Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Dec. 12, 2023 - The David Knight Show

03:01:33

The David Knight Show - 12/12/2023

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Thank you.
	Using free speech to free minds.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	As the clock strikes 13.
	it's Tuesday, the 12th of December, year of our Lord 2023.
	Well, today we're going to begin with war.
	We didn't get to that yesterday, and we'll talk about economics as well that we also did not get to yesterday.
	But we see war metastasizing everywhere.
	At the same time that we see the Pentagon unable to recruit Americans, and so they're turning to foreign soldiers, and they're turning to artificial intelligence.
	These are dangerous trends of a dying empire.
	And we're also going to talk about the moves against crypto.
	Because this really is a harbinger of what is to come with CBDC. Same enemies of cash and CBDC as of crypto.
	We'll also take a look at pop culture.
	Taylor Swift versus Handel's Messiah.
	Stay with us.
	We'll be right back.
	Well, I've spoken I've spoken about this briefly, but Venezuela...
	I held an election, as you know, about, I think it was a week before last Sunday, to see if they wanted to go to war.
	And surprise, surprise, you had 96% of the people rubber-stamped what Maduro wanted to do.
	And, of course, this is Venezuela.
	Where Hugo Chavez's cronies created Smartmatic, and they've been accused of rigging elections in Venezuela, throughout Central and South America, in several Mexican provinces, in Brazil, in the Philippines, and of course in America, if you say that, you get sued. But it's true.
	It had a long history. I've talked about this for a long time.
	And of course, it's not just Smartmatic.
	Any of these electronic voting machines allow people to game the system.
	A system that is gamed in so many different ways.
	As we look now, everybody's saying, well, it's over.
	Look at this. You know, Trump is, he's got a couple of swing states.
	Looks like he's beating Biden in those swing states.
	He only needs to flip three of them.
	And so he's not only won the Republican primary before the first vote takes place, but he is also being anointed as the winner by the mainstream alternative media, at least.
	Before even the primaries began, he's been anointed as the winner of the final election.
	It truly is amazing. Now, why not?
	We're not going to have any debates.
	There's nothing to talk about. This is just going to be about personalities, about criminal repercussions of this.
	And so, that's what it'll be based on.
	And he's already been anointed the winner.
	As Megyn Kelly said to DeSantis, why are you still in the race?
	You've already decided who the winner is.
	And of course, when they've decided who the winner is, when they decide whether or not they're even going to have primaries, the Democrats in Florida decided they didn't want to have any primaries, so we're just going to anoint Biden the winner.
	The Republican Party is rubber stamping everything that What's the debate?
	I mean, these guys both work for the same people.
	And so we're going to take a look at what Javier Malay is doing after he took office.
	And it really is a metaphor, I think, for what happens here in the United States.
	Yesterday I said, you know, it's kind of a metaphor that in Ghana they have a guy who is supposedly a very rich businessman who hasn't announced his independent candidacy yet, but he's got billboards that he bought everywhere with a mask on.
	Who is the new candidate?
	We'll find out. Well, you know, we're going to find out who these people are.
	But let's take a look at what is happening in Venezuela.
	This is really more like the old-fashioned American Empire wars.
	You know, the kind that Smedley Butler talked about.
	How he went to war for corporations.
	And, you know, that war is a racket.
	Well, certainly this is being initiated by Venezuela and the Marxists.
	Again, I don't believe that in any democracy people are going to vote to go to war.
	But this is his pet peeve.
	He wants the oil in the neighboring country.
	And so as this is happening, as they rubber-stamped the vote for war, the U.S. government started doing military operations in Venezuela as a deterrent.
	And again, this is not to the level as the provocative suicidal aggression occurs.
	I guess another superpower that the Ukraine war represents.
	If you want a context for that war, as I've said from the very beginning, go back to the coup that was done by Obama, Hillary Clinton, Victoria Nuland in 2014.
	It's an act of aggression following a long series of Moves towards the Soviet Union.
	And so, if you want to understand it, I think you have to go back and take a look at that.
	The fact that a civil war was raging within that country for eight years before Russia invaded.
	But this is not like this.
	This is really more the old-fashioned war.
	And in a sense, they're using gunboat diplomacy for peace and for deterrence.
	So it's a bit different.
	But Maduro has responded with the arrest of American citizens that he can find and any dissent.
	So in that regard, he's very much like the Biden regime, isn't he?
	Cut out of the same cloth.
	But it's a very long historical dispute.
	And so I guess it's time for the feds to get involved there because they're worried...
	Somewhere in the world, there might be a war that doesn't involve us.
	And this is a historical dispute that has gone over this particular territory.
	It's not just the fact that there's a great deal of oil there.
	Venezuela has more oil reserves than anybody does.
	They haven't been able to exploit it because they have socialist central planners who are not only incompetent, but corrupt.
	And so they haven't been able to exploit the world's largest reserve of oil.
	And Guyana's got a lot of oil as well.
	But this goes all the way back to the 1830s when the lines were...
	Arbitrarily drawn by the British Empire.
	It's almost like they set these lines up to make sure that there weren't going to be any regional power bases, but that people would be fighting each other.
	Do you see the similarity in what our government is doing in terms of pitting one group against another, and pretty much every group against white people, the white middle class, the white Christians?
	Well, we're the new Jews, right, from Nazi Germany.
	And so what the British Empire would do, Is they would go into an area and they would carve it up.
	In a way, there's going to be fighting between the different people as they drew the boundaries.
	And that's what they did here in South America.
	This dispute goes back to a period of time when the UK had Guyana as a colony.
	1831 to 1966, Venezuela rejected the borders that were redrawn by the UK for Guyana.
	First raised their objections in 1841, and of course they did this throughout the Middle East.
	They drew the borders for Iraq, for Iran, and then those were largely along the lines of Babylonian and Persian cultures.
	But then, of course, the Medes, who were there as an ancient people, They were left out.
	They didn't have a territory of their own.
	They had an area that was the northern part of both of those countries to make sure there was going to continue to be war.
	They're now called the Kurds.
	The Babylonians are now called the Iraqis and the Persians are now called the Iranians.
	And this is all a legacy of the divide and conquer strategy of the British Empire.
	That we see replicated, even within the United States, because they want to, again, have us involved in a civil war.
	So, in a lot of ways, this is an old-fashioned war.
	Money, oil, territory.
	But it's still a racket.
	Guyana recently discovered oil deposits and brokered a deal with ExxonMobil.
	This made Maduro angry, because he is failing to get to his oil as well.
	And so... As the U.S. has vowed unwavering support for Guyana, as we maybe won't go there and take the oil, right?
	As we're doing in Syria.
	Without the regime's approval, you know, Rand Paul's resolution to get us out of Syria failed.
	And that's just within this last week.
	That, by the way, is something that Trump talked about openly.
	Yeah, let's go take the oil.
	That's what they're doing. We invaded Syria.
	We're stealing the oil in Syria.
	And you only hear about it when there are attacks against American piracy bases, if you will.
	And people get killed.
	Americans get killed or injured.
	So the U.S. is holding military exercises in Guyana as the tensions are soaring.
	As Venezuela says, look, I've got a mandate from the people.
	He always wins all these elections.
	You know, 95 to 100% of the people vote for him.
	In collaboration with the Guyana Defense Force, the U.S. Southern Command will conduct flight operations.
	Did you know that Guyana had a defense force?
	What a joke.
	Yeah, the fearsome GDF that everybody trembles in their boots over, we will be the defense force of Guyana.
	Because we always are.
	Except when it comes to America, because our borders are wide open, aren't they?
	And not just to Venezuelans who now might come in and do something, but especially to the Iranians.
	And the Iranians have been engaged in multiple cyber attacks of water systems, say the federal agencies.
	But as I was saying last week, I talked to Jack Lawson.
	The cyber attacks on our grid are something that People can do, and you can't really tell who they are.
	So, again, when you see the federal government saying, it's coming from Iranians, there's no way that you can know that.
	Vault 7 was the program that's created by the NSA and the CIA to be able to hack into other countries and make it look like they were anybody.
	They could make it look like they were Russia or China or Iran or anyone, even a friendly country.
	And that was leaked by WikiLeaks, the manual was, and then eventually somebody else leaked the program, the actual code, and then WikiLeaks put the code after it was out, widely circulated, they put it on WikiLeaks.
	So the bottom line is, is that it's not just the U.S. government, but it's any government or any actor, malevolent actor in the world, can disguise themselves as any country.
	Because of Vault 7. So say this is an Iranian cyber attack is nonsense.
	But as Jack Lawson was saying, we have to be concerned about physical sabotage.
	And if we are going to have essentially a Cold War with these people, they can easily sabotage large amounts of the electrical grid.
	They don't need to have a cyber security attack.
	It's far easier and really probably far more damaging.
	To just go out and shoot up transformers, as Jack Lawson was saying.
	And so, again, in Syria, the bill that was led by Senator Rand Paul failed by a vote of 13 to 84.
	Think about that. Only 13% of the Senate does not want to invade another country and steal its oil.
	Isn't that amazing? This is just bull-faced.
	You want to talk about colonization?
	All these Democrats and progressives.
	You want to talk about colonization?
	You want to take a look at what we're doing in Syria.
	But, of course, they say nothing about that.
	Nothing. So, again, support an illegal invasion.
	You have 87% of Congress does.
	87% of the Senate, anyway.
	So let's take a look at what is happening as we look at the impact of Venezuela on shipping, for example.
	This is from freight waves, the shipping industry, and of course all aspects of it, whether it is rail or ship or truck, How the Venezuelan invasion of Guyana could impact tanker shipping.
	It'll reduce Atlantic Basin crude exports, they said.
	And as they point out in the bigger picture of what is happening here, with the Russian invasion of Ukraine, with the sanctions that Biden put in, which really didn't affect anything.
	It just created a very lucrative black market for Russia, who made more money in the black market than they did before, because they jacked up the price.
	So high that Putin could offer their stuff at a discount and still make way more than he made before.
	So it was just a hardship and expenses for the European Union and for us to some degree.
	And so the...
	In Venezuela, as they're saying, this has been a real bright spot for crude tankers because this is something with the conflicts that are happening, with the sanctions that are happening, to be able to get oil in the Atlantic and And then to be able to ship it to countries directly has been a real boon in terms of getting oil to Asia because
	they're allowed to burn it.
	We're not allowed to burn it, you understand?
	Right? China, India even, can burn as much oil as they want, as much coal as they want.
	No restrictions. They don't have to have any emission controls on their power plants.
	This is what the Paris Climate Accord is really all about.
	And so they're allowed to generate power.
	They're allowed to burn all these practical fuels.
	We are not. And so we sell them the oil.
	That's going to be the deal that we have here.
	And so, they said sanctions for Venezuela will likely be reimposed.
	They'll probably be tightened.
	International oil companies will move their assets out of Guyana, which will cripple the country's production in case they go to war.
	And they said it's been a real bright spot there for going back to 2019.
	They had massive increase.
	Of exports out of Guyana.
	Massive increase in their economy.
	That's another big part of the envy for Maduro.
	And so it makes them look bad, makes them envious, and so he's invaded that.
	So the Middle East to Asia volume, which is coming from...
	That's been reduced because of shipping volume.
	That's been reduced because of the conflicts, wars that are happening.
	So this Atlanta basin to Asia volume has increased.
	And so the oil industries of Venezuela and Guyana are a study in contrast.
	Venezuela boasts one of the largest oil reserves in the world, but its industry is in very bad shape after decades of communism, also known as mismanagement and corruption.
	And bringing on sanctions.
	In contrast, the developments in Venezuela, Guyana's oil industry has been a success story, and the future for Guyana appears to be bright, so the communist dictator wants to invade.
	However, as they're saying here, an invasion...
	We'll be a double negative for the mainstream taker demand, and we look at this, and this is going to have repercussions everywhere.
	The fundamental basis of all of our economies are oil and coal, because that's how you generate energy, and that's how you manufacture things, and that's how you transport things.
	And so, if you disrupt that, as Biden was very eager to do, That is a major injection of chaos into the system, as all of us who lived through the OPEC embargoes understood.
	Well, these are the Biden embargoes.
	So the issue is, though, that this is going to be less important, they said, in terms of shipping stuff.
	It would be less important to the crude tanker demand than U.S. and Brazilian exports.
	Potential shipping impact on third simultaneous war would be much less significant than the consequences of the first two wars we have in Ukraine, what we have with Israel and Hamas.
	So it'll have an impact, but it's not going to be as big, and it'll be a little bit different than these other wars of empire.
	This is the old-fashioned, you know, Monroe Doctrine type of thing.
	But David Stockman had a great article about Washington's entrenched war machine.
	He said, you know, we have been in a 77-year war.
	He said it began with the mobilization of the armies of Europe.
	In 1914 for World War I, which Woodrow Wilson pushed us into after he said he wasn't going to.
	He said, if you count the bodies, we had 150 million people killed by all the depredations that germinated in the Great War and its foolish aftermath at Versailles and into World War II and the Cold War that followed.
	He said upwards of 8% of the human race was wiped out during that span.
	The insanity of trench warfare and everything that happened during World War I. And the gassing.
	This is why we have wars breaking out everywhere.
	Because fundamentally, this is about population reduction.
	The climate MacGuffin is about population reduction ultimately.
	So is the COVID MacGuffin.
	And then as people understand what is happening, they take us to war because that's where they get the big population reductions.
	And this goes back to the 1960s.
	Paul Ehrlich talking about the population bomb.
	He said, well, you know, you could have disease could help us with this, but the thing that's really going to do it's going to be war.
	And, you know, when I took the kids to Britain to go to museums and everything about 22 years ago, we took them to see the War Museum, the British Imperial War, because, you know, there were wars of empire and things like that.
	And one of the most interesting things was pretty much one of the floors was set up to replicate trench warfare and show the stories of that.
	So they have, you know, one floor that's all about World War I, another one that's all about World War II and various things like that.
	And it truly was amazing.
	And, you know, they put the Imperial War Museum in a former insane asylum.
	It was called Bedlam. You know, when people talk about Bedlam, they talk about just chaos, right?
	Which really is what war is about, isn't it?
	Bedlam. It's insanity in and of itself.
	And it breeds chaos.
	And the days when Bedlam was an asylum, they would just take anybody who was really crazy and instead of leaving them on the street where they can go in and stab a priest to death, which is what just happened a couple of days ago, Instead of being a danger to everybody, they housed them in an asylum and basically just let them wander around in the early days, back in Victorian times.
	And so if you went in there, just crazy people that were, you know, banging their heads against the wall or mumbling to themselves as they paced back and forth, or maybe they would attack you.
	And so Bedlam was such an example of that as one of the early insane asylums that it worked its way into the language of And then, when things got crazy enough, in the 20th century, they made it a memorial to war, essentially. They made it a war museum.
	Anyway, going back to David Stockman, he said, At the end of the Cold War, the last embers of the fiery madness that had incepted with the guns of August 1914 had finally burned out.
	Peace was at hand. Yet, 32 years later, there was still no peace, because Imperial Washington confounds it.
	So as he's saying, you know, when you get to 1946, right after the World War II, Washington is ready for their empire now.
	He said, worse still, Washington's great war machine and teeming national security industry is its own agent of self-perpetuation.
	When it's not invading, occupying, and regime-changing, this vast apparatus of internal policy bureaus and outside contractors, lobbyists, think tanks, and NGOs is busy generating reasons for new imperial ventures.
	He said originally in Eisenhower's speech, he called it the military-industrial-congressional complex.
	And he struck out the words...
	Congressional, he says in a gesture of comedy to the legislative branch, I think instead of spelling it as C-O-M-I-T-Y, it ought to be C-O-M-E-D-Y. It's a joke.
	It is a congressional branch.
	They're appropriating the money for the military-industrial complex.
	But he also struck out congressional and he put in military-industrial-academic complex.
	We don't usually talk about the academic aspect of it, but the universities are a very big part of it.
	The government, with DARPA, things like that, the government has taken over scientific research and turned it to the dark side.
	Anyway, Stockman says, so he said, if you restore Ike's deleted reference to the pork barrels and the Sunday afternoon warriors of Capitol Hill and you toss in the legions of Beltway busybodies who constitute the civilian branches of the Cold War Armada, such as the CIA, the State Department, and the rest, he said the circle would have been complete.
	It constitutes the most awesome machine of warfare and imperial hegemony since the Roman legions.
	In fact, during the past 31 years, Imperial Washington has lost all memory that peace was ever possible at the end of the Cold War.
	Today, it is as feckless and misguided and bloodthirsty as were Berlin, Paris, St.
	Petersburg, Vienna, London, in August of 1914.
	Yeah, we're ripe for a repeat of that.
	A few months after that horrendous slaughter had been unleashed 109 years ago, however, soldiers along the Western Front broke into spontaneous truces of Christmas celebration, of song, even exchange of gifts.
	We talked about this many times.
	I said, for a brief moment, they wondered why they were juxtaposed in the lethal combat along the jaws of hell.
	Will Griggs wrote, he said, a sudden cold snap had left the battlefield frozen, which was actually a relief for the troops who were wallowing in sodden mire.
	Along the front, troops extracted themselves from their trenches and dugouts, approached each other warily, then eagerly across no man's land.
	Greetings and handshakes were exchanged, as were gifts scavenged from care packages sent from home.
	German souvenirs that ordinarily would have been obtained only through bloodshed, such as spiked helmets or the special belt buckles that they had, were bartered for similar British trinkets and carols were sung in German, English, and French.
	A few photographs are taken of the British and German officers standing alongside each other, unarmed, in no man's land.
	As you see that picture there, shaking hands.
	I think that is, I don't know if that's a recreation or if that's an actual picture.
	Because there's been many movies made about this.
	And of course, what happened in the aftermath of it, generals on both sides.
	Oh, that's never going to happen again.
	And they made sure of that.
	He said, the truth is there's no good reason for the war.
	The world had stumbled into this based on false narratives, on institutional imperatives, on alliances and treaties, arrayed into a doomsday machine, along with petty short-term diplomatic maneuvers and political calculus.
	He said the peace that was lost at that point in time has not been regained, and for all of the same reasons.
	Nothing has really changed.
	I tell that story so many times because I say, you know, the reasons that we have wars, whether it's Israel and Gaza or any other place, is because people are at war with God.
	Our leaders are at war with God.
	The nations rage continually against God and His Messiah.
	So God laughs.
	And it's really at Christmas time.
	We talk about peace on earth and how Christ came to restore peace.
	He came to restore peace between us and God.
	And that's a prerequisite for us to have peace with each other.
	And so that is still there.
	Even more so.
	And before I take a break, the...
	I find it interesting, I've talked many times about Restovich, the guy in Ukraine, who said in 2019, he was the peace envoy, and again, at that point in time, they had had A CIA-arranged coup.
	There had been five years of civil war with Kiev shelling the Crimea and other places like that, continually trying to bring them into submission.
	And so there was an election and everybody wanted peace, but not the leaders.
	And not Arrestovich, Alexei Arrestovich.
	And He had an interview on Ukrainian TV, and the reporter asked him, so what's the possibility for peace?
	He said he'd been at the peace talks.
	And because Zelensky's party had been elected on a campaign of peace, he said there's not any chance.
	And she goes, oh, that's horrible.
	He says, oh, no. Furthermore, in three years, that was 2019, and it happened in 2022, just like he said, in three years, there'll be a war with Russia.
	She goes, that's horrible. He goes, yeah, the country is going to be devastated, but he goes, the good news is we get to get into NATO, is what he said.
	She was not satisfied with that, but for him, that was the calculus.
	Now, subsequent to that, this is a guy who is like Fauci.
	He'll say anything because he's just arrogant, filled with pride, has no filter with any of this stuff, and Which made him very candid.
	He was very candid about the fact, yeah, we're not going to have peace.
	Instead, we're going to have an escalated war.
	This country is going to be destroyed, so we can get into NATO. And so, as part of that candid, arrogant nature of Alexei Arrestovich, he got canned immediately.
	When, in one of these episodes, there was a building that was destroyed, and I forget the details of it.
	It was either friendly fire, but I think it was a Russian missile that hit a civilian area, and he said, no, it was hit by fire as it was coming in.
	It wasn't intended to go into that thing.
	It's pretty clear that's what happened, and he told the truth.
	And the Ukrainian government was trying to spin it in a different way, so they fired him.
	And now he's holding press conferences again, which is another indication that Zelensky is circling the drain.
	He told the news that Zelensky has become hostage to his own propaganda.
	He's coming out to challenge Zelensky due to his propensity to, quote, play the hero in parliaments around the world.
	Again, Arrestovich has always told the truth.
	You've got to say that about him.
	I mean, he may be a reprehensible character, but he's shameless and frank about all this stuff.
	So he's played the hero in parliaments around the world.
	He thinks not about the national interest, but about his own position, said Arrestovich.
	He recently announced that he's going to be standing against Zelensky and run for the presidency.
	And by the way, he said he would campaign on a platform of peace.
	That's what Zelensky got elected on.
	And he was their representative to the peace talks.
	And he said, no, we're not going to have peace.
	We're going to have more war. Well, that is amazing hypocrisy, but it tells us everything about this.
	Maybe he will be the new NATO champion, you think?
	He said, for Russia...
	It's for Ukraine not to join NATO, and for us, it is to stop this war.
	These are great conditions to start a real discussion, not only between Ukraine and Russia, about a new system of collective security in Europe, he said.
	He said while Ukraine was in a far stronger position to negotiate in the spring of 2022, after Russian troops were closer to Kiev, he said Boris Johnson shut this all down.
	And it's not just him who's saying that.
	It's an Ukrainian member of parliament.
	Who headed the delegation in the spring of 2022.
	And he had said back in November that Moscow was ready to end the war if Ukraine promised not to join NATO. And he said, when we returned from Istanbul, Boris Johnson came to Kiev, remember that?
	Walking around, touring it, and trying to channel Winston Churchill, and said that we wouldn't sign anything with them at all, and that we should just fight.
	Yeah, he shut this whole thing down.
	Well, we're going to take a quick break, and when we come back, we're going to talk about artificial intelligence, autonomous killing machines, and foreign mercenaries.
	This is what our U.S. military is turning to because they are having trouble to find people to sign up to go fight for their empire.
	We'll be right back. Ladies and gentlemen, the Beatles!
	And the sweet sounds of Motown.
	Find them on the Oldies channel at APSradio.com.
	The Oldies channel at APSradio.com
	The Oldies channel at APSradio.com
	Thank you. You're
	listening to The David Knight Show.
	By the way, that's some of the Christmas music I did, and we got the album live on our website yesterday.
	It will not be on DistroKid this year.
	It'll take two weeks to approve everything, so that'll be Christmas Day.
	So, yeah, we got this out a little bit later than I'd expected.
	It's difficult to get this stuff done with the other work that I have to do here.
	But it is live on...
	On thedavidknightshow.com as merchandise there.
	And we're also going to, and there's a link there to Bandcamp, davidknightproject.bandcamp.com is what that link is.
	But if you just go to Bandcamp and you look for David Knight Project, perhaps they'll let you find me.
	No spaces, I think, in that.
	So, Travis, on Bandcamp, is it individual songs or is it the full album or is it both?
	It is individual songs, but you can purchase the entire album in one go as well.
	Oh, okay. All right. And we just do the entire album, and of course, it is a digital download.
	We don't have the time capability to put this on CDs and deliver physical media to people.
	So, anyway, take a look at it, and...
	Let's get back to what is happening with the second half here, what's going on with war in the military.
	And that is the transformation of our imperial war machine.
	This is from the Wall Street Journal.
	Why join the military?
	I'm sorry, not the Wall Street Journal.
	This is from...
	I don't see the source here, actually.
	Anyway... Why join the military to defend everyone except Americans?
	And of course, this is what we've been saying for the longest time.
	What is the purpose of the military?
	We've got Lloyd Austin going there and essentially lecturing and accusing anybody who opposes his war designs and unlimited funds for Ukraine.
	He says, you're the problem.
	You're the reason we have wars. You people who want to have peace, you're the problem.
	It's all these non-interventionists that are out there.
	They're the real problem. They're the ones who are creating wars.
	And so, as you look at this and the fact that we've got a proxy war in Europe, a murderous conflict, as he puts it, in the Middle East, a catastrophic war in Asia being threatened, and even critics of isolationism are told that we are the problem with all of this stuff.
	Not critics of isolation, but critics of people who are criticizing isolation.
	Like Lloyd Austin. They want to defend everybody except Americans, and so the bulk of military outlays go to either protect prosperous and populous allies.
	They can't be bothered to defend themselves.
	You know, like Europe, for example.
	Or even Israel.
	Israel's got a GDP that is, what was it?
	Ten times, hundred times more than Gaza.
	It was ridiculous. They got nuclear weapons, but we have to protect them.
	And we have to get involved in that ancient conflict.
	No, it's, as an American, and as American politicians, they ought to be looking after the interests of America.
	That's what they signed up to do.
	And it's not in America's interest to be involved in wars.
	He says, there's always more money, more arms, even though the U.S. is racing towards insolvency.
	And by the way, in 2017, I was saying the very same thing.
	I said, look, we're in wars in Afghanistan.
	We're in wars in Iraq.
	We're simply there as targets in Iraq.
	In Afghanistan, we're there because we want the lithium.
	We're there because we want to feed the opium trade everywhere around the world.
	And of course, the opium trade was booming while we were there.
	It was, and immediately, the Taliban started shutting it down.
	They had shut it down before, but CIA needed to fund their drug war everywhere.
	So I said, why are we still there?
	And Trump said he's going to shut these wars down.
	He said he's going to defend the border.
	You could at least bring the troops home, put them on the border as a deterrent.
	But no, he didn't do any of that.
	And I talked about that quite a bit as he first became president.
	He did absolutely nothing.
	At first, the massive waves of immigrants subsided because they thought, well, he's going to be tough on everybody.
	Then they realized he was a paper tiger.
	They realized he was a shill.
	And then he started seeing the first caravans coming.
	And he did nothing about it.
	Just like he did nothing about the riots in the summer of 2020.
	So, I'm not going to defend this country in any way, shape, or form.
	Newsweek's Alex Phillips.
	It says a majority of adult Americans would not be willing to serve in the military, based on polling, were the U.S. to enter a major war.
	Public confidence in the armed forces appears to be waning as well.
	Well, the Pentagon's problem is that Americans increasingly don't want to serve even without a major war.
	Why would that be? Well, we all know the answer to that.
	Boils down basically to the DEI military, which is going to D-I-E in battle because they're too focused on high heels.
	And they want to inject their Marxist cultural war into the military.
	And they want to eject anybody who doesn't sign up for that.
	Eject anybody who doesn't want to inject the jab as well.
	Active duty levels have fallen 39% since 1987.
	In a desperate attempt to increase the human pool, the Army decided to suspend the requirement for a high school diploma before they retreated under fire.
	They said, no, you're going to have to still have that, so they can't fill the ranks.
	Politicization of the military plays a big role.
	The high heels, the...
	Sex and gender war.
	The racist war.
	Skin color law. You're not the right sex.
	You're not a pretend gender.
	Your skin color's too white.
	Sorry, we don't want you here.
	And then, of course, there's the defeats that we saw in Afghanistan.
	The COVID jab mandates.
	More than 7,000 service members, nearly 8,000 contractors died in combat.
	After 9-11, but over that same period of time, 7,000 service members and 8,000 contractors.
	That's 15,000.
	Twice that many, 30,000, committed suicide.
	What is it that is driving people to suicide in the military?
	Some 52,000 were wounded in combat, many of them grievously.
	However, Brown University's Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs...
	Reports of the real number is exponentially larger.
	You mean they lied to us about that?
	You mean that the government lies to us about everything?
	Whether you're talking about inflation or unemployment or COVID numbers or vaccine numbers or casualties in war, the government lies about everything.
	Everything. They said the real number is exponentially larger.
	Given the injuries in theater, conditions diagnosed after returning home.
	And so, what are we doing with this empire?
	Well, in Europe, we're providing defense welfare.
	And that's what it is.
	It's defense welfare. You got Europeans who are enjoying the fruits of bread and butter while we do the guns.
	And it's been that way since World War II. Comfortable, self-satisfied Europeans, as he writes, eight decades after the end of World War II, they prefer to focus their funding on generous social programs while we foot the bill to defend them because we have a parasitic military-industrial complex, just like the pharmaceutical complex, both of them at war with Americans.
	and we get to pay them to bankrupt and kill us.
	Washington's policy is deformed by partisans of both Israel and Saudi Arabia in the Middle East, neither of which constitutes a vital American interest justifying war.
	Saudi Arabia has abandoned the petrodollar.
	Why are we defending them still?
	Israel is a nuclear-armed regional superpower that can manage its own affairs.
	Going to war with Iran over Israel would be supremely stupid, says the author, But of course, we do have supremely stupid shills like Nikki Haley and Lindsey Graham who want to do exactly that.
	They want to go straight to Iran.
	This is their ticket.
	This is one of the reasons why.
	They want to get involved in the Israeli-Hamas conflict because they really want to go to war with Iran.
	Then we look at Saudi Arabia.
	This writer says it's a grotesque dictatorship.
	The Clown Prince, MBS Mohammed bin Salman.
	Infamous for murdering and dismembering his critics.
	Yeah, they, you know, chop off.
	It's not just Khashoggi.
	But they chop off the heads of a lot of people every year, publicly, as far as their Sharia law.
	There's increased political repression even as he has relaxed social controls.
	His regime has ravaged its neighbor Yemen, killing tens of thousands of civilians with American aircraft, American munitions, and American intelligence.
	Yet the Biden administration continues to press an agreement with the Saudis, Which would essentially turn U.S. soldiers into bodyguards for this corrupt monarch.
	You understand? Do you want to sign up to be a bodyguard for him?
	Do you want to sign up to protect the rich, fat, and lazy Europeans?
	And they have no threat.
	We are the ones creating the threat.
	We continue to push, push, push, because the American government wants to take out Russia.
	And I think some of the Europeans are starting to see that perhaps the biggest threat to peace, the biggest threat to their economy, is the American military-industrial complex.
	Why would any American patriot join to become bodyguards for the Saudi royals?
	American soldiers should not die for either country, nor should they be in Iraq and Syria, where they are under frequent attack.
	Saddam Hussein has been gone from Iraq for 20 years.
	Today, Americans are doing little other than acting as targets for various small armies, militias, that they call them.
	They like to call them militias because they want to demonize gun ownership here in America.
	The U.S. is illegally occupying Syrian territory and stealing Syrian oil, as I pointed out, which is Trump's public statements.
	It's his policy. He was proud of that.
	He openly said it. Said the quiet part out loud.
	The Washington War Party continues to spend wildly to dominate the globe, even with the threat of national insolvency.
	And so, this author says, well, if Americans increasingly refuse to serve, the Pentagon will have to do more than the policy equivalent of adjusting the chairs on the deck of the Titanic.
	So what is their solution?
	Well, Dick Durbin... It's introduced a bill to allow illegal immigrants to serve in the armed forces.
	This is another historical sign of a collapsing empire.
	Hiring foreign mercenaries.
	Because, you know, you can always use foreign mercenaries to attack the native people.
	And you can use people who are foreigners in positions, high positions of government office, as we've seen in the Obama and the Biden administration.
	You had Vindman, who was a Ukrainian, right?
	And then you have the people who have been brought in to run all the big tech companies, whether you're talking about Google or you're talking about Microsoft.
	And these people are the allies.
	This government that is coming in to replace Americans, quite frankly.
	As I said before, they want to replace Americans at the top of these institutions.
	The Marxists, the foreign Marxists, have marched through the institutions successfully, and they want to bring in massive waves of people at the bottom so we can have chaos and civil war at the bottom to keep us in line.
	Do you know what the recruiting numbers are at the Army, Navy, and the Air Force?
	They can't reach their quotas each month.
	They can't find enough people to join our military forces, said Dick Durbin.
	And so he said, and so there are those who want the chance to risk their lives for this country who are not citizens.
	What a joke.
	What a joke. They want a chance.
	You know, we have patriotic non-citizens.
	We have patriotic undocumented migrants.
	Yeah, they are of military age.
	You might want to ask yourself, so are they coming here because of altruism?
	Are they coming here because they love freedom?
	Are they coming here because they want free stuff?
	I think the people who are coming here because they want freedom are doing it legally.
	I think the massive armies that are coming across the border are not a part of that.
	I think they're part of criminal organizations that are coming in, or they're foreign agents who are coming in, or they just want the money and the free stuff that we're offering everybody.
	The big welfare magnet, which is at the core of all of this.
	The big welfare magnet to help bankrupt us faster than we would be bankrupted by military empire.
	But what a joke this guy is.
	One commentator said, a buddy of mine and myself were talking about this maybe two years ago, about why the government was housing illegals, more specifically military-age men, on bases in Texas and then flying them around to other bases in the U.S. And we concluded it was to make out an army that the government could fully control against the Constitution without allegiance to America and its own citizens.
	And so here we are. I think that's a big part of the great replacement, replacing the military.
	Now, if you can't get foreigners who will just take orders and don't care about people in America, again, they've driven out people who care about the Constitution, people who have religious objections with a jab.
	They've driven out people who don't want to do their diversity, equity, and inclusivity.
	And so the other aspect of this, and it's one of the reasons why I got Peter Charest, who is heavily involved with the military-industrial complex, he's NGOs and think tanks, and he's part of that whole constellation.
	But his book, Four Battlegrounds, was looking at four battlegrounds against China.
	They are laser focused on fighting China.
	And what was interesting about the book was what he had to say about artificial intelligence.
	And he's intelligent enough to understand what a real threat it is.
	And I've been interviewing people on this topic for over a decade.
	Noel Sharkey, the Coalition Against Killer Robots.
	There are some people globally who are trying to stop this.
	But it is an arms race, and it's not going to be stopped.
	It's not going to be stopped politically.
	There's not any support for that politically to stop it.
	And it doesn't matter if there was a big UN agreement.
	If America, Russia, and China want to pursue this in an arms race, nobody's going to stop them.
	Who's going to enforce a UN agreement?
	And neither of these three are going to unilaterally disarm themselves.
	And so where is this headed?
	A recent boardroom drama over the leadership of OpenAI, where, you know, the chat GPT thing, Sam Altman, as you saw that, you know, he gets kicked out, and then he comes back, and people are speculating as to why that happened.
	Well, I said it was a corporate power struggle.
	Also, personalities are involved, but it was more than that, writes The Nation, and this was picked up by Zero Hedge.
	Said it was also, it was about all those things, but at the heart of it was an unusually bitter fight between company officials who favored unrestricted research On advanced forms of artificial intelligence and those who, fearing the potential catastrophic outcomes, sought to slow the pace of AI. At approximately the same time this was happening at OpenAI,
	there's a similar struggle in the UN. And so you've got several different countries, again, who want to stop this arms race over autonomous killing machines.
	And the key thing, as Peter Charest was saying, is that it eventually and is inevitably going to lead, not to them being autonomous, to them deciding when they're going to kill.
	And as he said, how do you shut that off?
	It's like what I said about the mRNA shots.
	Okay, so you're going to reprogram the cells to start replicating these spike proteins.
	How do you turn that off? Well, it turns out you don't turn it off.
	And he said, nobody's got an answer for how do you turn off these autonomous killing machines once they get turned on.
	And of course, there's also the cybersecurity issues.
	Since we've had all kinds of hacks into the Pentagon, the military, the CIA, the NSA, and since they've gotten everything about the F-35, they've reproduced it, but they also seem to have control over the Avionics and internal computers, they were able to, somebody was, able to eject a pilot from the F-35.
	So, that's the real danger.
	Are they going to hijack our sophisticated planes?
	The more sophisticated and the more connected they are, the more vulnerable they become.
	Same thing with the artificial intelligence and the killer drones.
	And so...
	Again, how do you stop these things?
	And it is going to inevitably be a race to having them be under autonomous control because he said, if you get humans in the loop, they're going to be too slow.
	So everybody realizes that the faster decision, the people going to win are the ones who make the fastest decision, which are going to be the ones who turn it over to their killer drones.
	But then how do you get that control back?
	And so there was a fight in the UN over the development of these autonomous killer weapon systems.
	Drone ships, planes, tanks operated by AI rather than by humans.
	A broad coalition of diplomats and human rights activists have sought to impose legally binding bans on devices called killer robots.
	But again, how in the world do you enforce such a ban against military superpowers?
	There's such a disparity there that even if you brought together a coalition of other nations, they couldn't do anything about it.
	It's kind of interesting that Netflix has a documentary about artificial intelligence and the end of the world.
	It's called Leave the World Behind on Netflix.
	It's about a cyber apocalypse.
	But even in a cyber apocalypse, notice who the villains are.
	I'm asking for you to remember that if the world falls apart, trust should not be dulled out easily to anyone, especially white people.
	Even mom would agree with me on that.
	Especially white people.
	Mom would agree with me on that.
	Netflix agrees with her on that because they're funding this.
	Again, always white people are the target of all of this.
	Even though there's real danger, even though we have to be concerned about these autonomous killing machines, we've got to understand the real problem, white people.
	Don't trust them. Sam Altman, evident that the crisis was triggered by concerns among members of the original board of directors, that he and his staff were veering too far in the direction of rapid AI development.
	Despite the pledges that he made on Capitol Hill to exercise caution, why was he on Capitol Hill?
	He was there basically to make connections to politicians, to do their bidding, just like Elon Musk is a younger version of Elon Musk.
	He wants to be the world's richest man.
	In terms of both potential upside and downsides, superintelligence will be more powerful than any other technologies that humanity has had to contend with in the past, said Altman.
	So you better be on my good side.
	You better give me a monopoly.
	Say, I'm with you, but we don't want everybody to have access to this thing.
	So first of all, you need to give me a monopoly.
	Then, you know, some nice government contracts.
	Do you really think that these billionaires are not shaking them down like that?
	We can have a dramatically more prosperous future, but we have to manage the risks here.
	We speak of the risk and you look at what is coming.
	I played just a little bit of this the other day as the show was ending, but not much.
	You had Google demonstrate Gemini.
	They're going to make it available in three different forms.
	But what this is, is there'll be, you know...
	Kind of a small, dumbed-down version for phones and things like that.
	But this is really where the state of the art is right now.
	Look at this demonstration.
	Testing Gemini. Here we go.
	Tell me what you see.
	I see you placing a piece of paper on the table.
	I see a squiggly line.
	What about now?
	The contour lines are smooth and flowing, with no sharp angles or jagged edges.
	Still doesn't recognize a duck.
	It looks like a bird to me.
	Hmm, what if I add this?
	The bird is swimming in the water.
	It has a long neck and beak.
	It is a duck.
	Yes!
	A duck is a type of waterfowl in the family Anadidate.
	Are you sure?
	He shows at me. I was just talking about a blue duck, and now you're holding one.
	Looks like blue ducks are more common than I thought.
	Would this float? That's a rubber ducky.
	I'm not sure what material it's made of, but it looks like it might be rubber or plastic.
	What if I tell you it's making a squeaking sound?
	Oh, if it's squeaking, it's definitely going to float.
	Hmm, nice. It is a rubber duck.
	Why would that fall? It is made of a material that is less dense than water.
	Can you teach me how to say this in a different language?
	And give me a few options.
	Ooh, can you explain how to pronounce the Mandarin one?
	Is it...
	is pronounced with a first tone.
	In Mandarin, there are four tones, which are essential to distinguish the meaning of words.
	The first tone is a high, level tone.
	Oh, okay. The duck is in the middle of the ocean.
	There is no land nearby for the duck to rest or find food.
	It is unlikely to find ducks here naturally.
	Okay, based on what you see, come up with a game idea.
	Oh, and use emojis, please.
	How about this? We can play a game called, Guess the Country.
	Sure, let's do it.
	This country is the home of the kangaroo, the koala, and the Great Barrier Reef.
	Oh, that's easy.
	Clue two.
	This country loves football and has won the most men's World Cups in football history.
	Hmm.
	Brazile, point to Brazil.
	You're trying to get me to find the paper ball under the cup.
	I accept the challenge.
	The cup to the left.
	And he gets it right.
	So that's pretty amazing how rapidly he's able to do that, how he's able to make inferences and think about that.
	So again, they are making very rapid advances in this.
	They point out a calculus regarding the exploitation of advanced AI governs the outlook of senior officials at the Department of State and Defense.
	They argue that artificial intelligence can and should be used to operate future weapon systems.
	They're fully on board with this.
	They have absolutely no reservations that are going to stop them with any of this because, again, this is an arms race.
	And so you had Bonnie Jenkins, who's the Undersecretary of State for Arms Control, and non-proliferation.
	What a joke. Was that the UN? And she said, we can't predict how AI technologies will evolve or what they might be capable of in a year or in five years.
	But we're going to put in place the necessary policies to build technical capacities to enable responsible development and the use of AI by the military, no matter the technological advancements.
	Do you trust them? These are the people who can't keep anything secure.
	At the Pentagon, at the NSA, at the CIA, as I mentioned, Vault 7, the plans for the F-35, they can't keep any of that stuff secure.
	So, foreign actors could do this, as well as...
	And the other part of this is that if the U.S. develops this, pours all this money, all this taxpayer money into this arms race...
	Technology will be stolen by the other governments, China and Russia.
	Jenkins was at the UN that day to unveil a, quote, political declaration on the responsible military use of AI and autonomy.
	They called for voluntary restraints.
	How do you think that's going to work? I had that work with nuclear proliferation, those voluntary restraints.
	The states should ensure that safety, security, and effectiveness of military AI capabilities are subject to appropriate and rigorous testing, as they did with the F-35, as they did with their secure databases and other things, right?
	None of this...
	Constitutes a legally binding thing in the UN, and there's no way to enforce any of this.
	As a matter of fact, several countries have signed declarations to oppose this.
	One of the leading spokespersons or countries is in Austria.
	They're insisting voluntary compliance with a set of U.S.-designed standards is not sufficient to protect against dangers posed by artificial intelligence-enabled weapons.
	And so they're looking in for something legally binding.
	Well, good. How are you going to enforce that?
	The ambassador from Austria said humanity is about to cross a major threshold of profound importance when the decision over life and death is no longer taken by humans, but made on the basis of pre-programmed algorithms, which raises fundamental ethical issues.
	I think we've had enough ethical issues with the humans, don't you?
	We go back and look at World War I. And if we go back and we look at the slaughter that they kept going with the trench warfare, they really don't care about the lives of their own people.
	And we've seen in the last three years that they have directly targeted us to kill us.
	What do you think they can do with artificial intelligence?
	For years, Austria and a slew of Latin American countries have sought to impose a ban on autonomous killing machines.
	But it's full speed ahead at the Pentagon.
	They have, as a matter of fact, Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks announced the Replicator Initiative August of this year, saying the U.S. has to prepare for possible war with China's military in the not-too-distant future.
	And we have to be prepared to overcome China's superiority in conventional measures, and it's what they call the military mass.
	They got a mass of, they got an army of incels, if you want to put it that way, involuntarily.
	Celibate people because of the gender side that they did against young girls.
	They've got a lot of boys, you know, the single-child policy, a lot of young emperors, spoiled boys, but they're also looking for women that they can't find.
	I said when we went to China, I told the boys that this is just a bomb waiting to explode, to invade other countries, to keep these guys under control in China.
	And so there's that, but there's also the fact that the U.S. government thinks, well, we don't have enough people, not just because of the disparity in the population between China and America, but also because of what the Pentagon has become.
	Nobody wants to sign up to fight for it.
	So how are they going to fix it again? They're going to bring in foreign people who are willing to die for the Pentagon.
	And they're going to use artificial intelligence, autonomous killing machines.
	This is going to be a cane that when they lean on it is going to pierce their own hand.
	And possibly us as well.
	So they're full speed ahead.
	As she said, we are going to be smashing bureaucratic bottlenecks.
	If these bottlenecks aren't tackled, our gears will grind too slowly.
	Our innovation engines still won't run at speed and scale that we need, and that we cannot abide.
	So, commence another Operation Warp Speed.
	Instead of a killer jab, we have killer robots.
	So, the powers that be in both Silicon Valley and Washington, same people who've been trying to kill free speech in our society for the longest time, are now working on killing us, I've made the decision to proceed with the development and utilization of even more advanced versions of artificial intelligence, despite warnings from scientists, despite warnings from diplomats, and even despite warnings from people who are at military-industrial complex think tanks like Peter Charest.
	They pay no attention to the warnings.
	Full speed ahead. These programs cannot be assured that their misuse could have catastrophic consequences.
	Unless greater efforts made, we may well discover the consequences that will entail.
	And so as all this is happening, as we're going further and further into debt, the arrogant pride of the Pentagon.
	An official there, again, meeting at the Atlantic Council, this think tank, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Christopher Grady.
	Said that the U.S. can handle wars in the Middle East, wars with Russia, wars with China.
	We can do it all at once.
	We can also keep up the Monroe policy and the Monroe doctrine throughout South America.
	Yeah, no restrictions whatsoever.
	These people think they are God.
	It truly is amazing.
	It is truly concerning for those of us who know there is a God.
	Who laughs at these people?
	So AI foreign missionaries, yeah, that's how they're going to solve all of these problems of manpower, how they're going to sustain their empire of perpetual war.
	We'll be right back. Whether you're feeling like the blues or bluegrass, APS Radio has you covered.
	Check out a wide variety of channels on our app at APSradio.com. APSradio.com
	APSradio.com
	APSradio.com I think it was about six or nine months or so after that war had begun.
	On Rockfan, Rachel O says, At work, I tried to bring up how no one is joining the military right now and nobody wants to fight this war, and they were all telling me how I'm wrong.
	Well, the numbers speak for themselves.
	And so the Pentagon officials who are wringing their hands in despair, Dick Durbin who says, well, it's important people to do that.
	There's a couple of, you know, again, bringing people with the welfare magnet, the Cloward and Piven strategy to implode this country.
	But of course, they can also implode us with a debt from the Pentagon, as well as the weapons that they're involved with.
	On Rumble, Raddis Bro, thank you for the tip.
	I appreciate that. He says, you think we'll see anti-draft violence?
	Or will the conservatives and independent media push everybody to die in a war because, meh, patriotism?
	Oh, I think that they're going to try to reposition things for women, number one.
	You see constant news articles and pictures, and the Israeli...
	Hamas War, they're featuring all the women warriors.
	They're talking about some brigade of women that they have on the front line.
	They're going to push that aspect of it.
	And you've got people like Taylor Swift who are pushing, you know, well, men, women are the equal or superior to men and all the rest of the stuff.
	So I think that'll be one aspect of it.
	I don't really think they were going to have anti-draft riots because, you know, there were major riots Anti-draft riots were the first draft in the Civil War.
	Lincoln started conscripting people as he started to raise an army of over 70,000 or 75,000 to invade the South.
	I made the analogy.
	I said, you know, here you have a situation where these are independent sovereign states who created this organization.
	Called the United States, just like independent sovereign states have created the UN. And I told Karen, I said, okay, yeah, she's from New York.
	She did textbook history in the Civil War.
	And I said, so, what are we talking about?
	Because we went on a Civil War tour when we got to North Carolina.
	Went all up into Virginia, different places like that, that I'd always wanted to see.
	And I said, I'll tell you, I said, here's an analogy the way I see it.
	I said, let's assume, you know, because it was a huge economic issue with the Civil War in terms of slavery.
	That was a big economic issue.
	But there were also trade issues.
	And as I've said before, if you go back to the 18, early 1830s, I forget the exact date, 1831 or something like that, there was a nullification crisis.
	And it nearly came to civil war at that point in time.
	And it was over trade tariffs.
	And so you had the government at the time was Andrew Jackson.
	and he imposed massive trade tariffs.
	And again, most of the taxation, there was no direct taxation until we had the income tax, no direct taxation of individuals.
	What they would do is they would send a tax bill to the various states or whatever, and they would appropriate money to send back.
	But most of the taxes were not internal.
	Most of the taxes were at the border.
	And so when they ramped up the tariffs, South Carolina and other Southern states who basically had an export economy, They're exporting agricultural products, specifically cotton especially.
	And so there was an uprising over those tariffs.
	And people in South Carolina were calling for nullification.
	They were calling for secession. But as I've said before, it didn't happen then.
	Why? Because socially the people were not prepared for it.
	It did happen once they got to 70- or 80-year period of the fourth turning, but that was still 30 years in the future.
	So it didn't happen at that point.
	They had a compromise over this issue.
	But then the same issue came back up again.
	And in addition to that, you had the fact that the people in the north were Again, what they said was they called Southerners secesh, right?
	They were not calling them racist.
	They didn't call them slavery, slavery people.
	But it was a part of the Industrial Revolution because we had these same civil wars happening in Italy at the same time.
	Garibaldi's army there.
	Slavery was not involved there.
	But what was involved was the consolidation of a nation-state, the creation of a nation-state, And the transition from an agricultural decentralized economy to a more centralized, industrialized society.
	And so you had this agrarian versus industrial society dynamic.
	And you also had the consolidation of power into a nation state.
	Those are the dynamics that were playing out at the same time in countries around the world.
	And so the timing was right at that point in time.
	And so, again, Abraham Lincoln decided that after Sumter, he was going to create an army of 70,000, 75,000 people.
	And he instituted a draft, to get back to the original question, in New York.
	And there were riots that happened at that time.
	And those riots were the biggest riots ever in American history.
	Until the Rodney King L.A. riots.
	They were the only ones to exceed that.
	And that was with a much bigger population.
	So New York really broke out in riots, but I don't think we're those kind of people anymore.
	I think we've been pacified.
	And so I don't think people are going to openly confront this in large numbers, large enough numbers to make a difference.
	Even back in the 1860s, when people were much more likely to physically stand up and resist, They didn't have large enough numbers to fight the draft situation.
	I think it's far less today.
	So I think they will focus and pivot to women to try to fill the gaps.
	And you can see this with Taylor Swift.
	I like the headline here from Breitbart.
	Taylor Swift lines about a patriarchal society as she's made Person of the Year.
	And they do the interview for the cover.
	This is... It looks to me like we've got a matriarchy.
	It looks to me like she is not suffering from this.
	In the same way that Barack and Michelle Obama were claiming, talking about how racist America was and how far we had to go.
	It's like, you just got elected president.
	She just got elected or chosen as person of the year on Time Magazine.
	And she said, I can't get an even shake because I'm a woman.
	Are you kidding me? They'll never be satisfied with this.
	And she said, we've been taught that things women gravitate toward are more frivolous than the things that stereotypically gendered men gravitate toward, right?
	She told the magazine. All right, let's take this apart.
	First of all, she says, stereotypically gendered men.
	Do you realize how far into this DEI stuff Taylor Swift is?
	I mean, she's like Mulvaney.
	Like Dylan Mulvaney.
	It's amazing how stereotypically gendered men gravitate towards things.
	And so we're told that women gravitate to things that are more frivolous.
	Is she the proof of this?
	Because she is...
	I mean, her base of support...
	And this is one of the things that I don't understand really about Taylor Swift.
	Her basis of support is predominantly female.
	I've never seen this kind of fanaticism...
	Female to female.
	Now, she's not selling lesbianism yet, I guess.
	So what is it about that?
	She's an avatar for them.
	She's an example for them.
	If you've got any ideas, Travis, chime in.
	Anybody out there, clue me in as to what's going on.
	Because I looked at this the other day, and I thought about this.
	I thought, you know, why is it that women are so drawn to her?
	And I said, you know, you look at the past and we've always seen, you know, think about the Beatles or Elvis or Frank Sinatra.
	You know, the fans were just crazy.
	Or Engelbert Humperdinck or Tom Jones.
	It was always some male that the women were going nuts over.
	It's the first time I've seen this.
	Over a woman, you know, that the women go hysterical over a woman.
	And even going back to, you know, Victorian England, Gilbert and Sullivan, if you aren't familiar with them, I think they're really, I like that.
	They got me into, they were kind of the draw for me to get into opera, you Which I'm not really very much into.
	I'm into Gilbert and Sullivan because I saw, we went to a theater, let's see, Central Park theater thing or something.
	We were up in New York one time and they had taken one of their productions and they made a movie out of it eventually.
	But they had, you know, in the movie it was Kevin Kline and Linda Ronstadt and other people.
	So they put contemporary pop singers together.
	And the roles. And then they had some other people who were, you know, legit Gilbert and Sullivan type singers.
	But they did Pirates of Penzance.
	And so we went to see it, Karen and her family, when we were up in New York visiting.
	And I didn't know anything about it.
	So I got the libretto.
	And libretto, I guess it is.
	And I'm looking through it because they couldn't quite get what was being said.
	Because again, they had some pop singers.
	And it's difficult to get people to understand.
	The language is a little bit...
	Rapid and archaic, and so I was sitting there reading the libretto so I'd know what was going on, and I was laughing hysterically, and they just didn't understand what was going on.
	Gilbert and Sullivan were kind of like a parody of legitimate opera of their day.
	And they also did a lot of social commentary.
	And so you look at that, and then after I enjoyed that, I saw another one that I got familiar with was Patience.
	And then Patience... You have this character who is exactly like Oscar Wilde, who was not a ladies' man, by the way.
	He's a famous homosexual.
	And they create this poet, and they call him Bunthorn, because he's a pain in the...
	And that was his name back in the Victorian times.
	And so all the women are throwing themselves at this guy who doesn't care at all about them.
	But they're just infatuated with him.
	And you've got all these military men and they're like, what's going on?
	We've got uniforms or manly men and they don't want to pay any attention at all to us.
	We've seen this type of thing over and over again.
	Going back to Victorian England.
	So why is it about Taylor Swift that all these women are coming after her?
	She says, what has existed since the dawn of time?
	She says, a patriarchal society.
	Is she not familiar with the Genesis account?
	It's kind of a punishment.
	And it truly is.
	And so they're kicking against the goads here.
	And I was like, well, since you did this first, you're going to desire to rule over men, but it's not going to happen.
	Not in an orderly society.
	That was part of the punishment, right?
	You're going to increase your pain in childbirth and all the rest of the stuff.
	And for the men, you're going to have to work hard and curse the ground and all the rest of the stuff.
	But women, you're going to want to be in charge, and you're not going to be in charge.
	And that's part of your punishment.
	So what has existed since the dawn of time?
	Patriarchal society. Well, prior to that, and the reason that exists is because of our rebellion to God.
	Both male and female, we've rebelled against God.
	She said, if we're going to look at this in the most cynical way possible, feminine ideas becoming lucrative means that more female art will get made.
	It's extremely heartening, says Taylor Swift, the most successful pop musician of all time, I guess.
	I think she had like five number ones or something, all these different metrics, so she's knocking it out of the park.
	And yet, it's not enough for her.
	Help, help, I'm being repressed.
	Time anointed Swift as its 2023 Person of the Year.
	Following in the footsteps of previous winners, such as Greta Thunberg, Barack Obama, Vladimir Zelensky, and they don't mention this in Breitbart, but I would also include Adolf Hitler.
	He was also personally, she's in great company.
	From Greta Thunberg to Adolf Hitler and everybody in between.
	She said she is the proudest and happiest that she has ever felt.
	So things are working out just fine for her.
	But again, it's just not enough because she's being repressed by men.
	I really do think that when they look for recruitment, they are going to turn in this direction.
	Well, you know, when we go back and we look at the time and we look at that we live in and contrast it with previous epics, or epochs, if you want to pronounce it that way, and go back and take a look this time of year, Handel's Messiah is popping up everywhere.
	You know, it originally was not a Christmas piece.
	It was originally written for Easter because we're given a very specific date.
	For crucifixion, for the Passover, that type of thing.
	That's very specific. We don't have a specific date for Christmas.
	It's not universally celebrated everywhere.
	It became really popular when it got moved to Christmas, and there's a lesson in that as well.
	Interestingly enough, Handel was really on the ropes, even though he was widely respected as a composer.
	He had not had a lot of success at that point in time.
	And he was afraid, as they pointed out in this article, to even answer the door.
	He was afraid it was a debtor knocking on the door, and they were going to haul him off to debtor's prison, which was a thing back then.
	It wasn't really a good way to get paid, but they would throw you in jail if you were in debt.
	So he had a friend who actually wrote the libretto, or whatever the lyrics, let's just call it that.
	And the guy's name was Charles Jennings, and he had focused a lot on Isaiah.
	And other things, but he takes it through the entire life of Christ and he does it in three acts.
	And he brought it to Handel.
	They were friends and Handel had been doing formal operas, but that was a difficult selling piece because it was very elitist.
	The operas were always done in Latin or German or Italian and nobody, you know, the masses didn't speak any of that.
	And so it was difficult to get people to show up.
	And so what he did with this was they broke this into shorter pieces and did it in English.
	And that was a real change.
	And so he premiered it in Dublin, Ireland in 1742.
	And then the following year, it was taken to London with King George II. And that was, again, these are being performed at Easter time or Passover.
	During the Hallelujah Chorus, the King, when we have the spot where it says, King of Kings and Lord of Lords, the King of England stood up.
	We don't have anybody like that anymore in political power to be even that little bit of pride removed from them.
	He stood up, and they say, well, some people say he stood up because he needed to stretch his legs.
	Interesting timing that he would do that.
	So that's now become a convention whenever this is performed.
	And then he performed it for an orphanage society about a decade later, the Foundling Hospital in London, annual benefit concert.
	And he gifted the musical score to them, and they continued to do it from 1749 to 1770s, and they would make money from this.
	But they owned it and owned the royalties to it, and they had the concerts there.
	And then in 1791, it had its first Christmas performances.
	In 1818, Boston's Handel and Haydn Society gave the first American performance of the Messiah on a Christmas Day.
	And that's part of the story, because one person has written a book on Christmas songs and traditions.
	His name is Ace Collins.
	He said, Christmas music is unique in the sense that it's a time machine.
	And I guess that's one of the reasons why I was really drawn to it, because there's such a number of styles that are out there.
	And it really is a time machine.
	He says, think about it.
	When have you ever heard a Bing Crosby song on the radio, except at Christmastime?
	But it's this time capsule.
	And so you can go back and you can listen to all different styles of music.
	You have the kind of variety that you typically don't have.
	It's typically very, very narrowly focused within a particular genre, within a particular timepiece.
	He said decades...
	After they've passed on, you've got people like Perry Como, Carpenters, Bing Crosby.
	You'll hear them on the radio all the time, and you'll hear older songs, and you'll hear all kinds of styles of songs.
	And so I guess that's one of the reasons that I'm drawn to the Christmas music.
	But certainly, Handel's Messiah has grown on me, and in my estimation, as I said before, opera was something I've never warmed up to and still haven't.
	I don't listen to Wagner stuff or anything like that.
	I enjoyed some of it with the comic opera.
	I enjoyed Handel's Messiah because of the Christian connections in it.
	And even with that, I had to kind of warm up to it because of the way that he utilized the lyrics in a very different way than we do.
	It's not like you have the words laid out With each note being a different syllable.
	You know, they're kind of repeating syllables in the way that they sing.
	So I thought it was kind of interesting.
	But again, I'll just point out, one of the reasons I'm covering this is because we've got the Christmas album on the David Knight Show.
	So let's play one kind of classical thing that I've got there, which is the Russian dance that I did for fun.
	Putting in some vocalists.
	I'm imagining the Russians here doing their Trapak dance where they cross their arms and squat down and kick the legs.
	You've seen that type of thing. That's what this is really about.
	But now we've got the Russian guys singing along with the Tchaikovsky Orchestra.
	The End
	Well, Fauci has...
	Identify himself now as not just Mr.
	Science, but he's now Mr.
	Religion as well. He has a sense of ethics that are so high that he doesn't even need to go to a church.
	Isn't that amazing? This guy has just this general sense of what is true in science, so much so that he doesn't have to do experiments or tests or show you his data, and he doesn't have to have any involvement with any religion because his sense of ethics are so high.
	I think it's really that he's Mr.
	Science and he's Mr. Religion because he thinks that he's God.
	It truly is amazing.
	He had an interview with the BBC and he was asked about his supposed Catholic faith.
	And he says, that's a thing I don't really need to do.
	I don't need it. I've transcended all this.
	You don't practice Catholicism anymore?
	He says, no. He says, there's a number of complicated reasons here.
	First of all, I think my own personal ethics on life are, I think, enough to keep me going on the right path.
	This is a guy... Who was involved in torturing puppies for his own intellectual curiosity.
	But worse than that, at the NIH, they were contracting with Planned Parenthood and the University of Pittsburgh to do abortions so they could harvest organs from babies.
	Murder for hire, that's his ethics.
	And then take the product of those murder for hire abortions.
	And use them to create humanized mice and other atrocities.
	This is his sense of ethics.
	This is the guy who was leading the medical martial law, that Trump turned it over to him, let him be the dictator.
	He says, and then he goes on to say, well, there's enough negative aspects about the organizational church.
	Isn't this always interesting?
	Isn't it interesting when we see people say, yeah, I would go to church, but those people are just such evil hypocrites.
	Well, maybe you could show them the way.
	You're so enlightened.
	I imagine one day he would show up before God and he would say, well, I would have followed you, but, you know, those people in churches are just despicable.
	I didn't want to be a part of them.
	He said it was really just kind of a pro forma thing that he doesn't need to do anymore.
	In other words, he was just kind of kicking off.
	Yeah, I went through this confirmation stuff.
	I got married in church. My kids are baptized in the church.
	It was just a cultural thing to him.
	And so, you know, if he's so perfect, he doesn't need God's help.
	He doesn't need to get somewhere where he's with Christians or any of that kind of stuff.
	You know, they're just a corrupt institution.
	Not that the NIH and the FDA and the federal government are corrupt institutions.
	And I agree with him about the Catholic Church, about the Pope.
	This Pope ain't Catholic.
	It's not a rhetorical question anymore.
	He doesn't even remotely pretend to agree with any of the ethics or even the doctrines of the historical Catholic Church.
	And I have differences with the Catholic Church's doctrines as well, but not in the way that this Marxist Jesuit Pope does.
	He just completely refutes.
	His religion is environmentalism.
	His religion is the global agenda of DEI and all the rest of this stuff.
	He's just a globalist politician, a Marxist.
	Which, you know, when I look at this, it seems like it'd be a perfect fit for Fauci.
	Seems to me like this would be his church if he was going to go to one.
	But he doesn't need to go to one because he's so perfect.
	It really is...
	Sad, honestly, to see a person who has no sense of their sin.
	No sense of their shortcomings.
	And when we look at this, and I see all these comments of all these people, you know, oh, Fauci, the biggest sinner of all, and all the rest of this stuff.
	Do we have to be careful of the same thing?
	Are we going to be like the Pharisee who bangs his chest, or sees the guy banging his chest and weeping in prayer, and he says, well...
	Thank you, God, that I'm not like him.
	Right? We don't want to be like that when it comes to Fauci.
	I mean, pray for him.
	Pray that God will do something to change his heart.
	Wouldn't it be interesting if that were to happen?
	And he were to come clean.
	That would truly be an earth-shattering event.
	It would be a government-shattering event if he were to come clean.
	But he has no sense of his sin.
	He's blinded by pride.
	He's blinded by his power.
	And he doesn't need God.
	And I've seen Bloomberg say the same thing as well.
	Michael Bloomberg said, hey, if there is a heaven, if there is a God, I'm going straight in because I've given so much money to all these good causes and everything.
	Well, you don't get to define God.
	Well, what is right and wrong?
	All of us have a tendency to want to do that, right?
	God has told us what is right and wrong.
	He's told us what his economy is.
	He's told us that the soul that sins will die.
	He's told us that we cannot pay for our own sins.
	We're in a state of rebellion.
	He's offered us a free gift.
	A free gift of grace.
	That's why we call it grace.
	It's undeserved. So he's offered us mercy.
	He's given us time.
	And yet you have people who are saying, well, you know, I gave money to all these good political causes like gun control and everything.
	So I'm going to go straight into heaven, says Michael Bloomberg.
	It's this arrogance. It's this pride.
	It's no interest in And what God says, because they're the smartest people.
	They have the most money. They have the most power.
	What do I need God for?
	But again, we need to ask, are we that way?
	Are we looking at this and saying, well, I'm not as bad as Fauci.
	Maybe God will cut me some slack.
	It's not graded on a curve.
	Again, take a look at what God says he requires.
	It's going to be on the basis of that.
	None of us merits salvation through good works.
	And so it will be by faith in Christ alone.
	And it's going to be followed by repentance or preceded by repentance, but also followed by good works.
	We're created to do those good works.
	And so that's one thing that you want to see is if your life has changed.
	But we can also, you know, you don't have to be rich.
	You don't have to be prideful.
	You don't have to be powerful to be prideful.
	You can be poor.
	You can be greedy. You can be full of pride and still be powerless.
	And so all these guys really are kind of cartoons.
	Cartoons. Cartoons for our instruction.
	And rather than thinking that we're better than them and God's going to grade on a curve, we need to take this as a warning.
	These people are so arrogant.
	That they don't care what God has to say.
	And so we should learn from that as well.
	I want to follow up on this abortion case I talked about yesterday.
	Of course, the Texas Supreme Court, I didn't cover it yesterday, but they ruled against the woman.
	So what is new is that she actually is going to go out of state to get an abortion.
	And I said that. I said, the reason that if she wants this abortion so badly, why go through a legal challenge?
	Well, it's to set up a precedent.
	And they were trying to set that up.
	And you had Judge Gamble in Austin who said, well, I'm going to do a temporary restraining order on the Texas law.
	And the Supreme Court said, you can't do that.
	And the Attorney General said, well, it's a temporary restraining order, but our law is permanent and our statute of limitations is still going to be there.
	And anybody who does this abortion, we're going to hold them accountable, any doctors or hospitals, and sent the letter out to them.
	And so the Supreme Court...
	In writing this decision, said a woman who meets the medical necessity exception in the law need not seek a court order to obtain an abortion.
	So what they said was the law is self-explanatory.
	The law, they said, leaves to physicians, not to judges, I think?
	And then they're going to be held accountable by the Texas state government if they did this within the legal exceptions that are in the law.
	This whole court challenge, however, was brought by the Center for Reproductive Rights.
	You see them over and over again.
	They're headquartered out of New York City.
	They're allied, typically, with Planned Parenthood and the ACLU on these challenges everywhere.
	Typical, usual suspects who are arrayed against this.
	And again, as I said, they're trying to set up a Roe v.
	Wade number two. The first Roe v.
	Wade was out of Texas.
	It was in a challenge to a Texas law at the time.
	And Texas has two ways that this law is applied to stop abortion.
	The first one is to allow private citizens to file civil suits against anybody who provides an abortion that is after six weeks of gestation.
	And so anybody who does this, any doctor, any hospital, can be sued by a private citizen.
	Secondly, the state comes in, and this came in after the Supreme Court decision.
	This is what the so-called trigger laws were.
	A lot of states had passed laws prior to the change in Roe v.
	Wade that said if the Supreme Court gets its boot off of our neck, this is the law that we would have there.
	Now, they had the legal authority to do it under the Tenth Amendment, and that's really what Dobbs was about.
	It was about the fact that the federal government, and not just an abortion, in many different areas, has jumped in to regulate, especially the Supreme Court jumping in to regulate, things that it doesn't have the power to regulate under the Tenth Amendment.
	And so, after this obstacle, this usurpation of power from previous Supreme Courts was removed by this Supreme Court in the Dobbs decision, Then it became a felony in Texas to perform an abortion.
	And so they have some exceptions in there for the life of the mother.
	But yet there is a felony as well as the ability for individuals to sue these organizations.
	And then in addition to that, as I said, the Attorney General Ken Paxton said that he was going to come after people who did this in spite of what this activist judge Gamble in Austin did.
	So the Supreme Court went on to say a pregnant woman does not need a court order to have a life-saving abortion in Texas.
	Our ruling today does not block a life-saving abortion.
	In this very case, if a physician determined that one is needed under the appropriate legal standard using reasonable medical judgment, said in its decision, And so she has now decided that she'll go to a neighboring state, and I guess they will try to continue with this appeal, or they will find somebody else to come up with it.
	They thought they had something they could destroy this law with.
	She was, and this is coming from NBC, they characterize it this way.
	They said that she was at high risk for multiple pregnancy complications.
	Well, NBC, that is always the case with an abortion as well.
	And that is especially the case with these abortions by pills, by mail.
	The people who do it are not even required to have a medical exam to see if there's going to be complications.
	They don't have to go somewhere.
	They can do this. They can be at high risk without a medical exam.
	They can take these pills, and they can bleed to death in their own home.
	So you're worried about women's health?
	You're worried about complications?
	You're worried about the increased risk to her future fertility?
	Again, this is something that has always been a pro-life argument against abortions.
	Talking about the health of the mother, they're crying crocodile tears over this, quite frankly.
	They've never been concerned about any of these things, and all of these concerns that they bring up are all issues with an abortion as well.
	Tennessee lawmakers have introduced age verification bill to protect children from pornography.
	Now, I'm not a supporter of pornography.
	I don't support the use of drugs.
	But I think that we need to stop looking to government as our savior.
	Are we at the same mindset again as Fauci that we have or should have?
	Government? Government as God?
	Do we have no ability?
	Every time we see a problem, what do we want to do?
	We want to bring in government law enforcement.
	Well, that hasn't worked for 50 plus years with war on drugs.
	That is a spiritual issue.
	And it continues to get worse.
	And the corruption of our courts and of our police, as well as our crime, all of that is increasing because we think we've only got one tool.
	And so if all you've got is a hammer, everything looks like a nail, and you treat it that way.
	And you say, well, every problem that we've got, there ought to be a law.
	And we need to make it a federal law.
	Or we need to make it, you know, law enforcement need to step in and stop kids looking at pornography.
	And they've got to stop in and step in and stop people from taking drugs and so forth.
	And yet, that doesn't work.
	There are some things that the government is never going to be successful at.
	And those are the things that are fundamentally spiritual and need to be addressed that way.
	Things that need to be addressed by parents.
	And you also understand how this is going to operate.
	This is the same type of thing that Nikki Haley is calling for.
	Oh, I don't like anonymous people on social media.
	I've got to know your name.
	Put an ID in there before you do this.
	And this is what all this leads to.
	This is a backdoor way to try to get a digital ID for everybody.
	To try to control everything on the internet in an even more direct fashion.
	So this is called the Protect Tennessee Minors Act.
	Well, if you want to protect Tennessee minors over sexual issues, you need, as a parent, to take them out of the school.
	And you need, as a member of society, to shut down these corrupt institutions.
	That's what's really needed.
	These things are band-aids on the side.
	We've got to have some radical solutions to these long-term problems.
	And again, it's fundamentally a spiritual issue.
	But you can take your kid out of the school.
	You can take them out of the burning building, as Alex Newman used to always say.
	But you've got to put out the fire before it burns down the rest of the society.
	And so that means we shut down these corrupt schools.
	They're not a good way to educate people.
	Schools do not equal education.
	Does anybody really think that anymore?
	You know, a lot of people look at this and say, well, Johnny can't read or write and he can't do math.
	But do you realize that that was the intention?
	To deliberately dumb down Johnny and Jane or whoever, you know?
	To deliberately dumb them down.
	And to create a brave new world type of school.
	We're in Aldous Huxley land here.
	And so, yeah, take them out of the school.
	You want to protect minors in Tennessee or anywhere else?
	You take them out of the schools.
	So it would mandate that pornography distributors put in place age verification measures.
	You would have to provide some sort of state ID. And this has already happened in Virginia.
	So places like Pornhub would need a user profile image of a verified government-issued ID. And so instead of doing that, Pornhub, when they were required to do that in Virginia, Just shut down access to its platform to people in Virginia.
	But of course, that doesn't solve anything.
	You can always use a VPN to hide where you're coming from.
	There'll be ways that people will get around this.
	And as I said, Hazelwood, who's chair of the House Finance Ways and Means Committee, was right.
	When, I don't know if it's a man or a woman here, when he or she said, exposing children to pornography is a form of child sexual abuse and exploitation that can severely damage a child's intellectual development and emotional well-being.
	Well, that's true. And it's true of adults as well, but it's especially true of children.
	You know, you see these school board meetings where people will show them pictures or read them excerpts of what is being pushed to kids in elementary school.
	You can't say that here, right?
	And yet that's in the school.
	The schools are far, well, I won't say far worse, but they're just as bad as Pornhub because they're coming after these kids and they're doing it under the guise of legitimacy, you see.
	And with other kids there, they're normalizing this and they're grooming these kids and they're sexualizing them at an early age.
	And these are our schools that are doing this.
	Again, as evidenced by over and over again.
	People getting shut down or thrown out of school board meetings because they show or read what is in these books that are being given to kids in school.
	And so there's, you know, when you look at this, you could say there's a stronger argument to do this than to say, well, we got trolls on social media, but they all point back to the same place.
	And that's one of the reasons why Nikki Haley is so beloved.
	By Jamie Demon, J.P. Morgan, and by people like the Koch brothers, all the rest of these people, why they're giving her money, because she is pushing their digital ID program.
	At the same time, she's fully accepting of all this transgender grooming of kids.
	So Clarence Thomas is very upset about the conversion therapy case coming to the Supreme Court.
	Six to three, they decided they're not going to listen to this case.
	And this case was, again, they call it conversion therapy.
	Whenever they talk about this, you have to understand that they're ultimately talking about Christian conversion.
	They're not talking about psychologists.
	Psychologists don't convert people.
	They counsel people.
	They give them advice. They do all these other things.
	They don't convert people.
	So when they call this conversion therapy, they're ultimately pointing, they're saying, we're not doing it right now, don't worry, we're not going to do it now, just as they always say about gun control, right?
	But occasionally you'll hear somebody say, like the Mayor Pro Tem of Austin at one of these Gun control rallies and a person had a sign, you know, stop the gun confiscation says, well, we're not coming for the guns, not yet, but you keep that sign because we're going to make that come true.
	They are pointing this at Christian counselors, not at psychologists.
	That's why they call it conversion.
	And so this is a case coming from the state of Washington.
	It was a law there that would ban any anti-LGBT conversion therapy.
	If it's anti, it's banned.
	But if it's pro, gender conversion or the rest of the stuff, oh, that's good.
	That's required. But if you push back against that, that is going to be banned, you see.
	And so it was six to three, Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Brett Kavanaugh.
	I was surprised that it wasn't Amy Coney Barrett because they made a big deal about how she was, you know, her Christian faith should disqualify her from being a Supreme Court justice.
	I haven't seen any evidence of that in her decisions on the Supreme Court.
	She was part of the group that said, we're going to open up casinos, but we're not going to allow churches to meet during the lockdowns.
	How do you justify something like that?
	No, she did. I don't know what specious argument she came up with.
	Not Gorsuch, not Barrett.
	But it was Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Brett Kavanaugh.
	Everybody else said, no, we don't want to take a look at this viewpoint discrimination.
	And Clarence Thomas was very upset about it.
	And that's exactly what he called it.
	And that's exactly what it is.
	Viewpoint discrimination.
	NBC News said the court left in place a state law that bars therapists from counseling minors to change sexual orientation or gender identity.
	But see, it doesn't ban school teachers, does it?
	That's what I'm saying.
	You look at Pornhub and all the hubbub about that and everything, and yet look at our schools.
	You look at this conversion therapy thing.
	Well, we can't have a therapist or psychologist talk to them about going in one direction.
	It's okay, and it's required that you go the other direction, and we're going to let school teachers do that.
	Again, get your kids out of school.
	Shut down these schools.
	Defund the schools.
	Defund them. So therapists cannot counsel minors to change their sexual orientation or their gender identity.
	It has to be hidden from parents so they can...
	Chemically mutilate them, surgically mutilate them.
	State lawmakers in Washington enacted the law to protect the physical and psychological well-being of minors, they said.
	Well, Justice Thomas disagreed.
	He said conversion therapy is an issue of free speech.
	And again, when we talk about conversion, they're talking about religious.
	What does it mean to convert somebody, right?
	It means that you, you know...
	Vert means to turn, right?
	So you have adverts which are going to try to turn you toward their product.
	Or you could divert and turn away.
	If you convert, you turn with.
	So the whole point of Christian conversion is that you turn with Christ, right?
	Now, there's not any conversion that's going on in a psychology.
	Are we going to turn with Freud or with Jung or what?
	There's nothing about that in there.
	Again, that choice of words is very important.
	They choose their words very carefully, and it shows what their ultimate intention is.
	So Clarence Thomas says this is an issue of free speech.
	He said there's a little question that this law regulates speech, therefore it implicates the First Amendment.
	He said, true, counseling is a form of therapy, but it is conducted solely through speech.
	A law that restricts speech based on content or viewpoint is presumptively unconstitutional and may be upheld only if the state can prove that the law is narrowly tailored to serve compelling state interests.
	He, and of course this is a raw story, which is all for the one-way LGBT religion.
	He didn't appear to consider the state's primary role in compelling interest in protecting minors.
	Do you hear that? The state doesn't have a primary role.
	Primary role is parents.
	And that's what this is ultimately about.
	It's about destroying the family, about removing the parents.
	Why do you remove parents? Why do you remove others?
	Just as I pointed out the other day.
	In terms of that cult, you get people away from their friends and family in a cult so that you can groom and control them.
	And when you say that the state's primary role is to protect minors, that is a role of the state.
	Nowhere in here. Does Raw Story or these establishment media, do they talk about parents' role?
	And it has a compelling interest in protecting minors.
	Yes, it does. And it ought to protect them from what is being done in the state's schools because they're the ones who are the predators.
	They're the ones who are attacking. Are they protecting minors in the schools or are these progressives attacking minors?
	CNN, quoted by Raw Story, says, Under the law, a licensed therapist can discuss conversion therapy with minors or recommend that it be performed by others, such as a religious counselor.
	But a licensed therapist cannot perform it.
	And again, I don't think they've got any answers.
	I don't think psychology has got any answers.
	I don't think people who follow Freud and Carl Jung have any answers.
	These are people who say they study the soul.
	That's what psychology means.
	But they deny that you have a soul.
	They deny there's a God.
	And so they have no answers for people.
	And they say, well, right now they can counsel somebody and say, well, you should talk to a religious counselor, but they can't say anything.
	What kind of an arbitrary line is that?
	Well, that's the kind of arbitrary line that gets erased because there's a progressive march towards the end.
	And again, conversion is what we're talking about here.
	Thomas was so upset, and he wrote this decision because he was so upset with the majority, six to three, saying we're not going to get involved here.
	He wrote that licensed counselors can speak with minors about gender dysphoria, but only if they convey the state-approved message of encouraging minors.
	To explore their gender identity, you see?
	That's the crux of the issue.
	That viewpoint, that you're in the wrong body, that can be pushed to these kids, and it can be pushed to them without their parents' knowledge, but you must not say anything else against that agenda or offer them a different opinion.
	He says, expressing any other message is forbidden.
	This is viewpoint and content-based discrimination in its purest form.
	He says this is presumptively unconstitutional and the state must show that it can survive strict scrutiny before they enforce it.
	He wrote, although the court declines to take this particular case, I have no doubt that the issue it presents will come before the court again.
	And when it does, this court should do what it should have done here.
	Grant Sertiori, or however you pronounce that, that's saying we're going to hear it, right?
	To consider what the First Amendment requires, he wrote.
	I've said it before, I'll say it again.
	You know, Clarence Thomas is not perfect, but he is by far and away the best judge that they have on the Supreme Court, which is one of the reasons why they're coming after him.
	We'll be right back. If you like the Eagles, on a dark desert highway, the cars, and Huey Lewis and the News, they say the horror You'll love the Classic Hits channel at APS Radio.
	Download our app or listen now at APSRadio.com.
	Music And
	now, The David Knight Show!
	Well, I want to talk a little bit about money issues, but especially about crypto.
	Because as I've said before, you can make all kinds of arguments about the potential for gold to go sky high because of the worthlessness of the fiat currency, because of all the games being played by the Federal Reserve and the federal government.
	To abuse the power that they have as the world's reserve currency.
	How they have indebted us.
	I just saw a congressional member of Congress, a Republican, who said, yeah, the debt is now $100,000 per American person.
	You got that kind of cash on hand?
	Pay that off? I don't.
	So, you know, this is what the government is doing.
	It's destroying the value of the currency, inflating it away, and doing various other things.
	But as I've said before, you know, we can never tell on any asset.
	You can make a very good case for gold, especially with inflation happening and the fact that it has weathered the war from the Federal Reserve, as Tony Arterman always points out.
	Again, by the way, davidknight.gold will take you to Tony Arterman, gold and silver.
	But when we look at Bitcoin, and we've talked about this, and Tony has sold Bitcoin in the past, I'm I'm wary of it, as I've said before, because I've seen billionaires.
	We just had a billionaire who lost a million dollars.
	He didn't know it was stolen from him.
	And somebody else said, I noticed this big whale transaction.
	$960,000 or something like that.
	And I traced it to you.
	Why did you sell a million dollars in Bitcoin?
	Because, you know, the price is going up.
	I didn't do that.
	I did that. Looked and somebody had hacked his wallet.
	I'm very concerned about that.
	I don't feel secure about that.
	Thieves can break in and steal anything you've got.
	The government can steal anything you've got with a pin.
	But when it comes to that, you're susceptible to every thief in the world.
	And so I'm concerned about the security issues.
	It's kind of a knowledge thing for me.
	I just don't know enough about Bitcoin to feel good about it.
	But I think it's important to take a look at what is being done because I think it is the canary in the coal mine and it is the obstacle that they have to get around to impose CBDC. And that's my primary reason for gold.
	The case that I would make for owning gold is to get around CBDC, and I've said that over and over again.
	When we look at Bitcoin, you've got people like Michael Sayre at a recent conference that was in Australia about the Australian Crypto Convention, the beginning, first week of November.
	He says he thinks demand for Bitcoin is going to grow by up to a factor of 10 times within the next 12 months.
	And that's true. It's very volatile, but it is also really the tip of the spear in this war with the Federal Reserve.
	And Elizabeth Warren and other people are ramping this up.
	The big bank systems are ramping this up.
	They want to restructure our financial system.
	And things like that, things like gold and things like cash are standing in their way.
	And so when you look at what they're doing about crypto, it really is a bellwether for all this stuff.
	Harbinger, what is to come.
	Bitcoin is going to be halving again just a few months away.
	They're going to, you know, that's part of the algorithm as it grows.
	So he thinks that because of that and because of other things, it's going to be Going up is going to be more institutionalized and mainstream, he says.
	And I see in that a bit of a danger.
	But he sees that as bullish for its price.
	And he said he thinks that what is going to happen is you're first going to see Apple companies, big companies like Apple and Meta, you know, Facebook companies.
	They're going to want to start taking Bitcoin, he said, because they're going to see it as another way that they can make money out of it.
	And then he says, and then I think the next big step that's going to happen is you're going to have the big mega banks J.P. Morgan, Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Deutsche Bank, etc.
	So they're going to start making loans and giving mortgages and customizing it and buying and selling it.
	I think that'll be the next thing to happen.
	Because he was asked to give his opinion as to what was going to happen in the next five years.
	Well, coming up against that...
	And again, this is going to be a full-on war between the central banks and cryptocurrency.
	They're at war with gold because gold has always been a standard of value that they can't control.
	They're going to be at war with cash.
	But I think the real harbinger is going to be Bitcoin.
	And we look at how the different banks have been attacking it in the press.
	People were mocking the European Central Bank.
	Because when Bitcoin went all the way down to $16,000, the ECB, Christine Lagarde, said, well, that's it.
	You know, this is the last gasp for Bitcoin.
	All these people pulled up that quote and they said, yeah, well, since it was the last gasp since that time, it's gone up 170%.
	And so, again, this is a war on words to try to vilify things like crypto.
	And once they do that, again, the ultimate goal is to reset the financial system and have a digital ID, digital controls for everything with CBDC. This is standing in its way.
	And so, Jamie Demon, I like to pronounce his name that way, instead of Diamond, CEO of J.P. Morgan.
	Came out and he said, well, he said, I've always been deeply opposed to crypto, Bitcoin, etc.
	And when he was being questioned by Elizabeth Warren, she set up this dog and pony show.
	He said, the only true use is for criminals and drug traffickers, money laundering and tax avoidance.
	They will be saying all this about cash.
	That's why I said this is a harbinger of things to come.
	He says, if I was the government, I would close it down.
	And that's exactly what Elizabeth Warren wanted to hear.
	She knew she could get that by putting him in there.
	He's previously called Bitcoin a hyped-up fraud, likened it to pet rocks.
	And Elizabeth Warren says...
	When it comes to banking policy, I'm not usually holding hands with the CEOs of multi-billion dollar banks, but this is a matter of national security.
	And again, terrorists, drug traffickers, rogue nations should be banned from doing this.
	Here's the truth about Elizabeth Warren.
	She has always been holding the hands of the CEOs of multi-billion dollar banking industry.
	Everything that she has done, she has labeled and pretended that it's for the small guy, for the small banks, for the consumer, the Consumer Financial Protection Board.
	I think that's the order, but that's one of her creatures.
	And that destroyed small and medium-sized banks.
	It added to the cost of loans for everybody.
	It did not help consumers.
	In other words, it was another one of these predatory agencies, and it was done in order to help the biggest banks become even more powerful.
	Everything that Elizabeth Warren does is for the big banks.
	And she says just the opposite.
	In that regard, she is just like Trump, who pretends that he is an anti-globalist, where everything that he does works out, strangely, for the benefit of a globalist and follows exactly their agenda and their plan.
	You see, you cannot trust what politicians say or how they characterize themselves.
	You have to look at what they do, and if you look at what she does, she's for the big banks.
	She's for the central banks, and she's for the biggest banks, just like everything that Trump is doing, is for the globalists, even though he's out there yelling and screaming, I'm anti-globalists, and the Globalists are doing their professional wrestling shtick, saying, he's a heel, we're the heroes, and back and forth, accusing each other.
	All these same arguments will be made for cash.
	By the way, why did the U.S. military, if cash is an instrument used by terrorists, it's used by drug traffickers and all the rest of this stuff, why did the U.S. military...
	Have pallet after pallet after pallet, just went on forever, of $100 bills in Afghanistan that they left behind.
	Was the U.S. government involved somehow with drug dealers and terrorists in Afghanistan?
	Well, you better believe they were.
	They were funding them.
	They're partners with them.
	That's why they had all that cash there.
	That doesn't mean that cash is evil.
	It means our government is evil.
	It means that our government uses all of this stuff.
	And you can say that about any form of payment.
	As a matter of fact, as Jamie Demon was saying this, people on Twitter said, are you kidding me?
	Your bank has been fined more than any other bank.
	You've been fined $39 billion with a B for criminal activity.
	And you have the audacity to say that Bitcoin is criminal?
	Your entire institution is criminal.
	As a matter of fact, some of them said, if you look at big banks in general, big banks in general have been fined $390 billion.
	He's got 10% of all that, his fines, and the biggest single offender in terms of banks.
	Again, he says for Elizabeth Warren, the only true case for crypto is for criminals, drug traffickers, money launderers, and tax avoidance.
	They pointed out that, you know, over $39.3 billion, actually, in fines.
	272 violations since 2000.
	And some of that includes not just fines, but it's a settlement that they did with the Virgin Islands over Jeffrey Epstein's sex trafficking operation.
	So I guess we could say that Jamie Demon and his bank are also...
	Sex traffickers, not just drug traffickers, tax avoiders, money launderers.
	Now we go back and we look at HSBC. Given a pass by Eric Holder.
	There was a great article done by Matt Taibbi when he was still at Rolling Stone about it.
	You know, we heard about all the big banks that have been created by the regulations put in place or deregulations put in place by Bill Clinton.
	And then allowing them to get involved in speculative investments and blowing up the real estate market.
	And then they got bailed out.
	Nobody else did.
	They were too big to fail.
	Well, Matt Taibbi said they're also too big to jail.
	He was talking about HSBC, which has a long criminal rap sheet, not as big as J.P. Morgan.
	But he pointed out that the Sinaloa Drug Cartel, which is run by El Chapo, had their own window of Where the Sinaloa cartel could come to their bank and bring in cash or take cash out, but mainly dropping off the cash.
	And again, that's cash.
	They're going to say all the same stuff about cash, the war on cash.
	And so both crypto pundits, many of them, pointed out the $39 billion and the fact that he also has had his own cryptocurrency.
	But since October 2013, the last 10 years, Jamie Demon's Bank, J.P. Morgan, paid $13 billion in fine, the largest fine in corporate history.
	For fraudulently misleading investors over toxic mortgage deals.
	Several J.P. Morgan traders were also investigated for manipulating various metals futures markets.
	See, they're the ones who are manipulating the price of gold and silver as well.
	They manipulated the housing market.
	They manipulated gold and silver.
	They funded Jeffrey Epstein.
	But everybody else are the criminals.
	You're talking about projection.
	This is what these people always do.
	They project their racism.
	They project their hate. They project their criminal activities, their sex trafficking, their drug use.
	They project all that stuff onto other people.
	Several traders, JP Morgan, were investigating for manipulating metals futures between 2008 and 2016.
	They agreed to pay nearly a billion dollars to settle this in September of 2020.
	And at the same time, he says he's always been opposed to crypto.
	He's got his own token that they created, JPM Coin.
	JP Morgan coin.
	He's got his own crypto that is out there.
	Yeah, they're demonizing this stuff simply because they want to have a monopoly, because they want to have control, because he wants to work with the government, because he's essential, as President Trump said.
	Small banks, medium-sized banks, small businesses, those are all non-essential and must be destroyed.
	But the big guys are essential.
	They're essential as partners to the federal government.
	So he said, if I was a government, I would close it down, he said to Elizabeth Warren.
	They've got their own crypto, and the bank also rolled out a blockchain-based tokenization platform in October with BlackRock as a client.
	They also contributed to a $65 million funding round for Ethereum infrastructure.
	It's starting to look like his problem is simply the fact that he's not invested in Bitcoin.
	He's got his hooks in the number two, which is Ethereum.
	He has previously referred to decentralized currencies as Ponzi schemes.
	Yeah, you see, the Federal Reserve is not a Ponzi scheme.
	The securitized mortgages that he was defrauding everybody with and fined for, that was not a Ponzi scheme.
	Again, this is all projection from these types of people.
	And when you look at it, you talk about tax cheats and money launders.
	Did Hunter Biden and Joe Biden, did they use crypto and his brother?
	Did they use crypto or did they use banking system?
	They used banks to do their tax avoidance, to do their money laundering, to do their bribery from foreign states.
	They used the banking system.
	I guess they figured that they are so connected that nobody can do anything about it.
	Other people pointed out that when you look at...
	Illicit criminal cryptocurrency transactions, that if you compare that to what is being done through the banking system, people like the Bidens, that in the banking system, it is two to five times greater than the criminal activity that is conducted in cryptocurrency.
	Why is that?
	Again, it's simpler.
	They're not afraid of being caught.
	And they already have identified people like J.P. Morgan, like Jamie Dimon, and the banking system who will partner with them.
	It's much easier to do it.
	And so this is going to be the big fight, says Elizabeth Warren.
	And it is. That's why I say we need to look at this because this is the big fight.
	This is the battlefront right now.
	And they're resetting of the financial system.
	And if they can win against Bitcoin and against crypto in general, they will come for cash.
	They will come for gold eventually as well.
	But unlike the cash, the gold is going to have intrinsic value.
	Bitcoin was hit with a double whammy after she held her little dog and pony show and talked about how she was going to destroy crypto.
	She went live on CNBC claiming that North Korea is using Bitcoin and crypto.
	To fund nearly half of its nuclear weapons program.
	Are you serious? She ought to be laughed off the stage.
	Prove it, lady. Prove it.
	How in the world could she?
	Again, she doesn't know any of that.
	So are they converting it to dollars?
	Are they converting it to Chinese yuan?
	But she came up with this bill.
	And it's going to require reports on transactions involving unhosted wallets and more.
	She wants to close loopholes.
	The bill is backed by all these small banking.
	No, it's backed by the biggest banking institutions.
	It's backed by the Banking Policy Institute, the Massachusetts Bankers Association, the Global Financial Integrity Organization.
	And she's got some local Massachusetts law enforcement organizations.
	AARP. Yeah, don't ever give those people any money.
	So again, this is about doing more know-you-customer rules.
	And as head of research at Galaxy Digital, said Alex Thorne, He said, this bill will effectively ban crypto.
	If you're going to say, well, you've got to know your customer and you've got to vet this and you've got to report this, he says, a non-custodial decentralized software cannot plausibly perform centralized compliance functions.
	Do you think that she doesn't know that?
	She knows exactly what she's doing.
	He said it would be impossible for miners or for validators to perform Know Your Customer on every public blockchain transactor.
	So he said, and then in addition to that, they want to close the gap with respect to unhosted digital laws.
	In other words, this is, you don't have your money on with some exchange, but you have it on a wallet that you physically have and you can make, you can buy and sell transactions.
	You know, as we've talked about many times with Tony Ardeman, it's the on and off ramps where they monitor, you know, your money going into crypto or coming out of crypto.
	But once it's on your unhosted wallet, they don't really have any way to find that information.
	And so what she's going to say is, well, you've got to find a way to do it or we're going to make it illegal.
	And that's exactly what they're going to try to do.
	These rules will effectively ban crypto in America.
	They fundamentally undermine the core innovation itself.
	If you believe that humans should have the right to transact without an intermediary, you have to oppose this bill.
	This is a big fight, said the person.
	And of course, again, this is the same fight that is going to be there for cash.
	As one person said, are you going to let this dumb woman manipulate our price?
	Well, she is a banking shill.
	She pretends to oppose the big banks, and yet everything that she does helps them.
	And she's got some senators who are joining her as well.
	There are five... Democrats, the Democrat senators who have joined her, and John Hickenlooper, Raphael Warnick, Lafonza Butler, Chris Van Hollen, and Ben Ray Lujan backed her Digital Asset Anti-Money Laundering Act.
	So, maybe they should just...
	Call themselves Dems.
	Democrats who are enemies of money.
	For the Democrats, I guess.
	But I think that this is all tied as well to the rapid expansion of the IRS. Because they're going to have to go around and do a lot of investigations.
	They're going to add artificial intelligence.
	They're going to add an army of law enforcement officers to try to ferret out this stuff.
	It's going to be very difficult, I think, for people to push back on this if they can't get any political allies to push back on it.
	Additional staffing at the IRS is already...
	Led to 53% more prosecutions.
	And surprisingly, and of course, you know, they've got 53% more prosecutions.
	They win 90 plus percent of these things.
	And so they're going to increase, if they go with a lower level that the Republicans want to do, they'll increase the size of the IRS by a factor of five.
	They said 75% of tax fraud is committed mainly by individuals in the middle income range.
	That's the IRS talking. Remember how they said they're just going to get this army of IRS people because they've got to come after the very, very wealthy?
	You know, the very, very wealthy who have their tax shelters and their lawyers and all the rest of this?
	No, they're coming for us. They're coming for the middle class because that's where all the money is.
	As we've heard people say over and over throughout the years.
	None of this, they play this class warfare envy game that But if they took all the money from the rich, they're still not going to get as much as they can get from the soft underbelly of the middle class.
	It's the same reason that they confiscate the cars with civil asset forfeiture in Detroit.
	They're looking for cars that are right around $1,000.
	And they say, well, if you want to fight it, it's going to cost you $900 to fight it.
	And they say, well, it doesn't make any sense for me to fight it.
	And so they can confiscate as many cars as they want around that price range, and they know that the people don't have the money to fight them.
	And that's what they're doing with the middle class.
	They know the middle class doesn't have the lawyers and the income to fight them.
	And so they're ramping this up.
	They said that they get a 90.6% conviction rate.
	Well, why wouldn't they? There is no presumption of innocence.
	There is no due process.
	They accuse you.
	You go to their court where, again, you have no presumption of innocence and you have no due process.
	The IRS was seminal in creating this system where we're ruled by a bureaucracy.
	It's not just medical martial law.
	It's bureaucratic martial law, which is what it's turning into.
	They write the rules.
	They have the people who accuse you of violating the rules.
	They can assess the fines.
	There is no presumption of innocence, and there's no protection against excessive fines.
	That's what we have. And they've just tripled the fees for people who don't pay enough taxes in advance.
	Why? Well, because they can.
	Because there's no restrictions on it.
	Who are the Republicans in all this?
	Nothing being done about any of these vital existential issues.
	Again, you need to try to prepare to get out of this system.
	It's incredibly corrupt.
	This empire is collapsing.
	Their financial underpinnings are collapsing, and it's going to get really ugly.
	So you need to have something that's going to operate outside of their system.
	And now is the time to get outside of their system.
	If you want to go into gold or silver, davidknight.gold will take you to Tony Arterman, a great guy.
	You can trust him. I've worked with him for years.
	We're going to take a quick break, and we will be right back.
	Tell Alexa to add the APS Radio skill and have access to the best channels anywhere.
	From country to blues, classic hits to news, APS Radio curates incredibly diverse playlists for you to enjoy.
	Get details at APSRadio.com.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	All right, let's talk a little bit about politics here.
	And as we were just talking about money, I think it's very interesting to look at what has happened with Javier Malay, who was just sworn in as Argentina's president.
	Central to his campaign was economics, where they are running nearly 150% inflation rate.
	The central bank is completely corrupt and ineffective.
	And so he campaigned on getting rid of that.
	As a temporary measure to pin their currency to the U.S. currency, he said all central banks are corrupt, but this is the worst one.
	We're going to get rid of the one in Argentina.
	He also, very bombastic, very theatrical, a populist, a libertarian.
	A lot of labels have been, I don't know if he's a populist or a libertarian.
	That's why we're going to take a look at some of his policies here.
	He wasted no time in getting to work in terms of cutting taxes and cutting some bureaucracies.
	And so that part of it is good, but there's still a lot of questions as to what he's going to do.
	Remember when he was running for office, he had a magnetic board and he had written the names of various departments.
	And it was in Spanish, but, you know, he'd read out the name of the department and he'd grab it and goes, out, gone, you know, and he'd rip it off the board and throw it, you know.
	He's done a little bit of that as he got in.
	Maybe there's questions about really whether that is what he's done or is he rearranging The deck chairs on the Titanic, or maybe even playing musical chairs.
	He has, as he was campaigning, he not only campaigned with a chainsaw, but also with a Gadsden flag, Revolutionary War.
	He talked about the American founders.
	He was an Austrian economics student and named his dogs after...
	Economists like Milton Friedman and others.
	He also then said that in terms of war, some red flags with this, because even though Argentina's not really involved in this, why does he have to pull this in?
	What audience is he playing to internally?
	I don't think he is.
	I think he's playing to some global audiences.
	He said he plans to convert to Judaism.
	He says he's going to move the Argentine embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
	He has shown support for Ukraine, for Zelensky.
	So is he playing to the United States?
	Is he playing to the globalist agenda in all of this?
	He used his inauguration to bring in a lot of foreign diplomats, and he brought in Zelensky.
	This guy, by the way, Zelensky, is that really a big draw?
	This guy will show up anywhere.
	He's become like a clown.
	He's even going to go to Congress and beg for money.
	And Mike Johnson, the Speaker of the House, who said he was against more funding for Ukraine, is going to be meeting with Zelensky.
	I guess that'll make it convenient for him to say, well, I just changed my office.
	Or my attitude.
	I was reading this headline here.
	He cut nine government offices on the first day, according to Breitbart.
	Dramatically rearranging the federal executive branch, reducing the number of cabinet-level ministries from 18 to 9.
	Except if you look at this, this is not really like getting rid of the Department of Energy or the Department of Education or something like that.
	What he's doing is all of these functions are going to continue.
	What he's doing is he's getting rid of some of the upper-level management.
	But he's taking the basic functions and all the rest of the stuff and putting them under another ministry.
	And some other ones that were not elevated to cabinet level.
	He is elevating to cabinet level.
	He put the general ministry into the hands of his sister.
	In his sister's hands.
	That required...
	Getting around the law that prohibits that kind of nepotism, pointing family members to top positions.
	How did he get around that law so quickly?
	Well, he signed an executive order.
	Hmm, this is not looking too good.
	At first, oh, he got rid of nine agencies, and yet it's just window dressing because the functions remain.
	It's like saying, well, I'm going to get rid of the Department of Education, but we're going to take all that and we're going to put it under the Health and Human Services.
	Right? HHS. It's just musical chairs.
	And then it's nepotism.
	And it's executive orders.
	So rather than it looking like he is keeping his promises, which is what the mainstream alternative press is saying, I think exactly the opposite is true.
	He, as a matter of fact, Blue Apples wrote on Twitter, said, Understand, these people are politicians.
	Trusting any politician of any persuasion weaves a doomed destiny into the tapestry of a nation's fate.
	The most recent poster boy of the hopelessly naive, if not outright false belief that a populist hero will emerge from the corruption of the establishment to dismantle it.
	The most recent poster child of that is a newly elected Argentine president.
	Exhibiting charisma, Malai was able to rampantly ascend from humble political origins.
	He echoes the tenor of Donald Trump from 2016.
	And if you remember, in 2016, what was Trump saying?
	He was going to be the outsider?
	He's going to be the guy with no political experience, just like Javier Malay?
	He's going to shake up this corrupt cronyism and everything?
	What is the first thing that Malay does?
	He appoints his sister, and he has to overthrow the law with an executive order to do it.
	Trump is going to shake up the whole system, as Zach Montanaro said on Twitter.
	He said, if you remember, pre-election...
	Trump was saying that he was going to prosecute Hillary Clinton.
	Trump, after the election, said, I don't want to hurt the Clintons.
	Said, beautiful Hillary was a friend, and he had a lot of respect for her.
	He didn't drain the swamp then.
	He's not going to do it now.
	That's the reality.
	That's why we're talking about Javier Malay.
	It's maybe easier to see it when you're not...
	Emotionally invested. And somebody likes that.
	People are so emotionally invested in Trump.
	How they've invested time, money, votes into this guy.
	But again, remember what he said before the election.
	And here's a reminder of what he said about Hillary.
	The Clintons are criminals.
	2016. Remember that. They're criminals.
	I am going to instruct my Attorney General to get a special prosecutor to look into your situation.
	Said that to her face in the debate.
	Honestly, she should be locked up.
	She has to go to jail.
	Ending this criminal government corruption is one of the most important reasons you have to go out on November 8th.
	CNN projects, Donald Trump wins the presidency.
	Two weeks later. The president-elect will not pursue any investigations into Hillary Clinton.
	They're good people. I don't want to hurt them.
	Quote, I don't want to hurt the Clintons.
	I really don't. She went through a lot and suffered greatly.
	He doesn't wish to pursue these charges.
	If Donald Trump can help her heal, then perhaps that's a good thing.
	He needs to heal the rule of law, and he needs to forget about healing Hillary Clinton.
	What would be at odds with the promises to drain the swamp that President-elect Trump made, promises which helped him win office?
	No, it's okay. No, they got it.
	That plays great before the election.
	No, we don't care, right?
	I was very honored, very, very honored, when I heard that President Bill Clinton and Secretary Hillary Clinton was coming today.
	And I'd like you to stand up.
	I have a lot of respect for those two people.
	We all want the same thing.
	We're all good people. We call her beautiful Hillary now because, you know, someone's over with.
	Yeah, that's put together by the Ron DeSantis campaign.
	Bullseye. You nailed him.
	You showed exactly what he was about.
	Oh, that was before the election.
	This is after the election. That's the thing about Trump.
	Who is it? The comedian.
	Oh. He's very frank, and he is the black comedian who has got everybody hating.
	Dave Chappelle. Dave Chappelle.
	Okay. He says, you know, the thing about Trump is he comes out and he tells you all those people in there, they're criminals.
	And you're like, oh, great.
	He's blowing the whistle on all these people.
	And he goes back in and he joins them.
	That's exactly what he did with this election, you understand?
	Yeah, they're evil people.
	They've got to go to jail. She's really got to go to jail.
	He tells her face-to-face in the debates, I'm going to come after you.
	I'm going to prosecute you. And then when it's all done, they show up to his inauguration.
	I wonder if he paid her to be there.
	He said he paid Hillary Clinton to go to his daughter's wedding.
	People said, you've been sending her money.
	You've been supporting her.
	There in New York, you're a New York Democrat.
	You've been a New York Democrat until you reimagined yourself as a A conservative Republican, a gun-loving Republican, and all the rest of the stuff.
	And, of course, he doesn't love guns.
	He set a precedent of gun control by executive order.
	But, you know, they said, you've always been heavily involved with the Clintons.
	So you attended your daughter's wedding?
	Oh, I paid her to be there.
	Did he pay her to come to his inauguration?
	Like the political climate that fostered support for Trump's election in 2016, Argentina finds itself in a similar state of upheaval.
	While the premise of handing the presidency off to an establishment figure representing the insular political class in Hillary Clinton was a catalyst for popular support for a fringe candidate in 2016, the backdrop that set the stage for Malaya's election was an economic climate in Argentina.
	It was more disastrous than any that's been seen in generations.
	Nearly 150% inflation.
	So that was the hook for Malai.
	The hook for Trump was, I'm an outsider.
	I'm against these insiders.
	I know Hillary. She's corrupt.
	Vote for me. And then after he became president, he really doubled down on the anti-global.
	So he's no longer anti-Hillary, right?
	Now is beautiful Hillary.
	Then after he gets elected, he pretends that he is Mr.
	Anti-Globalism, and yet he does everything the globalists want.
	Let me tell you, when he gets in a second time, he's going to want to impress the left so much that the establishment is going to write good things about him and remember him.
	And of course that won't happen.
	But he wants to believe that.
	The same reason he keeps giving Maggie Halberman at the New York Times exclusive access to him.
	I think it's the New York Times that she writes for, not the Washington Post.
	But he keeps giving her access.
	And Trump's supporters and the mainstream alternative media will say...
	Stop doing that. You know that she's going to stick the knife in your back.
	Why do you keep giving her access?
	Give us access to you, right?
	Because they're all about access. And yet he does it because it is so important to him.
	He thinks that he's going to get a good write-up from her.
	And he keeps thinking it. No matter what happens, he keeps thinking she's going to come around.
	And he's going to do that as president.
	Anyway, the Biden administration will have a lot of comfort in the fact that Malai intends to remain a part of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change.
	And he actually sent his diplomat there on the day that he was being installed there as president in Argentina.
	He sent a diplomat.
	Marsha Lavaji, who assured the UN at COP28 climate summit in Dubai, said Malai is a liberal, he's a libertarian, he believes in market forces and the market demands to include measures to address climate change.
	Now, how do you define the market?
	Is this what people are wanting to buy in terms of electric vehicles?
	Are we all saying, I have to have an electric vehicle because of all this CO2 out there?
	No, it's not coming from the people.
	This is all coming from, this is top-down.
	This is coerced, it's forced, it's blackmailed, it's a gun to our head.
	This is saying, well, to say that this is a market, demand.
	It's as cynical as saying, well, I'm not forcing anybody to get a vaccine.
	I'm just saying that if you don't get a vaccine, you're not going to go to school, you're not going to travel, you're not going to have a job, you're going to be kicked out of society.
	I'm not forcing you to get a vaccine.
	And if you say that all of this climate nonsense is market-driven, that's just as cynical.
	The Malai administration intends to keep its commitment to reach net zero emissions by 2050.
	Nothing is changing there.
	So nothing is changing there.
	Nothing is changing in terms of the wars abroad.
	And he's got the full support of the IMF because, again, you could have explained that away at the beginning by saying, well, the IMF is worried about getting any money out of this basket case economy.
	So maybe they're looking for somebody who's going to have radical economic change.
	But it seems like all the globalist organizations are aligning behind him, and he's aligning with them.
	While Argentina is poised to undergo a seismic shift in its domestic policy, the tenets of Malay's early foreign policy framework demonstrate a contradiction to his previous steadfast rejection of globalism.
	And so if we're going to look at Javier Malay, we're going to say, well...
	Is he just saying that to get elected, just like Trump said things to get elected?
	Are we going to judge him by his policies and what he does, or by what he said as a candidate?
	Are we going to judge Trump by his policies of what he's already done in four years?
	Are we going to judge him by his campaign promises?
	You know, when he ran in 2016, nobody knew what he was going to do.
	He had never held political office before.
	We had a lot of indications that he was a New York Democrat, allied with Hillary Clinton.
	It's just a phony Hegelian operation.
	All of these elections are.
	So as the earliest of developments in his newly inaugurated presidency are counterintuitively playing to the global establishment.
	Do you think he's playing 4D chess?
	Is that really what's going on here?
	Yeah, as Alex would always say about Trump.
	Well, Joe Biden's got to solve an electoral math problem In order to get elected, says CNN. Do you think that Joe Biden can do math still?
	I think he knows that 2 plus 2 equals 5.
	I think he knows how to force things on people.
	But again, this is CNN saying that, as I said earlier in the program, these people have already elected Trump in their minds and in their media.
	You know, he won the Republican primary a long time ago, according to these people, even though we're still a month or so away from the first primaries in Iowa.
	They say, well, look at this.
	We've got polls that say that Trump is at 51% in Iowa.
	You see, they've always used polls to influence people.
	They call them push polls. You can push this kind of stuff out there and people say, well, I don't know, you know.
	They keep saying that Nikki Haley's got all this momentum.
	I really never thought.
	But maybe I'm missing something.
	If everybody else thinks that Nikki Haley is great, maybe Nikki Haley is great.
	And not only that, but I want to back the winning person, you know.
	It's like backing the winning horse or the winning team somewhere.
	I want to be on the winning side.
	I don't want to get behind this guy who looks, who they tell me is losing.
	How do they know he's losing? Do you trust any of these polls?
	These are the same people who consistently miss in the polling when it comes to the election.
	And again, maybe the polls are right.
	Maybe the elections are wrong.
	Or if the elections are honest, maybe the polls are completely wrong.
	And maybe what we ought to do is maybe we ought to use the same standard of measurement that the State Department does when they say, if you want to know if a foreign election is rigged, you look at the exit polls, and if they vary more than 5% from the reported results, Somebody's manipulating something here.
	That's what our State Department does in foreign elections.
	But we don't do that here. We have exit pollings and they'll tell you everything about every issue and about every demographic group.
	It's like, look, you know, the left-handed white men all voted for this particular candidate.
	They'll tell you all that kind of stuff in great detail, but they will never tell you the exit polls in such and such an area or in such and such a state.
	The exit polls chose overall They picked Trump or Biden or whatever, but they'll never tell you that because they don't want you looking at the exit polls versus the reported votes.
	So don't get vested in these elections, but do understand how they're going to come after you and how this is going to play out.
	Georgia plus Michigan plus one more equals a Trump and this is CNN. And of course, the conservatives After Trump wins, if he does win, the conservatives will just stand by and let him run the table for Davos, just like Alex and company did in saying it was 40 chess in 2020.
	These people, you know, as I said yesterday, David Icke calls them the MAMs, the mainstream alternative media.
	He said, that's what's behind all this Pageantry with Musk and with Tucker Carlson and with Alex Jones.
	They're establishing a mainstream alternative media.
	This is the Hegelian operation, right?
	So we're growing up an opposition media to CNN, New York Times, and Washington Post and stuff like that.
	The left-right Hegelian dialectic that they're setting up here.
	And the mainstream alternative media will go so far, but no further.
	And they will not criticize Trump.
	Why? Well, because it's not good business for them, first of all.
	But because it also is, in a sense, he didn't call it Mockingbird Press, but I think a better term for it, the mainstream alternative media.
	Even though I liked, as a group, you can call them the mammies.
	They're like house slaves.
	But, you know, it's, I think, a better term for them than MAM, I think, is the neo-mockingbirds.
	Because they're only being run by the CIA. And maybe instead of mockingbird, You call it MAGA birds.
	That's Operation MAGA bird.
	That's maybe too many hops in terms of derivation there for people to get it.
	But Jack Smith is going to be using Trump's phone data at a trial.
	Is this going to be the Perry Mason moment?
	Where he says, I didn't do this, I didn't do that.
	Well, I happen to have your phone information here.
	It happened with Alex.
	He said, I gave you all the information.
	No, you didn't. Here's some of the stuff we requested that we found on your phone because your lawyer sent it to us.
	So they're now asking as well the Supreme Court to decide before they get into this trial whether or not the president is immune from prosecution.
	They asked yesterday, Jack Smith asked the Supreme Court to quickly rule on Trump's claim that he is immune from prosecution because this is something that happened while he was president.
	And the Supreme Court said they will expedite consideration of this request.
	And Trump's team has got until December 20th to respond.
	I mean, we're talking about only 10 days or so.
	The judge, Chutkin, who's got the case, said that she rejects the idea that Trump's lawyers have claimed that he has absolute immunity because it was based on actions that he took while he was in office.
	This case presents a fundamental question at the heart of our democracy, whether a former president is absolutely immune from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office.
	That's their statement that they want answered.
	And it's also going to be an issue because if this trial gets put off until after the 2024 election, and if Trump were to win again, then he'll simply have all the stuff dismissed.
	And that is basically what they're looking at.
	When you look at the people who really were exploited, ripped off, and now sent to jail, you know, many of them very angry.
	You know, you saw the clip of Roger Stone.
	He had the documentary group following him around.
	And he just could not contain his anger as he was speaking on the phone and talking about what he would do to Trump if Trump were to win again.
	But now, you know, big sycophant for Trump.
	Why? Well, because Trump is his hope.
	You know, he's got a, and same thing with the Proud Boys.
	You know, very few people who got thrown under the bus and ripped off, jailed, and all the rest of the stuff.
	Very few of those people actually come out critical of Trump.
	Because he's now their ticket out of jail.
	Their only ticket out of jail.
	A Trump presidency where they hope that he's going to show some loyalty to his people.
	Well, keep hoping, quite frankly.
	And then there's this back and forth about the, you know, the left is saying he's going to be a dictator.
	And so then he gets on with Sean Hannity.
	And Sean Hannity says, are you going to be a dictator?
	And he says, well, I'll do it for a day.
	That's all I need to do it for. And so then now the left picks that up.
	And now everybody's doing this thing back and forth as a dictator for a day.
	You realize he was a dictator from March until November when the election was and then on?
	The medical martial law?
	That's why I oppose Trump so strongly.
	That's why I got fired, because I oppose that.
	He was a dictator that entire time.
	What are you talking about? He turned over our government to a bunch of bureaucrats, medical martial law.
	What's the point of even having an election when these people who are given the power to run roughshod over us, given the money to run roughshod over us, if we don't have, if we're going to have rules without representation, Regulation without representation.
	Things under color of law without any representation.
	What's the point of having an election?
	None. He's already been dictator.
	What's all this back and forth about?
	Why is the left giving him a free pass on all this stuff?
	And why is, more importantly, why are the conservatives?
	And that's the thing that really concerns me about a second Trump term and why I've been opposing this for the longest time.
	I remember right after this stuff ended, after January the 6th, and even, you know, after...
	After Biden is installed and all the rest of stuff, people angry at me because I was criticizing Trump.
	It's like, shut up! He's not president anymore.
	Leave him alone. You've got derangement syndrome.
	I said, no, he's not. He's not done yet.
	He's going to run again. And his second term is going to be much worse.
	Chris Christie says the second term of the Trump administration is likely to be staffed by, quote, deranged sycophants.
	Well, first of all, I'd have to say there's not any presidential staffs that are not Of any president, any party, they're all staffed by sycophants in the first place.
	But it isn't the staff that really control anything.
	It's the people who the president reports to.
	The true deep state.
	Certainly, you know, you could say that the derangement that is there, that is also a part of it, that is a permanent fixture, but I think it'll be especially true as Trump is coming in.
	But the key is not the people underneath him.
	him.
	The key is the people over him.
	And the fact that he was doing the same thing that every politician in every nation was doing throughout 2020, which is marching in lockstep behind the World Economic Forum, behind the rest of these people.
	And I'm telling you that it gets in the second time.
	He's going to march in lockstep with a climate MacGuffin.
	And there may be a, you know, some kind of a pandemic MacGuffin there as well.
	We'll be right back.
	Looking for better information?
	APSRadioNews.com features articles and commentary, along with audio from all the top news from around the world.
	APSRadioNews.com You're
	listening to The David Knight Show.
	Well, let's understand what the DNA or what the idea is coming in.
	And of course, DNA is, they're looking at this as the ultimate globalist idea.
	Wouldn't that be interesting? Instead of having to have something inserted under your skin, as I have talked about doing, What if it's your DNA, the ultimate global ID? And this is coming from Biometric Update, picked up by Technocracy News.
	Your DNA is beyond unique for every person, revealing all your genetic predispositions, all of your family connections.
	It cannot be altered and endures lifelong immutability.
	And so you can understand why these people are excited about it.
	You know, it's interesting because John Lennox, who is an Irish mathematician, I enjoy listening to him.
	He debates. He's a Christian apologist, which he's not apologizing for being Christian.
	He is explaining to people, debating people.
	He's debated Richard Dawkins and many other atheists.
	And he's a really brilliant person.
	And, of course, when he talks about DNA... He talks about it as being a code.
	And he says, if you stop and think about it, if you make this a word, he says it's really the longest word.
	And he says, in the very beginning, we are told, in the beginning was the word logos.
	And it is not just a word, but it is something that also embodies a purpose, a plan, all the rest of this.
	And in a sense, DNA is reflective of that defining logos, that defining intelligence.
	And Crick and Watson understood that when they discovered it.
	Well, we can't have come here by accident.
	It has to be planned.
	But, of course, we know there can't be the God of the Bible.
	So we're going to say that space aliens did this.
	And we'll call it panspermia.
	But biometric identification solutions are going to be an angle that they're going to play in this, I think.
	For citizens, proof of their own identity is going to be the key to state benefits, to education, to mobility, just as we saw with the rollout.
	But, of course, if you're illegal...
	Somebody that they want to have here, they will not ask you for ID. You'll be able to do anything that you wish without those restrictions.
	And so this is something that, again, you could say that it is immutable.
	But the question is, if they're going to give us DNA vaccines, if they're going to give us mRNA, and they're going to modify things like that, is it really immutable?
	Are these two different things going to work against each other?
	That's the question. And so, as they say, unlike fingerprints or eye scans or facial shapes, which change over time, the DNA does not change, but it can be modified, and that's what they were working on.
	So, as we continue to look at it, the key thing to understand is that DNA identification is far more precise than other biometric methods.
	And they're always looking at a way to mark us, to corral us, to track us, which truly is amazing when you think about their obsession with all this.
	Carbon travel, for example.
	Soon you will be restricted by your personal carbon allowances.
	I estimate that your standard of living is going to be reduced by over 85%.
	90%, if you want meat or dairy, they're going to shut all of this stuff down.
	This will all be their methods of control.
	Before we run out of time here on Rockfin, Sergey, thank you very much for the tip.
	He says, David, I've got to say, always refreshing to hear your analysis.
	You're as real as it gets.
	Well, thank you. Tired of all my friends shilling for Trump and Alex?
	Me too. As a matter of fact, I said something, the comment that I made on Twitter the other day, and some person responds, I said, you know, I worked for him for 10 years, and I gotta say, whatever.
	And the first comment there was, sources?
	What are you talking about sources?
	I'm telling you what I saw there.
	Believe me or don't believe me.
	I am the source of this stuff as I saw it.
	I mean, all of you lived through all this stuff as well.
	You experienced firsthand what Trump did in 2020.
	Why are people supporting this?
	This is the amazing thing to me, as I pointed out.
	People who are, you know, even their handle on Twitter is no vaccines, and yet they shill for Trump.
	It wasn't Trump. It wasn't his fault.
	He was responsible for everything that happened.
	And if he was bamboozled, why do you think it isn't going to happen again?
	I don't think he was bamboozled.
	You know, that's the interesting thing.
	I don't think that Trump is stupid.
	The Trump supporters think he's stupid.
	Because the Trump supporters are stupid.
	If they haven't caught on to this trick yet, they are beyond hope, quite frankly.
	On Rockfan, thank you for the tip.
	Okay, you got me with a special take on the Nutcracker Suite.
	Heading to get mine today.
	Well, thank you very much. That is really nice to hear that.
	I appreciate that. And again, that's the album.
	You can find it on Bandcamp and under David Knight Project, but you can also find it at thedavidknightshow.com.
	Again, it is a digital download as the delivery that we have there.
	But as we're about to run out of time, I just want to say that just tell everybody that I really do appreciate all the support that you've given us.
	By the way, we still have some Black Friday sales on t-shirts, on tumblers, and I've got that clip here somewhere where I can show it to you.
	The... The t-shirts that we have are available at $16.99, Black Friday sale, as well as the tumblers.
	And that is a double-wall tumbler, a koozie tumbler.
	Simple mechanism on the lid, so it's very easy to clean.
	I like those tumblers a great deal.
	So those are all still available.
	We do have the shirts that are going out, and we're actually going to make available a design with the album cover on it.
	This is what the t-shirt design is going to look like.
	Just in case you need to have some more crazy Christmas t-shirts or sweaters.
	Of course, it's not a sweater, but it will be a black t-shirt that we'll put that design on.
	But I do appreciate the support that we've gotten from everybody.
	I haven't gone through in total things up.
	I've been... I'm busy with everything that's happening, but I'll get you a total tomorrow.
	We'll update the gas gauge just to let you know where we are.
	So I appreciate all of the support.
	And again, check out the album at TheDavidKnightShow.com and we'll talk to you tomorrow.
	Thank you very much. Looking for better information?
	APSRadioNews.com features articles and commentary, along with audio from all the top news from around the world.
	APSRadioNews.com Let me tell you, The David Knight Show, you can listen to with your ears.
	You can even watch it by using your eyes.
	In fact, if you can hear me, that means you're listening to The David Knight Show right now.
	Yeah, good job.
	Ha ha ha! And you want to know something else?

▲