, um, it was, was it last week or two weeks ago?
	I can't remember that I interviewed the financial, I think it was last week.
	And, um, uh, again, um, the, uh, book, um, uh, economics and the 15 lessons, 120 pages, number one bestseller there.
	and the author Axel New, Javier Malay, I went on a hunch that he would know him.
	It turns out they're good friends.
	It's so hard, said one person, each day things cost more.
	It's like always racing around the clock, searching and searching, said this woman as she was shopping for groceries on the outskirts of Buenos Aires.
	She said you buy whatever is cheaper in one place and then you go to the next place and you buy something else.
	A central bank analyst poll released after the data forecast that inflation would end the year above 169%.
	A sharp hike from its estimate a month earlier of 141%.
	It predicted monthly inflation of 12% in September and 9% in October.
	And so Argentina is in this cycle of economic crisis.
	So how did they get there? The central bank.
	And this is what Javier Malay points out.
	He said, you know, you get into this situation because of the central bank.
	Some central banks are worse than others.
	And so, his solution to it, since nobody wants the peso, nobody will take it, nobody in China.
	And of course, it's a big part of this discussion, is that we should use somebody else's currency, because ours is gone and nobody will take it.
	And it is just in free fall.
	And so that is the obvious solution.
	But the question then became, which is not a question that anybody would have asked a couple of years ago, do we go with China or do we go with the US? At this point, the answer is still the US, but it could be China.
	Now, when we look at this, just in case you think everything is different in this country, you have an analyst saying, well, we need to see some pain.
	We've got to have unemployment jump to 40 to 50%.
	This is what their thinking is.
	In other words, they're not looking at the welfare of people in these countries.
	Instead, what they're looking at is their wealth and their power and to manipulate things.
	So Jeremy Grantham, hedge fund manager, speaking in a conference in Sydney, said, in my view, he says, unemployment has to jump 40 to 50 percent, in my view.
	We need to see pain in the economy.
	We need to remind people that they work for the employer and not the other way around.
	We've got to show them who's boss, right?
	Quite frankly, you know, this guy's got the mind of Chairman Mao.
	I mean, that was the purpose of the Great Leap Forward.
	You know, I'm going to show these people who's boss.
	That was the purpose of Stalin's halamador.
	I'm going to show these people who's boss.
	We need to show, remind them they work for the employer and not the other way around.
	The tradies, the trades, have definitely pulled back on productivity.
	They've been paid a lot.
	To do not too much in the last few years, and we need to see that change.
	Crack the whip. This guy is like...
	He's like these old robber barons, Mr.
	Potter from...
	It's a Wonderful Life.
	Well, let's look a little bit at Javier Malay.
	And there's also something here, not only about...
	What is happening in terms of economics and an economic shift.
	But also what is happening in terms of a political shift.
	And that is the basis of this article from the American Conservative.
	Because they're talking about the international new right.
	You have all these labels, right?
	Are you alt-right? Are you new right?
	Are you Christian nationalism?
	I mean, we have all these different labels that are put out there.
	And the labels, for the most part, don't really mean much.
	For the most part, it's just a means of controlling discourse, of taking the high ground rhetorically and that type of thing.
	So we always have to be careful about it.
	Don't put too much into labels.
	They're weaponized, always, and created by your opponents, usually.
	But take a look at what is behind this.
	He did have some interesting observations about what is going on politically and about the alliances that are forming, because the money is really kind of a reflection of that.
	So the victory of Javier Malay in the Argentine presidential election, open primary, took the political world by storm.
	And again, we talked about that a little bit with Axel Kaiser and the author of that book.
	He is a self-confessed anarcho-capitalist Famously known as El Palooka, I guess, as you pronounce it that way, the wig, because of his hair.
	And when I interviewed Axel, I said, well, you know, Wall Street Journal does an article about this guy.
	And you would think that being the Wall Street Journal, they'd want to talk about his economic policies, but all they wanted to do was to talk about his hair.
	And so I said, I want you to tell me what's on his mind.
	His eccentric hair, he claims, is combed only by the invisible hand.
	He goes to a barber named Adam Smith, I guess.
	He rose to stardom as a radio host and a frequent TV guest while Argentina's economy collapsed under rapid devaluation, three-digit inflation, and rising poverty.
	And then here's the background, of course.
	We all know about Evita Perón because of musicals and stuff.
	Don't cry for me, Argentina.
	Evita was what that was called.
	And if you've got a Marxist in politics and you've got a corrupt regime that goes on forever and ever, you can bet that they're going to do Broadway plays and musicals and movies about it.
	For 80 years, the Argentine political landscape has been dominated by the Peronismo, a big tent movement created by Juan Domingo Perón after World War II as a nationalist and populist third wave between Soviet communism and Western capitalism.
	But it took a hard left turn in 2003 with President Nestor Kirchner, a close ally of Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro.
	So it might appear obvious why a populist uprising seems set to thrust a libertarian into power in Argentina.
	But, as the American conservatives Bradley Devlin has asked, in other words, it might not seem obvious, I think is what they meant to say, How does a libertarian that wants to end the Argentine Central Bank and to privatize state assets, how does that fall under the umbrella of the international new right, which is typically more skeptical of capitalism and less scared of wielding state power?
	The new right, a populist right, a national conservatism, or whatever you want to call it, remains a new phenomenon, he said.
	And, um... It doesn't have a unified ideological or conceptual foundation.
	And so what is really happening here?
	Again, I don't care about the narratives, or the labels, rather, they're used to shape the narratives.
	So they interviewed, in the American conservative, they interviewed a close ally of Malai, And his name is Augustin Lager.
	And so they asked him the question.
	They said, why did he win in these primaries?
	And why is he now leading in the polls for the presidential thing?
	They said, well, the Peronismo was a catch-all populist movement.
	So it was populist, but it was populist with leftist socialist economics, highly centralized government control.
	And so he said it has dominated Argentine politics for 80 years, and now it's 21st century socialism.
	They manipulated public opinion through public TV and radio.
	They bought journalists.
	They bought the movie industry.
	They bought the schools, the universities, through intellectual groups paid by the state.
	And again, this is exactly what the plan has been in America today.
	The plan for this, for the early 20th century Marxists, is not about a violent revolution per se.
	It's about, first, marching through the institutions.
	We talk about how the Marxists are trying to create a race war here, and that is true.
	But part of that is that's really only possible after they've marched through the institutions, like we just mentioned.
	The news media, entertainment, schools, universities, that type of thing.
	Then they're able to go to war with us.
	They had the march through the institutions.
	They have now accomplished that.
	And that's why all these institutions, including corporations, are now weaponized against...
	The values, the history, the culture, the laws of our country.
	There was a group of citizens who waged a culture war as we could, as much of a culture war as we could.
	We wrote books. We gave conferences.
	We gave workshops. We hosted debates.
	We used our social media.
	We did podcasts.
	We created YouTube channels.
	We wrote on Twitter. See?
	You do what you can.
	You know that they're going to censor you.
	You know they're going to shut you down, but you do what you can.
	And that information does get out to some degree.
	And even though they get most of it, What gets through is still very powerful because it's the truth.
	And because people are so hungry for the truth.
	And so I have to keep telling myself, and all of you who are involved in this, Jason Barker and Angry Tiger and Gard, when you're looking at this, it is, even though it's difficult to break through with this stuff, We have to remember and we have to understand, and this is a good example of this in Argentina, that what gets through is going to be very powerful and people are really hungry for the truth.
	They know they're being lied to, just like the people in Stalinist Russia knew they were being lied to.
	They said there's no truth in Pravda, which meant truth, and there's no news in Izvestia, which meant news.
	They knew they were being lied to.
	He said some of them were able to get into mainstream media, and that is the case with Javier Malay.
	He managed to get into the systems media due to the intrinsic characteristics of his personality.
	He's got a very TV-like personality.
	The hair, right?
	So he said, He says, And at a certain moment, Javier Malay decided that it was time to reap the fruits that we had been sowing.
	And so now it was time to reap the fruits through an electoral struggle by creating a political party.
	And the political party that they've created, they called Liberty Advances.
	That's good. This is very important to understand Malay's victory in the primary.
	Public opinion in Argentina has turned to the right in such a way that the other two political alliances had to opt for figures as far to the right as their own spaces would allow.
	That's interesting. So we had three parties that were there.
	He finished first. But the other two parties, even though they are left-wing, they moved as far to the right as they could.
	And they still came out second and third.
	So he says, Bullrich is the most right-wing that exists within the Juntos El Cabrio, the center-right coalition.
	Masa is the most right-wing that exists within Kirchnerismo.
	He says, this is what the election looks like here.
	You don't have any politician talking about social justice.
	You don't have politicians talking in the name of social and collective rights.
	You do not have politicians talking about redistribution of wealth in Argentina.
	You do not have politicians in the campaign talking about leftist cultural issues.
	You do not have politicians at this moment Raising feminist flags or multi-color flags or using so-called inclusive language that we're seeing everywhere in the United States.
	Because these people are running from shop to shop trying to find food with the little money that they've got that is constantly losing its value.
	They got serious there.
	You see, it's one thing when you look at all of this stuff that is happening that he just mentioned, you know, social justice and You know, redistribution of wealth and reparations and the LGBT stuff.
	These are first-world problems when people don't have any real problems.
	But I think it's bigger than that, quite frankly.
	You know, as a Christian, I think I look at those things as a test.
	Because I understand that our blessings come from God.
	And this is the test.
	Are we going to follow God or are we going to follow the culture?
	Are we going to speak up and stand on that or are we going to cave on that?
	This other stuff is downstream from it.
	The politics and all the rest of this stuff is downstream from that.
	But anyway, getting back to this...
	He said, some basic numbers that may be useful for readers who want to understand this.
	We're already headed toward 150% inflation.
	We have 45% of the population below the poverty line.
	Six of ten children do not eat every day.
	We have a fiscal deficit.
	We have a huge devaluation of the currency.
	The country has 2 million more poor people every year.
	And a country of only 42 million people.
	That's amazing. He says we have about 160 different taxes, and we have one of the highest tax pressures in the world.
	And so they said, well, something, they asked him another question.
	They said, something that has confused people in the U.S., Is that although he is allied with a new right, and he claims to be an admirer of Trump and he endorses Bolsonaro, he seems to be cut from a different cloth, doesn't he?
	In the U.S., the populist right shares a certain level of skepticism of the free market and of capitalism, while Malai is a confessed anarcho-capitalist on a theoretical level and a libertarian in practical terms.
	So how does he fit into this new right?
	This is what I think is interesting when he starts talking about the different labels that we have here, and we need to start thinking about this in different terms.
	You know, these labels are very superficial, and these labels are used to cloud, I think, what's going on in the same way they talk about people.
	You know, the blue states and the red states.
	Red is always the color of the Marxists, so of course they didn't want us to make that connection.
	So they called conservatives and libertarians, they called them red.
	And we foolishly went along with that.
	So the new right is an effort to articulate three sectors that in principle would seem to be incompatible.
	Libertarians, conservatives, and patriots or sovereigntists.
	He said not all libertarians, conservatives, and sovereigntists are compatible with the new right.
	For example, a progressive libertarian does not fit into the new right, but the most important libertarian politician in history, Ron Paul, was allied with conservatives and was completely opposed to the abortion agenda.
	He said others, more dogmatic, who can only read politics under religious glasses, these would not belong in this in many cases.
	But he said finally you have the patriots or the sovereigntists And on the other hand, you have the statists who do not confuse love for the homeland with love for the state, right?
	So that's the key thing, key difference, you know, confusing love for the state with love for the homeland.
	He says, for example, now, it's going to look different in different places.
	In the case of Spain, it is expected that the one who's going to take the lead in the alliance will be somebody who is a sovereigntist and Or somebody from the patriotic sector because the problems affecting Spain have to do with the EU government in Brussels, with illegal immigration, and with a government that has a 2030 agenda ministry.
	And he said in the United States, something relatively similar could be said.
	In addition, the United States has a geopolitical situation or a confrontation with China that calls for protecting American industry from unfair competition against a political force that uses slaves to To generate wealth.
	Now, in Argentina, it is expected that under the economic conditions of the country in the last 20 years, the sector that is going to be capable of articulating and leading the new right will be libertarian.
	In other words there, it's more of an economic approach to take.
	But here's the key thing. And here's the key thing that is missing in our approach here in America.
	And that is any kind of intellectual, philosophical, principled basis.
	That's what we're missing with Trump.
	That's the big danger of the MAGA movement.
	And I said for the longest time, even when you go back to the Tea Party, that's fine.
	Tea Party meant tax enough already.
	But what do you want to do?
	Do you want to lower spending?
	Do you want to lower taxes? If you don't understand what your basic philosophy is, what is government actually supposed to look like?
	And we never had that.
	And we don't have that from Trump either.
	There is no clear, concise vision, and there certainly isn't any adherence to any principles.
	Well, I see now that we have Dr.
	shiva yadure that is ready so we're going to take a quick break and we are going to connect with him and we will be right back 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 All right,
	welcome back, and joining us now is Dr.
	Shiva Ayyadurai, and we'll say hello to the people who are on his live stream who are also following us.
	And, of course, he is running for president, and he's done so many different things.
	And he was, as we were connecting while this commercial break was going on our program, he was saying, you know, let's follow up on what a real leader looks like.
	Thank you for joining us, Dr.
	Shiva, and what does a real leader look like?
	We were talking about what is happening in Argentina, what is happening in America with Trump.
	Well, David, I think if you look at, in my sense of real leadership, there's three elements, you know?
	There's a clear vision.
	There's a scientific or philosophical framework that you can communicate to people on why that vision should be supported.
	And then the last piece is a practicality or what we call the engineering.
	You know, how do you execute on that vision?
	Because it's good to talk about stuff, but you've got to be able to execute on it.
	And this is true, I think, in any endeavor, right?
	If you're serious about something, if you're an entrepreneur, you have a very clear vision.
	You have to have some physics or science, how you can achieve that vision.
	And there's a material reality of how you execute it.
	That's right. And to me, those are sort of the three foundations.
	And if you tie that into the foundation of our country, you've got a clear articulation of the view, the general view of what government's purpose is in the Declaration of Independence, and then you've got the plan and the framework of how you're going to achieve that in the Constitution.
	And we seem to just, that doesn't really matter anymore.
	We just do whatever we think is going to make us popular or give us fame, fortune, and a following, right?
	Right. Yeah, I think you nailed it.
	And the reason this has happened is, I think you mentioned this about how Hollywood essentially finds characters You see, to run their operations.
	They have the front. You may have seen that swarm video I did, David.
	If you haven't, you should check it out.
	It's a 15-minute video that I really explain what the swarm is.
	It's not really a swamp because it means it's a geographical location.
	And what's important when you go through that, you really understand that the forces of power, profit, and control have people who are just interested in power, right?
	Right. The hundred university presidents, you know, let's say those people were involved in the non-profits like Clinton Global Initiative, right?
	All these kinds of people.
	Then the other people are interested in just profit, maximization of profit at any cost, right?
	Which includes the central banks, you know, probably 2,000 leaders of the major CEOs.
	And then front-facing is you have the way to control the masses, right?
	And the controlling of the masses involves the obvious establishment, you know, that everyone says, Oh yeah, they're evil.
	Right.
	The Clintons or the Bushes by and large people sort of understand that, but the more I think the insidious people are that not so obvious establishment, the Trump's right.
	The Joe Rogan's the fucker Carlson's, as I like to call them.
	Right.
	And we're going to talk about our interaction with Alex Jones, you know, And it's important to have a candid conversation.
	I stopped going on Alex's show, and you had a falling out with him, and I think it's important for the public to understand why we sort of don't support that anymore.
	And it's a deeper discussion, which follows into this obvious and not-so-obvious establishment.
	And what's really happened, David, is they've gotten so good now, the swarm itself evolves.
	Its intelligence evolves.
	So they're watching the behavior of our movement, the fact we're getting on the ground and handing out leaflets, right?
	They're watching that.
	We're relentlessly exposing Kennedy.
	We're relentlessly exposing Trump.
	And in response to that, they see they have enough data.
	Wow, people are starting to follow Dr.
	Shiva. They're starting to absorb his content.
	And so immediately, they'll manufacture these people actually mouthing back our positions, but to lead people back into the establishment.
	But that dynamic is what people need to get educated about.
	But coming back to what you were saying, David, is, yeah, the founders...
	They actually had sort of a classical philosophical framework, right?
	Coming out of sort of classical liberalism philosophy, right?
	The period of the Enlightenment.
	Then they had the engineering, because these guys were engineers and surveyors and architects.
	Jefferson could build stuff.
	Franklin was an inventor.
	Washington was a surveyor.
	They actually had to build real things with their own hands, not like outsourcing to others.
	So, and then they had a very clear vision, right?
	Which was their inalienable rights.
	This is quite profound.
	And because they were builders and they were scientists and they were visionaries, they materialized all of that.
	You know, they said, okay, we're going to balance the power.
	Yeah. I mean, when you look at the documents that they wrote, they're like engineering diagrams to me.
	They're like blueprints.
	They're specifications. Any of these fellows here could...
	I mean, I can't think Trump even writing one sentence of the Declaration of Independence or Constitution, right?
	I can't think of Booby Kennedy doing any of this, you know?
	So, what we have...
	We kind of read like ChatGPT, you know?
	Trying to plagiarize something.
	I talked about that earlier. It's really kind of a joke.
	Turn it into English type of thing, you know?
	And it's plagiarizing it and then translating it into English.
	That's what they would probably do.
	But that's a key thing. They had a vision, a clear vision.
	The government is there to protect our rights.
	That's the principal mission of the government.
	They set up a framework to do it and to guard against as much as possible, but of course it has to be enforced by us.
	Yeah.
	Yeah. Yeah,
	I think what's happened, David, to this character piece, what's happened is a degeneration of these basic fundamental values.
	And the degeneration piece has been to convince people...
	Look, our leaders ultimately reflect our consciousness.
	This is my view, you know?
	So they've convinced people that your personal integrity and your public integrity can be two different things.
	There was an interview with this fool, Boobie Kennedy, as I call him, and that's what we should call him.
	And I call him that because I want people not to have respect for these people.
	And the interviewer starts talking about how, you know, Herschel Walker, you know, said one thing and does another thing, right?
	He said he was against for pro-life and then he had various abortions.
	Or his own uncle who killed a woman here, Ted Kennedy.
	So Boobie's squirming.
	And he goes, well, let me tell you, your personal integrity and your public integrity are two different things.
	Wow. Quote, unquote, to Megyn Kelly.
	So, you have people telling you to your face, this is a new...
	They're new ethos.
	I can do anything what I want.
	I can hire prostitutes.
	I can, you know, have a relationship with them when my wife is pregnant.
	I can pay them off.
	I can travel with Epstein on his plane.
	I can travel with Epstein.
	But you Christian evangelicals will still think I'm a redeemed, good, you know, saved human being.
	Right? So they have manipulated people to lowering their standards at such low levels, David.
	And so what...
	What needs to happen is you have to set the standards high.
	And you cannot compromise.
	And those people who come, you build a movement around that.
	And then, like a magnet, you bring more and more and more filings over, right?
	But if you compromise to the...
	30% of people have no integrity, in my view, or resistors...
	50% of people are watching which way the wind blows.
	Their ethics are based on which way the wind blows.
	And there's 20% who will always stand firm.
	And my view is you don't kowtow to the 50%.
	You don't kowtow to the 30%.
	You completely don't even argue with the 30% even.
	But you mobilize the 20% with the highest values.
	In our case, truth and freedom and health, right?
	Right. And you educate those people.
	You educate those people that you should have a really vicious, you know, you have to be like a Doberman to those 30% of the people.
	And these numbers, by the way, David, many, many years ago when I was like 29 years old, I was running a company called Echo Mail.
	Yeah. And I was invited to speak to the top 2,500 General Motors executives, right?
	With a guy that I shared the stage with, a very, very wise guy by the name of Price Pritchett.
	He was one of the world's leading organizational theorists.
	And GM was having major problems then.
	And he got up on the stage and he said, look...
	30% of people in your organization, and by the way, he'd studied all different organizations, pygmy cultures, aboriginal cultures, non-profit organizations, Fortune 1000 companies, and he always noticed 30% of people are complete pygmy.
	Assholes. Resisters.
	They will always never want to do anything.
	Okay? 50% of people are the fence-sitters, he called them.
	And then 20% are the change agents.
	And he said the biggest mistake change agents make, they spend 90% of their time arguing with the 30%.
	And they burn themselves out.
	So he said, you have to be like a Doberman.
	At those 30%, you have to viciously annihilate them because they will destroy your organization.
	So in my view, Trump, Booby Kennedy, you know, now they have this other brown-nosed Brahmin big pharma bullshitter, Vivek the Snake, right?
	And Tulsi Gabbard, another one, right?
	They manufacture these people.
	And these people are typically the ones that...
	You know, the 8 billion people are taught to say, well, you know, they did say some nice things, David.
	David, why are you attacking Trump?
	You know, he did work hard for us.
	You know, Booby didn't do this.
	And that trick, and those are the people that are used to manipulate the other 50.
	And it's not just that.
	They'll say, well, sometimes they don't even have to come up with something nice about their candidate.
	They just tell you how awful the other guy is.
	You know, you don't want this other guy.
	You take anybody other than that guy.
	So, you know, let's go with this. And they'll always give you a choice.
	You know, it's A or B. It's just the Gellian dialectic that they got going.
	It's this flyer we came up with, the lesser of the two evils is killing your children.
	That's right. And that's become the focus, the core of the campaign.
	So what is the vision that we have, David?
	A very clear vision.
	Truth, freedom, health. And notice I don't use the word and.
	It's truth, freedom, health.
	It's a composite structure.
	Vision-wise, you need all those three because without freedom, you can't do any real science to get to truth.
	Without truth, you can't really understand what's good for your economic health, physical health, infrastructure health.
	And without health, you fundamentally have no way of fighting for freedom of truth.
	You don't have the wherewithal.
	You don't have the strength.
	So in my view, all those three have to exist.
	So that's a clear vision.
	The philosophy and the science of that, David, you know, at the time of the time of our founders, you know, they were coming off the enlightenment, right?
	Or a period of great new findings in chemistry and science, etc.
	So these people were very moved by science, right?
	The physical sciences were being, you know, physical chemistry was coming with the work of Lavazier and all these kind of guys, right?
	So they had a physical sense and they had a deep curiosity.
	So they were including scientific philosophy, some of, you know, classical philosophy, right?
	So here, we live today, David, when you step back in the world of very complex systems now.
	The systems we have today really didn't exist in 1776.
	We didn't have a transportation system.
	We didn't have healthcare systems.
	We didn't have election systems, right?
	It was much simpler. So it was only the 1900s and the 1950s that the science of systems came.
	So, system science, which is, by the way, what the elites learn, George Soros is one of the leaders in the field of reflexivity theory.
	So, if we want to be a leader in today's world, and you don't understand how systems work at a scientific level, you're just a moron, okay?
	Because someone else is going to tell you what to do.
	Mm-hmm. Right?
	Right. So as a system scientist who studied this for years, in order to achieve that vision of truth, freedom, health, and to really do a systems overhaul, that's where we're at, you need to have a foundational understanding of system science.
	So we now educate people on that, David.
	It's not only for the hallowed halls of MIT.
	And then the engineering is you have to get on the ground.
	There's no other way to change the world anymore because social media is completely controlled by the elites.
	The First Amendment is destroyed.
	On November 16, 2018, Trump is the one who signed CISA into law, the cybersecurity infrastructure security agency.
	As my lawsuit revealed, is the one that allowed the unholy alliance between government and social media companies to destroy the First Amendment.
	That's right.
	Trump did that.
	Unanimously voted by every member of Congress, by unanimous consent by every member of the Senate.
	So everyone needs to understand that all of these people were involved in destroying the First Amendment.
	They passed a law which abridges our freedom of speech.
	And what does the First Amendment say?
	Congress shall pass no law to bridge freedom of speech.
	That's what they did.
	Brought to you by Trump.
	That's right.
	Yeah, and you go back and you look at CISA, you know, the way I pronounce it, but, you know...
	It used to always be CISPA, right?
	They tried over and over again to get CISPA through there.
	What was the P? Why'd they take it out?
	Well, because that was protection, right?
	And we all know that what it was protection for was for the corporations were going to be protected from any liability when they spied on us as the deputized state.
	And so when they finally got it through, they took that out and pretended that wasn't really what it was about.
	It was about protecting us.
	It's always about protecting us, isn't it, when they enslave us and they were The Constitution is always about our protection and our safety.
	But that's the subversion that was there from the very beginning.
	And, of course, going back to 2018, that's when they first started openly colluding and censoring on a massive scale.
	And it's been that way ever since.
	I mean, I can't even get...
	I've been kicked off so many times off of YouTube, I don't even bother to get on anymore.
	I just go to Rumble and other places like that.
	Because the last time I got kicked off, she was because I had...
	I thought, well, let me just put up some Christmas music that I did for the program.
	And I have music that I do for a little bit of a break that's about a minute.
	So I had several Christmas songs.
	The Rogans, the Fucker Carlsons, the James O'Keefe's, right?
	You can go down the list. It's a grifter media.
	They may even say negative stuff against them.
	That is allowed because that's a fake dialectic that they're creating.
	Anyone who exposes that swarm is shadow banned.
	I know this on a very personal level because in 2020, as we've shared before, you were one of the few people to cover it.
	When I was thrown off Twitter for exposing the government backdoor portal into Twitter in 2020, which Glenn Greenwald and Tucker Carlson concealed.
	Tucker Carlson concealed it.
	He had all of it. They waited two years to delay the truth.
	That was a limited hangout.
	It was a CIA intelligence operation that Tucker did with The Intercept.
	That's what really happened. Then Elon Musk, another goon of the establishment, was brought in.
	sugarcoat and make the conservatives think now twitter was a safe place yes and all the conservatives fell into line dinesh d'Souza another opportunist scumbag okay james woods every one of them they started bowing down to elon and now you have isaac walter isaacson doing a big biography on him who by the way comes out of the aspen institute which is like this with the wef right oh yeah yeah but they are creating their false heroes
	so now they have their neo media swarm tucker carlson elon musk james yeah. Who says, oh, Elon Musk is fighting censorship.
	When he knows, he came to all of our lawsuit hearings.
	He knows a backdoor portal still exists.
	He knows Elon has done nothing.
	He knows Elon and government are like this.
	SpaceX, $6 billion.
	elon got he got what 1.5 billion dollars from uh government to make uh tesla profitable and the section 230 immunity ensures that twitter so elon musk where government ends and elon musk nobody knows so all of these guys are part of the swarm and when you expose them is when they shadow ban Now it's a digital cage.
	They let you on Twitter, but they control it.
	That's censorship 10.0.
	What's great, David, the good news is this.
	And I want to share the good news.
	Because in 2020, we got our stuff out to about a half a billion people.
	It was a time when the censors hadn't caught up.
	Right? So now when they make us invisible, David, we have so many people saying, wait a minute, Dr.
	Shiva's the one who ran the Fire Fauci campaign.
	Why is Megyn Kelly now covering it?
	Wait a minute, Dr.
	Shiva's the one who talked about the immune system and how you need to boost natural immunity.
	Dr. Shiva's the one who discovered the backdoor portal.
	Why did Fucker Carlson wait two years?
	Why isn't any one of them interviewing him when he's probably the most qualified candidate to become president?
	He's got all the degrees.
	He has a science, he has an engineering, he has a vision.
	And that active invisibility that they're doing, David, in my view, it's gonna destroy them, and it's a good thing.
	Now, added to that, we encourage people to get on the ground.
	Because when people get on the ground, they can't manipulate this.
	We tell people in a simple way, old school, take a bumper sticker, put it on the back of your car.
	100,000 people see it.
	So we're encouraging people to make them empower themselves to think, to fight, and to heal.
	And no one else is going to do it.
	And then we've given them the operating system to do that, David.
	You know, all the science that I could still be just a professor at MIT teaching, right?
	We've taken it out of there and brought it to the masses.
	So that's what's exciting, David.
	And I think it's important that we transcend these systems.
	As you point out, you know, when you look at the electoral system, I got involved with third-party stuff 30 years ago.
	I was idealistic enough to think that maybe we could make a change with it.
	And I found out just how controlled the two-party system is from ballot access to debates to the rest of the stuff, and it's only gotten worse.
	And so they control this from the inside very rigidly.
	I mean, just take a look at what is happening with the debates.
	What is happening with the debates between the different candidates and how they're being shut down?
	I think the Democrat Party has taken it to a new level to protect Biden as we're going through all this.
	But that's the way they can manipulate these things from the top down, and that's how they control who even gets on the ballot.
	I think the Democrats, I think they're doing something even more insidious, David.
	What's happened is, if you look at the Democrats...
	Or the Republicans. Typically, they have the obvious establishment wings, right?
	Let's say the Bushes on the right or the Bidens.
	The swarm is actually getting more intelligent, David, and we need to understand this so we don't get fooled by Booby Kennedy, because he's a complete bullshitter.
	Let me explain why. If you go back to 1984, you remember Jesse Jackson, right?
	Mm-hmm. Remember him?
	He was running for president.
	They had the obvious establishment, which was Reagan, and let's say the obvious establishment candidate, which was Mondale.
	They had the wings of the right, which were like the emerging Tea Party, and they had the wings of the left.
	the wings, which sometimes will talk against the establishment.
	Like Jesse Jackson would say stuff against Mondale, and he was building a quote-unquote movement.
	At the last minute, Jesse Jackson brings all of his votes, and he says, look, we need to choose the lesser of two evils.
	Okay, and the left and the right have been doing this.
	What's happened recently, if you look at Sanders, that was his job.
	Sanders did that in 2016 for Hillary.
	He took all the young volunteers and got, oh yeah, Hillary, she's part of the establishment, you know, did that thing, even though he's with them, says all the words to act like he's anti-establishment.
	And then at the last minute, he gives all of his votes to Hillary Clinton.
	This election, Bernie, typically they wait until November to do that.
	Or October. Bernie's already done that.
	So, in my view, they don't have a not so obvious establishment on the left.
	That's where Kennedy comes in.
	Kennedy, literally, David, I can show you word for word, has spies come into our campaign, literally steal our content.
	Word for word.
	And so they are setting him up, and potentially Tulsi Gabbard, to come in to be the new not-so-obvious establishment, mouthing all this stuff, and being the alternative to the, quote-unquote, the Democratic left wing.
	Okay? And I think one of the things about Kennedy that has bothered me the most is, you know, this new book that he's done, which is all about the Wuhan lab.
	And I see this, as I did from the very beginning, as a move to legitimize all these pandemic actions.
	To say, hey, this is a real pandemic, and it's the Chinese, and we've got to go get the Chinese, because the Chinese are the enemy of the establishment.
	And so, to me, that was a real establishment move of misdirection.
	Because, you know, again, forgetting, let's ignore the vaccine and stuff like that.
	Let's focus on the Wuhan lab.
	I think that is a real revelation of where he's coming from when you're talking about being fake opposition.
	David, they're both connected because, remember the Kennedys, there's two threads that go through the Kennedys.
	They're really the purveyors, the beginners and pioneers of global imperialism.
	You know, U.S. imperialism.
	John Kennedy was not fighting the military-industrial-academic complex.
	There's a wonderful video that just came out.
	If you look at the Kennedys on the imperialist front, Kennedy was an absolute imperialist, right?
	Yeah. But the Camelot mythos is created, forgetting the fact that he was a reckless idiot.
	He created one of the biggest blunders with PT-109.
	He wasn't even allowed to go into the Navy.
	His father had to get him in, Joe Kennedy.
	And then after he was shot, because it was a mob war, in my view, one mobster fighting against another mobster, they had to make him as though he was fighting against the establishment.
	when in fact four weeks before he dies or is assassinated he says we must stay in vietnam he wanted to escalate the war there the video just came out okay then they make the brother seem like robert kennedy the father of booby seem like he's some peacenik
	he's giving a massive talk on the floor of the u.s senate completely supporting lbj's escalation of the war and then booby is a multi-tongued um snake When he launches his campaign, he says, we are in Ukraine, quote unquote, for all the right reasons.
	And he goes, however, I'm against regime change.
	Oh, but I want to thank my son who went and fought there.
	Mm-hmm. Well, he's the one who endorsed Hillary Clinton three times, who's a mistress of regime change, right?
	Everywhere she went. She's the one who did the regime change in Ukraine.
	So that's just on the imperialist front.
	And now going after China, trying to create the dialectic that it's US versus China, right?
	When you know that both of these organizations have worked together against people, right?
	If anything, the whole concept of BRICS It's a new not-so-obvious establishment to move.
	The trillionaires are going to move capital out of the U.S. to these emerging markets, destroy the U.S. and bring them back.
	Now, if you go look at the vaccine thing, you'll see the same thread of what a scumbag he is.
	Go back to John F. Kennedy.
	He's the one who created the 1962 Vaccination Act.
	Which created all those corrupt institutions in government, but most importantly, it said government has a right to come into your physical body.
	That was done by John Kennedy.
	Wow. 1962.
	Then, 24 years later, as people are getting injured, they're filing lawsuits legitimately in the third branch of government called the judiciary in federal cases.
	Ted Kennedy, the guy who murdered a woman here in Massachusetts and got away with it, Boobie's uncle, John Kennedy's brother, is the one who was a co-sponsor of the Senate side of the bill to create the 1986 National Vaccine Injury Program, which basically said we're going to protect Big Pharma.
	You can't go to the judiciary and sue.
	You must now sue within a new government entity, more government, that they put under Health and Human Services.
	The incisive thing that people need to understand about Boobie, he's a freaking snake.
	What he says, you know, when I got into the medical freedom movement, I realized all these contradictions.
	Wait a minute, Hillary Clinton three times?
	Here in Massachusetts, he came and endorsed his own nephew, who was pro-rabidly for vaccine mandates in 2020.
	Then at his own home, right?
	People like to have an RNA jab.
	But more interestingly is, everyone needs to actually look at what he's saying.
	He's saying, I believe, he said this, we have a live on video, I'm for full vaccination of all Americans.
	I vaccinated all my kids.
	And then he proceeds to, that's the first part of the video.
	And then the second part of the video is even more damning, if you really study it.
	He says, what does he say?
	He goes, we must, he attacks the CDC and all these organisms that got created by his uncle.
	Mm-hmm. But he goes, he's going to now, getting back to the very important word used, create safe vaccine, safety.
	Whenever we hear the word buzzword safety, it means more government, more government's going to get into, like we talked about what happened after 9-11, right?
	Oh, yeah, absolutely. And you look at the other part of this that, you know, I talk about the different MacGuffins.
	They always have some kind of a crisis that they use to scare us.
	It doesn't really matter what it is, as Hitchcock said, right?
	The MacGuffin doesn't matter. It could be the Maltese Falcon or whatever.
	It could be climate change. But they always use that to achieve their objective.
	And he's a true believer on that kind of stuff.
	And he has pushed that very hard.
	And you hear him say the kind of things like, well, you know, we wouldn't have to worry about getting rid of fossil fuels if you just stopped the subsidies.
	And yet when you look at the subsidies that are there for the green stuff, And he believes that government is, in the sense of the old-style Democrat, selling the idea that government can solve our problems.
	But I like what you were talking about before in terms of the Kennedys and the different crime families shooting it out.
	Today, right now, at this point in time, we haven't had any physical assassinations or anything.
	We've got this lawfare thing that's going back and forth.
	And I saw an interesting thing from James Carville, the old Democrat strategist, and he said, how did we get so lucky for them to impeach Biden?
	They love this stuff.
	And I've always looked at this and I said, you know, they can't be so dense and so stupid that they don't understand how they're building Trump up.
	They want to build Trump up by the indictments, and that makes him, you know, the avatar, the messiah for the followers of Trump.
	And now Carville is saying, all right, now they're going to do it.
	For our side, for Biden, he really needs help.
	And they both will send emails, and they both will collect 10, 15 million bucks from those email candidates.
	They got it down to a racket.
	Yes. Oh, yeah. What's interesting, David, is over the last, you know...
	Two years, I've had to, even though, you know, I knew to hang out with Trump, you know, I had the meetings with him, you know, he thinks I'm amazing and all this.
	I've had to expose him, you know, hard.
	Yeah. We've had to expose the fact, you know, over the last six months, I'm saying, wait a minute, you Trumpers, you know, they would make the excuse, oh, Trump had to protect Fauci, right?
	Or he couldn't fire Fauci.
	Mm-hmm. But when we shared with him, look, here's a commendation award he gave.
	12 hours before he left.
	Now, Megyn Kelly didn't do anything about that.
	And she's part of the swarm, too.
	So you have to wonder why she's suddenly doing this interview.
	That was another theatrics that they just did two nights ago.
	Because I think Fucker Carlson has lost all this credibility.
	So now they need to create a new MSM person as though who's unbiased.
	So they bring her in.
	She asked, why didn't you fire Fauci?
	Why didn't you, you know, why did you get this commendation award?
	Oh, I didn't give it to him. But they're creating the new dynamic.
	It's pure theater. A week ago, Trump said, we will not comply.
	He says, when I'm back in office, I will get rid of these vaccine and mask mandates.
	But precisely, he was saying, oh, I can't get rid of them.
	That's what the governor's forced me to do.
	So they have this down, David.
	To this point, I think you're saying with the Biden impeachment, pure theater.
	It is. It's pure theater.
	And even when she talks to him about Fauci, she repeats his excuses.
	Well, it would have been too controversial, or I don't have that power, that type of thing.
	And yet, it didn't bother him when he fired Comey.
	Everybody said, oh, you can't do that.
	The FBI directors are appointed for 10 years.
	He fired him. He didn't even tell him.
	Well, that made money for both sides. Yeah, exactly.
	And then he did the same thing with Andrew McCabe.
	I mean, the bottom line is that the swamp is under the executive branch.
	You can fire these people.
	And he chose not to do it and even ran a campaign video, which I played here many times.
	Where he campaigned on his obedience to Fauci.
	It was a super cut of Fauci talking about how every time I told him to do this, he did it, you know?
	And basically, it was really kind of an emasculating thing to say that he did everything that Fauci told him to do when he told him to do it.
	But that was his campaign video.
	He had the top of the text to this amount to contribute to the Trump-Pence campaign and all the rest of the stuff.
	I mean, he campaigned on that, gave him the medal, all the rest of the stuff.
	He could have... He could have done that, but he chose instead to turn over the government to Fauci.
	And as I said earlier in the program, I don't buy the idea even of the mandates.
	I said, in the run-up to the election, I said, people are going to, these guys have different ways of approaching.
	You can offer carrots, you can offer sticks to get people to do this kind of stuff.
	And we saw that really with DeWine when he offered a million-dollar bonus of people to take the I said, Trump is going to run it out that way.
	He's going to run it through the corporations.
	And a lot of the stuff that Biden did was through corporations.
	He did have outright mandates.
	But Trump also supported mandates back in May of 2019, mandates for MMR vaccines.
	And he said, it's going around.
	You've got to get it. And so, you know, I don't have any problem believing that he'd do it.
	He was the pharma's ad man.
	I got the FDA to do this.
	He was supporting Operation Warp Speed.
	Pfizer's revenue had lost $25 billion.
	Just look at the facts.
	He took a million dollars to his inauguration campaign from Pfizer.
	The data is just in front of us.
	The issue is, David, that that 30% of people who are the quote-unquote MAGA cult members, right?
	We're never going to be able to change them.
	But what we're finding, David, the more we expose Trump and Kennedy, like we do open houses every Thursdays, we're finding now a whole set of people who are coming who are truly enlightened people.
	Well, we need to understand...
	They need to understand that.
	Look, I've gone down the list.
	I said, you know, what do you think about the lockdown?
	What do you think about being called non-essential?
	What do you think about the trillions of dollars training people for universal basic income?
	What do you think about the vaccine and all the rest of the stuff?
	It's like, but you support the guy who still brags about all that stuff and who still, you know, tries to tell you that the pandemic was real and it's the most dangerous thing we've ever had?
	That's the cognitive dissonance.
	And there is hope, I think.
	That the people can transcend that, but they also have to transcend the partisanship as well.
	Well, what's happening, David, is the more we expose, like a Doberman, these guys, the Trumps, it initially creates cognitive dissonance.
	But we're finding a subset of people who are actually, I wish I had some of these recordings, people are saying, you know, Dr.
	Shiva, I really hated you for cursing out boobie.
	Kennedy, but you know what?
	For two days, I didn't have sleep because everything you said was true, and I had to self-reflect, and that's why I'm part of supporting your campaign and your movement.
	So we're starting to get these very, very enlightened people, David, and those are the people that you can build a solid movement on, you see?
	And that's what's happening, so it's a good thing.
	But I think it's a good time to transition to Alex Jones.
	Sure, yeah. Yeah, we got about five minutes left.
	I don't want to do a clickbait thing here with people who said we'd talk about that.
	Yeah, yeah. So, I mean, maybe you should just start, David, and I'll sort of hop in.
	But I contacted David to everyone listening because the interviews I did with you, David, when I did interviews with Alex and Owen and you, yours was very, very thoughtful, you know?
	The last time I did an interview with Alex...
	You know, this was in the heat of 2020, 2021, where I was leading, exposing Fauci, leading, exposing Booby Kennedy's complicity.
	He was supporting lockdowns.
	And it's fascinating...
	Kennedy and this Klan, the Swarm, literally goes and finds another Indian guy from East Asia.
	A guy called Buttar.
	Buttar, I called him. And he called me up and I wanted me to do a live with him.
	And I said, look, why are you supporting Kennedy when he supported Hillary Clinton, who was part of Monsanto?
	And he goes, well, you know, Boobie's doing a lot of good things.
	I said, you know, you're a star fucker.
	And he goes, what did you call me?
	So anyway... That was a conversation with Butar.
	Alex has me on his show, and Alex and I are talking about exposing Kennedy, which is what he should be doing if he's really wanting to help people.
	Suddenly he says, Shiva, I'm now going to bring Rajiv Butar on, and I want you to have it out with him like he wanted to do a Jerry Springer with me.
	Oh, yeah. That's always a good Springer.
	And I go, you know, Alex, I'm here to educate people about what's going on.
	I said, I'm not playing your fucking game.
	And Alex said, you have to do my show.
	You know, we have, I have the right to free speech.
	I go, you can, but I'm not doing this.
	That was the last time I ever was on Alex's show.
	Because I realized that he wasn't about building a movement.
	That's right. He was about, at best, entertaining people, but not about getting to the root of the evil.
	And more recently, when my Swarm video got like 40 million views, David, it went everywhere.
	He took my Swarm video, put it on Infowars website, and then on the bottom of the fold, he's promoting Kennedy.
	Okay? Mm-hmm. So that's why when you realize Alex is part of the swarm, okay?
	Yeah. He's part of this.
	That's right. So I think to everyone listening, David was on Alex's show.
	And David, maybe you can share briefly with what happened, why you decided to break off, because I think it's an important piece people should know.
	Yeah, you go back and you look at the movement around Sandy Hook to try to push through massive gun control.
	And that's where the Sandy Hook lawsuit came from and that type of thing.
	But it was an all-out push.
	They kept going with more and more sensational stuff, and that's how they got entrapped with that.
	But he really was pushing at that point in time to try to stop gun control.
	But I noticed a big change in what happened with Infowars, and that really kind of came about with Trump.
	You know, with Trump, that was his ticket to fame and fortune and following.
	And he became a sycophant at that point in time.
	He had always been independent prior to that.
	And, you know, as I looked at Trump through the first three years or so, typical president says one thing, does another, doesn't follow through on what he has to say.
	People project what they want on these presidents.
	But... That type of thing was usual.
	But 2020 was a whole other level.
	It was the worst thing, in my opinion, I've seen my entire life in terms of politics.
	The biggest attack on our country, on the Constitution, on our liberties I've ever seen.
	And from the very beginning of this, because I had followed the types of, you know, the...
	Weaponized gain of function and things like that, that I think is a very, very dangerous thing that should be stopped.
	And I talked about it going back to 2014.
	Allison Young at USA Today did a very long expose about that.
	It's a real problem. It was shut down at that point in time, but Fauci and Francis Collins continued to do their research domestically, and they also set up the Wuhan Institute.
	And so when this stuff started buzzing around by China, I said, you know what, that's...
	This wet lab thing is absolute nonsense, but did they really have something escape out of Wuhan?
	So we need to keep an eye on that.
	But it was clear from January on that they were hyping this into some kind of a global pandemic where they didn't even have a body count.
	And don't cut us off.
	We'll just extend this, Travis.
	Well, they didn't have a body count, but they were coming up with the same procedures.
	Hey, David, just to remind people, it was January 6th.
	That's when they said, you know, they showed pictures in China of people suddenly falling down, right?
	These dramatic pictures.
	And this virus was now coming to the United States.
	That's what you're talking about, right? That's right, yeah.
	That was so incredibly fake.
	And then their reaction to this was something that had been practiced in the United States by the intelligence agencies for 20 years, going back to dark winter, which was two months before 9-11.
	And then you had 9-11 the week after 9-11.
	You had the anthrax attack.
	And two months later, Congress sent out a bunch of legislation to the states and said, give yourself the power to in a public health emergency to take everything from everybody.
	lock everybody down until we get an experimental vaccine and they're going to be required to take So we knew all of this stuff.
	I knew it. Alex knew it.
	Mike Adams knew it. All of us knew that.
	When I saw that, when I saw the falling down, I saw the other stuff, it's like, okay.
	So just to be clear, David, what you're saying is everyone knew...
	That this whole Wuhan thing was basically a psyop that was going on.
	And internally, even Alex knew that.
	I absolutely, 100% believe that.
	We had talked for years about the games of panic and how they would skew the statistics and all the rest of this stuff from the CDC to get people to do the annual flu vaccine thing.
	And, uh, as a matter of fact, um, you know, um, Mike Adams had been involved in that as well.
	And Mike Adams, uh, directly challenged me on that.
	So, oh, David Knight doesn't know anything about math and all the rest of the stuff.
	It's like, I've got an engineering degree.
	Uh, he says he's got a science degree, but he doesn't say what it's in.
	He doesn't say where he got it from.
	I'll tell everybody where I got mine from, uh, University of South Florida.
	And, um, In electrical engineering, look, it's not rocket science, and it wasn't even necessarily about the numbers.
	We're talking about how they manipulated the numbers that they had done every year on an annual basis.
	But it was clearly their pattern of behavior and what they wanted from these simulations, and they all knew about that.
	And so when they started selling this stuff, it's like...
	You know, I pushed back on that.
	We had loggerheads, and I started calling out Mike Adams by name.
	And yet Alex was giving him the show on a regular basis, you know, which is not a position that I had.
	But Alex would do three hours, and he'd have a guest host.
	And so you just had Mike on all the time.
	And he did the same type of stuff with me that you told me he did with you in terms of dumping somebody on unexpectedly.
	And I was told by someone that I'd interviewed that I didn't watch Alex's programs because I, you know, I had enough to do to create my own stuff for a three-hour show.
	And I said, yeah, Alex is telling people that this isn't the bad vaccine, that the bad vaccine from the Gates wants a really bad one.
	Trump is playing 4D chess and he's not doing that.
	I didn't believe that.
	But let me just state that.
	So Alex was saying he was basically supporting Trump's Fauci vaccine.
	He was saying this isn't as bad.
	This isn't as bad as what Gates and the other people are because Trump is in there.
	He's pulling it back, you know.
	He's playing fifth-dimensional chess, and this vaccine is not going to be as bad.
	So he's promoting that stuff again to kowtow to the Trumpers.
	And I didn't believe that until one day I was on.
	I didn't even respond to the guy.
	And then one day I'm on the show with him.
	He wants me to come in for a short segment or whatever.
	At the end of the segment, as the music is playing in the last 30 seconds and we're going out, he comes back on and he said that.
	And I didn't have it.
	It cut me off. I didn't have a chance to respond.
	What did Alex say, David? What did he exactly say?
	Well, he said, this is not the bad stuff.
	You know, Trump is there.
	He's keeping this under control, that type of thing.
	I'm paraphrasing it. I don't have the exact quote, but that's exactly what he did.
	He sold that same line that I've been told that he was talking about.
	But then it got worse because when we got to the when we got to the election and, of course, you know, the new rules that the new scam, I should say, the new corruption of the 2020 election was based on what Trump did in terms of locking everybody down and doing it on a vote by mail.
	And so then when we get to the election, two days after the election, Steve Pachinik, who is a guy who I always had a lot of problems with Steve Pachinik.
	Steve Pachinik was somebody who, he had a long history with the CIA. He was a consultant to Tom Clancy.
	He's a great raconteur and fiction writer, but in these types of things, and that's how Alex used him.
	And he was somebody who, in reality, had been involved with Operation Gladio, which is a major false flag operation in Italy.
	The Red Brigade and these other things, it was a NATO operation.
	The Prime Minister Aldo Morrow was kidnapped, and he was executed by his kidnappers.
	But before that happened, Steve Pachenik was sent by Henry Kissinger to go talk to the kidnappers and supposedly let him in to talk to the kidnapped Prime Minister.
	And what the Italian government said after they did an investigation afterwards is the Italian government said this is a false flag operation.
	Bacinic came in and he talked to him and Aldo Moro knew that this was a false flag operation and he gave the order to kill him.
	And so this is the background of this guy that Alex has all the time.
	And it was the second time I had interviewed him.
	He came on just as I had my first show.
	And then I had my own separate three-hour show at InfoWars.
	And then two months after that started in 2017, you had the shooting in Las Vegas.
	I've been interviewing people all week about the shooting in Las Vegas.
	And he comes on, and he's supposed to come on for two segments.
	He missed the first segment. He comes on with a second segment and tried to sandbag me to say that nobody had died at Las Vegas.
	And I said, I don't believe that.
	I said, I don't believe the official story, but I don't believe that nobody died, and I know why you're doing that, you know?
	And so I never had him back on again.
	But two days after the election of 2020...
	So Steve Pchenik said no one died in the Las Vegas show.
	That's right. That's right. He's pushing the idea.
	And the reason he did that, of course, is to try to destroy my credibility, try to get me in trouble, because all the stuff about Sandy Hook had already hit.
	You know, that was already a lawsuit.
	So he tries to pull that game on me.
	He went on with, on Thursday, after the election on Tuesday, he goes on with Owen Schroyer, and he says, this is a sting.
	He said, Trump knew everything that was going on.
	He's working with CISA, right, that we were talking about earlier.
	He's working with CISA. They created a blockchain watermark ballot And they've got quantum computing, and she's throwing out all this unrelated buzzwords and terminology that didn't make any sense whatsoever.
	And they said, and not only that, but we know who these people were that cheated on the election, and we've got 20,000 National Guard troops that have fanned out all across the country, and...
	The arrest have already started.
	He said that two days after the election.
	And Owen's response was, Steve, if you were here, I'd just kiss you right on the lips.
	I mean, no question about any of that stuff.
	It was absolutely absurd.
	And so I pushed back against that heavily on my show, on social media.
	I was told by Daria, you know, that Steve Pachenik called Alex and said he wanted me fired for that.
	But I kept on because Alex kept having him back on.
	And that had a lot of impact.
	Rush Limbaugh talked about that.
	And you had Clarence Thomas' wife send a text to Mark Meadows and said, I hope this is true.
	It went viral and it was giving everybody this hope and that was the wellspring from which Stop the Steal came.
	And so Alex is out and stopped the steal with Ali Alexander, an ex-con man and ex-convict.
	And, you know, so they're running this thing.
	And, you know, I was opposing that.
	And I opposed it all the way up to the point where I was fired.
	Of course, that week I was fired on Monday.
	That was when the electoral colleges had submitted.
	So, David, so because January 6th was on January 6th.
	Yeah. You were fired when.
	Well, December 14th was the Monday that they turned in the votes from all the different electoral college things.
	And I said, look, it's over with, folks.
	Whatever legal challenges or if they could have gone, there were five states that had Republican legislatures.
	It was razor thin.
	They could have made a case for that.
	They didn't. So it isn't going to happen.
	I said, this is nothing at this point but an obvious grift.
	And so that Thursday, I was fired.
	And I began this program the following Monday.
	And I continued to warn people about that.
	I said, look, January the 6th is a trap.
	I said, it's going to be filled with agent provocateurs.
	There's nothing that can be accomplished.
	Do not go to it.
	Washington, D.C. is dangerous and so forth.
	And I said that every day in my program, going back the morning of January the 6th.
	My program ended before that started.
	And I told people, I said, get away from there.
	Don't, you know. And so, you know, I oppose that stuff from the very beginning, but I knew exactly what that was all about.
	David, what's interesting is the week prior to that, January 6th, I was invited to give a talk, you know, on what had occurred in our election, which was a real stuff.
	Chain of custody, signature verification.
	Mike Lindell and all these bozos, another disinformation.
	Yeah.
	All sorts of shit out there hid the real issues.
	And this is what I think happens.
	There are real substantial issues.
	Then these clowns come and do a double whammy.
	They make money off talking crap like Ali Alexander, you know, and then they mislead people away from the problem.
	So I remember on January 6th, we had a bus, you know, that we were thinking of sending.
	And at the last minute, on January 3rd, I remember 4th, I saw this freaking screwball, Ali Alexander.
	And he had, in 2018, one of our screwy volunteers are trying to bring him in.
	I said, this guy doesn't smell right.
	And when I found out he was leading Stop the Steal, and then I saw him at the White House, that's when I put it all together and I realized Trump was full of shit.
	That this was an operation.
	And I haven't shared this with too many people.
	And literally, we had a busload of people and I called it off.
	And all these Trumpers were really angry with me.
	Oh, Dr. Shiva, why aren't you...
	I said, something is going to happen there.
	I said, this fool Ali Alexander is a scumbag.
	And he's going to do some...
	And we had a number of young people who'd probably be in jail right now.
	And many of their parents called me and said, Dr.
	Shiva, thank you. But I could see Trump was with Ali Alexander.
	Stop the Steal was a money-making organization.
	And Trump took all of my material, the real stuff, And they juiced it up and they made about a half a billion dollars.
	Well, if you go back and you're looking, it was even, Roger had a film crew that was following him around.
	And so they've even got him filmed saying, this is great.
	We're going to make so much money out of this.
	It's going to be like falling off a log.
	And that's what it was about. It was simply about making money and building an audience.
	But I think what's wrong. And what could be accomplished by giving money to Alex, you know, to hold these rallies and stuff?
	Nothing. And nothing could have been accomplished on January the 6th.
	It was all done by mid-December.
	And like you, I understand how elections are rigged.
	And as I said before, it begins with the ballot.
	It begins with debates.
	And it begins with all the rest of the stuff, how closed the political process is.
	all of the electronic stuff.
	And for years I had covered, you know, how easy it is to hack into voting machines and various things like that.
	They've had voter village at DEF CON and black hat conference and so forth.
	They've demonstrated how vulnerable these machines are, but Trump added a whole new level of vulnerability with a vote by mail.
	I'm going to mail out the ballots to everybody and, And for him to complain about that, and the other thing that I was angry about on the morning of January the 6th, I said, okay, so yesterday, January the 5th, we had the runoff in Georgia.
	Not a single thing was changed about how the election was done in Georgia.
	And look what happened. They just turned the Senate over to the Democrats.
	And, of course, even though we don't have a pandemic going, We still have our elections are going to be run under those pandemic rules that Trump put in.
	Now tell me that's not a double cross.
	That makes me furious when I look at that.
	I think, David, the key thing that you just brought up is they have two goals.
	Make as much money as possible and get as much visibility as possible.
	And people really need to understand this.
	It doesn't matter.
	It's all theater to them.
	You get indicted?
	Great. More money. More visibility.
	Okay, Megyn Kelly interviews me.
	More money. More visibility.
	Whatever happens, they get more money and more visibility.
	And then there are other scoundrels like Boobie fucking Kennedy and Vivek the Snake.
	All of these guys fall.
	It's part of the Swarm's ethos.
	Screw people over.
	Create fake dialectics.
	In fact, make these events take place.
	So I came to the conclusion that Trump made a shitload of money.
	When I met with him, after all of this, he did a big shout out.
	He goes, I want to thank Dr. Shiva, who did all of this work.
	Yeah, I did all the fucking work for him so he could have the credibility to make that money.
	And when I met with him for two hours, and he had just endorsed David in Massachusetts, This was last November, a guy who committed the election fraud against us.
	And Trump invited me to Mar-a-Lago.
	I didn't go. My assistant wrote him an email saying, we respectfully refuse to come because you just endorse someone who did the election fraud against our campaign.
	When I went down there, because I was down in Miami, people begged me, oh, Dr.
	Shiva, go, Dr. Shiva, go. You should give Trump a chance.
	Don't be so hypercritical.
	That two-hour meeting was clearly in a small room.
	He looked like an actor.
	In the back room. Okay?
	Very frail. Didn't know what the fuck is going on.
	Frankly, a moron. Okay?
	Praising me, apologizing why I endorse this guy, taking notes of my soundbites that he could use in his next speech.
	That's what that meeting was.
	Wow. And I left realizing this guy's just a hollow shell.
	He's a puppet. Yeah.
	And what he cares about. So he kept asking me, David, in that meeting at least 20 times, what do you want from me?
	Like, I'm some sycophant.
	I said, I don't want anything from you.
	Two weeks later, I said, you know what?
	That guy raised a lot of money off me.
	Why don't we set a Real Election Systems Integrity Institute up?
	Because Harvard, Stanford, they have all their intellectuals always saying nothing's happening.
	So I went back to him and I said, look, you made a half a billion dollars.
	Why don't you set aside some of this for this institute?
	Didn't want to give one fucking penny, David.
	No, if you look at the people who have been co-indicted with him, it's a very foolish strategy because he's not giving them any money.
	He made, the first day I think he made $4 million, the next day he made $3 million, but it's like the first couple of days he made $7 million, but he's not paying for any of his co-defendants' legal fees.
	He is finally, after a couple of weeks, he's going to hold a fundraiser for them, but he's not going to give them any of his money.
	And that's a very dangerous thing.
	If these guys are going to swing, I think that's the whole reason that they indicted so many people.
	They want to get them to testify against him.
	So there's a real Game of Thrones.
	I mean, these people are out there.
	It's... Even though he has been built up into this anti-globalist, which he is not, he gave the globalists everything that they wanted.
	He even gave people training for universal basic income.
	Look at how many people don't want to go back to physical work.
	You know, they want to work from home or not work at all, and you have, as they make demands for them to go back to work, they just quit.
	And so he gave people a taste of this, knowing what was going to happen.
	He spent all of that money just from the financial side, but he did everything that the globalists wanted to do.
	He's doing the same stuff that people like Boris Johnson and Emmanuel Macron and Justin Trudeau and all the rest of them, they're all doing the same thing.
	But Trump, we're supposed to believe, is the anti-globalist.
	He's just the fake professional wrestling version of this.
	And so people need to understand that it's just a show, and he's...
	All these people are in it for themselves.
	This is the thing, though, Shiva.
	I hope that we don't have, as I've said, a civil war because I keep seeing people get more and more polarized and partisan in this thing, not looking even after themselves.
	It's only simply about Trump.
	And you really see this about January the 6th.
	I don't care what happens. I'm going to go defend Trump.
	And I don't want to make him the Mason-Dixon line of a new civil war.
	And that's what they're trying to do.
	And that's something we've got to be very concerned about.
	And I think getting back to, you know, when I titled this conversation, why David Knight left Alex Jones, you know, a conversation, I think the key thing here is, Alex Jones represented himself as some independent journalist.
	But at the end of the day, he fell in line with the globalist front, man, which is what Trump was.
	And once you know who Ali Alexander is, I mean, you're just gut instinct.
	You look at that guy, he looks like a fucking snake, okay?
	And I was very, very fortunate.
	Bring them in and to jail them.
	That's my thesis, okay?
	And probably 15 years from now, someone will do an Academy Award-winning movie, which will show that.
	Well, just look at what happened.
	Look at the results. Regardless of what his intentions were, look at how he responded to all this and how he let these people swing.
	You know, he could have pardoned them before he left.
	He didn't pardon them. He didn't pardon Julian Assange.
	You know, he pardoned the white-collar criminal friends and family of his son-in-law and other people of that ilk, but he didn't do anything for the people who laid their lives on the line for him.
	Nothing at all. And he doesn't care about the rest of the world that he's unleashed this poison on.
	He continued to promote that until only about four or five months ago.
	That, you know, it's the greatest thing ever produced by mankind, it's a miracle, it's a moonshot, all the rest of this stuff.
	No, it's killing people, and we all know that.
	The amazing thing to me is the cognitive dissonance of the people who know that, and I've seen it over and over again by political commentators who hate the vaccine, and they hated the fact that Trump would promote it, but they would say, Trump, you've got to stop promoting this.
	It's like, why would you give him, just reject this guy?
	You know it's a lie.
	Do you think that he's that dishonest, or is he that stupid?
	And why would you then keep giving him this advice?
	I mean, I saw that advice coming from Alex Jones, from Wayne Allen Root.
	Over and over again, all of these different commentators say, you've got to stop promoting the vaccine.
	People hate that. It's like, why do people hate that?
	Let's talk about why they hate it.
	It's because it's killing people.
	Stop that. It's just amazing to me.
	What I'm saying, David, is they're giving him advice, not for the benefit of others, but giving him advice to maintain their own credibility because they know they have an individual who's part of the swarm.
	They're making money off of it.
	Alex made a shitload of money promoting Trump.
	All these people follow the money.
	And when I had to do the...
	Just like I had to expose Kennedy...
	You know, all these women were like, oh, you should work with Bobby.
	We want to donate you a lot of money.
	This guy's full of shit. I could have played that game, but I can't.
	Yeah. Right? Oh, you know, talk about the money.
	You know, it came out with this lawsuit that he had, the Sandy Hook lawsuit.
	Record amount of money that he made the spring of 2020.
	Betraying this country.
	Just amazing to me.
	I mean, I knew he was making a lot of money because they said, well, you know, the storable food people can't keep up with it.
	And it's like, well, you know, who knows what Trump is going to do to us next, so we need to prepare, you know, have some storable food or whatever.
	But he made a record amount of money.
	And then, of course, he finished it up again at the end of the year with the election stuff, just like Trump did.
	You know, hundreds of millions of dollars Trump made.
	It's basically using these crises to perpetuate them without any solution and manipulating people.
	With crises, no solutions.
	They do not want to build a movement to address the fundamental issues.
	They want to perpetuate the crisis because they make money talking about the crisis.
	That's why when I look at Fucker Carlson, when he was at Fox News, he's texting people, David, and we'll end on this, right?
	Yeah. It's like another Alex Jones here.
	Texting people internally, like what you just shared, telling people there is no election fraud.
	Then he sees the MAGA movement wanting that news, goes out, shares it, and the reason that Fox...
	I don't care about Fox, but what Fucker Carlson did was tee up Fox to lose probably $4 billion in troubled damages because they had enough data, the fact it would have been defamation with malice, right?
	Yeah. Because he internally knew that he didn't believe any of this stuff.
	- Well, then of course it was also the Ray Epps stuff.
	They fired him the day after 60 Minutes did the Ray Epps thing because they're gonna get serious about it.
	But you can see with Darren Beattie at Revolver, with Alex, with Tucker, the rest of these people, they focused on Ray Epps.
	Why would they focus on Ray Epps?
	Did Ray Epps make hundreds of millions of dollars getting people to go to Washington on January the 6th?
	No.
	Did they go there because Ray Epps told them to go there?
	No.
	If Ray Epps is an agent provocateur, and again, the place was riddled with it and you knew that it was gonna be riddled with it.
	Right. I've seen the same type of stuff behind the scenes.
	I know what these guys think, and I know what they say.
	I know what they think and say about Trump.
	And it's come out occasionally.
	You see the videos released of Alex going off on it.
	But I know what that stuff is about.
	It's fake. And they don't say what they believe.
	They betray the country.
	And they do it so they can make a lot of money.
	It's just that simple. Look, whether it's Alex Jones, fucker Carlson, Donald Trump, all of these people, they actually hate America.
	It's a very clear line.
	They do not love this country.
	They do not stand for these values.
	They may say they do, but you look at their actions.
	Yeah, just look at 2020. Yeah.
	Yes, they do not, you know?
	Trump could have let all those people, he could have pardoned those people, instead pardoned Jared Kushner's father, right?
	Who hired a prostitute to blackmail his own wife.
	That's the kind of people he pardoned, right?
	He's the one who told people, I will follow you.
	It's in words, I would follow you to the Capitol.
	He had the other way, right?
	So all of this is here.
	Everyone needs to understand this is literally like WWE theater.
	It is. And once you get that...
	And by the way, David, you know who is Donald Trump's agent?
	Who? The guy from wrestling, I think, McMahon, or who is it?
	Well, it's Harry Emanuel.
	Oh, okay. Harry Emanuel, you know, part of the prom Emanuel, who owns World of Wars Agency and Endeavor, who owns UFC, who just bought WWE. Wow.
	He's the one who is Trump's agent.
	Mm-hmm. So all of this is theater.
	It is. Once people get that, they're going to get very, very angry.
	Once they really understand how they're being played.
	Trump wanted to be an actor.
	He's an actor. Alex is an entertainer.
	Fucker Carlson is a CIA frontman.
	These people don't give a damn about you.
	And the only way forward, Alex, in closing, I just want to say, look, the reason I decided to run was we need to build a movement.
	And I decided to run because we can use the chaos that they're doing to direct people back to you.
	And everything I say to you, this is about empowering you.
	You have to understand truth, freedom, and health are interrelated.
	We have to build a bottoms-up movement.
	And I'm one of us.
	Why isn't one of us always there?
	That's right. And they do not want to give visibility to us.
	So the only way out, I keep telling people, Alex, is, I mean, David, is, I tell people to go get this bumper sticker.
	Because when they do this, and they peel it and they put it on their windshield, some people just take it and they leave it on their dining room table.
	But when they do that...
	It's a physical act that they're doing of activism.
	We have open-sourced all of our flyers.
	The flyers start with the fact that the U.S. life expectancy is going like this.
	So your children are going to die younger than you.
	And it's not the vaccines. It's a systems problem that goes back 60 years.
	From an engineering standpoint, David, it's a set of things.
	And then we teach people who is a swarm and that they have to get educated and they have to go on the ground.
	They have to become warriors and scholars.
	So that's what we're doing, David.
	And that's why our campaign is very fascinating because I'm seeing this evolution of people who are getting over the Trump, getting over the Alex Joneses, getting over the fucker Carlsons.
	And everyone we get over, David, is like a razor blade to the swarm.
	You know, once you've found out that you've been deceived...
	Once you come to that real, it's difficult to get people to admit that they've been fooled, but once you realize they've pulled that wool over your eyes, they're not going to do it to you again, and you become really angry about that, and I know that from personal experience.
	It's been great talking to you, Dr.
	Shiva, and give us your website where people can find you.
	Yeah, so people should go to shiva4president.com.
	And you can get these bumper stickers, right?
	That's the main thing I'm getting.
	We want to get millions of these out there.
	And if you go to the download section, David, people can get this flyer.
	You know, I go out to the train station.
	I give them out at least once a week.
	We have everyone out there.
	We want to get millions of these out.
	The other thing is people can go to truthfreedomhealth.com.
	And that's where they get the training, David, the scientific training.
	They get basically engineering systems training, David, that they don't have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for.
	And we have a community.
	And our model is you take the course, you can give it away to as many children.
	You get to be a philanthropist.
	So it's really a learn, teach, and serve model.
	And the last thing is I tell people to go to vashiva.com slash orientation.
	We do an open house every Thursdays at 11 a.m. and 8 p.m.
	For example, and they're educational open houses.
	Yesterday, we talked about noise pollution, how noise affects the physiology, and we went through that.
	And in the morning, we talked about the real cause of gun violence, the real cause beyond left and right.
	And we take systems approaches to this so people break out of the dialectics to actually see things, what they are, and what the solution is, David.
	Well, that's a key thing.
	We've got to break out of that Hegelian dialectic, the dichotomy, the false dichotomy that they give us.
	We've got to break out of this party system.
	And we need to focus on ourselves, on our community, and not so much on Washington.
	We need to keep an eye on Washington.
	We need to understand what these guys are up to.
	But they don't have the solution.
	They are the problem, always have been.
	Thank you so much for joining us.
	It's been great talking to you.
	Thanks, David. Be well. Thanks for sharing everything.
	Thank you. Be well. Bye-bye. Thank you.
	Bye-bye. Thank you.
	And so that's our program for today.
	We're about a half hour over.
	But thank you so much for joining us.
	Have a good weekend.
	And I apologize for the language.
	I know some people had some issues about that, but it is what it is.
	I did not realize I would have said something to him about that before we started.
	But thank you so much for joining in, and have a good weekend.
	We'll see you on Monday, hopefully. Let me tell you, the David Knight Show, you can listen to with your ears.
	You can even watch it by using your eyes.
	In fact, if you can hear me, that means you're listening to the David Knight Show right now.
	Yeah, good job.
	Ha ha ha! And you want to know something else?

▲