Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Sept. 18, 2023 - The David Knight Show

03:00:22

The David Knight Show - 09/18/2023

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	using free speech to free minds music You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	As the clock strikes 13, it's Monday, the 18th of September, year of our Lord, 2023.
	Well, today we're going to take a look at what is happening with Russell Brand, because I think it's much bigger than one guy.
	This is about the GOP brand, and this is about what we're willing to put up with.
	Does character matter when we look at the people that we fall behind?
	Clearly, he has not been found guilty.
	But I don't think that means that he was innocent either.
	And we see now that the game that has long been played by the left, by Hollywood, by the establishment media, is now being played by the right.
	And we are supposed to hold him up as the standard, as a victim.
	Yeah, they are canceling him.
	And he does get canceled in a different way than the rest of us.
	But we're going to take a look at that.
	We'll look at the assassination attempt.
	We have some update news on that.
	We're also going to have, joining us today, someone to talk about the anthrax attack, which happened 22 years ago today, just a week after 9-11.
	And I want to do it in that order so that you would get the sense of it.
	We'll be right back. Yeah, I think it's important that we maintain that, you know, last week we had the anniversary of 9-11, 22 years, and throughout the week we had a lot of people writing about that.
	And, you know, it was certainly not the kind of information and intensity that you saw after the original event.
	But you still, we've kind of kept this in view and in front of people.
	And so I wanted to do the same thing with the anthrax attack.
	Because the anthrax attack laid the foundation for the attack against us by Trump and the globalists worldwide in 2020.
	You have to understand, 9-11 was about seizing the reins of control here in the United States.
	And 2020 was about seizing the reins of control worldwide.
	You understand? And they're tied together.
	They're tied together by the same people who are orchestrating this stuff.
	The intelligence community here in the United States.
	Their footprint.
	It's not limited to the five I's, the five English-speaking countries of the U.S., U.K., Canada, New Zealand, Australia.
	It's not limited to that.
	And this is something that is much broader.
	So this is something that affects everybody.
	And again, you know, the foundation of the surveillance state directed against Americans who would normally resist this stuff was the Patriot Act.
	And then for the same patriots who would normally resist this kind of tyranny that we had in 2020, if it had come from a Democrat, if it had come from Hillary or Obama or Biden, we would have resisted it.
	But not when it came from Trump.
	That was another inside job.
	So we'll take a look at that. But I want to begin with Russell Brand.
	And I know that I'll be criticized by Alex as saying, well, you're holier-than-thou attitude type of thing.
	No, I'm not talking about that. But if we don't have some moral and legal and ethical standards here, and if we're going to do exactly the same thing that the left did, you understand that he did all this.
	These are very old charges.
	And as he pointed out, hey, I was very clear, I was very promiscuous at one point in time, but you know, so that makes it okay.
	He was promiscuous.
	Well, no, it was worse than promiscuous.
	It doesn't even come close to what we know about the public depravity of the man and the period of time under question.
	And, you know, about 15 years ago or so, on average, I guess.
	But the reality is, is that the mainstream media, Hollywood, Everybody, the politicians, they all gave him a pass at that time.
	Why? Because he was on their team.
	He was on their side.
	He was with them on the political issues.
	Certainly wasn't opposing them.
	And I think it is true that when you see these viral clips that have come out of him going on and reading his list of what big pharmaceutical companies did to us in 2020 and so forth.
	By the way, giving Trump a complete pass.
	You notice that, right? Did you notice that, all of you?
	Yeah, it's only about the pharmaceutical companies.
	Oh, we really hate that vaccine.
	But the guy who funded it, who gave them all of your money to fund it and roll this out for the entire world, that guy, Trump?
	No, we don't care about that.
	That's not a problem. So anyway, yeah, he does a limited hangout.
	Getting you upset about the vaccine?
	Upset about big pharmaceutical? Yes.
	But you still don't understand and see the bigger picture if you don't see that Trump is the one responsible for the Trump shots that he bragged about, that he sold, that he sold and bragged about up until just a few months ago.
	And so yes, they came after him because of that.
	Absolutely did come after him because of that.
	And now the conservative media...
	Like Alex, like Tucker, are now giving him a pass.
	Musk, okay?
	We're going to give him a pass on this because now he's on our side.
	So now he's forgiven all of his sins.
	Look, Christ can forgive a serial killer.
	You know, we've had stories about Son of Sam supposedly had a prison conversion when he was waiting on death row.
	I think same thing with Ted Bundy.
	But they were still executed.
	Christ can forgive you your sins, but there's going to be certain consequences for your actions here on this earth.
	And there should be.
	And, you know, God does not absolve us of consequences of our actions.
	He forgave King David of grievous sins against fellow man, but even more grievous sins against him.
	His sins of pride.
	It absolutely flabbergasts me.
	To see Jim Caviezel going around blowing Trump's shofar, if you will, and saying, this guy is our King David.
	What? What?
	Maybe with a Bathsheba stage, King David.
	Or maybe King David when his pride was so horrible that God unleashed a plague.
	The plague came from David's pride just like the plague of the vaccine came from Trump's pride.
	Maybe that's how Trump is like King David.
	How Trump is not like King David is that there is no contrition.
	There is no repentance.
	There is no begging for mercy.
	But understand that even though God forgave David, there are still consequences.
	The child that he had with Bathsheba died.
	And because of these other issues, he said the sword will never depart your house.
	He had constant civil war the rest of his life.
	Even within his own house, his own children.
	Products of all these different women that he had married.
	And so there are consequences and God leaves those consequences.
	They're for our own good.
	But When we look at this, why is it necessary for Tucker to jump on the bandwagon with Russell Brand and for Alex Jones?
	I told Karen, I saw this with Russell Brand, I said, you know that Alex is going to be on that right away.
	He's going to get Russell Brand on right away.
	Probably he'll be on today.
	I bet he's going to be on with Alex today.
	Because as soon as he sees Stephen Chowderhead, Stephen Crowder, abusing his pregnant wife on video, first thing he does is bring him in and defend him.
	And then set up a business partnership with him.
	Maybe that's what they could do. Maybe they could take Andrew Tate, which, again, Tucker and Alex love Andrew Tate.
	Abuser of women. Pornographer.
	And one of the most prideful people on earth outside of Trump.
	But, you know, you bring these people together.
	You could have a media organization with Andrew Tate and Crowder and Alex and Tucker.
	Oh, there you go. Big synergy.
	Bring in Joe Rogan, too.
	And if you can change his politics, you can bring in Howard Stern.
	Because, see, that's the thing about Russell Brand that I didn't really understand.
	I mean, I never thought he was funny.
	His whole persona was one of depravity.
	I was not interested.
	But when I started reading the details of all the things that he's publicly done as a quote-unquote comedian, oh, it's just for laughs, right?
	The acts of depravity that he's done in public as a comedian.
	He's worse than Howard Stern, I think.
	Although I haven't gone through all of Howard Stern's list of things.
	I'd probably be surprised. Never saw his film.
	I don't listen to Howard Stern.
	Alex went on with Howard Stern.
	I was surprised at the time because I had a different opinion of Alex until some of the stuff happened.
	Anyway, yes, he was targeted for what he said about the pharmaceutical companies and about the vaccine.
	He didn't say anything about Trump, though.
	Very important to understand that Russell Brand compartmentalized his criticism.
	Do not criticize Trump.
	And so, again, the left never cared about that.
	The left embraced him, celebrated him, gave him program after program.
	There was one thing that he was involved in, and you can look it up yourself and see what it was.
	The guy's name is, I think, David Sachs.
	But if you remember Fawlty Towers, he's the British actor that played Manuel.
	And he goes, yes, Mr.
	Fawlty, yes, Mr. Fawlty.
	Okay, okay. But, you know, that's not politically correct to do that today, which is one of the things that makes Fawlty Dower so delightful in retrospect.
	It's even funnier today. But he was a British actor, but he was elderly at the time.
	And Russell Brand had a radio program, and he and another guy called up David Sachs, the actor, Manuel, and did a routine on him.
	And Russell said, well, this is what I've done to your granddaughter, describing all sexual things that he'd done, taunting him.
	Just amazing. And even the BBC had a problem with it, even at that time.
	Fired the two of them on the Standards Review Board, fined BBC 150,000 pounds.
	I don't know how that makes any difference to them.
	Nobody lost their job, so I'm sure they didn't care about any of that.
	But now... He's being accused of rape.
	Excuse me, I had a sneeze there.
	And of a minor.
	Having sex with a minor.
	He denied the allegations.
	He said all of his relationships have been consensual.
	You cannot have a consensual relationship with a minor.
	If that is true, end of story.
	One woman alleges that he raped her against a wall in his L.A. home, and she was later that day, same day, went to a rape crisis center in L.A. So that also looks very damning.
	That was done. This is not an old charge.
	That was something that she established at the time.
	But again, with that kind of stuff happening then, why is it that this is just now coming out?
	Because the mainstream media and the left doesn't care about any of that stuff.
	They didn't care about any of that stuff when there were all these credible allegations of Bill Clinton violently sexually assaulting women and raping them.
	They didn't care about that. They didn't care about his financial corruption like we see with Biden and Hunter.
	It was Bill and Hillary and their financial corruption.
	They didn't care about that either. I didn't get indicted for any of that by Ken Starr.
	None of that. None of that happened.
	And so now we are...
	And it was amazing to me when all that stuff was happening that these people would just get a pass.
	But now we have become them, you see.
	And this is why I'm talking about this.
	The right has become exactly what we always criticize and left.
	Amoral. You have no morals whatsoever.
	The only thing that matters is, are they on our team?
	Did he say the kinds of things that I like?
	And... Did he not criticize Trump?
	As long as that's there, you're good to go.
	You see, other people have said the same things that Russell Brand said.
	They said him, I said him earlier than he did.
	I said it more than he said.
	But they cancel me in a different way.
	They make sure that nobody sees me.
	He's already out there.
	So they have to take him down.
	He's already got a big following, a big presence.
	They can't make him disappear like they can me.
	So they have to take him down.
	That's what's going on now.
	But that doesn't mean that we need to coalesce around this guy as our standard, as we have been doing.
	Again, can we find somebody who is going to tell us the truth, who isn't also a scumbag?
	Somebody who won't be like this.
	It's true with stars that they can grab women by the...
	Well, that's what...
	If you look over the last million years, I guess that's been largely true.
	Not always, but largely true.
	Unfortunately or fortunately.
	And you consider yourself to be a star?
	I think you can say that, yeah.
	Yeah, yeah, I think you can say that.
	I don't think he gets a pass for anything that he wants to do to women.
	Or anybody else. You know, it was him and his shot killing people.
	If you can't get excited about what he does to women.
	Oh, yeah. I think, you know, for a million years it's been like that.
	Stars can do that. You consider yourself, oh, yeah, I'm a star.
	Yeah, I can do whatever I want.
	So, you know, Tucker Carlson, Elon Musk appear to back Russell Brand.
	Alex Jones came out very specifically about it.
	Again, once an interview with him, even posted a previous interview that he had with him.
	See, the GOP brand, we're talking about Russell Brand, but the GOP brand has now become, we don't care what you do, as long as you talk about GOP issues.
	Just like Trump, you don't even have to do anything about those GOP issues.
	You just talk about them.
	And these other people who are in the press, People like Tucker and so forth.
	They're just trying to attach themselves to a very famous person because they want to get the coattails of that fame, the followers, and the fortune that comes with it.
	So now accused of rape, sexual assault, and emotional abuse of numerous women over a seven-year period from 2006 to 2013 when his career was at a peak.
	See, he was a star. I mean, you know, we got it from the man right there, Trump.
	Stars can do whatever they want.
	All right? And Tucker will tell you that as well.
	Published reports indicate that one of the alleged victims of the sexual assault was a 16-year-old schoolgirl.
	He is staunchly denying all charges.
	Tucker Carlson says, so you criticize the drug companies, you question the war in Ukraine, and you can be pretty sure that this is going to happen.
	And you can also be pretty sure that if you toe the line, the Republicans will now give you a pass on anything that you want to do.
	At least the mockingbird MAGA press.
	These CIA controlled pushing Trump.
	These allegations pertain to a time when I was in the mainstream, said Russell Brand.
	When I was in the newspapers all the time, when I was in the movies.
	And of course he's right. You know, the media had no problem with that.
	He got fired several times for various things, but they didn't come after him for this.
	He says, I've written extensively in my books.
	I was very, very promiscuous.
	Well, there you go. He made his confession.
	Didn't even say he was sorry necessarily, I guess.
	He said, during that time of promiscuity, the relationships I had were absolutely always consensual.
	I was always transparent about that then.
	Almost too transparent.
	And I'm being transparent about it now as well.
	And to see that transparency metastasized into something criminal that I absolutely deny makes me question, is there another agenda at play?
	Yes, there is. But again, it doesn't give you a pass for any of this stuff, does it?
	Seriously, do we really want to give a pass to people?
	They can rape, they can do whatever they want to, as long as they're in our political party, in our party, right?
	As long as they say the stuff that we want to hear, even if they don't do it, we give them a pass.
	He says, particularly when we've seen coordinated media attacks before, as they did with Joe Rogan, when he dared to take the medicine that the mainstream media didn't approve of, and we saw a spate of headlines and media outlets around the world using the same language.
	Well, of course they do that.
	So I guess that means that we embrace scumbags like Russell Brand and Andrew Tate for fame and fortune, right?
	Look, you don't need to have a pornographer manipulator like Andrew Tate to tell you that the feminists are wrong.
	There's better ways to approach it, quite frankly.
	If you bring in a guy like him, he is so far overreacting to all this stuff, besides his depravity as a person.
	But he has gone so far to the other side that you're going to lose that argument.
	You can't carry that argument.
	Russell Brand, same thing.
	But again, these are our political heroes.
	These are our political heroes put out by the Mockingbird Media.
	You know, like Tucker. You know, CIA guy.
	And understand the CIA is not monolithic.
	You're all saying, well, wait a minute. The CIA, the face of the CIA recently has been very left-wing.
	We have people like Brennan, Clapper, and so forth.
	But, look, the intelligence community is not monolithic.
	There's ultra-right-wing as well as ultra-left-wing factions within the CIA. And these people are pushing their information through people like Tucker, through people like Alex.
	This is, you know...
	I'll just say this. If you're going to suffer political persecution, let it be for doing the right thing.
	And, you know, if they were coming after him simply because he said that, and there have been many people who have had the government come after them simply because they talked about medicine stuff.
	And there wasn't anything else that they were coming after them.
	They're coming after Russell Brand for these other things.
	But, you know, we've had so many doctors and journalists and everybody else who have been canceled, who have been punished for all this stuff, and we're going to coalesce around Russell Brand?
	I think it's time he twists in the wind for what he did, frankly.
	Again, I don't see any...
	And we see the same thing happening with Ken Paxton, and I'm going to talk about that.
	You see, it's not just happening with one guy.
	We're seeing Maga say, well, I don't care what Ken Paxton did.
	You know, he defended Trump with the election stuff, so let's defend Ken Paxton.
	It's that kind of attitude.
	It remains to be seen if that's going to happen with Lauren Boebert or with this, you know, pornographer running for, this woman running for Congress in Virginia.
	Again, two of a kind.
	But, you know, hey, one of them is Republican.
	That makes it all different, right?
	So, again, this kind of tribalism, and we see this being pushed.
	You know, always, excuse me, go back to Ken Paxton again.
	You know, what Lauren Boebert did does not rise to the level of this woman, the Democrat in Virginia, certainly.
	But again, it's a character issue.
	Why is it that we don't want or care about character anymore?
	Because Lauren Boebert said, well, look at this.
	We got all these issues, right?
	We got the impeachment stuff has just started with Biden.
	We got all the borders wide open and, you know, Ukraine is happening and all the rest of the stuff.
	And what's headlining? Stories about me going to see Beetlejuice and my conduct there, that type of thing.
	Don't you realize character doesn't matter is what she's saying.
	Yeah, all of those issues do matter.
	But character also matters.
	And folks, if you say, as we heard in 2016 about Trump, look, you know, I need to get a plumber here.
	I've got a water leak in my house.
	I've got to have a plumber fix this.
	I'm not going to ask him about his marriages, about his business history, and all the rest of this stuff.
	It's like, well, maybe you might want to know about the guy that you're bringing to your home.
	Maybe you might want to know if he's a rapist.
	You might want to know if he's a robber, a thief, all the rest of this stuff.
	You might want to know some of that, right?
	Is he a serial killer?
	The plumber? Or do you just care if you're going to get your plumbing fixed?
	See, character matters even at that level.
	But it certainly matters with these politicians because they can give you a great story and not deliver on any of it.
	So, again, the mainstream media didn't care before.
	Now the MAGA, Mockingbird media doesn't care because there's no difference between them.
	There's no really difference between CNN and MSNBC and Tucker and Alex.
	There really isn't any difference.
	So, he finishes off and he says, well, in the meantime...
	I want you to stay close, stay awake, but most importantly, if you can stay free.
	Okay, so there you go. We've got to have Russell Brand.
	And I understand the precedents that are involved, that we don't want to have people unjustly canceled.
	But the bottom line is that he'll have his day in court.
	The people who are out there pronouncing him innocent...
	Are just as bad as the people who are instantly pronouncing him guilty.
	You see? That's a legal term.
	He'll be found guilty or not guilty.
	But from his public behavior, we know that Russell Brand is not innocent.
	Not innocent.
	So, anyway, one of the women said that Brand entered into a relationship with her while he was 31 and she was a 16-year-old schoolgirl.
	She reportedly said that he referred to her as, quote, the child during an alleged emotionally abusive and controlling three-month relationship.
	And so, and there's more details about what he did that I'm not going to go into.
	The paper also reported that the woman who said that she met Brand when she was 16 contacted his former agency, Tavistock Wood, in 2020 to alert them to his behavior, she had alleged.
	And seeking an apology.
	She said she was promised a response when he returned from a wellness retreat.
	And when one came, she said it was from lawyers representing him who issued a denial on his behalf.
	And so she's not happy with that, but she's one of many.
	Again, I don't know where the statute of limitations are on this stuff.
	But why would Alex immediately put out a thing saying, I stand with Russell Brand?
	Yeah, birds of a feather flock together, don't they, Alex?
	The brand name, the fame, the followers, the fortune, anything that he does, it's okay.
	Just like Andrew Tate. And of course, Tucker sucked up Andrew Tate as well.
	Again, He says he believes that Brand is under, quote, attack by the desperate forces of the Matrix.
	This is a fictionalized imagination thing, a label that Trump has come up with.
	Talk about the establishment cabal.
	Got to come up with a new name for this, the Matrix.
	Matrix is coming after Russell Brand.
	Anybody that challenges a globalist, anybody that challenges big pharma, well, Trump did everything that they wanted.
	It is a Game of Thrones.
	He also noted the timing.
	These charges, many of them, stem from 2006.
	But of course, as I said before, mainstream media gave him a pass at the time.
	Just like Alex is giving him a pass at this time.
	You know, if you're on our side, and you're a star, you can grab.
	You can do whatever you want.
	Right? He said they want to punish people and destroy people that decide to stand with humanity.
	So I stand with Russell Brand.
	He is completely innocent.
	This is what they do when you're ultra-famous.
	No, he's not innocent.
	He's not guilty.
	He's presumed not guilty until he has a trial.
	But yeah, ultra-famous.
	This is what Alex does when you're ultra-famous.
	He stands with you to get into the spotlight.
	So, again, I'm sure there'll be an update coming this afternoon.
	You'll probably have a brand on with them.
	Katy Perry, who was married to him, had said back at that time, or she said she had the real truth about him, they were married after a brief, like three months after they met or something, or three hours, I don't know.
	We're talking about stars here, right?
	And then she said, I felt a lot of responsibility for the marriage ending after about three years or something.
	But then I found out the real truth, which I can't necessarily disclose because I keep it locked in my safe for a rainy day.
	Wow. She said that back in 2013, ten years ago.
	I let it go, and I was like, this isn't because of me.
	This is beyond me.
	So I have moved on from that.
	Which brings us then to Ken Paxton.
	And he was found innocent in the impeachment trial in Texas.
	And again, very predictable that you're going to see people like Darren Beatty at Revolver immediately backing him.
	Why? Well, because, you know, he sucked up and sided behind Trump and all the election stuff.
	But his issues here go way back before Trump.
	And as I suggested before, perhaps that has something to do with why he's such a strong Trump supporter, because that gives him immunity.
	I used to live in Texas.
	I was getting, last week, the end of the week, I was getting constant texts from Republican organizations telling me to call people in the Senate, put pressure on them.
	So he was not found guilty in the Senate.
	But understand that 70% of the House Republicans voted to impeach him.
	16 articles of impeachment.
	And 70% of the Republicans in the House voted to impeach him.
	In the House, it was 121.
	121 to 23 to impeach.
	So he got 144 people, 121, mostly Republicans in that House, voted to impeach him.
	They want to make this about the Bush family, and they want to make it about the Speaker of the House, who is more of a left-wing political issue.
	But there's some real issues here.
	And this came up.
	Nothing had happened with this.
	This isn't something that happened back in 2021 or something.
	This isn't something that happened with the Bushes.
	They say, well, this happened because he was challenged by George P. Bush and lost in 2022.
	No, there were four whistleblowers who used to work for Ken Paxton.
	And they sued him for...
	Being terminated when they went to state authorities and to federal authorities about what they believed was corruption with Kim Paxton.
	He fired them. They took their case to court and they won $10 million.
	And so Paxton said that he and his department should not have to pay this.
	So they took it to the house and said, we'd like for you to pay this $10 million.
	They looked at it like, what?
	What is this? Ten million dollars for what?
	Let me see the receipts here, right?
	That's when the impeachment stuff began.
	And it also has a tie-in with Trump, because a lot of what was happening with Ken Paxton, Was a very rich foreign national who came in with the financial crisis, you know, 2008 and so.
	We had massive collapse of real estate.
	This guy was a foreign national, and he was able to grab large amounts of real estate at fire sale prices.
	And he made a lot of money.
	And then you had the pandemic, and he was losing lots of money.
	And as Trump was giving power to the CDC to suspend any evictions or foreclosures and that type of thing, he went to Ken Paxton, among other things, in the articles of impeachment and asked him to delay that from happening in Texas.
	There was also somebody who worked for him that Ken Paxton was having an adulterous relationship with and on and on.
	So it was overwhelmingly 70% of the House Republicans voted to impeach him in 16 articles.
	But then in the Senate, there was only two Republicans.
	There's about 30 senators in the state of Texas, 144 people in the House, but only about 30 in the Senate.
	And only two Republicans and then all the Democrats for partisan reasons.
	But it fell far short of the two-thirds majority they needed to convict him.
	And so when you look at this, and this is the type of thing we've seen in Texas before, there's a huge disparity between the Texas House and And the Texas Senate.
	To give you an example, you may remember going back to when they first rolled out the naked body scanners and they were doing pat-downs and all this other kind of stuff.
	There was a big pushback against it.
	And it was led in Texas by a representative by the name of David Simpson out of Longview, Texas.
	Great guy. I interviewed him multiple times.
	One of my... I think a person with the most integrity...
	Well, I wouldn't say that, but I mean, prior to coming here to Tennessee, I never saw anybody that I felt had the kind of integrity that David Simpson did.
	And I say that for multiple things that he did.
	First of all, he wrote a bill to stop the TSA from doing all this stuff.
	Saying, you're not going to do the naked body scanners, you're not going to do pat-downs, you're not going to touch kids, and so forth.
	I remember that. And that was passed...
	Unanimously by the Texas House.
	Unanimously. People were furious about this.
	Then it went to the Senate.
	And they stopped it in the Senate.
	There was all this talk about how they were going to turn Texas into a no-fly zone if we didn't let the TSA have its way with us.
	And so what they did was, at the time, you had a lieutenant governor who had been a part of the CIA his entire career.
	When he retired, he went to Texas, and they set him up in the oil business like they did the Bushes.
	And he spent more money to get elected as lieutenant governor than any politician had ever done in the state of Texas.
	And as president of the Senate, he led the opposition to that, and they shut that down.
	And then David Simpson came back a second time.
	And again, it got shut down in the Senate.
	But he also, as a conservative and as a Christian, He tried to remove marijuana from the Texas legal code.
	Just strike it. He says it's a plant.
	Why are we locking people up for this?
	And the example that he gave was people who were constituents of his, who had children who had uncontrollable epileptic seizures and stuff.
	Most likely the result of vaccines, by the way, I'll say.
	Not proven, but we've seen this happen many, many times.
	They have kids, many of them vaccine injured, who have uncontrollable seizures.
	The only thing that would stop it, there was no medication that would stop it.
	Medication probably started it.
	And so they were going to Colorado at the time because they could get medical marijuana.
	And he said it's outrageous that these parents face being locked up Here in the state of Texas because of this medicine that could help their kids.
	It's pig-headed. It's wrong.
	It's a natural substance.
	We shouldn't be regulating this for the pharmaceutical companies.
	Now, he was successful in getting a medical exemption for that one condition for kids and adults.
	And that is in spite of the fact that medical marijuana is not legal in Texas.
	That marijuana is a class one scheduled drug in Texas and with the federal government, which means that it has no medical use.
	And yet they recognize now, because of David Simpson, they recognize that it has a medical use.
	And so I have the utmost respect for him.
	He got out of politics in 2016 because he ran for Senate.
	Because he realized that's where they're stopping this stuff.
	And he was opposed by the man who is still Lieutenant Governor, Dan Patrick.
	Dan Patrick, who portrays himself as a manga Republican.
	Somebody you can trust. Look, you got people with character like David Simpson who are rare and far between.
	And you got people like Dan Patrick and people like Ken Paxton in Texas and other states who will do whatever they need to for fame, fortune, and followers.
	It's just that simple. So the impeachment result in being found not guilty by the Senate, again, a political process, not a jury trial.
	Already they found that he was guilty, essentially, in the whistleblower case because they got $10 million.
	And the impeachment result isn't likely to alter the course of Paxton's security fraud case.
	Paxton faces, in a Texas state case, he faces two counts of securities fraud, a first-degree felony that carries a punishment of up to 99 years in prison, stemming from his 2011 efforts to solicit investors in Servergeek Incorporated without disclosing that the McKinney Tech Company was paying him to promote its stock.
	He also faces one count of failing to register with state securities regulators, a third-degree felony with maximum punishment of 10 years in prison.
	And he's been fighting these things for a long time.
	And he's even been re-elected with these charges there.
	Why? Well, because Republicans don't care about character.
	You're going to elect a state attorney general.
	Who has all these indictments about security fraud?
	Wouldn't you like to know what the outcome of this is going to be?
	And this is before Trump.
	But now he has inoculated himself by sidling up to Trump.
	In 2018, when he ran for re-election as Texas' state attorney general, he was under state and federal indictments for security frauds.
	And he also has a reputation for pettier malfeasance.
	He has long been dogged by allegations of fraud, corruption, and general impropriety.
	His state securities fraud charges date from 2015, but until recently, he seemed impervious to them.
	And now, by supporting Trump, he will be impervious, politically.
	And then if he is convicted, everybody will say, well, it's because he supported Trump.
	And then that brings us to the lesser ones.
	Again, Lauren Boebert.
	And, you know, hey, folks, character doesn't matter, she says.
	She goes to this play, and she is smoking in the theater, which, you know, vaping.
	I don't think that that has ever been allowed, at least not for a long time.
	So she's blowing plumes of smoke in the air.
	There's a pregnant woman behind her who asked her to stop.
	She didn't. She's singing loudly.
	She's groping the guy next to her, and he's groping her.
	And it turns out that her male companion runs a homosexual bar that hosts drag queen shows.
	But of course, it's in Aspen, so it's okay.
	He's probably very, very wealthy, because it is in Aspen.
	And her excuse is that she's going through a divorce.
	I bet she is.
	Yeah, you see what is happening.
	Power corrupts women just like it corrupts men.
	This idea of power and celebrity.
	So she says, we just had Kevin McCarthy, Speaker of the House, announce an impeachment inquiry.
	We're facing a government shutdown, and we have wide open borders.
	You know, put this in perspective.
	My character doesn't count, right?
	Maybe it should. This is not the perspective of the Founding Fathers.
	They believed that character was paramount.
	She said, I'm Christian.
	So they try to drive me to my knees, but that is where I am the strongest.
	And again, she said, parents, take your kids to church, not to drag shows.
	But then she's groping in public a guy who runs a homosexual bar that hosts drag shows.
	And so, George Takai, who, you know, Sulu, who is very outspoken, calls her out on the hypocrisy of this.
	And, you know, it is, I don't know, it is what we need to focus on.
	We are not going to win the culture, and most importantly, we're not going to have the blessings of God.
	You know, the founders understood.
	That liberty was a blessing from God.
	And these people who are shameless, you know, she is just as shameless as this woman, pornographer, she and her husband, you know, running in Virginia, goes on the offensive against people talking about it.
	Oh, yeah? Well, you committed sexual assault by showing the stuff that I put up on the internet for free.
	And she was tipped off, by the way.
	She took down the worst stuff, perhaps, because she was tipped off in advance.
	And she deleted a lot of content that was out there.
	These are the type of people, and you can see in them and these other people, in the women running for Congress, in the media, the MAGA media, you can see that there's absolutely no difference left and right.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	All right, on Rockfin, Eric Kovarmi.
	I've not tried to pronounce your name before.
	It's a very familiar name. I see you on there many times.
	Thank you so much for your support.
	And a tip again today.
	Thank you. I apologize if I did not pronounce your name correctly.
	On Rockfin, handy.
	He says, Russell Brand was rubbing elbows with Yuval Noah Harari not too long ago and Klaus.
	Yeah, what a surprise.
	It's probably not just their elbows he was rubbing.
	Lala Harris dodging questions about at what age, what's the cutoff for life, right?
	When can we not kill babies anymore?
	And this was on the Sunday show yesterday.
	Face the Nation, Margaret Brennan.
	Margaret Brennan's trying to get a magic number from her.
	You know, the Supreme Court didn't shy away from that.
	But Lala Harris is.
	She said, what is it that you believe?
	You know, we don't like to know that.
	Does she have any beliefs?
	Again, no. She just wants to be elected.
	I mean, what week of pregnancy should abortion access be cut off?
	Harris replied, We need to restore the protections of Roe v.
	Wade, and we're not trying to do something new.
	Margaret Brennan said, Well, that's nebulous.
	And she reminded Harris that Roe v.
	Wade allowed abortion on demand through viability and for so-called health reasons until birth.
	She told Harris that viability fell at 20 to 24 weeks under Roe, But Harris still refused to give a direct response, despite using the words clear and precise multiple times.
	Let me be clear. I'm not saying anything at all.
	Let me be clear. From day one, the present has been clear, and I have been clear.
	Just this time thing, you know?
	So she got caught up on the word clear here and just kept repeating clear, even though she would not be clear.
	So she was continually pressed by Brennan.
	Brennan says, but does it need to be in specific terms of defining where the guarantee goes up to and where it does not at which week of pregnancy?
	And so Lala says, well, we need to put back in place the questions of Roe v.
	Wade. I just want Roe v.
	Wade. Roe v. Wade. I'm asking you these questions because, and then she cuts in, we're not trying to do anything that didn't exist before Roe v.
	Wade. I just want to go back to Roe v.
	Wade. That's my talking points.
	They told me to say nothing other than repeat Roe v.
	Wade. Let me be perfectly clear.
	Roe v. Wade. Well, let's take a look at what this looks like.
	When is it murder?
	When is it infanticide?
	And when it is, is it abortion?
	We just had a situation that went, and this is an international situation.
	This is out of Poland. They had a father and daughter charged with murder and incest after three dead babies were found in the basement in Poland.
	Now, we've got people in Washington, D.C., pro-life protesters who found boxes of bodies outside an incendiary area.
	But they're under the FACE Act because they got in the face of some of these abortionists.
	They're looking at long jail sentences, but nobody is facing anything for the boxes of bodies that are there.
	A 52-year-old man and his 20-year-old daughter have been charged with murder and incest.
	The man has been charged with three counts of murder in the case of newborns and with two counts of incest because his other daughter was involved as well.
	And so when we look at, should we care about abortion?
	Dan Crenshaw doesn't.
	Nikki Haley doesn't.
	They're furious at Tommy Tuberville because The senator from Alabama is holding up military promotions because the Pentagon has decided that they're going to ship people around so they can have abortions if they happen to be stationed in a state where abortion is prohibited.
	And so Crenshaw is furious about that.
	He says he's ready to, quote, tear apart the Tommy Tuberville.
	I'm at the point where I'm going to tear apart, if asked, coach Senator Non-Veteran Tuberville for personally attacking service members who have spent almost 30 years serving our country.
	See, the only thing that matters is career.
	And, you know, as a Navy SEAL, he can do whatever he wants.
	He says, I don't know what outcome he expected, but I'm hearing more and more that his actions are having worsening consequences.
	Yeah, this guy who doesn't respect life at any age, Dan Crenshaw.
	He wants wars everywhere.
	He feels entitled to murder.
	I thought this, pull this up, Travis.
	This is Maine church vandalized, and they write on the side of the church, abortion is our human right.
	Look at that. Now, they've got a big, looks like a bloody, covering up a sign.
	Smeared it with red paint, so it looks like blood.
	I mean, this looks like The Shining.
	They wrote on there, abortion is our human right, and another place, queer love forever.
	These people are definitely the good guys.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Exactly. They don't realize the message that they're sending with this, do they?
	It's just amazing.
	The window up there looks like it's completely covered blood, and it's dripping down the side of the white building there.
	You can tell they're the good guys because they continually look like methetic freaks and want to practice child sacrifice.
	That's how you can tell they're the good guys.
	Yeah, yeah. And there are signs that they leave behind there.
	This is the Second Baptist Church in Palermo, Maine.
	And it said abortionism.
	Why didn't they just write on there, red rum, red rum?
	You know, I mean, it's straight out of The Shining.
	The church has previously been a target of vandalism.
	In 2019, somebody rearranged the letters and a sign that said, Jesus made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.
	And before this week's vandalism, another bucket of red paint spilled over the anti-abortion sign.
	So, you know, the...
	And then it's...
	Parental rights is at the center of so much of this stuff, not just the abortion stuff, but they want to completely end the family.
	This report here, picked up by WinePress.com.
	Wired Magazine says preferring biological children is immoral.
	And they put it in the context of pushing transhumanism and depopulation, of course.
	Because that's where this all goes.
	They want to end the family because they want to end humanity.
	They want to end reproduction.
	They want everything to be brave new hatcheries.
	Transhumanism, we're going to merge with machines and live forever.
	These are the...
	Sadistic lies that these people push.
	It was truly amazing to see over the weekend, just as an aside here, Niall Ferguson, who is a historian, kind of conservative bent, talking about Elon Musk as he knew him because there's a big biographical book about Elon Musk that's coming out.
	And he continually compares Elon Musk to Napoleon.
	But, you know...
	Talking about his family and all the rest, it completely glosses over any of the stuff about transhumanism, any of the abomination stuff about Neuralink and all the rest of this stuff.
	Glosses over the fact he says that his grandfather, his maternal grandfather, was a conservative businessman who fled Canada because he wanted to go to South Africa because of apartheid, not in spite of it and so forth.
	But it doesn't talk about the fact that his grandfather...
	Had organized a political party to try to overthrow the Canadian government and institute a technocracy.
	A technocracy.
	Pushing transhumanism, technocracy, and all the rest of this stuff.
	By the way, you know, as all these organizations are coming after Elon Musk, the shakedown from the Defamation League and so forth.
	They call themselves the Anti-Defamation League.
	I find it interesting that they keep bringing up these charges of anti-Semitism, I think are baseless against Elon Musk, but I haven't seen any proof of it yet.
	Not that I'm a fan of Musk.
	But they ignore the fact that his mother's side of the family is Jewish.
	So he's anti-Semitic, but he's half-Jewish.
	Yeah, you can be that, but that is not what is happening here with ADL. ADL was coming after him for political reasons.
	But anyway, on Wired Magazine they say, you know, having kids, this has been expected, and it's an accepted norm in our society, and we've got to change that.
	And we need to push transhumanism, gene editing, selective breeding.
	All of this has to be enhanced.
	You know, all this eugenics and the rest of this stuff.
	They even have a term for people having kids.
	They call it biologism.
	Again, they have to create new terms so they can demonize it.
	We just call it family and parents and things like that.
	A few core beliefs they said have already solidified, namely that we've converged on the idea that if biology is to be a factor at all, it should only be considered insofar as it prevents harm and suffering.
	But they want it to go far beyond that.
	And it's not just them.
	It's also Gavin Newsom.
	As the California government legislature is doing everything they can to separate kids from their parents.
	If you're foolish enough to send your kid to school, they're going to groom them.
	They're going to do it in secret, which is why we call it grooming, because groomers always do that.
	Child molesters always do that.
	And so, as all this stuff is getting a lot of pushback, Newsom comes out and he says, well, the problem is these parents are all ginned up with misinformation about trans kids.
	And so the nuisance administration, or they call it the Newsom administration, I think it's more the nuisance administration, grabbing nuisance, he's grabbing the kids, is currently suing the school district of Chino Valley in Riverside, California, over its new policy of parental notification, claiming that it violates the rights of transgender minors to out them to their parents.
	And again, this is going back for decades.
	The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child It was always saying children have rights so they could say parents have no rights.
	It was always about separating kids from their parents so they could do this type of thing to them and more.
	They want to steal your kids.
	And, you know, when you take, as the trainees are always saying, this is genocide to our movement if we can't steal your kids, you see.
	Newsom was asked about the issue, and he came back and he said the question of parental notification, he says, the other side is misinforming parents of what is happening in school.
	No, they're not informing parents as to what is happening in school.
	That's the issue, and we all know what it is.
	Newsom then claimed without evidence that the, quote, most likely outcome for these kids is suicide.
	No, it's exactly the opposite.
	The gaslighting, the social pressure, the mutilations that they do to kids...
	That's driving kids to suicide.
	Driving them to suicide as young adults.
	And so, again, you know, this whole thing with the Pentagon and abortions, Nikki Haley, there with Dan Crenshaw, and she has been on with Jake Tapper, saying that Tuberville is using military families as political pawns.
	No, Nikki Haley is using babies as And their lives as political pawns.
	And the Pentagon is using babies as political pawns.
	And so, again, he's been holding up more than 300 military promotions because of what the Pentagon is promoting.
	You're going to promote the murder of babies and other stuff that you're promoting?
	Then maybe you shouldn't be promoted.
	Maybe the people that have been selected...
	To be elevated. And again, why are these Republicans pushing for this?
	Don't you realize that the people who have been selected for these promotions, some of them are based on merit, but are you seeing the Pentagon really focusing on merit anymore?
	Or is it focusing on the so-called, and I hate to use the term, woke?
	They're not woke. They're using that LGBT standards to promote people.
	They're using diversity, inclusivity, and equity.
	So the military is going to D-I-E, die.
	You want those kind of people promoted?
	Is that what you want?
	I guarantee you that if they don't kowtow to this stuff, they're not going to be up for a promotion.
	Is that really what you want?
	I mean, just forget about what they're doing to babies at this point in time.
	I think what Tommy Tuberville is doing is wise.
	If there is any chance that a Republican would become a president, perhaps he'd get a different perspective on promotions.
	Maybe then it would be about merit, because it certainly doesn't seem to be that way now.
	And so, Nikki Haley, in response to this, Jake Tapper said, why is the Republican Party tolerating what Tommy Tuberville is doing?
	Not allowing these promotions.
	And she says, well, I think it needs to be handled, first of all, through proper channels.
	Secondly, we don't need to be using military families as political pawns.
	These military members and families sacrifice enough.
	They don't need to be a pawn in Congress.
	She's using the term families in the same way that Planned Parenthood uses the term parenthood.
	You don't have kids.
	You know, you're not looking to create a parent, right?
	They want you to plan unparenthood.
	And again, who's using what as pawns?
	What she's saying is, you know, saving babies' lives doesn't matter.
	Just vote for me. And I'll fix it once I get in.
	You know, that's the kind of 4-D chess we always hear from these people.
	And so, where are we right now in this country?
	There's an interesting article on World Christianity and the Post-Religious Right.
	They said, Christians should remain engaged in politics, but we must not sacrifice our identity.
	And are we doing that with Trump and MAGA? You know, we just had, I think, Family Research Council or something, some Christian organization that he spoke at, and then they had a poll, and it was like he got 65% of the vote.
	And at the same time, you see these articles being written by the establishment press and by Drudge saying evangelicals need the Republican Party, but the Republican Party doesn't need evangelicals.
	Folks, we don't need the Republican Party.
	I don't need a president.
	I've got a king.
	And I'm not looking for some savior in Washington.
	It just disgusts me how politicized people have become in their personal life.
	They think that everything depends on getting the right person in the White House.
	That doesn't even make sense from a political standpoint.
	Let alone if you're a Christian.
	That doesn't make any sense.
	A new academic book on popular politics, written by Jesse Smith, says a religious right has become more of a social identity group than a platform informed by a coherent set of religious beliefs.
	You see, I'm opposed to identity politics, even on the right.
	And I'm opposed to this kind of personal idolatry, even on the right.
	And I'm opposed to giving people passes for all kinds of reprehensible criminal conduct because they're on the right.
	Do you oppose that?
	I hope you do.
	We can protect our identity by ensuring that politics is understood for what it is.
	It is a means to an end.
	An earthly end.
	And some of these means do not justify the end, and should not, if you're a Christian.
	Christendom without Christianity is what he was calling the new right-wing populism.
	He says it lays claim to a heritage of Christian artifacts and cultural markers, but with little interest in core Christian doctrine or distinctive morality.
	This sort of exclusively cultural Christianity is more obvious in Europe, Where national majorities are baptized as infants, but otherwise never attend worship.
	You see, this kind of Christianity is a cut flower.
	It may look nice, and you can set it on the shelf for a little while, but the leaves are immediately falling off and rotting.
	It's dead.
	This is a cut flower Christianity.
	Completely dead.
	On a policy level, One could argue that the major right-wing party in the U.S. is more Christian than ever.
	After all, the pro-life movement achieved its most significant victory ever by repealing Roe v.
	Wade. And yet, things are more complicated.
	After his keeping as promised to nominate pro-life Supreme Court justices, Trump now mostly wants to avoid the topic of abortions.
	Except to say that when you go as DeSantis did in Florida, that's too harsh.
	Too harsh. You should be able to kill babies at a later age, says Trump.
	His former aide, Kellyanne Conway, is warning Republicans that further activism about abortion is a political liability.
	Similarly, support for gay marriage is at its highest level ever.
	Even 49% of Republicans defend it.
	So again, you need to be quiet about abortion.
	You need to be quiet about marriage.
	Because we're playing 4D chess here.
	And you're the pawns. Savvy political advisors will want to retain the parts of Christianity that play well to the political market, but only those.
	And ironically, the future looks religious, but not spiritual.
	Well, quite frankly, I don't think anything about Christianity is going to be embraced by these people.
	They're going to run as far as they can away from any of these principles, and they're going to run as far as they can from the exclusive claims of Christianity as well.
	Christians do not need to respond to this new identitarian era with political disengagement.
	It is precisely the level of identity where detachment should happen We do not need MAGA churches, just like we don't need MSNBC churches.
	Christians should never participate in the political arena, including voting, organizing, even running for office, but we should never let this activism define who we are.
	It should never overshadow or distort our spiritual duties.
	It should never take first place in our hearts.
	Which is what it does when we fall in line behind people like Russell Brand, an unrepentant degenerate, just as much as Howard Stern.
	But hey, hey, hey, hey, it's all consensual.
	And, you know, celebrate them.
	Christians should seek the welfare of the city, Jeremiah 29, 7, but also desiring a better country, looking for a heavenly reward.
	Do the best that we can here, but understand the eternal perspective.
	We're free to be good and honest citizens because we know who we are in Christ's life.
	Let us never forget heaven while thinking about earth, he says.
	And so then this article from a person who's not a Christian, she makes some interesting observations about the history of culture.
	And also about abortion.
	And the title of the article is, We Are Repaganizing.
	Repaganizing. She said, there's a very short and brutal poem by the Scottish poet Holly McNish written in 2019 titled, Conversation with an Archaeologist.
	Here's the poem. He said they'd found a brothel on the dig he did last night.
	I asked him how they know.
	He sighed. A pit of baby's bones.
	A pit of newborn baby's bones was how to spot a brothel.
	And so she said, I asked a A lawyer, Helen Dale, about this because she said, I chose it as one of the epigraphs to her book that she just put out, The Case Against the Sexual Revolution.
	And she said the lawyer who had been a classicist before she became a lawyer, and as a younger woman she had been involved in archaeological excavations at ancient Roman sites, she said, yeah, it's true.
	It's true. She said, first, when you find a brothel, first you're going to find the erotic statuary.
	And then you dig a bit more and you find the male infant skeletons.
	Male, of course, because the males were of no use to the keepers of Roman brothels.
	Whereas the female infants born to prostituted women were raised to become prostitutes themselves.
	Yeah, of course you can tell from a skeleton, male or female.
	That's a biological objectivity.
	Biological is binary and it's subjective.
	B.O.B. Anyway, she said, Personally, I find that if I let my mind rest for more than a moment on these tiny, extinguished lives, and on the cruelty of the society that regarded their suffering as an acceptable consequence of the need to satiate male lust...
	I experienced a painful, squeezing, swooping sensation in my chest that I've discovered only since I became a mother myself, an involuntary physical response that I felt for the first time.
	During my third trimester when I read an article on abortion that included a graphic description of what the procedure actually involves.
	This is why I say, forget Kellyanne Conway.
	Forget Trump. Forget Nikki Haley.
	Forget all these people who say it's too harsh.
	We don't want to, you know, this is a tough issue.
	No, it isn't. It's a very easy issue.
	This woman's not a Christian.
	She's a feminist.
	She's looking at this from an attached perspective.
	But you show people that clip, the procedure, that was narrated by Kevin Sorbo.
	You show that to people, and you're done.
	You know, she just read a graphic description.
	You show that short cartoon depiction of an abortion as witnessed by an ultrasound technician.
	And you're finished. Just unleash the truth.
	That's all we need to do. But we got these people, like Trump, They were telling us, we don't need to do that.
	Nikki Haley, the rest of it.
	No, no, no. This is a losing issue.
	No, I'm telling you, murdering babies is a losing issue.
	It's a losing issue for this society.
	We're killing our own, cannibalizing our own for politics.
	There's no future in that.
	And God will judge this nation.
	So, she said, it occurred to me, That you're not going to be able to find where the modern abortion clinics are like you could in the past.
	Because they burn the bodies as clinical waste.
	There will be no infant skeletons for the archaeologists of the future to find.
	Destroy the evidence.
	And that's what they've got those people locked up for in D.C. Because they showed the evidence.
	To mention abortion and infanticide in the same breath is a provocation.
	Think about that.
	She's right. It is.
	That's why I say it.
	A majority of voters in Britain and America regard abortion as permissible under some circumstances, whereas very few are willing to say the same of infanticide.
	But this distinction has not been made by all peoples at all times.
	Anthropologist David F. Lancey.
	This is a far more common pattern.
	He describes it. He says, among the ancient Greeks and Romans, sickly unattractive or unwanted infants were exposed or otherwise eliminated.
	The exposure, you just leave them out in the weather to die.
	We call that comfort care when the former governor of Virginia...
	Does it? Or we call it comfort care when an abortionist does it.
	Governor Nolvum in Virginia told us that it's just comfort care.
	The Chinese and the Hindus of India have, since time immemorial, destroyed daughters at birth.
	Still doing it in China, by the way.
	To open the way for a new pregnancy and more desirable male offspring, the Japanese likened infanticide to thinning the rice plants in their patties.
	Among foragers such as the Inuit or the Gevarro, unwanted babies were left to nature to claim.
	So there you go. You have nomadic tribes in Alaska.
	You have the Japanese, the Chinese, the Hindus, the Greeks, the Romans, all these different cultures have.
	She said... But the most common reasons given by women seeking abortions today, poverty, fetal disability, and just simply because you don't want them.
	Those are the same reasons given by mothers and fathers who killed their newborn infants in other times and places.
	Historical anthropological accuracy demands that we plot the acts of abortion and infanticide on a chronological continuum.
	Since they've typically been performed for the same reasons and have been permitted in accordance with the same moral calculus.
	It was a rival of Christianity, she says.
	And again, she goes on to talk about it.
	She's not against abortion, actually.
	And she's not a Christian.
	But listen to what she has to say. We're good to go.
	And their legal regime prevailed until the mid-20th century when we experienced a religious shift that will probably be understood by future historians as a second reformation.
	I think it's a reformation.
	I think it's a defamation.
	Malformed. Christians are no longer in charge in their prohibition of abortion, unlike their prohibition of infanticide, at least so far.
	It's regarded by most pro-choice secularists as archaic, illogical, and misogynist.
	She says, I am uneasily agnostic on this issue.
	She has some issues with it, but she doesn't want to condemn it.
	And let me just say here, you know, people say, well, I'm agnostic about God or this or that, right?
	Agnostic is a Greek term.
	We talk about, you know, the Greeks, they would negate something by putting the letter A in front of it.
	Gnostic means knowledge, right?
	And so when you put an A in front of it, it means you don't have knowledge.
	The Latin equivalent of this is a little bit clearer.
	Ignoramus. I'm ignorant, okay?
	And so when you say you're agnostic, why don't you say you're an ignoramus on this issue?
	And she's actually informed, but she doesn't want to go there.
	That's the sad thing. She said, And I do not wish to see abortion, per se, criminalized, she said.
	If I'm entirely honest with myself, there is a very limited number of circumstances in which I would want an abortion for myself, and I would want it to be legal.
	But like most voters, even in our rapidly de-Christianizing era, I don't consider abortion to be morally trivial.
	Abortion is not just health care, she said, quote-unquote.
	It is not at all like getting a tooth or a tonsil removed.
	I'm repulsed by the grandstanding of pro-choice activists who insist that all abortions are good abortions and who have rejected the Clinton-era slogan, safe, legal, and rare, on the grounds that it promotes stigma.
	Yeah, we would not want to stigmatize murder or infanticide, would we?
	And when she talks about abortion being criminalized, let's understand the women are not being criminalized.
	It's the doctors who know better that are being criminalized.
	Women are being deceived by this stuff just like we have kids that are being deceived by this transgender thing.
	And it's the doctors who know what they're doing.
	The doctors are fully cognizant of all the issues involved in this.
	And they should be held accountable.
	And they will be held accountable, if not in this life.
	She said, an echo of humanity's infanticidal past is still found in jury rooms throughout the common law world.
	The reason we do not refer to infant killing as murder...
	It's because, in 1922, it was reclassified and renamed to the passage of the Infanticide Act.
	This was done, listen to this, this was done because juries refused to convict, even before 1920, when they were all male, and the Crown case was overwhelming, juries refused to convict women for abortion, even at that time, even when they did try to make it criminal.
	The only crime for which fewer convictions were recorded was abortion.
	In Scotland, there hadn't been a successful abortion prosecution for 50 years.
	Yeah, this is not about criminal charges against women.
	That is a canard. In 1939, T.S. Eliot said Western civilization might continue along the Christian path, but he predicted it might adopt a modern paganism.
	We are now at a fork in the road, he said.
	T.S. Eliot, who was a Christian convert, hoped that it would go down the Christian fork in the road, but he feared that we were already hell-bent on the ladder.
	One might reasonably ask why our choices should be limited to Christianity or to paganism.
	She said, if we fully abandon Christianity, so say the secular reformers, shouldn't we clear the way for something that's newer and better as a guiding philosophy?
	You know, maybe something like transhumanism?
	Something like that? Except that that also is just repackaged paganism.
	She doesn't say that.
	Her perspective is, well, you know, paganism is going to be there because paganism never left.
	It just kind of was festering over there in the corner.
	But all this stuff that we're now seeing is nothing new.
	Solomon wrote there's nothing new under the sun.
	It's just being repackaged.
	And there's some shiny new stuff being added to it, you know, some flashing lights from the people in Silicon Valley.
	Paganism lingered on in both the countryside, even after Christian emperors began to persecute pagans in earnest.
	As a matter of fact, when you look at the etymology of the term pagan, it means rural.
	Because these people were considered to be, first and foremost, nature worshipers.
	Where would we find nature worshippers today in the political spectrum and the cultural movements?
	Well, of course, the environmentalism.
	Even to the extent that you had Lovelock talk about the Gaia theory.
	You know, it's based on the Greek goddess, that's Mother Earth, was Gaia.
	They present Earth as a living, sentient being that just happened by accident.
	And humans, who also happened by accident, happened to be a deadly virus to Gaia, to Mother Earth, and we have to be removed.
	That is the fundamental basis of all environmentalism and all this climate change.
	Do not forget that.
	Fundamental basis is that you are a disease and you have to be eradicated.
	To protect this fragile, accidental thing they call Earth.
	That's what happens when you take God out of the equation.
	So, he says, she goes on to say, Pagans are oriented toward the imminent.
	That means what is right there, not what is up above you, that kind of imminent.
	The pagan gods and all their beauty and terror are elements of this world, in contrast to the transcendent god of the Abrahamic faith.
	To be sure, Christianity incorporated eminent elements over time.
	The ancient sacralization of some sites, with heathen deities replaced by Christian hermits or by martyrs.
	Pagan festivals became intertwined with the Christian calendar.
	The pantheon of deities was replaced with an ever-growing host of saints.
	And so she's saying, oh, so, you know, we've seen this type of thing.
	And she thinks that's a good thing.
	Okay.
	Many of us would disagree.
	But she said the strangely supreme thing about Christianity and anthropological terms is that it takes a topsy-turvy attitude towards weakness and strength.
	And I think this is very important, what she has to say here, because again, all of this social justice and everything is portrayed in the dynamics of power politics.
	You know, who has privilege and who is pushing this and everything?
	Listen to what she says. She says, Christianity is different in its attitude towards weakness and strength.
	To put it crudely, most cultures look at the powerful and the wealthy, and they assume that they must be doing something right.
	The poor are poor because of some failing of their own, whether in this life or the last.
	You know, the first part of it, well, you're successful because you're doing something right.
	That's what I call the Rodgers and Hempstein theology.
	Remember that from The Sound of Music?
	You know, Julie Andrews singing, somewhere in my youth or childhood, I must have done something good, right?
	I don't know what I did to deserve this, but I deserve it.
	That is not the Christian perspective.
	As a matter of fact, you know, something happens to you that is bad.
	The poor are poor.
	Somebody is sick and they've got a horrible disease.
	It must be their own failing.
	Either in this life or their parents' life.
	You remember when...
	When Jesus encountered the blind man at the Pool of Siloam, by the way, they just found the archaeological site of that.
	Talked about both the Old Testament and the New Testament.
	Not really surprising that they found it.
	I guess some people were surprised.
	It's long been the case to find that the Bible is rooted in reality.
	But anyway, they found the Pool of Siloam.
	But at the Pool of Siloam, You had the blind man who'd been blind from birth, and they said to Jesus, they said, Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents?
	See, that's what she's talking about here.
	And what did he say? What is the Christian understanding of that?
	Neither. But so that God might be glorified in what he does here.
	That's a perspective that goes far beyond her perspective of Christianity being different because of weakness and strength.
	She said, the smallness and the feebleness of women and children is a sign that they must be commanded by men.
	See, no, no, that's not Christian.
	We don't command the weak and the feeble.
	The Christian is there as a servant, you see.
	And Jesus said, I came not to be served, but to serve.
	And so, the smallness and the feeble...
	Let me rewrite this and correct her here.
	The smallness and feebleness of women and children is a sign that they must be protected by men.
	See, that's the Christian values.
	And that's what the feminists have worked so hard to eradicate.
	Karen's from New York, and we started dating.
	I would open doors for her and car doors for her, and she was really taken aback by that.
	Got to where she liked it.
	Then I quit doing it. After we got married.
	I should do it more often.
	Anyway. But I was just taught that.
	That was my Christian Southern upbringing.
	Most cultures, perfectly logically, glorify warriors and kings, not those at the bottom of the heap.
	But Christianity takes a perverse attitude towards status and puts that perversity at the heart of its theology.
	God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong.
	She said, that's baffling.
	And that's an alarming claim to anybody from a society that is untouched by the strangeness of the Jesus movement.
	An early Christian author, Lactantius, summarized the pagan objection to this topsy-turviness, she said.
	He said, this is what you object to.
	He said, your questions are, why did Christ render himself so humble and weak that it was possible for him both to be despised by men and to be visited by punishment?
	Why did he suffer violence from those who are weak and mortal?
	Why did he not repel by strength?
	Or avoid, by divine knowledge, the hands of men?
	Why did he not at least in his very death reveal his majesty?
	In a book, Dominion, Tom Holland tracks the development of this confusing preoccupation with weakness and humility.
	And again, she's got the terms a little bit wrong, right?
	We don't command women, we protect women.
	This is not, Christ was not weak.
	He was meek.
	That's a very different thing.
	He was tough. He was tough like Flint.
	He was not weak.
	Meekness means that you don't seek to assert yourself like Andrew Tate.
	Andrew Tate is the opposite of Christ.
	He notes that though early Christians might make the sign of the cross or illustrate the gospels with the stylized crosses, they would not for many centuries regard the crucifixion as an appropriate subject for vivid artistic representation.
	The manner of their Savior's death was, to the Roman mind, so obscene, so humiliating, as to be beneath mention.
	It was not until the 5th century, this is 200 years after Christianity became the formal religion of society, of course the Roman Empire is gone by that time, not until the 5th century that Christ began to be depicted in the moment of his death.
	These Christs were imagined with calm expressions and sculpted as a bodybuilder, more pertinently as a Roman god.
	And so her point is that we've mixed in paganism here.
	But she said built into all this fabric of the religion was a love for the weak.
	She said Christians were not unique in owning slaves.
	But they were unique in eventually banning slavery, something that no other civilization had done before.
	And modern secular feminists, who are only familiar with the caricatures of Puritanism presented by Margaret Atwood's Handmaid's Tale, wholly underestimate the emancipatory effect that Christianity had on women.
	Kyle Harper has described the first sexual revolution.
	He said it emerged in a slave society in which Roman men enjoyed unrestricted sexual access to the bodies of their social inferiors.
	You know, like stars do today.
	People like Trump and Russell Brand and these people, Andrew Tate.
	You know, that type of paganism.
	That's what we're talking about here.
	Including children.
	And they would murder infants if the women got pregnant.
	They were understood as acceptable consequences of the need for frequent male sexual release.
	The violation of slaves and other low-born people was simply, quote, beyond the field of vision for ancient thinkers, unquote.
	All legal systems, including the Roman one, have some concept of rape as a forbidden sexual violation.
	However... Rape is normally a crime that can be committed only against some categories of women.
	You know, the ones who are not famous.
	Right? Not rich, not famous.
	Not of any use to Tucker Carlson or Alex Jones.
	Typically, only those whose male kin are inclined to object to the offense and able to punish the perpetrator.
	The poor and the friendless have no such recourse and they're thus defined as unrapeable.
	Especially if your hero is useful as a ultra-famous conservative and Trump supporter.
	The moral innovation of Christianity was to reconceptualize rape as a moral wrong done to the woman herself, regardless of what her social status was.
	Paul's prohibiting of it, and prohibiting of the term pornea, you know, what Andrew Tate does, Illicit sexual activity, including prostitution, upended an ethical system in which male access to the female body was unquestioned.
	Early converts to Christianity were disproportionately female, she said, because a Christian valorization of weakness, no, meekness, offered obvious benefits to the weaker sex.
	Feminism, she says, is not opposed to Christianity.
	It is its descendant.
	I absolutely disagree with that.
	No. Feminism is a twisted expression that sees meekness as weakness.
	And it was attractive to women.
	Because, again, they were given respect that they didn't have.
	They were given protection that they didn't have as the weaker sex.
	It wasn't that Christianity made men weak.
	It made them stronger to stand up against injustice.
	It made them stronger to defend the helpless.
	And I guess it goes back to the Psalms.
	God is spoken of as a defender of widows.
	As father to the fatherless.
	It calls us to be that way.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	Conor Fitzgerald uses the image of a necklace to describe the nature of moral systems.
	He says the system may contain discrete ideas that are a good thing, or that feminism, she says, is a good thing, or that slavery is wrong, or whatever.
	But all these beads are threaded together on a string.
	You cannot, he wrote, pick up the individual bead without lifting up the whole necklace.
	You do not, I'm afraid, get to pick and choose.
	Thank you.
	They're strung together. They're part of it.
	And, you know, we can clearly see this when we look at philosophies of the left, for example.
	When you look at climate alarmism and when you look at transgenderism and LGBT stuff, there's this thread that is there that holds it all together, which is a hatred for humanity.
	A hatred for humanity that is satanic, that seeks to eliminate the human race.
	That is the central thread to it.
	Now, she's not put her thumb on the central thread of Christianity, which is a love for humanity.
	A love for humanity from the Father, a love for humanity that we have.
	She said the legal status of abortion is at the center of the contemporary culture war because it represents the bleeding edge of de-Christianization.
	When pro-life and pro-choice advocates fight about the nitty-gritty of abortion policy, like Nikki Haley, you know, the rest of these people, what they're really fighting about is whether our society ought to remain Christian.
	Most people who describe themselves as pro-choice have not really thought about what truly abandoning Christianity will mean.
	And that is truly abandoning Christians' historically bizarre insistence that God chose the weak things of the world to shame the powerful.
	And that he calls us to defend that.
	We'll be right back. We're
	Thank you.
	Making Sense.
	common again.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	All right, welcome back.
	And I want to thank Doug A. Lug.
	Thank you very much for the tip on Rockfin, on Rumble, Grant.
	Thank you very much. I appreciate that.
	They say thank you.
	I thank you for making this possible and supporting our family here.
	And while I'm talking about that, let me just say thank you to the people whose checks we got on Friday.
	Anna A., Pam N. As a matter of fact, Pam sent this card, which I thought was funny.
	I don't know if you can see that.
	There you go. I guess that's me, the squirrel.
	And as a megaphone, I get one of these traffic cones.
	So, yeah, I do talk about the traffic cones.
	And the squirrel needs to take one of the traffic cones and put it on an electric vehicle.
	That's what I need to do. Stop them in their tracks.
	Warren F. Thank you very much.
	Jack H. Ben and Cindy B. William L. Thank you.
	We have two checks from William L. Thank you.
	Clay R. Ken S. George M. George V. Rob, 42, in New Jersey.
	Clint D. Helen T. Thank you.
	And Helen, Karen got the card.
	Thank you very much. And she wrote a note to me and said, please thank her for me.
	Appreciate that.
	And she is still recovering.
	She hurt her ribs. She had a fall and...
	Her leg, the leg is getting better.
	The ribs are taking a long time to heal.
	And also Star, who just, that was what was written there.
	So thank you all very much.
	And this is from George V. He also put a note in there.
	It said, any friend of Gerald Salenti's is a friend of mine.
	Well, thank you very much. That reminds me of a story when Karen was teaching in elementary school.
	Her mother came to the school to visit the class, and she introduced her mother.
	And she was teaching, like, second or third grade, very young kids.
	And this little boy walks up and shakes her hand and says, Any mom of Miss Knight is a mom of mine.
	And he kind of... Hesitated, because even for him, as soon as he said it, the words came out of his mouth.
	He's like, what did I just say?
	Any mom of Miss Knights is a mom of mine.
	So, yeah. Let's talk a little bit about the RFK assassination.
	And it was something...
	Oh, we've got some more stuff here.
	Also, on Rockfan, Audi MRR, thank you for the tip.
	He says, prayers for Angry Tiger.
	What's going on with Angry Tiger?
	I don't know, but let us know, and we'll mention it to people.
	I didn't know that there was something going on with Angry Tiger.
	So, yeah, I would like to know what to pray for for him.
	Thank you, Audi. But, yeah, send us a note, and Travis will pass it along to me.
	And so he had a strange thing at an RFK Junior event in L.A. He went public with it.
	I think it was on Saturday, I think it was.
	And a guy showed up, a 44-year-old man.
	We now have his name. He showed up armed with two loaded pistols.
	They were actually in shoulder hosters. He had an additional magazine that was loaded.
	And he also had a lanyard saying that he was a federal marshal and a badge on his waist.
	He was spotted by the security team that Kennedy has because he can't get any protection from the Biden administration.
	Who would think that a Kennedy would get shot, right?
	I mean, whether you support, again, it's a Game of Thrones, and I've said there's many things that I disagree with RFK on.
	I don't want to see him shot.
	He deserves to be protected with his stuff.
	But anyway, and what was also interesting was that he had, when they took all that stuff off, he had an EMS t-shirt.
	I thought, was that for a getaway or something?
	I don't know what the deal was.
	But it turns out that he actually, I think, works in EMS, as we now find out who this guy is.
	Was not what that was about.
	A second man who's not yet been identified was taken into custody also.
	He was allegedly in possession of a backpack which contained another handgun.
	So this guy's got two guns loaded with an additional magazine and then the other guy that's there has a backpack with a gun in it.
	Now, I don't know if he was with this guy or if they're just going through to see if anybody's got any firearms on them.
	I don't know. But anyway, the...
	Main person in question has now been booked on felony gun charges and held on $35,000 bail.
	He is now being described by the Daily Beast as an anti-vaxxer.
	The Daily Beast. What a piece of trash that is.
	Again, they're the ones who repeated the Defamation League's attack on me as being anti-Semitic because I said two weeks, not even two weeks into the lockdown, I said it's medical martial law.
	Well, that makes me anti-Semitic, right?
	Insane. Anyway, their headline, anti-vaxxer held on $35,000 bail after the RFK Jr.
	rally arrest. And they said, and this is the way this trash rag, the Daily Beast, refers to RFK Jr.
	as a disinfo super spreader.
	Yeah, and so anyway, the guy has, they found a TikTok video that he had under his name.
	There's an unseen cameraman walking in front of the ranch-style house with a Betsy Ross flag until he reaches the garage where this guy, Aspero, is standing beside a motorcycle with a pistol at his hip and a badge hanging around his neck.
	Again, evidently, he may walk around with that all the time.
	At first it looked like, well, maybe he's trying to get inside.
	Maybe he just walks around with that badge on all the time.
	The man makes a number of bizarre statements referring to either himself or the person filming as, quote, God's gangster, unquote.
	I think God's got gangsters.
	Maybe I'm wrong on that, but...
	I think he's lacking somewhere, but he's confused about a lot of things.
	Listen to this. And encouraging viewers to visit Rumble and view the Daily Beast feels compelled to explain to people that Rumble is, quote, parenthetically, a YouTube alternative known for hosting extremist content.
	No, it is a YouTube alternative known for hosting free speech, which is what it is.
	Anyway, it says, so visit Rumble and view the content of the two hosts who have promoted QAnon-flavored conspiracy theories about aliens, shape-shifting reptilians, and the supposed deep state cabal.
	Again, this is coming from Daily Beast.
	But still, he expressed a belief that his name has a special numerological significance and a desire to communicate with the rival Hells Angels and Mongols motorcycle gangs.
	So that's where I guess he's saying, I'm the opposite of hell's angels, I'm God's gangster.
	That's probably what he's talking about.
	But there is some really strange cognitive dissonance with this guy.
	They talked to his brother, acknowledged that his brother is a strong Trump supporter, but that neither of them have taken the vaccine.
	You know the Trump shot? So they hate the Trump shot, but they love Trump.
	Isn't that amazing how common that is?
	He does not want it, he said multiple times.
	But he says he does want Trump to be president of the U.S. again to fix this country.
	Well, you know, maybe he could do another depopulation jab.
	This is loony-level Trump derangement.
	And by the way, he said his brother is an unemployed emergency medical technician who lives with his parents, does not have a car, and asked him for a ride to what the accused told him was a single-day security job.
	So it looks like this is not an assassination attempt.
	It looks like yet another person who's being used as a patsy.
	But again, you need to take that kind of precaution.
	But it looks like he's an unemployed EMS guy, so that would explain the t-shirt.
	And, you know, he likes to dress up and think of himself as law enforcement and walk around with a gun.
	Rock fan. Christopher Mincy says, Angry Tiger is at the ER. Okay, so Jason Barker says, Angry Tiger did not say what happened.
	He just said he was headed to the hospital and asked for prayers.
	So let's pray for Angry Tiger, that God will bless him, protect him.
	So... And again, Jason Barker, Angry Tiger, Knights of the Storm, you can find their listing in Good Guys.
	They know what's happening, and they don't have any other agenda.
	They're not trying to get famous or rich.
	And they've got listings of a lot of programs that are there.
	Guards program, you find the times in it.
	So they've got a whole schedule of different programs.
	They've got the program they do together, and then programs that they do individually.
	Jason Barker, the Foxhole Report, Angry Tiger.
	He's got a couple of them, and an economics one as well.
	So we're going to take a quick break, and we'll come back.
	Just pray for Angry Tiger.
	He had to go to the emergency room. I know that he does a lot of car repair.
	I see on social media pictures of cars that he's repairing.
	So I don't know.
	Maybe it was something that had to do with that, if he was able to communicate with people.
	We'll be right back. You're
	listening to The David Knight Show.
	Alright, let's talk a little bit about Rama Swami, or as I call him, Pharma Swami.
	And of course, we had as a guest on Friday, we had Dr.
	Shiva Ayyadurai. A lot of positive feedback from the interview.
	He was very clear.
	And his disdain for Tucker Carlson, for Ramaswamy, for pretty much the entire political and media class that, as he calls them, the swarm.
	He said, you know, we're getting all these different...
	I think of them as essentially false flag media, Mockingbird media that is out there.
	And I think it's interesting to...
	I'll tell you, he put up about a seven or eight point...
	...statement called Vivek the Snake, talking about how he is presenting himself and his position on issues that is worth looking at.
	But it's also worth looking at his, quote, bold plan to take down the administrative state.
	This is put out by some...
	Actually, that headline is from the Tennessee Star.
	And they have some people who are commenting...
	About his proposal to take down the regulatory state.
	That is something that I've talked about for a very long time.
	I absolutely agree with that.
	That is a key thing to do to reform our government.
	And so I'll just say this, you know, he's put out a white paper about that.
	And as I said before, you know, Trump, when he was running in 2016, had a white paper about what needed to be done with the healthcare system.
	And it was spot on. Everything in it was right.
	And everything in it was completely ignored and never heard from again after he ran.
	It's interesting, you know, when these people are running for office, sometimes they'll give us some really good ideas and some really good plans, but they're not necessarily going to be the people who are going to implement it.
	You have to have somebody who really has the character to get this stuff done.
	And he's constantly presented, as he is in this Tennessee Star paper, as a biotech entrepreneur.
	Actually, he's a hustler for pharmaceutical companies.
	That's the truth of the matter.
	But in the white paper, and it's worth talking about this, even though I don't think he's going to get elected, and even if he did get elected, he would not put it in, but it is worth talking about this.
	They said it takes a big bite out of an unconstitutional, quote, as he refers to it, an unconstitutional fourth branch of government that is choking American democracy called the administrative state.
	Look, What we have now, as I've said many times, is taxation without representation and regulation without representation.
	Our elected representatives don't write the laws anymore.
	They've abdicated, because they want to avoid responsibility, they've abdicated this task to the administrative state, to the bureaucracy.
	And even though the bureaucracy is under the president, the president abdicates to them as well, because they don't want to take the responsibility for this.
	They want to be able to position themselves on the fence.
	And so that's why they do this type of thing.
	So he wants to eliminate the FBI, Department of Education, the BATF, and many other of them.
	As a matter of fact, he said he would eliminate 50% of the administrative state workforce, which would be about a million jobs.
	There's 2.2 million jobs.
	And so as people...
	Are critiquing it. They said, well, this relies on a novel interpretation of existing federal laws that usually protect civil servants from being removed without cause and reserve reorganizations of the executive branch for the lawmakers.
	Well, that's not true.
	And you've got a lot of people who could be fired for cause.
	Certainly the people at the top could have gone much, much lower.
	That's what everybody's talking about with Fauci, by the way.
	And by the way, The shameless sycophancy now.
	When I looked up this thing with Russell Brand, they put up a thing on Infowars.
	Trump knocks it out of the park with Megyn Kelly.
	Seriously? Seriously?
	It was one of the most blatant, evasive lies.
	She gave him alibis that do not hold water.
	She was giving him alibis.
	She is sucking up to him.
	Everybody is sucking up to him.
	Just amazing. She flattered him.
	She did all the rest of the stuff, but that's not...
	The title of it was, you know, Trump hits it out of the ballpark, shows why he's by far and away the number one pick.
	It's like... This is just disgusting.
	But look, Trump fired Comey.
	He fired McCabe out of the FBI. He could have fired Fauci.
	He should have fired Fauci.
	And there's many others that could be fired for cause.
	But anyway, Ramaswamy said there's existing federal codes that could be used against this.
	And he points out that former President Jimmy Carter had an Executive Reorganization Act While most provisions of the Act expired in 1980, portions are still in effect and are embodied into the U.S. Code to this day.
	This is why it's worth talking about.
	So, I'm glad that this has been brought up, and we should pay attention to this.
	It's going to be a back-and-forth fight, but somehow...
	We have to get rid of this boa constrictor bureaucracy that Jesus keeps choking us to death.
	And so the president shall, this is what the code still says, the president shall from time to time examine the organization of all agencies and shall determine what changes therein are necessary to accomplish.
	That includes reducing, quote, the number of agencies by consolidating those having similar function under a single head, and to abolish such agencies or functions thereof, as may not be necessary.
	But see, what they're trying to tell us is that Jimmy Carter can expand and create the Department of Education, but subsequent presidents can't get rid of it, and on and on and on.
	And yet that's in the code.
	And we've seen this with Trump and DACA, for example, you know, an executive order, not even something that's in the code, not even something that's coming from the legislative branch, but an executive order saying, I'm not going to enforce immigration law.
	That was DACA. Trump comes in.
	Well, I don't know if I can get rid of that.
	Let me ask the courts because he didn't.
	And he found a court that's going to say, no, you can't.
	Well, that's it. I can't undo his executive order.
	That's the weakness. That's the passivity that we have now seen.
	And that's nothing other than an excuse.
	Jimmy Carter created the Department of Education in 1980 while the presidential campaign was going on, and Ronald Reagan said he was going to get rid of it.
	It was a newborn monster, and he could have strangled him the crib, and instead he grew it into maturity over the next eight years.
	This is the type of betrayal that we've seen from these people who say they want to get rid of these departments over and over again.
	Rick Perry. You know, had a bunch of departments that he wanted to get rid of.
	He said, there's three that I want to get rid of when he was running for president.
	And he couldn't remember the third one, the Department of Energy.
	The Department of Energy was what Trump gave him to run.
	He didn't reduce the size of it.
	He didn't reduce its scope.
	Look at how it's being weaponized now by Jennifer Granholm.
	And so Ramaswamy says, what I just read to you, he said, this is not a suggestion.
	This is a mandate to the U.S. president.
	And so... In his 1976 campaign, Jimmy Carter, the Democrat, described the federal government as, quote, a horrible bureaucratic mess, unquote.
	But again, everybody plays this game.
	Trump is now playing it.
	Well, you're like me. I'm going to get rid of the Department of Education.
	You've already had your chance, pal.
	You didn't do anything about that.
	So, you have people who are pushing back against it, saying, well, it's not easy to do it, said Hans von Spakovsky.
	He's a constitutional law expert at the Heritage Foundation.
	You know, Congress still has a major role to play an executive branch of organizations.
	Look, the Constitution says these organizations are under the present.
	If they're under the president, why can't he fire them?
	And then you have that additional law.
	I think this is something that's important to take a look at.
	And this is why I said it's important to have these debates.
	It's important to have the campaigns because some people will come up with things.
	And it's important to understand where these people are coming from.
	But character still matters, just like I said before.
	And just because he's got a good policy there, he's like, thank you very much.
	We'll take that and do something else with it.
	But just because he's got a good policy there, it doesn't mean that we can trust him.
	And so this is an article going back to August, about two weeks ago, August 28th, from Dr.
	Shiva. He says there's two kinds of Indians, real Indians and fake Indians.
	During colonialism, British promoted the fake Indian with dollars and status to suppress the real Indians who fought the empire.
	Now the swarm, the global imperialism, that is what he calls global imperialism, promotes fake Indian snakes with dollars and visibility to mislead you.
	And so this is a picture of...
	He says, let's review, and he's got like eight points here.
	The first one, Vivek, the snake, tells Americans to ban business with China, but he partnered directly with Chinese government to launch his pharmaceutical company.
	Number two, during COVID, the big pharma guy promoted lockdowns and social distancing.
	He said nothing against Fauci.
	He was all in for mask and vaccine mandates, and now he says what you want to hear, that he is against the mandates.
	Yeah, I've talked about that.
	The fact that he was on Governor DeWine, the Republican's I said, did he come up with this idea of the million-dollar lottery, you know?
	You want to play Russian Roulette with Trump's vaccines?
	Well, you know, you might die, you might get crippled, or you might win a million dollars.
	You feeling lucky, punk? That type of thing.
	But we also know, and Dr.
	Shiva didn't mention it, we also know that he was jockeying to make money by tracking people, right?
	Which is what this all lockdown was really ultimately about.
	It was about justification for surveillance and tracking of us.
	Number three, he said just five months before he was fully supportive of the science of climate change and carbon taxes, but now, at the GOP debate, he says climate change is a hoax.
	He tells you what you want to hear.
	He's an actor chosen by the swarm, says, uh, uh, Says Shiva.
	Number four, he says that he's for meritocracy and truth.
	But he made billions IPO-ing a bogus company to sell a useless drug that he knew had failed four clinical trials.
	He sold his stock before the company crashed and burned when the truth came out.
	A scam artist.
	And yes, this is how he's made his money.
	To call him a biotech entrepreneur?
	He's a Martin Scarelli type scam artist.
	As a matter of fact, he had a partnership with Martin Scarelli and brought him on with his other people.
	He writes a book, Vivek the Snake, attacking Democrats and being anti-woke.
	He donated, however, $7,000 to Act Blue Democrats and never voted for anti-woke Trump in 2016 when that was a possibility.
	Like Obama, he was manufactured to mislead you.
	He spits out stuff about excellence and about cream rising to the top, about no nepotism.
	However, he literally had his mama in his company reanalyze clinical data of failed drug and release a report deeming it successful.
	Mama's boy used a report to BS investors.
	Cheers.
	And he's got links.
	So, again, that is, you know, a couple more things.
	He also... He deceives the MAGA cult by saying that he is against ESG, the UN agenda, but his latest venture, Strive Asset Management, purchases shares precisely in those companies who are supporting the ESG agenda.
	He presents himself as a rags to riches story.
	That's also BS. Insulting to those who actually suffered, he comes from the elite, a Tamil upper caste Brahmins.
	He went to an elite prep school that cost $16,000 a year.
	He was funded by Soros.
	Parents are doctors and engineers.
	So there you go.
	And last one. He tweeted out on March 11th, 2021, This is two months after Biden gets in.
	Ramaswamy tweeted this out.
	Quote, Biden says all adults will be vaccine eligible by May the 1st.
	That's all uppercase good news.
	Give credit where credit is due.
	Yes, let's give credit where credit is due to Ramaswamy.
	We're going to take a quick break.
	Do we have our guest yet?
	Okay, good. We're going to take a quick break, and we're going to be back with our guest, David Mieswinkle.
	He has been with the Lawyers Committee for 9-11 Truth.
	He's now got a new organization that he's with that he started, the National American Renaissance Movement.
	So we're going to talk to him about that, but I especially wanted to get him on To go back over what happened with the anthrax attack.
	And I've interviewed him in the past when he was still with the Lawyers Committee for 9-11 Truth.
	He was the president and CEO at the time, I think.
	And we talked about some new updates to that anthrax investigation.
	So we're going to take a quick break and we will be right back.
	The Common Man.
	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.
	TheDavidKnightShow.com All right, joining us now is David Mieswinkle.
	He is a New Jersey criminal defense attorney, a U.S. Army veteran, a retired police officer.
	And during his police tenure, he was a whistleblower, successfully addressing local, municipal, and police corruption.
	He served for three years as the president and the executive director of the Lawyers Committee for 9-11 Inquiry.
	And he now is a board member and president of a new organization, National American Renaissance Movement.
	We'll talk about that as well.
	But I wanted to get David on because we've spoken in the past about the anthrax attack.
	And as I said at the beginning of the program, I just want to underscore the chronology here for people.
	The fact that we had one week after 9-11, we had this anthrax attack.
	We're going to talk about that. We're going to talk about subsequent investigations that David and others did with the Lawyers Committee for 9-11 Inquiry to update this after a couple of decades.
	But understand that this is a very important second shoe to drop of 9-11.
	And they understand, and you should understand as well, how these things are connected.
	So we're going to start with a review of the anthrax attack.
	Thank you for joining us, David.
	Appreciate it. Thank you very much, David.
	Thank you, and thank you for all that you've done.
	I know that you've been very...
	Your bio here talks about how you have previously co-hosted Quantum Matrix radio show where you walked the 9-11 crime scene, not just in New York, but in Pennsylvania, the Pentagon, and other places like that.
	So thank you for focusing on this.
	And again, this is a cold case, but it is not going to go away.
	It has transformed our world, and especially the second part of it, the anthrax attacks.
	Can you start with a review of the anthrax attack that happened 22 years ago?
	Sure. A week after 9-11, and that's where the Twin Towers came down, and there was a crash at Shanksville, and there was an incident at the Pentagon.
	With all that terror and trauma, a week later, anthrax letters were sent out.
	It was September 18th through a postmark to Tom Brokaw and to a number of networks, NBC, CBS, ABC, etc., And that caused certainly an alarm.
	And meanwhile, within about two weeks or so, another set of letters were sent out.
	And that was to the Senate leader, Democratic leader Tom Daxel.
	And to Patrick Leahy, in October 5th, Mr.
	Stevens, who lived down in Florida, died of anthrax.
	And that was the first alert that there was actually an attack that was in the process.
	A number of things happened that were curious.
	One is that Daxel got a second letter two days later on September 20th, it was postmarked, from actually St.
	Petersburg. And that was one of the areas that the Lawyers Committee mentioned, that if he was a lone wolf, that was Bruce Ivins, who became the primary suspect, how did he get down to Florida to mail a letter, then get back to New Jersey, and not be missed, or there was no documentation of finance that he expended on that, or no plane tickets, etc.?
	Yes, let me ask you something first, before we get too far away from it.
	When these letters showed up to Tom Brokow and Tom Daschle and others like that, what made them, you know, how come nobody died with that?
	How come they identified that as suspicious?
	I mean, why would they be looking for something like that at that point in time?
	Well, at that time, there was rumors actually going around about anthrax.
	Just amazing.
	And actually, there was an exercise scheduled for the day after 9-11, 9-12, in New York City, called the Tripod 2.
	And that was to be in pure 92.
	And when 9-11 happened in New York City, all those people that were going to be in that exercise, which was going to involve anthrax, were already in New York City.
	And what happened was that the emergency offices in Building 7 on the 23rd floor, they were evacuated that day, and they needed a place to set up to handle the emergency.
	And conveniently, Pier 92 was available, and so the emergency team moved into that.
	That was convenient.
	Even more convenient was the person who headed that, basically, that setup, and who headed the emergency services in New York City at that time was a guy named Jerome Hauer.
	And Jerome Hauer, conveniently, all of a sudden advises Cheney that his staff should take Cipro.
	Which is an antidote to anthrax.
	Now, nobody knew that anthrax was in play at this time.
	This September 11th, Jerome Hauer is advising Vice President Cheney and his staff to take Cipro.
	While George Bush is on a plane coming back to New York, supposedly he's taking Cipro.
	So there was a concern about anthrax.
	This is at least a week before the anthrax letter was even sent out.
	So that's highly suspicious.
	Yeah. Jerome Howard worked for Kroll Security.
	Kroll is known as the CIA of Wall Street.
	Kroll was the security system there at the Towers Trade Center, one of them.
	And he was also the fellow that brought in John O'Neill.
	John O'Neill had been an expert in counter-terrorism and dealing with the terrorists, and apparently he was too good at what he was doing, and the FBI was very upset with what he was doing, and I won't go into it, but apparently he was being set up within the FBI, so he got out. He resigned, and his first job was to be head of security at the Twin Towers.
	And he was killed on 9-11 in the towers.
	Supposedly, his body was found by none other than Jerome Hauer, who actually talked to him apparently the night before they had dinner.
	And again, it was very suspicious.
	Jerome Hauer is still around.
	He should be a person that should be talked to about this incident, even going up into the COVID-19 incident.
	And, of course, as I frequently mention, it was two months before 9-11 that you had this simulation of everything that we did in real life in 2020, Dark Winter.
	The first time they talked, it had a large-scale simulation called a germ game or whatever with...
	Johns Hopkins and the CIA and Fauci and all these people are running this scenario, and they did it on an annual basis every year after that, but two months, the first one was two months before 9-11, then one week after 9-11, you got the anthrax attack and all the things that you just mentioned there.
	Indications that these people were talking a great deal about anthrax, and for some reason that was their focus with all of this.
	And so we had, how many people were, there was more than one person that died with the anthrax attack?
	Sorry, David. Five people died, 17 were injured.
	But going back to what you were talking about, that was called Dark Winter.
	Yes. That exercise.
	And the brainchild of that was Robert Chadlik.
	And eventually, Cadillac becomes, again, involved in COVID-19, where there was another exercise right before the Wuhan incident, allegedly, and that was called Crimson Contagion.
	And what they were doing was simulating a...
	A respiratory, a virulent respiratory infection that came out of Wuhan, if you can believe that.
	And that had been going on for a few months in the various states in the United States.
	So Cadillac is involved both in the dark winter exercises that preceded the anthrax attacks, and he's again involved in the attacks, basically the COVID-19 attacks with Crimson Contagion.
	It's interesting how they seem to always have these exercises that are exactly identical to what actually happens.
	I mean, exactly identical.
	At the same time, we even saw this in the UK with the 7-7 bombings.
	You know, they're at the exact same time, and it does create a lot of confusion for people, as we saw with the planes on 9-11 as this stuff was going on.
	Is this real or is this an exercise?
	But it's exactly, you know, what actually happens is exactly what they were going to be training on that day.
	Isn't that a curious coincidence?
	You're right. It seems to happen quite frequently.
	There was another exercise called Event 201, which was in October, which was, again, simulating this sort of pandemic and illness.
	That was a short thing I think they did in the day.
	But eventually, it seems like they rehearsed this very well, and then they go live.
	That's right. That's right.
	Now, the anthrax attack, it went through several stages.
	And the first stage, of course, is to enhance alarm.
	And, you know, they were able, two months after this was out there, they were able to pass the Model State Health Emergency Powers Act, telling, you know, model legislation for the states to pass.
	So that they could not have this being so obviously run from Washington.
	Washington could give them money to do it, but they now got state laws that would authorize what they did to us in 2020.
	But talk about the first thing that they did.
	There was a lot of noise.
	At first, they blamed it on Iraq.
	Talk a little bit about that.
	Okay. Well, that's right. It seemed like even before that, the neocons and the Project for a New American Century, they wanted some action.
	It seemed like they had their eye on the Middle East for a while.
	Iraq couldn't do anything right with them.
	And as soon as 9-11 happened, even though there was no evidence to show that Saddam Hussein was involved, they tried to set him up that he was basically the front for, put it this way, the powers for Al-Qaeda.
	And they had James Woolsey, who was a former CIA guy, saying that Muhammad Adda, who was supposedly the number one suspect and terrorist, that he met with Iraqi people in Prague, Czechoslovakia.
	And that was not true at all, but they were throwing a lot of dirt on Saddam Hussein.
	And the problem was, when they analyzed the anthrax, it didn't have betonite in it, all right, that's...
	Betonite was a clay substance that was characteristic of the Iraqi anthrax at one time.
	So that wasn't there.
	What was there, though, was there was two major attacks.
	The second was a more sophisticated anthrax than what Tom Brokaw got.
	This was a tax on Leahy.
	And this was a fine powder, so fine that it was like an aerosol.
	It just lifted up.
	And when it was in a test tube, it was like dancing, like jumping beans.
	And when it wanted to get out, it was alive, they described it in dancing.
	And it was highly virulent.
	And it was estimated that on one gram, there was a trillion spores of this stuff.
	And what made it incredibly dangerous was that there was silicon in it.
	And the silicon, just think of little glass beads that don't clump together, but they're real slippery.
	And that's what this stuff was.
	At a nano level, it was real slippery stuff and very dangerous.
	And they sent it over to the laboratory at Fort Diedrich, Dr.
	Essel, who was an expert with this stuff.
	He analyzed it.
	Well, he got the envelope.
	And there was 12 people in the room, and all of a sudden, right in front of their eyes, they noticed some of this stuff looked like it was coming out of the site, and it came out of the site.
	It was such a dramatic moment.
	They were panicked. He went and got bleach, diluted the bleach, and snorted it, and almost knocked himself out by snorting it.
	That's how dangerous they thought this stuff was.
	So they had never seen anything like this before.
	This was not the... Anybody...
	And none country could be manufacturing this.
	And what they eventually discovered, basically, it had to come from the United States laboratory because we were the most sophisticated in developing it.
	And even the mainstream media pointed that out.
	And so what you're describing there is the types of things that, you know, everybody is now trying to talk about the Wuhan lab.
	And, you know, I look at this and I believe that the bioweapon was not anything that came out of Wuhan.
	I believe it was the vaccine, clearly.
	However, we need to be concerned about these gain-of-function programs because of what you just described.
	there very sophisticated highly aerosol aerosolized and you know very potent the type of thing that could only come from the United States we're the ones who had that technology and that was a smoking gun that was there you mentioned Wolsey James Wolsey he was and what was it that you said that he was doing I forget what you said, because I started writing it down.
	I said, oh yeah, this is a guy who played the president in Dark Winter.
	In the simulation, they had Woolsey, former CIA, playing the president in the first Dark Winter simulation.
	What was his involvement in this again?
	He gave a statement, that's my understanding, that of the connection between Al-Qaeda and Iraq, which didn't exist, he drummed that up and said that there was a meeting in Prague, Czechoslovakia, and that that involved,
	that was a connection, or one of the connections to, you know, eventually attack Iraq and say that they had some connection with Al-Qaeda and that Saddam Hussein and And Osama bin Laden, in my understanding, didn't get along at all.
	There was no connection there, right?
	They created the connection so that they could justify going in to a country that was not even involved in 9-11.
	And then we won't kill a million people and use depleted uranium and get a foothold there.
	It's really a terrible situation.
	Come up with a new justification.
	And they kept coming.
	The mainstream media pushed back on this narrative that it was coming from Iraq.
	As soon as they found out the details about this, as you were just talking about how highly weaponized it was, they said, well, that couldn't be coming from Iraq for the reasons that you mentioned, the Bentonite things that would be characteristic of Iraq and how much more sophisticated it was.
	And then eventually, so that That kind of shut that down.
	But, of course, we all know that then they had their torture program, and the CIA got lies about weapons of mass destruction based on their torture program.
	That was used as the big lie to get us into Iraq.
	Eventually, they got what they wanted.
	But let's follow this thread.
	Again, CIA. CIA torturing, lying us into the Iraq war.
	But Wolsey, former head of the CIA, making the connection, the bogus connection, to al-Qaeda and to Iraq.
	And also, you know, even playing the president in the dark winter simulation.
	But then what happens?
	The New York Times and other press, maybe even the Washington Post, came out and said, no, this isn't Iraq.
	That's correct.
	That came out. They started pushing back against that pretty early on.
	Is that correct? Right now.
	Well, what happened was that instead of finding it was a betonite and they couldn't blame Iraq for it, really, they found that it was an AIM strain.
	Now, AIM strain is the kind of anthrax that the United States has in experiments in their labs with their vaccines, etc.
	That's typically American if you see AIM strain.
	So what does the FBI do right away?
	They have, they order all the Ames strain at the University of Iowa, which it was stored, to be destroyed.
	They destroy evidence right at the beginning of an investigation.
	All right?
	That's what they do.
	Inside job.
	Yeah.
	So you would think that anything that a rookie police officer is talking, preserve the scene, preserve the evidence.
	And it's typical, too, where they're going to be.
	In 9-11, when they carted off all the steel, the steel was, forensic experts could look at that steel and tell you a lot, as far as how it came down and, you know, by the malformations on it, what destroyed it in a sense.
	Same with the Ames strain.
	There was the DNA involved there.
	So now we know that it's an American product made in America.
	And then they had to blame some people and then look very hard.
	The ones that were most obvious, they did not go after.
	They went after Stephen Hackfield, who was a scientist.
	And eventually, for three years, they hounded him.
	And he turned the tables on them, went public, and then sued them.
	He sued the FBI and got $4 million, if you can believe that, for personal injury.
	And then at that time, they went after Bruce Ivins.
	But, excuse me, they had information or evidence.
	I mean, we had the evidence.
	The Lawyers Committee developed it.
	If you want to see an excellent grand jury petition, go to lc4911.com.
	And you can pull up that petition which we worked on.
	And who was on that? Graham McQueen was on our committee, Merle Nass, and Graham McQueen wrote a book on that.
	On anthrax, Merle Nash was on our committee.
	She was an expert in bioweapons.
	And, of course, the Lawyers Committee was there.
	We had a top-notch group of people that looked into it.
	So what we found out that they blamed Bruce Ivins eventually because of these, I like to call them, magical morphs.
	There was a mutation that was discovered.
	They kind of said it was in his flask that he was using.
	Because everyone would go to him to get anthrax so they could work on the vaccine projects and stuff like that.
	So he had a 1,000-milliliter flask.
	It's called RMR-1029.
	And in that flask was found these magical morphs.
	But what they didn't tell the public and they didn't tell Congress is that 85% of that content of that flask came from Dugway.
	And they didn't tell them that Dugway and Battelle were very close.
	They worked together. Battelle was the expert in aerolization.
	Dugway could create that type of material that aimed strain.
	And they didn't tell the public that Bruce Ivins had another flask that was his at 1030.
	That was the stuff sometimes when the Dugway would send that stuff, he needed a little extra and he'd use his.
	They tested his flask.
	It was totally clean.
	His flask was clean.
	The stuff coming from Dugway was dirty.
	Now, what happens is the FBI eventually orders about 20 different agencies in the United States that was working on this stuff.
	Over 1,000 exhibits come in or 1,000 samples.
	And they only find eight samples that had these magical morphs.
	Seven of them came from Eusemirid, which is where Ivins worked.
	That's at Fort Diedrich.
	One came from Battelle.
	Now, they never told anyone one came from Battelle.
	These were four different morphs that were the variant.
	And, you know, they didn't tell people anything about the content of that coming from Dugway.
	So how Dugway gets out of having these tested, the requirement was you had to grow this stuff, and then you had to, you know, and then they would analyze it and look for the morphs.
	But if it was dead, you didn't have to do that.
	So conveniently, all the Dugway's stuff from their big vat It was dead.
	So they were tested.
	All right? Never tested, although they could have been tested.
	They were criticized later by the National Academy of Sciences for not testing the dead morse, because there would have been a DNA on that, which would have showed that it came from Dugway.
	But the way the protocol was set up by the FBI, we didn't have to test dead morse.
	So Dugway gave him dead morse.
	They weren't tested. Wow, that's amazing.
	Yeah, so they destroy evidence, and then they come up with a rationale to not test this stuff to show the connection to it.
	And it turns out that it was not just, you know, how it was weaponized, but also the way, if I recall, when we talked before...
	It was the way that the delivery mechanism, I mean, it was the thing itself and then the way that it was delivered.
	All of this pointed to not just American, but to specific labs, and they chose not to look at those labs.
	Instead, they set up this guy, Bruce Ivins, as kind of a fall guy, didn't they?
	Right, David.
	And another thing that was a smoking gun in there was the B subtilis.
	B subtilis is a substitute instead of putting this delianthrox out, sometimes you use the B subtilis.
	And that was regularly a contamination Doug Way's fermenters, the giant fermenters, had the B. subtilis, and Bruce Ivins didn't have the B. subtilis.
	The sad thing about this, and we got to talk to a lot of people, we had Richard Lambert came and basically spoke with us for two and a half hours.
	Richard Lambert was the head of the investigation, the anthrax investigation, at one time, the FBI investigation.
	He left. He was like a whistleblower because he was being obstructed himself.
	He told us he had 16 pages on Ivins, and there was evidence to indicate he was innocent, and the FBI wouldn't allow that to go forward.
	He said when he left, it was a 2,000-page summary he gave to the FBI. We tried to get a hold of that.
	We couldn't get a hold of it.
	You probably only can get a hold of it if Congress subpoenas it, and the lawyers' committee are going to try again to go in there, and I think they're going to try to go it through a judge.
	They've tried to go it through the U.S. Attorney unsuccessfully to get them to look at this information that's in the petition.
	It's so key, and that's why I really appreciate it.
	It was a couple of years ago, I think, that we talked, and you guys were in the middle of this investigation, or just concluded it.
	And we talked about it a couple of different times, I had you on.
	And very, very key, because, again, there were red flags all over the place about how they were lying and misrepresenting this and using it as a false flag.
	Even the mainstream media agreeing about that, and then it just kind of disappears.
	And as you point out, they falsely accused one guy.
	He sued them, got millions of dollars.
	I think he said $4 million judgment against them.
	But they kept coming after this scapegoat guy out there.
	And then eventually he died or committed suicide.
	And then they jump in and blame him 100% for all of this stuff.
	And it wasn't, as your research showed, he didn't have access to this.
	But there is absolutely no interest In the mainstream media or in Congress to try to get to the truth of this, the FBI destroying evidence from the very beginning.
	And it really is foundational to what happened to us in 2020, isn't it?
	Well, I think that's because of the captured media.
	That's why you have a show now, David, because you're a part of the alternative in trying to bring truth to people.
	The media is totally captured.
	Maybe it was the Project Mockingbird or whatever.
	All the assets are in there.
	The agents are in there. Unfortunately, you're not going to find any truth in the media anymore, at least mainstream, for the most part.
	Maybe you could find out, you know, the score of the Yankee game or, you know, the Packers game or something.
	Something like that. And lots of times I think that's why I read the papers, just for the sports.
	I think maybe there's more integrity in that.
	But, you know, you're totally right that the media is totally deceptive.
	That's why they get away with this.
	You know, we've seen a similar pattern, though.
	Look at Bruce Ivins as a patsy.
	He didn't do this, okay?
	We got to know him a little bit.
	I actually talked to his son.
	He's a police officer now.
	And he doesn't want to talk to anybody.
	I mean, the whole family was traumatized, but he was a good guy.
	He said, you're the first person I've talked to since his dad's death that was, you know, trying to solicit or trying to get, you know, information.
	We had two people that intimately knew him and thought he was murdered.
	And we had, we talked to four, three colonels.
	We got affidavits from them saying that Bryce Bruce Ivins couldn't have done it.
	This was from Fort Diedrich, Yosemarit.
	You know, United States Military Research Institute of Infectious Diseases.
	And they basically gave us, in fact, Colonel Anderson gave us a treasure trove of documents never seen before that are exhibits in the Lawyers' Committee petition.
	So if you go there, you can see the exhibits there and see some of what Dr.
	Colonel Anderson gave us.
	When Bruce Ivins died, the church was filled.
	Totally. Hundreds of people there.
	Everyone was crying.
	That's the account.
	They knew this guy was a good guy.
	They knew he was a patriotic guy.
	They knew he was set up.
	He couldn't have done it. And you're right.
	The media is disgraceful.
	They allowed this to happen.
	We've seen other patsies being set up, and maybe it even goes back to Lee Harvey Oswald saying he was a patsy, or goes back to James Earl Ray and information evidence to say he was.
	I think the Martin Luther King family doesn't believe he was the killer.
	Then you have Saron Saron.
	It seems like he was under some kind of MKUltra program.
	And then you even have Mark Chapman that kills John Lennon.
	You have a lot of these supposedly lone nuts.
	But this was an organized effort.
	This was not a loneer.
	This was not Lone Wolf.
	This was not Bruce Ivins.
	They might have had programs.
	They had these programs called Chatterbox and even have a program called Satan where they can...
	These are intelligence agencies.
	They can get in people's minds and you don't even know they're in your mind.
	And they can make you do things you wouldn't normally do or react.
	The FBI even had a woman there who was supposedly his counselor.
	I forget her name. Maybe it was Jane Dooley or something like that.
	And she should be further investigated for sure.
	But she basically came and signed a complaint against him.
	She was supposedly a therapist or counselor, but apparently she was on probation, all right, for something.
	And apparently the word is that the FBI coaxed her into doing that.
	And that totally blew, really, what...
	But semblance of stability Bruce Ivins had, I think he lost it at that point when his own therapist turned against him, his own counselor.
	And then they were watching him 24-7, my understanding.
	And they knew he went to the drugstore and, you know, apparently bought some things.
	And, you know, I think they know a lot more.
	They were advised by their own psychiatrist not to lean on this guy because he was fragile.
	He was not a Stephen Hatfield.
	Hatfield was stronger of Constitution and will.
	He turned against him, and he won his lawsuit against him.
	Ivins was maybe a different type of person, and he was very reflective and very emotional, it seemed like, and the FBI undressed him in public.
	He had some secrets, just like we all probably have some secrets, and he was so forthcoming To his detriment, even his attorneys said, you don't want you to talk to these guys, basically.
	I think Paul Kemp, who we talked to, too.
	So we talked to all the key people that were around there.
	We talked to Barbara Hatch Rosenberg, who started the investigation.
	Actually, she thought Hatfield did it at first.
	We talked to Martin Yu Jones, who was an expert.
	We read their material on anthrax.
	So we know what we're talking about, about anthrax at that time and how sophisticated this was.
	They didn't think that Bruce Ivins did it.
	Royal NASA was an expert in our committee.
	She didn't think she knew him as a friend.
	So it was terrible.
	It was disgraceful what they did to that family.
	The FBI, and this is not the way in the whole organization, it was just those key people that they sent in there like attack dogs on him.
	That's what they did. Oh, yeah.
	Yeah. And it's not the first time or only time we've seen that.
	I mean, they've gone around and collected evidence and destroyed it for Flight 800.
	So many different things that they've done that way.
	It is a pattern of behavior, and they have the people that they can use to do that type of thing.
	So as it stands right now, you guys put together, and this has been there for a couple of years, a tremendous amount of documentation disproving everything that the FBI said and pointing to the CIA. There is more information that could be obtained, but you don't have the power to subpoena that, and you can't get anybody in government that is interested in helping with that.
	But we can see the overall picture of this, and we can see how this is of one piece of We're good to go.
	And it's just my opinion, David, that, you know, 9-11 was a way of attacking our country and its foundation, changing it more for surveillance and monitoring surveillance police state.
	But I think, you know, the other shoe to drop with this and this pandemic thing that they unleashed on us in 2020 was practice planned.
	And it goes back to the anthrax attack and the legislation that followed it, you know, all this climate stuff.
	But it became worldwide.
	And I think, you know, this thing is expanding like that.
	And this is the way that we're seeing them move as the alarm and the panic becomes more and more widespread for greater societal change across the globe.
	And that's really what this all eventually came to is why they practiced it for 20 years and then executed exactly what they've been practicing.
	It truly is amazing to watch this.
	But these, you know, when they start their practicing of their games, when they start these simulations and wind up having exactly the same thing happen at exactly the same time and place and exactly the same way they're practicing it.
	I mean, these people are meticulous about it, aren't they?
	Right, well, you know, we talked about Dax Olay getting the anthrax attack, you know, that really virulent.
	Well, they were holding up the Patriot Act at the time, and Cheney had told them, gave them a date, and they wanted to, you know, modify it or compromise it and look at it closer.
	And, you know, they basically were attacked, you know, for wanting to slow that down.
	Yeah, yeah. Kind of a shot across the bow.
	That's pretty interesting.
	But what you're saying, too, with regards to Bill Benny, who was a friend of ours at lawyers' committees, they talked to us.
	And he personally, I mean, told our group that your emails, your text message, your cell phone communications, and your messaging, your searches are all being harvested now and stored.
	Yes. Right? That's it. Let's just insert here, Bill Binney, NSA technical head for several decades, an NSA whistleblower, straight up guy.
	I've interviewed him myself. But yeah, as Bill Binney said, everything is...
	And I had an interview with him once and I said, so what should people do to protect their privacy?
	Because there isn't anything you can do to protect your privacy.
	Yeah. He said they can get anything.
	He says, if they're interested in you, they're going to find some way to get through it.
	You're talking about civil liberties and you're talking about now them becoming more, I mean, actually telling you to take a vaccine that hasn't been approved.
	Yeah. No informed consent.
	You don't know what's in it.
	People are dying from it, getting sick from it, and they're still telling you to give it to your babies, six-month-old babies.
	So they've upped the ante now from 9-11 and the Patriot Bill, where they're looking at all your personal correspondence on your computers, etc., and your text, where they're actually now trying to legislate and regulate how you go to work.
	For our lockdowns and distancing and masking and having to take these vaccines, it's terrible.
	So people have to draw a line now.
	Freedom is really the major issue.
	That's amazing. That's a key thing, yeah.
	When you look at it, and again, you know, all the games that they practiced for 20 years and all the rest of this stuff, but I think one of the key things was Fauci.
	In October 2019, the Milken Institute saying, well, how do we get rid of these requirements of test drugs and stuff?
	He goes, well, you do it from the inside, you do it with disruption, and you do it iteratively, right?
	I mean, he laid it out right there for everybody as they were doing it.
	But let's talk a little bit about what you're doing now, the National American Renaissance Movement.
	Tell us a little bit about that. Well, this is really an exciting project, and it's just beginning, an American Renaissance movement we call national arm.
	It's national versus global, so we're not particularly keen on globalists.
	In fact, I look at them as a Trojan horse, the World Economic Forum, the United Nations, or the World Health Organization.
	These are agencies we don't really need to make us more prosperous people or healthier people or more informed people.
	They're the exact opposite.
	They're there to enslave us and to use their money to buy our politicians, to buy our industries, and basically put their agenda in there.
	Their agenda is 2030.
	We've seen it from Klaus Schwab.
	You will own nothing, you'll be happy.
	We would say that.
	You will own nothing, you'll be happy.
	That's because they'll own everything, and you will be all zombies and slaves.
	And or his Rasputin Harari, who says you're now hackable.
	Forget about your soul, your spirit, your freedom, your dignity.
	You're a thing. You're in commerce.
	You know, we control you.
	That's what we're talking about.
	So that is a repulsion that, I mean, any normal human being would have.
	And what I say, David, is because lots of times it's out there, I tell people—and this is a little story— One time I was sick, I went to Rutgers University, and I remember I was a student.
	I was sick for a while. And I remember during the period of time, I had a really bad fever, and I was reading the book, and the book was the godfather of all books.
	And I was reading it straight through.
	And there's a section there where they're talking, and the guy says, it's not personal, it's business.
	And then the guy says, it might have been the godfather, Michael Corleone himself, he says, He says it's personal.
	Everything is personal.
	So what I would say to people out there, this is personal.
	This is an attack on you, your family, your loved ones, your country.
	This is personal.
	Take it personal. And when you take it personal, all of a sudden it's not something on a TV screen or a computer screen or a book.
	It's something right in your face.
	It's a guy right in your face who is, as I said, they like to put a boot on mankind and That's one of the descriptions, I think, in Orwell with 1984.
	Well, that's what they want to do.
	Take it personal.
	When you take it personal, you're going to find you have a strength and a courage you didn't have.
	And the reason you're going to take it personal is because you have a love that they don't have.
	You have a love for mankind.
	You have a love for your country.
	You have a love for the Constitution.
	You have a love for the Bill of Rights to keep you free.
	And when you realize that's all at stake, take it personal, please.
	Yes, yes, absolutely.
	Yeah, you're going to be wearing that boot on your face just like they want you to wear the mask on your face if we don't do something about it.
	And the key thing, you know, they keep telling everybody, 2030, and that's been there for a very long time.
	They understand that, you know, Biden has talked about it.
	Everybody talks about millennials and the different generations, and we know that we're in a fourth turning.
	If you look at this, they understand the time of this.
	We're in the midst of a fourth turning.
	They want to have their new society.
	In our face and on top of us within the next seven years.
	So this is happening right now and we have to be aware of that so we're not fooled by the next alarm that they come out with it.
	But your organization is National American Renaissance Movement and the website is nationalarm.org.
	Tell us a little bit more about what you're doing at National Arm.
	Thank you.
	Well, as I said, the national as opposed to global, the A is for America.
	That's our nation state.
	We want to preserve it. The R is for Renaissance, rebirth, or revolution in the sense of the Founding Fathers.
	We're heirs to that great history.
	We should embrace it now, especially now, and realize that.
	And for the arm is movement.
	We want to do a grassroots movement throughout the entire country.
	What we're doing now, our first initiative, really is a grand jury petition.
	Depending on the state, it's between 82 to 85 pages.
	And what it does is it outlines 15 crimes.
	There's federal crimes, state crimes, and crimes against humanity, the Nuremberg Code violations, etc.
	And what we want to do is to custom make that template, to have a template, and give it to law enforcement, We're good to go.
	There's a legal section there.
	You can drop it down. The states that have been thus far given this document are New Jersey, Florida, Texas, Tennessee, and Idaho.
	And we're working on a number more.
	If there's some attorneys out there who want to help, just look up the law for the various states.
	We can use that help for sure.
	And, you know, we'll work together and get that done quicker, sooner than later.
	But we are asking law enforcement, and here's the strategy, different.
	What I learned, anyway, from 9-11, when we went to the federal court, we had a very good grand jury petition in New York City at Ground Zero, which was presented to the U.S. Attorney there for an investigation to show that these towers came down through controlled demolition.
	And we had gathered the evidence from architects and engineers for a long time, repackaged it, and put a little bit of our own in there.
	It took them five years.
	Eventually, the Supreme Court went accepted.
	It was denied because of standing.
	Even though people lost their relatives, their sons, their husbands, their loved ones in there, they said they had no standing for just a grand jury to receive the evidence and look at it, not make any decision on it, just to look at it.
	Now, the same thing we did with the Lawyers Committee before I left, we submitted it to the U.S. Attorney in Washington, Anthrax.
	Now, the Anthrax is a wonderful investigation we did.
	I think we took everything up a notch from what had been out there, and it was our investigation.
	It wasn't that we didn't borrow from architects and engineers or anything to Help them put it together.
	This was our creation.
	It's still there. My understanding is they're going to try and go through a judge right now, which is maybe a federal court judge.
	Maybe that's what we have to try if the U.S. attorney won't take it.
	What we're trying to do here with a national arm is we're trying to go to the states' rights thing, the Tenth Amendment thing.
	We want the states to finally say, hey, this is a crime that's affecting our people in our state.
	So many people have died.
	So many people have been disabled.
	So many people have gone to the hospital with serious injuries.
	So, let's look at this and let's bring some of these alleged suspects, you know, to the forefront and investigate it.
	Now, we have persons of interest as somebody that has information that could be helpful to an investigation, someone that might want to cooperate with an investigation, or someone who basically needs more investigation.
	Alright? So, as I said, the list is there.
	There's 149 exhibits.
	Now, this is something that's a little bizarre, but this is where it is in the cutting edge.
	One of our board members is Dr.
	Anna Mahalcha. She's an expert.
	She's a pathologist over 25 years, but she's become an expert in dark field microscopy.
	And her microscope was 4,000 magnification and five times brighter than a regular microscope that a doctor would look at.
	She's found a technology in these vaccines that we've never seen before.
	These are hydrogels that are self-replicating and microdots, which is like a technical electrical little circuit that is going into the blood system and into the blood cells.
	And this research matches up with Clifford Carnigan's research, which maybe you've never heard of him.
	He'd be excellent to put on.
	He's a scientist. He's studied air quality for over 25 years.
	He's found all these heavy metals that are in there, titanium, strontium, aluminum, that we're breathing at a nano-size all the time.
	Chemtrails are not condensation trails, all right?
	They're not good for us.
	That's right. What he's found, too, is the Morgellons.
	He's an expert on Morgellons' blood, and he's found a protein there.
	The government won't identify it.
	He called it a cross-domain bacteria.
	Now, Dr. Anna Mahalchis, working separately, and Dr.
	Clifford Cornicum, they found each other in their work, and they compared the work.
	What Clifford's found in the blood analysis, the same thing she's finding, is an attack on the red blood cells and oxygen in people.
	So people who have long COVID or they have chronic fatigue syndrome, this is something you can connect to the blood.
	And it's like an oxidation in the blood where blood has iron in it.
	Well, Clifford's found the iron, I think it's Fe2, turned into Fe3.
	It's like rust is slowing you down.
	So, again, even though we look at this as what it's all about, let's look at the context, and we have to look at the globalists, what are they up to?
	We can see the pharmacies, look at, for the safe and effective medicine, which it's not, they've got emergency use authorization, Pfizer, for poison, they've made over $100 billion, right?
	over $100 billion, right?
	So you might think, well, that's what the theme is.
	So you might think, well, that's what the theme is.
	This crime is just to get money, make in profits, which they've done.
	This crime is just to get money, make in profits, which they've done.
	Or this is just to basically make the people more conformity, more like sheep and stuff.
	Or this is just to basically make the people more conformity, more like sheep and stuff.
	But this is even more.
	But this is even more.
	Look at it as a transhumanistic type of thing, what they are doing in these vaccines.
	Look at it as a transhumanistic type of thing, what they're doing in these vaccines.
	And, again, Dr. Anna Mahalczyk, she's on the front line.
	She's one of our board members.
	Joe Sansone, who's leading the jab in Florida, he's one of our board members.
	He's gotten 10 counties, the executive committees in the Republican Party, to ban the jab.
	Why?
	Because it's toxic and poisoning people.
	Dr. Anna is saying the same thing that Clifford Carnicum is saying.
	You've got to look at these vaccines, and you have to have the equipment to do it It's more sinister even than you think.
	It's more sinister even than you think, David.
	Yeah, that's the thing. I tell people all the time and I have to keep telling myself that as well.
	We continually, as George Bush would say, misunderstand the evil of these people and their technology.
	And that's the key thing.
	We look at this and you can't believe how evil some people are.
	You know, it's just like nobody believed that Ted Bundy could be that way.
	That's how he got away with his crimes.
	And that's how these people get away with it.
	And we also don't realize just how advanced their technology is.
	It is like, you know, it's beyond what you've even seen in a lot of science fiction stuff.
	So that is the key thing.
	And you're exactly right.
	We've got to investigate this at the state level and at the local level because there is no interest whatsoever in investigating any of this stuff at the federal level.
	Tell me a little bit about what's going on in Tennessee because you mentioned Tennessee.
	I live in Tennessee. What's happening in Tennessee with this?
	Well, I know there's some kind of sovereignty and nullification action down there, and some of the people, they've asked for the petition.
	So we're just getting that petition together for them, and we'll give it to them to submit to their law enforcement.
	And we'll send it to... We just sent...
	Actually, yesterday, I sent something to the governor down there.
	We're using thumb drives now in certified mail, so we know that they get it.
	The thumb drive into the Attorney General.
	We've done that to Texas, too.
	And like I said, we want to do it to the whole country.
	We're a little bit behind in doing that because we're just starting up.
	We have big, you know, I wouldn't say dreams, but we want to do a lot of good things, and we need the good people to help us do it.
	And I think they will come.
	I think when we say this is going to be a movement, that's what we want to do.
	We want to organize the states so that every state has an arm.
	So Tennessee will have an arm, Pennsylvania will have an arm, and what that means is American Renaissance movement, Renaissance rebirth or revolution.
	But it's at a higher level.
	We want a new thinking, in a sense, and I call out to the artists.
	I mean, lots of times the artists or the poets or the philosophers are the ones that might lead the way, but we need a new way of thinking.
	We're all captured by this media, and if you're locked into the media, you don't even realize that we're in a smoky room.
	And you can't breathe really good in this room.
	We've got to create the new forum, the new room, which doesn't have all this toxic that you inhale, however you inhale it.
	And that's what this is about, creating a new society.
	We hope to eventually look at the issues.
	Maybe it would be finance, because we mentioned they want to implode the economy, basically bring us down.
	They want to reset it.
	They want to have a new kind of currency, a digital currency they can control.
	Well, all right.
	Well, if we don't have an alternative, well, they're going to get their way maybe because that's the only thing out there.
	Well, people are desperate and panicked.
	So we want to anticipate.
	We want to take them serious at their word, as you said, 2030.
	Okay.
	Some people told me it's really earlier.
	They're telling us 2030.
	So by that time, they'll have it locked in.
	I think they want to have it.
	That's their ideal society that they want to have by 2030.
	So I absolutely do believe they're going to try to take everything down and then rebuild it by 2030.
	So we've got less than seven years, even six years, because we're at the end of 2023 now.
	It's going to be really quickly.
	We can expect they're going to have, I mean, they've laid this out.
	They've had years and years to think about how they're going to do this.
	And you can imagine, we believe this pandemic was planned, as you said, a plandemic, as Mickey Willis says in his movies, and that they have an agenda, that they're ready to go to B, C, D, E, whatever they have to do to eventually have the society capitulate.
	So it's really interesting coming up.
	This is an interesting phenomenon with Robert Kennedy and the Democratic Party.
	I mean, he seems to be the only person that looks like a Democrat from the old days when I was a kid.
	And then you have the Trump phenomenon, which is really interesting, going on in 2024 here, coming up.
	Big election. You've got Biden looking really shaky.
	So who knows what's going to happen.
	Hopefully there is an election.
	Hopefully it's a fair election.
	I mean, that might be asking for too much, right?
	But a nice fair election would be fantastic.
	We're still going to play the election by the rules that were put in in 2020.
	We've had another election in the interim.
	They put in that vote-by-mail thing.
	The key thing is... We've got to make sure they don't get a sucker punch off on us.
	You know what I'm saying? And that means that people need to understand what the plan is.
	We talk to people about CBDC, and most of them don't know what that is.
	And it's like, oh, I don't know. But if you go down and you talk to them, for example, on that one issue, and you tell them, these are the things, just list out the things that have been talked about by the various central banks about what they want to do.
	And nobody likes that.
	It's like, you know, 75-80% of the people oppose every single aspect of CBDC. They just don't know it by the name CBDC. And they don't understand it's the plan.
	They don't understand it's coming. I've talked to people about banning automobiles and car shows.
	And they all say, yeah, it's going to happen, but it's not going to happen in my lifetime.
	They just don't understand how fast this is going, what the plan is.
	The best thing that we can do right now is just give people the intel so they don't get a sucker punch with this stuff like we've been punched in the gut with 9-11 and with the pandemic in 2020.
	That's the key thing. If people understand what's going on, I knew what was happening immediately because I had seen Dark Winter, and I knew about all that stuff.
	So if people know about that, They'll be wise about this, and they won't panic, because panic and fear is what they have to have to make their plan work, and knowledge is the way that we stop that panic and fear, in my opinion.
	That's right, 100%.
	I agree with you. That's what we're trying to do, is educate the public.
	But first, while we're educating the public, we're trying to educate law enforcement.
	We believe that there has to be a courageous law enforcement, an attorney general or governor that's going to have I see that DeSantis is doing some good things in Florida.
	There's some action down there.
	Maybe other governors can take a lead from that.
	His Surgeon General, Oladipo, I think, is doing an investigation now.
	We don't know how that will go.
	We don't know if it will be compromised.
	But at least it's happening.
	And it's an example for other governors to do it.
	And for other prosecutors to step up and do it.
	It needs to be done.
	It has to be done. We can't allow what happened in 9-11 to happen here.
	We can't allow it.
	Exactly. We'd always like to see it happen sooner and a greater degree and everything, but whenever something like that happens, we have to encourage it and say, we need to see more of this, and maybe we can get some other people to join in in other states, and maybe they will go further, and maybe they will do it faster and so forth.
	But you're exactly right.
	We've got to do this as a grassroots movement, and you know...
	From your experience, just how insular Washington is and how corrupted it's become.
	Again, the organization is nationalarm.org, nationalarm.org.
	And we're talking to David Meiswinkle.
	Thank you so much, David. Appreciate all the work that you've done, and it's very important.
	Thank you very much. Appreciate it.
	Thank you, David. I appreciate you very much, too.
	Thank you.
	We're going to take a quick break, folks, and we'll be right back.
	Using free speech to free minds.
	Music It's the David Knight Show.
	The Common Man.
	They created common core to dumb down our children.
	They created common past to track and control us.
	Their commons project to make sure the commoners own nothing.
	And the communist future.
	They see the common man as simple, unsophisticated, ordinary.
	But each of us has worth and dignity created in the image of God.
	That is what we have in common.
	That is what they want to take away.
	Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation.
	They desire to know everything about us while they hide everything from us.
	It's time to turn that around and expose what they want to hide.
	Please share the information and links you'll find at TheDavidKnightShow.com.
	Thank you for listening.
	Thank you for sharing.
	If you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers.
	The David Knight Show dot com.
	Thank you.
	Well, we've got about seven minutes left, and I want to go through some stuff on climate that is very important.
	I'll try to go through it rapidly here, but I want to thank real quickly Eric Jungwirth.
	Thank you very much. Ron Rockfin for the tip.
	He says, love the show. Well, thank you very much.
	I appreciate that. We've had King Charles of the UK has taken some heat because he flew four ministers 400 miles to his Scottish castle.
	To talk about carbon emissions.
	The stupidity.
	The hypocrisy of all this stuff.
	And I love the title of this Reason article.
	And I've gone through all this stuff in detail in terms of coming for your stoves and your dishwashers and all the rest of this.
	But I love the title. Environmentalists are destroying my kitchen.
	That's the article on Reason.
	And that's true. They're going to destroy your kitchen, everything else.
	They're going to gaslight you, as a matter of fact.
	She says, despite the New York Times gaslighting, bureaucrats and politicians are coming for your stoves.
	Yes, that's right. They are going to turn off the gas on the stoves, and that's a big part of the gaslighting.
	Make no mistake about it.
	California is looking toward a renewable future amid contentious power plant decisions.
	This article from The Hill says, It's actually saying, no, criticizing California for not moving quickly enough to destroy the power grid without any alternative.
	One of the most amazingly naive articles I've ever seen.
	Shut everything down now.
	You know, they're even more...
	This piece from the Hill is even more radical than the California legislature, if you can imagine such a thing.
	California officials have garnered criticism, you know, from...
	Some say, you know, and that's where they put in their bias, garnered criticism, such as this article, in recent months over their decision to prolong the lifespans of natural gas and nuclear facilities despite the state's pledge to shift to cleaner energy.
	So what does that mean?
	There's no emissions coming out of the nuclear plants.
	So what do you mean by that? Lawmakers have argued that the moves are part of a critical balancing act between California's ambitious renewable energy goals and the need to keep homes heated and powered.
	You understand how they create alarm, and then they create this sense of urgency, like somebody who is a scam artist trying to sell you something.
	This deal is only good for today.
	We're all going to die if we don't do this right now.
	And then they warp speed you on whatever it is that they want you to have.
	Keep you fearful.
	Push this on you. There's no time.
	It's not going to be good after today.
	You've got to accept it right now.
	And then they go on. This is another trick that they always use.
	The hill. But many scientists and environmental advocates say, that's what this person thinks.
	Many scientists and many environmentalists, they think that this is unnecessary.
	Just go for it now. We have abundant, renewable, clean energy resources, said the State Director for the Environment of California, an organization, told The Hill.
	Well, here's the problem, and we all know that the sun doesn't shine at night.
	The wind does not always blow.
	But, you know, they don't have a story for this.
	I mean, the best you can do is try to come up with some of these Tesla, you know, massive energy, battery energy storage sites that are an unbelievable fire hazard, an unbelievable expense.
	But now you have, this is from the Epoch Times, On the other side, meteorologists and scientists are explaining why there is no climate emergency.
	And again, this is 1,609 scientists, many of them with credentials, Nobel Prizes and signatories include Nobel laureates, theoretical physicists, meteorologists, professors, environmental scientists worldwide.
	But that's not the important part.
	But they do get to the important part in this article.
	In other words, we don't want to play the game that they play, which is, oh, look, the weather is hot or it's cold or whatever.
	That means that, you know, this is an extreme.
	No, we don't want to say, well, you're having this conference And look at this, you've got about global warming and you've got the biggest snowstorm you've ever had.
	That does not win the argument.
	The appeal to authorities does not win the argument.
	But there is data in this declaration and they are talking about that.
	And that does win the argument.
	One person said, I signed the declaration because I believe the climate is no longer studied scientifically.
	It has become an item of faith.
	They talk about how they cherry-picked the time frames to exclude a period of medieval warmth and other things.
	But they said the public perception of carbon dioxide is that it goes through the atmosphere and it stays there.
	And this is the crux of the issue here.
	They think it just accumulates, but it doesn't.
	And they point out that it's got a carbon dioxide molecule that will stay in the atmosphere for about three and a half years.
	Central to this fraud, central to this lie, is what the IPCC is telling people.
	That's the UN organization that is promoting the climate change fear.
	They say that...
	No, human carbon dioxide inflow is about 5% to 7% of the total carbon dioxide inflow into the atmosphere.
	So to make up for the lack of necessary human-caused carbon dioxide flowing into the atmosphere, the IPCC claims that instead of having a turnover time of three and a half years, that human CO2 stays in the atmosphere for hundreds or even thousands of years.
	See, this is why when they say, well, you know, it's only 0.4% of the...
	Oh, no, but your stuff stays up forever, and it just accumulates.
	And so, Mr.
	Berry, one of the scientists, says, so here, they're saying that there's something different about human carbon dioxide.
	That it doesn't flow out of the atmosphere as natural as carbon dioxide.
	And so he says, here's the simple question.
	Is a human carbon dioxide molecule, carbon and two oxygen atoms, is that exactly identical to a natural carbon dioxide molecule?
	Well, the answer is, of course, yes!
	And so it doesn't take any longer for that to precipitate out of the environment than it does for natural carbon dioxide.
	And that's just one of the many lies that are pushed out there by the carbon alarmists.
	Thank you for joining us. 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.
	And you want to know something else?

▲