Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 23, 2024 - The David Knight Show

03:01:31

The David Knight Show - 05/23/2024

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	you
	using free speech to free minds You're listening to The David Night Show.
	As the clock strikes 13, it's Thursday the 23rd of May, Year of Our Lord 2024.
	Well, today we're going to begin by taking a look at this thing that has set the media and social media on fire.
	That is the revelation that there was authorization for the use of deadly force in the Mar-a-Lago raid.
	Let me tell you, the real issue is the FBI. And whether or not we're going to alter or abolish this bureaucracy that has become destructive of our God-given rights, as the Declaration of Independence says.
	And so we've got a lot of people weighing in on it, but it's very instructive about both the media and politicians, both left and right.
	We're also going to take a look at movies.
	We've got several movies that have direct bearing on some of the things that are happening to us politically.
	From 1917, 1933, 2013.
	From politics to artificial intelligence.
	Well, what do they tell us?
	And it's not their predictive programming either.
	We'll be right back. Music Well, there has been no serious debate of real issues that concern us.
	And there will be no debate of those issues.
	Instead, what we're going to have is cartoonish accusations going back and forth, left and right.
	Let's begin with this, from the Hill.
	Trump's latest flirtation with Nazi symbolism draws criticism.
	This has been popping around for a couple of days now.
	And what they're saying is that somebody had done an amateur fan video on Truth Social, and it was retweeted by the Trump account on Truth Social.
	The Trump people, after they got this criticism about Nazi symbolism, they said, well, it happened while Trump was in trial.
	It wasn't him. It was a staffer.
	Made a mistake. We've taken it down.
	But there was actually nothing there.
	Nothing there at all.
	This is the way The Hill reports it.
	Trump has once again stoked outrage for his flirtation with Nazi rhetoric.
	True social account that put up this video that had the phrase in it, Unified Reich.
	Look, number one, this is a template.
	It's not even a good template.
	These are just random things, and if you look at the stuff, none of it makes any sense.
	By the way, when I looked at that ad, it's like, Reich, where is it?
	Well, it wasn't up there, you know, there wasn't anything, you know, with Trump text or anything him saying, you know, we need to have a unified Reich, Sieg Heil.
	It wasn't anything like that, that obvious.
	I thought, well, let me look at this the second time, you know, and maybe there's something more subtle.
	I couldn't see it.
	And then I looked and somebody had done a freeze frame and circled it in red and you could barely see it then.
	It's just flying by and they had this on a template and it's just a bunch of garbage.
	And this is total garbage.
	Why don't they call it out for total garbage?
	They won't even debate that.
	Let alone the existential issues that are killing our country.
	The video drew swift condemnation from the Biden campaign which spent the day on the attack.
	Yeah, they did. Trump is leading Biden in polls in several key battleground states, but, says the Hill, these self-created controversies sparked by his rhetoric could be cause for concern for his campaign.
	And this is one case.
	I mean, he does open his mouth and stick his foot in it over and over again.
	This is not the situation with this.
	It's a totally made-up situation.
	Every time Trump goes there, it's a giant gift to the Biden campaign, said a veteran of multiple Republican campaigns, Alex Conant.
	He said they want this election to be about Trump.
	They want to portray Trump as far outside the mainstream, and when Trump gives them fodder, they're going to take advantage.
	Look, I oppose Trump.
	You know that. And too much for my own good, actually.
	Because I hate what he did with the medical martial law.
	I hate what he did in terms of poisoning people.
	I hate his gun control by executive order.
	Many, many other real issues.
	You know, I have so many people say, I don't like, I really agree with you on the issues, but I hate the fact that you criticize Trump.
	It's like, do you notice that I criticize Trump on the issues?
	So, if you agree with me on the issues, but it's more important to agree with Trump, And to focus on the issues.
	You're the problem. I'm not going to tailor this show to your idol worship that's going on.
	This kind of rhetoric is unsurprising.
	Coming from the former president, it is appalling.
	And our freedom and our very democracy are at stake, said Vice President Lala.
	This was not a campaign video.
	It was created by a random account online, reposted by a junior staffer who clearly did not see the word.
	I couldn't see it even when I was looking for it.
	While the president was in court.
	It's very amateurish.
	Like I said, it's a template. I couldn't find it even when I was looking for it.
	But again, Trump also had his own fake outrage.
	And it got a lot of attention on the right.
	See, both of these guys are scaring people about how the other guy is an authoritarian dictator.
	And you know why that lands and has credibility with the people on both sides of this?
	Because we all know that Biden and Trump are both authoritarian dictators.
	They both supported medical martial law.
	They both killed people.
	They both want to do whatever is in their advantage and they don't care a whit about the Constitution.
	That's why these charges stick.
	Because they really are authoritarian dictators who don't care at all about the rule of law.
	They'll use lawfare, but they won't be ruled by the law.
	They will try to rule us with executive orders.
	They are both dictators.
	That's why this game is being played.
	And the only reason people, you know, the only reason they're there is because they're partisan supporters.
	Oh, my guy's not a dictator, but that other guy certainly is.
	They can see and admit the fault in their...
	Partisan opposite, but not in their own guy.
	It is pathetic, the blindness that's there.
	But they're both that way.
	That's why it rings true. So, on Trump's side, that was Biden's fantasy there of authoritarian dictatorship.
	On the Trump side...
	We'll start with the Babylon Bee version of it.
	The Department of Justice authorizes deadly force for postal workers to use on Trump when delivering his mail.
	Because it was all about the fact that there was a document released by this pro-Trump judge over the document case in Florida.
	And she released this and it showed on the document that it authorized use of force.
	Deadly force.
	Is that something that's different?
	Or is it boilerplate?
	Unsealed documents from the Department of Justice reveal that postal workers were formally authorized to use deadly force while delivering mail to Mar-a-Lago.
	Attorney General Merrick Garland confirmed, This is standard procedure.
	We're in no way secretly targeting Trump.
	We are merely authorizing mail carriers to fire on Donald Trump if he shows up to collect his mail.
	This is for the safety of our postal workers, and it is nothing out of the ordinary.
	And there's so much truth in all of that.
	You know, they always kind of fit the little aspects of that in there.
	And so we see that Breitbart and WND and every one of these alt-right media things are just outraged.
	The federal agents were authorized to use deadly force at Mar-a-Lago when seizing the documents.
	Look, I said from the very beginning it was an outrageous rage.
	First of all, there's no reason for them to be there.
	Secondly, they could have done this By just saying, you know, we're going to come to pick up the paperwork and all this sort of thing.
	They did it as a staged raid.
	All of this stuff is staged.
	And it is...
	But I said from the very beginning, as outraged as the right was, that Mar-a-Lago...
	Sacred, expensive, Mar-a-Lago.
	Was raided.
	Do you care about all the no-knock SWAT raids that are happening everywhere?
	Do you care about them throwing flashbangs into baby's grenades?
	Do you care about them shooting into houses?
	Where suspects are?
	Do you care about any of that stuff?
	Do you want to pull back any of that stuff?
	Or you only care about this just because it's Trump?
	They didn't come in with guns blazing like they do for the rest of us.
	The rest of us, we get the raid from Brazil.
	Terry Gilliam's film.
	That's what we get. But not Trump, right?
	Again, there's no reason for that raid to start with.
	And the raid was about lawfare.
	But it certainly wasn't the same standard that they give to us in terms of deadly force.
	And now they've got this written down.
	We'll talk about why that's there.
	Nobody cares about any of this stuff.
	People being killed, they only care about Trump.
	Breitbart says FBI agents were authorized to use deadly force if necessary during the raid of Mar-a-Lago when seizing suspected classified documents according to court filings recently unsealed by Judge Eileen Cannon in the Trump documents case in Florida.
	They should call her Eileen Trump.
	Eileen to Trump.
	Anyway, the authorization of deadly force prompted shock and outrage from Trump and his supporters.
	Trump posted on Truth Social.
	He said, this illegal non-constitutional raid of Mar-a-Lago, all uppercase, authorized the FBI to use deadly lethal force.
	Now we know for sure that Joe Biden is a serious threat to democracy.
	He's just like Lala, isn't he?
	Yeah, he is. He's just like Lala.
	There we go. This is the Brazil raid.
	This is what the rest of us get.
	But, you know, for Trump, it's like, I'm sorry, you need to turn off these cameras that you've got everywhere.
	How dare them?
	I am outraged here.
	Yeah. This is 1984 when this was really over the top.
	Today it's pretty much standard operating procedure of the police state, unfortunately.
	So the FBI issued a statement arguing that they followed standard protocol, standard policy statement that limiting, they said, limiting the use of deadly force.
	No, it doesn't. It enables the use of deadly force.
	Again, the FBI, you should spell it F-I-B, fib, the lying bureaucracy.
	There was no departure from the norm on this matter.
	However, Dan Bongino milked it for all it's worth.
	Dan Bongino milked this as bad as Trump did.
	And so he spent his show evidently yesterday talking about this.
	He argued the idea that this is a standard procedure, he said, is BS, Bolshevik.
	Except to use the other words.
	It's absolutely a big deal.
	He said, don't buy this Bolshevik otherwise.
	It was not a standard op.
	The Mar-a-Lago raid was unprecedented action with significant potential for confusion and blue-on-blue issues.
	What does that mean? You could have cops shooting each other.
	You could have the FBI shooting the Secret Service or vice versa.
	This is a very dangerous situation.
	And it is. But... Do we only care about blue lives?
	Is it only blue lives that matter?
	We don't care when they attack a middle class family or poor family and they, you know, throw grenades and shoot guns into the house.
	We don't care about that kind of stuff.
	It's only if it's blue on blue.
	Are you kidding me?
	Come on, Dan. Get real.
	He says it involved competing equities between federal agencies, the FBI and the U.S. Secret Service, with equal statutory claims to interrupt the other's activities.
	Anybody telling you otherwise is either dumb or playing dumb.
	I've done more de-confliction with the Russians in a foreign op than I did for the U.S. Secret Service than the FBI did in their search warrant at Mar-a-Lago, because they did none.
	In the same way, we can say that, and it is true, It is a true factoid that Ruby Ridge, the government, the FBI, so forth, spent more time, more money on surveillance than they did before they raided, what was it that Reagan had, was it, it was the Caribbean nation that he raided.
	Travis is like, I don't know, that's decades before he was born.
	Grenada. Was it Grenada?
	I don't know. Anyway, I'm an American.
	I don't know any geography here.
	Bottom line is, they spent more time on this backwoods family, reconnaissance and watching them, than they cared about with this raid.
	Now, that's a factoid.
	You can look it up and disagree with that if you want.
	Bottom line is, they just shoot from the hip.
	That's the bottom line.
	And, you know, this is unique because the Secret Service was involved.
	Unfortunately, the rest of us don't have Secret Service protection.
	What we need is protection from the FBI. And he ignores that.
	He's a symptom of the big problem.
	Nothing matters except Donald Trump.
	Why is it that nothing matters except Donald Trump?
	Well, because he's all about the fame and the fortune, isn't he?
	And then we got the politicians who piled on.
	Marjorie Taylor Greene called the authorization of deadly force, grounds for impeachment of Christopher Wray and of Garland.
	And then she slammed Mike Johnson for funding the Justice Department of the FBI as well as a new FBI building.
	Yeah, she should slam them.
	They do much worse than this all the time to the general public.
	Then you got Jim Banks, Republican of Indiana.
	Running for U.S. Senate.
	He called Biden a threat to democracy.
	There we go. There's that phrase again.
	Everybody is a threat to democracy.
	That'd be a threat to democracy just for criticizing these two guys.
	Because they're both threats to democracy.
	They're both threats, more importantly, to our republic and to our constitution and our God-given rights.
	That's what they're really a threat to.
	I don't really have much interest in democracy, frankly.
	Josh Hawley, his response was, let's put on a show.
	Let's have a hearing and we can get Garland in there and we can get some ratings and I can get my face on TV. And then CNN says, look at this email that Trump sent out.
	This email will shock you, but it's just Trump trying to raise money.
	They said it has an arresting subject line on the email.
	Quote, they were authorized to shoot me.
	Come on, Trump.
	Are you going to do occasional cortex?
	AOC after January the 6th?
	I died! He's just as bad as AOC. I died.
	I nearly escaped death.
	He nearly escaped death.
	He meant to say narrowly, right?
	This is his email.
	I'm quoting it. I nearly escaped death.
	That means that he died. Maybe he's a specter now.
	Maybe they've got a Ouija board in Mar-a-Lago talking to them.
	Yeah, you've got a near-death experience here.
	I nearly escaped death instead of nearly escaped death.
	Biden's DOJ was locked and loaded for deadly force at Mar-a-Lago.
	The melodramatics and the lies.
	I mean, sensationalism.
	He says, everyone should know.
	It says CNN, it was just Trump asking again for money.
	And doing nothing and not suggesting that anything should be done about the rogue, unconstitutional FBI that is a threat to the rest of us.
	He doesn't say anything about reforming the FBI. He doesn't say anything about altering or preferably abolishing them.
	Steve Friend, who I have interviewed about his book and about why he lost his job at the FBI, because he resisted this kind of stuff.
	And he has something to say about this as well.
	And he understands where the really big problem is.
	The big problem is not what happens to Trump and Biden.
	It's what happens to the other 330 million of us that nobody cares about because they're just milking this for the money.
	They make me sick. You know, Trump, Bongino, CNN is milking it for the money just like they're milking the, oh, he put in their consolidated, unified Third Reich or whatever.
	Again, just like that was a boilerplate template.
	This is a boilerplate template as well.
	The Justice Department said that, and Dan Bongino and the rest of these people scoff at that.
	Scoff at it. Then the rest of his email here.
	It says, on any given day, there will be likely at least one that is misleading.
	They said, so that was yesterday, that's Wednesday.
	On Tuesday...
	He put out a fundraising email.
	Trump did. I've made a final decision.
	What do you think of my VP choice?
	He didn't. He didn't announce the VP choice.
	He wants you to click on it.
	He wants you to click on it.
	Other subject lines are pushing merchandise.
	You have seen my mugshot?
	Well, I put it on a mug for you.
	And then he's even got sweepstakes where you can win a trip to Vegas or to London.
	Very much like what DeWine did with the Trump shot, the Trump poison.
	Get the shot and you get a chance of winning a million dollars.
	You also have a chance of being disabled for the rest of your life or dying.
	But, you know, you could win a million dollars if that's any consolation.
	If you enter this sweepstakes to go to Vegas or to London, all you have to do in this particular case is not put your life and your credibility and your ethics at risk.
	You just did $20.24.
	2024. Get it?
	Trump's allegations about the FBI documents were not just contained in fundraising emails.
	Again, he put it out on social media, which I already read that to you.
	Now, with all this phony stuff going back and forth, it was something that was also kind of interesting and real that happened.
	Really bizarre. ABC News reports that vials of blood were sent to the RNC's Washington, D.C. headquarters.
	Vials of blood.
	I wonder if they were talking if this is a reference to the vile, blood-destroying poison that Trump put out.
	I don't understand otherwise what that would be about.
	Vials of blood. Maybe it's a war protest.
	Maybe it's somebody who...
	Trump supports Israel on this, so maybe it's somebody doing it for that.
	I don't know why they sent blood to him.
	They have not come up with anything about it yet.
	Would it be injury or death from the clot shot that Trump put out there?
	He does have blood on his hands.
	He's got a lot of American blood, a lot of blood from around the world on his hands.
	And so that is one thing they could talk about.
	But again, you know, going back to Dan Bongino, it was not a standard procedure.
	It was brought up blue on blue issues.
	Well, I beg to differ.
	He went on to say, just remember, to unfollow the moron class after today, you'll save neuronal brain mass, and you'll be better off for it.
	The idiocracy took their masks off today, and I'm glad you all saw it.
	Thanks for listening. You know what?
	You want to talk about idiocracy, Dan?
	You're the idiot who took a jab.
	You're the person who sold yourself out, not just the rest of us.
	He said he was not going to be forced to take the jab.
	Was it Cumulus or whatever the big radio...
	Syndicate, one that he works for.
	Was demanding that all their employees get the jab.
	And he said, I'm not going to do it.
	And then he went silent. And he stayed on the air.
	Did they make an exception for him or whatever?
	And then he tearfully said, you know, I got the jab.
	I think he had some reactions to it or whatever.
	I don't take any satisfaction in the fact that he's harmed himself.
	But he sold out his principles.
	He was bought off for money.
	He would sell out his own life.
	And he did. So don't call those of us who question your lies, Dan.
	Don't call us.
	When did he call us? The moron class.
	You know, so he thinks I'm part of the moron class?
	You're the moron who didn't have enough principles or common sense and took that vaccine.
	Why? Because you wanted the big bucks.
	Just amazing. See, that's the nice thing about having principles.
	Even if you're not smart enough to figure out something is bad, usually the principles will kick in and say, no, I can't do this.
	Sorry. Yeah, you can look at it from a pragmatic standpoint or from a principle standpoint, but he didn't look at either one of those.
	See, that's why I'm glad you instilled principles in me, because I need that sort of guideline.
	Well, thank you. It's...
	Yeah, if you want to unfollow Bongino, you probably ought to do that.
	He'll probably unfollow me on Rumble now since he owns that platform.
	He's not going to be happy with what I have to say if he even notices it.
	But look, here's somebody who actually did some research.
	A journalist. And boy, she was ratioed by the Trump people.
	Her name is Brianna Morello.
	She was somebody, and I said, who is this?
	I looked her up. She was fired from Fox.
	Because she wouldn't take the jab.
	See, Bongino took the jab and played along with it, because that's what was important to her.
	But Brianna Morello was fired because she had principles.
	Because she understood what was going on.
	Because she did, what should we call it?
	Oh, investigation.
	Which Dan Bongino can't be bothered with.
	He doesn't investigate what he puts in his body, let alone what he speaks out of his mouth.
	So, this is what she showed everybody.
	She said, take a look.
	This is the FBI form that everybody uses.
	And look at that. Okay, so that's page one.
	And then on page two, notice this.
	It says, coordinate instructions, and it talks about the FBI's deadly force policy.
	Oh, it is.
	It is a boilerplate.
	It is a pre-printed form.
	But if you say that, oh, you're against Trump.
	You gotta go.
	Wow. She makes it very clear, by the way, that she's not against Trump.
	She says she's against the raids.
	She thinks it was a crock and it was unnecessary and all the rest of the stuff.
	But look, sensational partisan lies don't help us.
	They undermine us.
	But it is the stock and trade of people like Dan Bongino and Alex Jones and the rest of these people.
	If you want to make, if your emphasis is on making money, if you want fame and fortune, well, you're going to get famous.
	If you scoop everybody else because you make up a lie.
	That's what they do. That's what Alex did with the sting.
	I scooped everybody. Look at Steve Pachinik, the CIA show, is telling everybody that arrests are already taking place two days after the election.
	Oh, that's great.
	I certainly hope that's true.
	They all wanted it to be true.
	And he scooped everybody.
	Nobody else was reporting that because it was an absolute lie.
	And then he had some followers on, repeated it.
	Also, lying shills.
	For who? For the intelligence agencies.
	So, you know, you unfollow those people.
	Seriously. It's ridiculous what's going on.
	And actually, David Icke chimed in yesterday, not on this particular issue.
	I mean, he can criticize Trump and he can criticize the sycophantic alt-right media.
	Because he's in the UK. He's got a big base of people in the UK, even if he loses his American audience.
	But he put this in to show just what a shill Joe Rogan is.
	And he said this. I'll play you the video, the clip that he put up.
	But his comment was, what a groupie looks like.
	One that has a $250 million contract from the system to, or, quote, challenge, unquote, the system.
	Talking about Joe Rogan. If it wasn't so tragic it would be hysterical. Has he ever done 30 seconds of research into his focus of worship or does he simply not care anyway? The quote-unquote alternative media.
	What a joke. And here's Joe Rogan.
	I know multiple guys that are billionaires.
	And they're very nice people.
	And I can see how it happens.
	But you're also friends with the cool billionaires.
	Yeah. You know? Like, you managed to find the cool ones.
	Well, Elon's the coolest. He's my favorite billionaire.
	That dude's wild.
	He's a wild boy.
	I will buy Teslas as long as they sell them.
	Just to support that dude.
	Just to keep Twitter going.
	And they're dope. But yeah, just to support him, man.
	You need an Elon Musk in this world.
	You need a wild boy.
	You need a dude who's got $200 billion who dunks on people.
	How great was watching him realize in real time how stupid Don Lemon is?
	Oh my god. You could actually see on his face as he's asking the questions.
	Well, there you go. Isn't that important?
	That's what a groupie looks like.
	These people sucking up to billionaires.
	Absolutely amazing.
	Well, as I mentioned earlier, Steve Friend, who is an FBI whistleblower, and he writes serious articles about how we alter or abolish the agency that he once worked for.
	He used to work as local law enforcement.
	He worked for the FBI. He refused to do one of these types of raids on some nonviolent January the 6th people.
	He said, look, people could get killed with this stuff.
	I'm not going to do that to these people.
	They didn't do anything wrong.
	And they fired him. And he became a whistleblower.
	And he's testified to Congress and everything.
	I've had him on the show.
	He said, first of all, I said, the only difference between a raid and a routine search warrant is whether or not you call CNN at a time.
	This, again, is standard operating procedure.
	If it's done to Trump, it's a raid!
	It was done to somebody else as a search warrant, they say, even if they kill somebody in the process, right?
	And then he said, he talked about how this is standard operating procedure as well.
	He knows it because he was in the FBI for years.
	Dan Bongino, law of Secret Service.
	Well, you weren't in the FBI, first of all, and you didn't look to see what was going on with it.
	And Steve Friend says, yeah, this was reckless because you got the Secret Service there.
	You could have these guys, both of them, doing their job and they could wind up opposing each other lethally.
	They said it was really stupid and it was unnecessary.
	But then Steve Friend looks at the bigger picture.
	The bigger picture that affects all of us.
	The FBI. That affects all of us.
	Here's what he had to say. All the hoopla about this quote-unquote assassination attempt or the death or the kill order from the FBI, this is a standard form that is in every single operations plan for the FBI that simply restates I can recite that verbatim because I've done it hundreds of
	times. And here's the thing to remember about use of force.
	It is always in effect.
	Whether or not you're on a search warrant, or doing surveillance, or walking from your car to the office, or at home on your private It's a use of forms continuum that every law enforcement agency has.
	The fight that it's having right now is the wrong fight.
	The fight is over paperwork.
	That if you were to actually look at the operations plan for Bob Menendez, the same form would be in there.
	And if there's an operation involving SWAT elements, then there would be a medics plan for that as well.
	There would be actually a medical evacuation plan, a route to the nearest hospital, a plan to land a helicopter.
	The discussion that needs to happen, that should have been happening, is that this is further evidence of the fact that this raid was wholly inappropriate.
	It was dangerous.
	The FBI sent their own personnel and jeopardized their safety and possibly endangered the We shouldn't be arguing over...
	The paperwork aspect of this, I know it's salacious.
	There are other aspects of this, though, that were wholly inappropriate that need to be fleshed out.
	But by getting into the weeds of this paperwork, there's going to be an argument now that the FBI needs to have a different use of force policy on a case-by-case basis.
	And that opens the door for further weaponization because a time will come, regardless of who is elected president this November, a time will come when the pharaoh who knows not Joseph is in charge and you think that calling the shots When they will send SWAT and they will send guys that are authorized to use deadly force to some scenarios and not others won't happen, that just continues to open the door to further opportunities for weaponization of the FBI. So I think that really this was wholly inappropriate.
	They went about this for political reasons.
	They wanted to make the process the punishment.
	I think that the best argument that you could have to disarm the FBI, this is Exhibit A. The FBI shouldn't actually have firearms.
	They should be forced to partner with local law enforcement officers who are cross-deputized to actually effect arrests.
	So therefore, the sheriff in town can say, I'm not down to clown.
	I'm not sending my SWAT officers over there to go and execute this arrest.
	And beyond that, why don't we even question the hostage rescue team, the most elite SWAT team that the FBI has that executed this search warrant?
	Why is that team leader sending his people in harm's way?
	Why didn't he look at this and say, the subject of our investigation isn't even there, and we know that.
	This is a misappropriation and use of our assets, and he should have actually had the backbone to say, I'm not doing it.
	But he didn't because he just followed orders like too many people are in the FBI. They are not following their oath of office.
	They're not following their training.
	They're content to keep their heads down, to collect their pensions and their paychecks, and the American people are suffering as a result of it.
	Well said. Well said.
	And he says, look, this is a politicized thing where the process is the punishment, right?
	That's what we see in the trial in New York.
	Let's drag Trump in here and we'll go through all the salacious details of his relationship with this hooker.
	They want to make the process the punishment.
	They don't have a crime there.
	You know, he'll have to talk to God about what really happened there.
	But that's not anything that's on the New York books that's there.
	But it's all just a politicized FBI. And it's always been a politicized FBI. J. Edgar Hoover from the very beginning was blackmailing politicians and had files on everybody.
	And you had presidents like Truman and Nixon who openly said that about J. Edgar Hoover.
	Republican and Democrat, they all knew what he was doing.
	And of course, it is a very blackmailable area.
	Washington, D.C. is not a gray area.
	It is a very, very, very dark, evil, satanic area.
	And it is a target-rich environment for somebody who wants to get involved in blackmail and who wants to make a lot of money.
	But he also referenced the hostage rescue team.
	They sent the hostage rescue team there.
	The wonderful FBI hostage rescue team.
	Lon Horiuchi and the hostage rescue team.
	Lon Horiuchi, the hostage rescue team sniper who shot Randy Weaver's wife at point-blank range right between the eyes while she had a baby in her arms and was standing in the doorway of their cabin.
	And he got a medal for it.
	I've been against the FBI for over 30 years, and the more I look at it, the more opposed I am to the FBI. Put that in your file, Ray, or whoever it is that's there.
	I'll have to get my FBI file someday.
	But yeah, make sure you get all the stuff in there, all the good stuff in there.
	Anyway, Steve Friend has written a lot of stuff about this.
	And as you heard him say, we need to abolish the FBI. We need to abolish the FBI. But he says, if we can't do that, let's at least disarm them.
	And this is an article that he wrote.
	I'm not going to go into the detail of it.
	I'm not going to read it. But he put this out nearly a year ago, July of last year.
	He said, it's time to disarm all FBI agents and return authority to local law enforcement.
	I endorse that message a thousand percent.
	We need to understand that law enforcement should be done locally.
	And it is a wonderful check and balance if the feds come in and they want to do something and they've got to get the local sheriff to go along with them and sanity check it.
	I mean, we go back here and look at the Bundy Ranch standoff.
	We've been on a very, very dangerous trajectory with armed bureaucrats, not just the FBI. And you have the BLM there.
	And there was a guy who was in charge of Nevada, and the Bundy Ranch fell under his jurisdiction.
	His name was Dan Love. This guy was a piece of work.
	He was eventually exposed and kicked out in that time for a lot of corruption and other stuff that was there.
	But when that was happening, and one of the reasons that you had BLM whistleblowers, It's one of the reasons why that rigged courtroom scenario did not get a conviction except the first one or two trials.
	Eventually you had a BLM whistleblower who just couldn't stand it anymore and he spoke up about that.
	And part of what came out was how Dan Love was really goading this into a standoff, into a crisis.
	Even to the extent that his counterpart, a guy who had equal rank in Arizona, looked at this plan and he goes, you're crazy.
	You're going to try to create some kind of a war, some kind of a shoot-off, you know, something like that.
	And I could see that happening, too.
	That's why I wanted to go.
	It's the first time I went on the road for a trip.
	I could see that happening. I could see another Waco, Ruby Ridge, or something like that.
	And that's what the BLM agent in Arizona said.
	And as they were talking about this at that time and later on, people said, you know, BLM agents used to not carry guns at all.
	And then, you know, at some point, they said, all right, you can carry some sidearms with you.
	Now, you know, they've got their full SWAT teams, the full militarized police.
	This is happening everywhere.
	Even before that, I remember an article from the Washington Post.
	That, you know, they said, well, we've been talking about the militarization of the police and the militarization of the federal bureaucracies.
	They said, here's an example of this.
	We were just talking about this last year.
	We said, why is the Department of Education getting body armor and shotguns and automatic weapons and all the rest of this?
	Why is that? The Department of Education is getting that?
	And then they said, well, now we know.
	Because they had these goons show up at a house to arrest a woman who had an overdue student loan.
	Now, Biden is just wiping these things off by the billions for votes, right?
	Another $100 billion student loans would just wipe it off.
	Well, a couple of decades ago, You had the Department of Education SWAT goons showed up at a suburban home, the wee hours of the morning.
	It was oh, dark, 30, you know, probably before sunrise.
	At gunpoint, they bust into the house.
	They drag the family out on the front lawn, put the dad face down in the ground, the kids as well.
	Where is she? Or who?
	You know, so-and-so. That's my wife.
	She's gone. She left the family, you know, months or years earlier.
	They were looking to arrest her because of her overdue loan, and they terrorized the entire family.
	A Department of Education SWAT team.
	Yes, take the guns away from the FBI. I know it's almost unthinkable because we've all been propagandized by years of Efren Zimbalist Jr., the FBI, you know, the G-men who saved us.
	Oh, no, actually, they didn't save us from Al Capone.
	It was the IRS that did that.
	But all the untouchables, they never got anything on them, really.
	But the, you know, the way that...
	Jagger Hoover built this up in the public persona, and he was behind that TV thing that ran for years, and all of the movies and all the rest of this stuff, making them into these heroes.
	We've got to get over it.
	They're no different than the Department of Education, armed to the teeth, and we need to disarm all these people.
	I see here, and I was talking, I didn't see what Travis had put up, breaking news, a huge Microsoft outage, takes down Bing.com, DuckDuckGo, and ChatGPT for thousands of users, says the Daily Mail.
	Well, DuckDuckGo, I thought they were piggybacking on Google to provide anonymity.
	Maybe they've changed, I don't know.
	I know that ChatGPT is...
	Allied with Microsoft.
	Somehow, I just don't think we'll miss it.
	But, oh, where's my chat GPT? Maybe it's just gone off and linked up with some other AIs, right?
	As the movie Her. No, I don't think so.
	On Rumble, Scary Terry 88.
	How can I work for you, David?
	I'll do anything. Well, thank you very much.
	I appreciate that. I'm a very bad manager with all this stuff.
	Karen kind of manages.
	Thanks for me. That's all I can do to get through this.
	And I get so narrowly focused on this.
	I'm like the absent-minded professor stereotype.
	I get so focused on the news.
	I'm not much use of anything else.
	But I appreciate that offer.
	Thank you. On Rumble, it's not Trump's fault.
	He was tricked. And then write sarcasm.
	Yeah, that's right. Rumble, no truth, and then we elected him, Trump, and the world got worse.
	Any questions? Rock fan, Angela Oswald.
	Thank you for the tip. She says, Hi, what are some good questions for a new candidate running for sheriff?
	We're selecting sheriff, and I've heard you say the sheriff is very powerful.
	He is taking questions tonight, and I want to go ask questions.
	Can a sheriff stop a raid by the federal government?
	Yes, actually, I think.
	Again, it depends on what other circumstances, and of course, you need to stand with a sheriff.
	You don't want them to be like Gary Cooper in High Noon.
	You don't want that scenario.
	Look, there's some excellent questions to scope out where a sheriff is on constitutional issues.
	If you go to Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers, Look that up.
	I think it's CSPOA.org, maybe.
	But Sheriff Mack has put that together, and there's an excellent questionnaire there.
	And he says, you know, you can take this and give this to your candidates for sheriff, so you can ask some questions off of that.
	I would begin by asking him, though, what he would do with a similar scenario like 2020, because we did have a lot of sheriffs.
	We had several of them who did stand in the gap and stopped it in different places.
	Again, one of the people that I interviewed up in Illinois where Pritzker was one of the worst.
	And he was threatening to send out state police to arrest people if they went ahead and had church.
	And this guy did it, and he was very public about it.
	I saw him on Fox News, and I got him on and interviewed him.
	And he said, we're not worried about that.
	He said, the sheriff is here.
	He's got his deputies.
	They're around the church, and they weren't there writing down people's license plates like they did in Texas.
	He said, they're here in case the state police show up.
	And so there's a situation where they're going to interpose between the state police and these other guys.
	They say, no, you're not going to arrest these people.
	You're not going to do anything to them.
	And he said, the sheriff is a member of this church.
	He's not going to let them shut this church down.
	So, yeah, I would start with asking them, you know, what, if bird flu or something else happens, what, if these are new people, you can't ask them what they did.
	You could look to see what they did if they're running for re-election.
	But if it's a new person, how would you handle that situation?
	And, you know, what would you do if you have a conflict from bureaucratic orders and the Constitution?
	Because that's what we had in 2020.
	We had a direct conflict between the Constitution and between our God-given rights, which are far more important than even the Constitution, the Bill of Rights.
	They're just part of it, recognizing it. So good luck with that, and that's good that you're paying attention to the local area, because that's where it really matters. And he's right about this as well. We got to get local law enforcement to be where the rubber meets the road, not the FBI.
	Not because they are better quality people or smarter people, but because you have decentralization.
	And because of that decentralization, they're less likely to be politicized over this kind of stuff.
	So if the FBI's got some issue, they want to come in and search through gold bar Bob Menendez closets, Okay, fine, but leave your guns and we'll let the...
	So not everybody's carrying a gun.
	Kind of minimize the conflict and we'll let the local law enforcement be there with the guns.
	On RockFam, Michelle Obama.
	Thank you for the tip. Responding to Angela about the sheriff question.
	Sheriff, do you support the communist anonymous tip line that pits neighbor against neighbor in true Soviet Stasi fashion?
	Yeah, that... We had a lot of that kind of stuff happening in 2020 as well.
	Well, we're going to take a quick break.
	Please like the stream if you like the stream.
	And just to remind people that you can get Gerald Slenty's Trends Journal and you can save 10% off of the subscription if you use a promo code KNIGHT. We're going to have Tony Arterburn on with us later in the show.
	And we're going to talk about what is happening with the dollar, what's happening with interest rates, gold, and other things like that.
	There's been a lot of news with that.
	And I think we're still on Roku.
	Again, you talk about, somebody asked, Travis is shaking his head yes.
	I don't even have time to look.
	People think I'm, you know, send me stuff and say, here, watch what this other guy said about it.
	I don't have time. I don't even look to see Roku this week after we got some video taken down that was there.
	But evidently, I think we are.
	And so if you want to find us on Roku, you can search on Roku for the David Knight Show, and if it doesn't show up, please let us know.
	But you can also go into your search engine of choice and type in the David Knight Show Roku, and it should also give you a link to see where that is.
	We're going to take a quick break, and we'll be right back.
	Talk, talk, talk, talk.
	You're listening to the David Nye Show.
	David Nye Show.
	Well, while we were talking about Trump, let's do one more thing here.
	We'll talk about what is happening with the film, The Apprentice, because that's the next thing they've got queued up to make this about the soap opera, to make it about people and not about principles or policies.
	And so that's the next thing that is queued up.
	But I thought it was interesting.
	Babylon Bee had a headline.
	Prosecution offers Michael Cohen $130,000 hush money to stop talking.
	That should have been $130,000 hush money to hush up.
	Because he's such a liability to them.
	Prosecutors in the trial, says Babylon Bee against Trump, offered star witness Michael Cohen $130,000 if he would keep his big mouth shut for a while.
	And then what they have, the...
	A prosecutor saying is very much what you saw Anderson Cooper say.
	I'm not going to play it again for you.
	I'll spare you. But I played Anderson Cooper two days running where he has asked about what Michael Cohen said.
	And he's like, yeah, well, it's pretty amazing.
	He's absolutely lying. But of course, I'm sure he's telling the truth about all these other things, you know, and he's trying to You can watch him weaving this web of deception.
	You can watch him weaving it live.
	Yeah, yeah, that's the ticket.
	Anyway, this is what the prosecutor says, according to the bad movie.
	Every time Cohen talks, it totally ruins our case.
	I mean, he's totally legitimately trustworthy completely.
	Totally. Like Anderson Cooper.
	But sometimes he sort of has this knack.
	We're completely undermining the entire credibility of our totally and completely airtight case against Trump.
	That's what Anderson Cooper was saying in a nutshell.
	It's a clown show.
	It's a reality TV show.
	You're fired, right?
	That's the real apprentice thing.
	But now Trump has an apprentice suit, and I'm not talking about the red tie and coat.
	No, this is a lawsuit that he is threatening against the people who did this film.
	Now, Newsweek says why the Donald Trump lawsuit would fail, according to law experts.
	And I think it will.
	I think it will.
	I'll tell you why I think it will fail.
	Not because what they said was true, necessarily.
	But just, you know, I'll explain to you the history of why we have...
	That disclaimer at the beginning of almost all movies, based on a true story, that's a legal loophole that they all put there.
	Even when they really push hard that it really is a true story, they put that there.
	Any resemblance to the truth in real people is purely coincidental.
	The film, The Apprentice, depicts a scheming young Trump climbing up the property ladder and then dropping his wife, Ivana, when she's no longer of use to him, says Newsweek.
	It also depicts him as a domestic abuser and that he abandoned his property mentor, also when he was of no longer of use.
	The film received an eight-minute standing ovation when it premiered at Cannes Film Festival on Monday.
	In one scene of The Apprentice...
	Trump rapes Ivana Trump during an argument.
	In her 1990 divorce deposition, his ex-wife alleged to have been sexually assaulted by Trump, but she disavowed the allegation in 2015 when Trump was running for president.
	But she said it once, and so that's what they're going to hang their hat on in a lawsuit.
	We'll be filing a lawsuit to address the blatantly false assertions from these pretend filmmakers, said a Trump spokesperson.
	This garbage is pure fiction, which sensationalizes lies that have long been debunked.
	But because it is pure fiction, and because it is garbage...
	Because it's garbage, they love it at Cannes.
	I mean, the garbage that they applaud there is unbelievable.
	But, yeah, it's like everything else that's coming out of Hollywood today.
	As with the illegal Biden trials, this election interference by Hollywood elites who know that Trump will retake the White House and beat their candidate.
	Well, an LA-based civil trial lawyer told Newsweek, his name is David Ring, that a Trump lawsuit would have little chance of success.
	He said Trump is the ultimate public figure and would have to show blatant, outrageous falsehoods in the story, and that the creators intended to lie about Trump and knew that they were lying about Trump's background.
	You see, there's a different standard if you are slandering John Q. Public, a small person there, or if you are slandering a well-known public figure.
	That's just the way that it's been because of court precedence.
	He said, the First Amendment grants a lot of leeway for people to write about or to make movies about public figures like Trump.
	They are allowed to use artistic license.
	Now, the First Amendment didn't come into the movie business until the 1950s.
	I think it was like 1952.
	And as I've pointed out many times before, there was a filmmaker in 1917 as Woodrow Wilson was pushing for war and shredding the Constitution and burning it in every way that he could.
	The Woodrow Wilson administration in 1917, and by the way, these are the same people who gave us the 1917 Espionage Act.
	To be able to arrest people.
	And the person who used it the most was Obama.
	He arrested more people under the 1917 Espionage Act than all of the previous presidents combined in 100 years.
	Because he was out in 2017.
	He really loved that.
	And of course, Woodrow Wilson had his Palmer raids and that turned into the basis for J. Edgar Hoover to start the FBI. It was a dark time.
	And he was doing all this kind of stuff so he could lie us into a war that we had absolutely no business being in.
	That it was unjust for us to be in.
	That America did not want, and he severely punished this filmmaker who did a movie about the American Revolution.
	This filmmaker, whose name was Goldstein, had, and let me show you a picture of the promo sheet here.
	Robert Goldstein, a 12-real production.
	Remember, this is 1917. The movies are in their infancy.
	They're silent films.
	And prior to Birth of a Nation by D.W. Griffith about the Civil War, there had not been any epic stories.
	And so Birth of a Nation, despite the fact it's about the birth of the Ku Klux Klan and stuff, was widely celebrated as this epic film.
	And a lot of the only good stuff that was in it...
	Where the historical scenes are recreated and they were recreated by Robert Goldstein.
	He basically set the stuff up where they had Appomattox and they had the assassination of Lincoln.
	Those are pretty amazing. I mean, it looks like, you'd say today, in retrospect, it looks like you took a still picture and told artificial intelligence to animate it.
	It was pretty amazing how he captured that 100 years ago.
	Well, he'd done that with D.W. Griffith, and so he thought, well, I'll do another movie about another fourth turning.
	He didn't call it a fourth turning, but, you know, we'll go to the Revolutionary War since we've already done the Civil War.
	So he comes up with a storyline and makes up some characters.
	And if you can see that picture there, you can see really detailed, high-quality set values, production values, especially for the time.
	The movies are very, very simplistic, but again, you know, he's got these vignettes, these set pieces about this stuff.
	He says, Spirit of 76, historical romance, dealing with the American Revolution and its causes.
	This film has been in production for over a year and has happily completed at this time to help rouse the patriotism of the country.
	Oh, wow. Okay.
	Wilson was trying to rouse the country for war.
	Not against Great Britain, but on the side of Great Britain, against the Germans, right?
	And so he told them, shut it down.
	We don't want you showing that.
	And he showed it anyway.
	And then he showed it again.
	And so then they arrested him.
	And they convicted him.
	The First Amendment didn't apply then.
	Not in 1917.
	They were shutting it down for political purposes.
	And by the way, the case was called, I love this, it's called the U.S. versus Spirit of 76.
	How appropriate that is.
	It's like the American government, the Wilson government versus the Spirit of 76.
	The Wilson government versus the Bill of Rights.
	The Wilson government versus the First Amendment.
	Here it is. Goldstein found guilty.
	Film producers convicted by a jury.
	On two counts, he is much affected by the verdict and will ask for a new trial.
	Given 22 years and a heavy penalty, Now, I had seen it once before, but I couldn't find it.
	I think they fined him $10,000, which, you know, as the Federal Reserve did its worst, also another thing that Wilson was pushing through, because they have debased our currency so much, that $10,000 fine is about $3 million today.
	And the 26-year prison sentence, I think that was perhaps what he could have gotten under their trumped-up charges, shall we say?
	People think that the etymology of the phrase trumped-up charges applies to all these things that just happened to Trump in the last two years in the future.
	You know, people are going to be surprised.
	Well, no, actually, that was there before.
	Anyway, he did get sentenced to 10 years, and he went to jail.
	10 years! For making a movie about 1776.
	Because the U.S., Government was against the spirit of 76.
	Got 10 years, got a $3 million fine.
	Wilson, after the war was over, graciously decided he'd let him out, so he only served three of the 10 years.
	Only three of the 10 years.
	And so, yeah, free speech and the First Amendment and all that stuff doesn't necessarily apply anymore.
	But here's how this applies to the case of Trump.
	This lawyer says, well, even though you've got the First Amendment and everything, they cannot, however, just simply make things up.
	The Apprentice biopic sounds like it is based on more than sufficient facts such that it will be lawsuit-proof.
	In other words, they can say, well, look, yeah, you know, she said that she was raped, and we're going with that, even though she recanted that.
	Trump can certainly threaten a lawsuit, and he can even file a lawsuit, but it will be a loser at the end of the day.
	And then he also references another Supreme Court case, the 1964 case of New York Times v.
	Sullivan. The standard of proof for defamation of public figures, which is different than defamation of, you know, little guys, especially defamation of little guys by a bigger person.
	Public figure. And he references, he said, you know, that was the dynamics when you had the situation with Mike Lindell or Alex Jones.
	This is a bigger public figure, and they're saying things about, you know, a not well-known individual or something.
	It says in Sullivan, the Supreme Court overturned a successful defamation case taken by a public official who claimed his reputation was damaged by an ad in the New York Times.
	So there's a different standard.
	There really is a double standard.
	We're talking about public comments that are made on non-public figures.
	And so the question is, when we look at the E. Jean Carroll thing, was she a public figure?
	I mean, she had written books and things like that, but she was not, I guess, standard is she was not nearly as public as Trump was, because he lost two defamation suits.
	But again, you know, this is also indicative, perhaps, of the due process that he would get in New York that is going to be set against him.
	Eugene Carroll, a columnist who said that Trump had sexually assaulted her in the mid-1990s.
	In her mid-90s, so she's not that old yet.
	So he says, the film, from what I've read, is based on material from public records and allegations that have been publicly made, and while labeled as a biopic, as with any similar films, it is known to be a work of fiction based on real-life events.
	Now, here's what I think is interesting.
	What is the rest of the story?
	About this disclaimer that's put up there, based on a true story.
	Everybody knows they play with the facts, fast and furious with that, based on a true story.
	Well, it goes back to Rasputin.
	It goes back to a film that was made in 1933.
	About Rasputin and the Russian royal family.
	This is from, how long ago was this article here?
	No, this goes back 2016, so we're eight years ago.
	And it's a Slate article talking about this.
	And they said, virtually every film in modern memory ends with some variation of the same disclaimer.
	This is a work of fiction.
	Any similarity to actual persons living or dead or actual events is purely coincidental.
	You've all seen that, right?
	This cut-and-paste legal writer must be the most boring thing in every movie that features it.
	Who knew that its origins were so lurid?
	This boilerplate can be directly traced back to Grigory Rasputin, the famously hard-to-assassinate Russian mystic and intimate of the last doomed Romanovs.
	It all started when an exiled Russian prince sued MGM in 1933 over the studio's biography picture about Rasputin, claiming that the American production did not accurately depict his murder.
	And the prince...
	I would have known because he was the one who murdered him.
	So the guy who murdered Rasputin said, you didn't get it right, and I know because I did it.
	And what happened was that the Romanov family was so upset with him that they exiled him and saved his life.
	He didn't get caught up with the rest of the family and executed by the communists.
	In 1916, the fabulously wealthy Oxford-educated Prince Felix Yusupov was one of several Russian aristocrats agonizing over the unseemly influence that Rasputin, the magical healer, charismatic leech and peasant, had over the Tsar, and particularly over the Tsarina.
	In December, Yusupov invited Rasputin to his palace, where he offered him cyanide-laced cakes and then shot him for good measure.
	Although the Tsarina was distraught, the Tsar let Yusupov off lightly, exiling the prince and his wife, Irina, and in doing so, spared their lives from the revolution.
	Sixteen years later, MGM produced Rasputin and the Empress, and it was based on those events.
	And it was a big casting coup.
	It had three members of the Barrymore family.
	Yes, it used to be that that was a respected acting company before Drew Barrymore.
	Who worshipped at the feet of Dylan Mulvaney and calls Lala Harris Mamala.
	Anyway, you have the Barrymores.
	So in the lead roles, you had Lionel Barrymore playing Rasputin, Ethel was playing the Tsar Arena, and John Barrymore was playing the grandfather of Drew.
	And they changed the name of this prince.
	This is one of the things that they changed.
	Prince Paul Chagodyev was the part that was played by John Barrymore.
	And it was kind of a composite figure.
	But, of course, he's the one who murders Rasputin.
	And the guy who actually murdered him was Prince Felix Yusupov.
	Well, Yusupov was penniless in Paris at the time.
	He heard about the film and he thought it was defamatory.
	He argued that audiences would recognize him as the assassin, in part because he'd publicly cashed in on killing Rasputin.
	He'd bragged about it in a memoir, the fact that he killed Rasputin.
	He bragged about it. And he wasn't wrong.
	The New York Times did an article about how this character in the film really was him.
	But since he had already confessed to the murder, there wasn't really much that he could do to come after them for defamation.
	He was proud of it, you know, kind of like Trump with his vaccines.
	Except that Trump didn't actually shoot people.
	He just poisoned us with cyanides.
	It wasn't cyanide.
	It was something worse. The vaccines.
	Anyway, so what he did was he alleged that the movie had defamed his wife.
	Because in the movie, it shows Rasputin raping the wife of the guy who kills him.
	And isn't that kind of interesting?
	You know, just like in the Trump film, this rape allegation is at the center of it.
	Well, this guy who actually killed Rasputin, his wife was not raped by Rasputin.
	She never ever even came in contact with him.
	And so that was demonstrably false.
	And but that was the basis on which he sued MGM. And you may ask, well, why didn't MGM, just because there was a lot of speculation about whether or not Rasputin was having relations with the Tsarina, mainly because Rasputin used to like to brag about it.
	He would go to the local bars and talk about how that was what he was doing.
	And as they point out in this article, the person who was libeled really was perhaps Rasputin, who couldn't do anything about it because he was dead.
	They claimed that he was infatuated with his beard and he used to love to kiss it.
	Anyway, an MGM researcher had pointed out to the company that this is a really bad idea.
	You're showing that this woman has been raped, who never met him.
	There was Zarina who was having sexual relations with him.
	But the problem was, is that because they had gotten the Barrymores as a family there to play these big roles, and that was their big thing.
	We got these big stars in this movie.
	The problem is that if they had a...
	Of course, they weren't going to explicitly show anything in those days, but if they had even suggested...
	That Rasputin was having sexual relations with the Tsarina, that would be, everybody knew that the two actors, the actor and the actress that were playing these two roles, were brother and sister.
	And that kind of association would just be too incestuous in people's minds.
	That's how much America has changed now.
	Isn't that interesting? No, no, we can't do that, they said.
	And as a matter of fact, as she said, this is going to get us sued, they fired her.
	That decision came back to haunt them because they lost in court.
	Again, they didn't want to have a real-life brother and sister in this romantic role, and so they concocted this rape of someone else.
	So the wife sued the studio, and the jury found her in favor, and they gave her a large settlement.
	And as a matter of fact, it was $125,000 back then.
	I said earlier that the guy was fined $10,000 in 1917.
	I said it was $3 million.
	I made a mistake. I was thinking of this.
	This is the $3 million. $125,000 in 1933.
	$3 million today because of the Federal Reserve and their policies.
	Anyway, so big fine to MGM. And the problem was they didn't have anything that said it was a fictional piece of work.
	They had prefaced the film instead with this.
	Quote, this concerns the destruction of an empire.
	A few of the characters are still alive.
	The rest met death by violence.
	And so from that, the audience could logically infer that they're talking about the Yusupovs because they're the only ones who are still alive.
	That family. So a judge in the case...
	told MGM the studio might have had a better chance if they'd incorporated a disclaimer stating exactly the opposite, that this is not a true story.
	That the film was not intended as an accurate portrayal of real people or events.
	So, in the wake of the landmark lawsuit, the film industry slapped that wording on everything.
	They didn't want to get another $3 million judgment.
	So, for decades, the films disclaimed absolutely any relationship to reality.
	Interestingly enough, that even in the film Raging Bull, which is based on the life of boxer Jake LaMotta, And actually credits Jake LaMotta as a consultant.
	And it cites his memoirs as source text.
	And then it says, but it's entirely fictional.
	They're running away from it as fast as they can.
	But they put that in. It's just a boilerplate thing.
	So, again, I'm sure they've got that in this movie.
	And if they got that in the movie, and Ivana said it at some point in time, there's not going to be anything he can do about it.
	It will be used to smear him, just like these trials are used to smear him.
	But again, he'll do the lawsuit to try to protect his honor.
	I don't know.
	And then we got the Trump media stock, as I talked about.
	He lost $328 million on revenue of $770,000.
	Just stop and think about this.
	For every dollar that Truth Media, or it's actually Truth Social, Trump Media, for every dollar of revenue they took in, they lost $424.
	Isn't that amazing? I mean, this is like the bad decision of Ford to lose, what was it, something like $130,000 on every car, every electric vehicle that they sell.
	It cost them something like $100,000 or $130,000 for each one of those.
	So I guess you just make it up on volume, right?
	Revenue of $700,000.
	And he lost $328 million.
	So after that came out, the Trump stock fell by 10%.
	But look, the biggest loss, if Trump gets it, let's talk, here's one policy issue that comes out of all this stuff in the last couple of days.
	All the rest of this is just professional wrestling, circus, and all the rest of this stuff.
	But here's something that'll actually cost you money.
	Trump is proposing to have massive tariffs.
	10% across-the-board tariff on all imports combined with higher tariffs aimed specifically at China, where we get most of our stuff.
	Now, if this were to go through, Reason Magazine points out that one organization that has looked at this, as a matter of fact, three of them have looked at it, and they've all come up with pretty much about the same figure.
	But if he does 10% across the board tariffs, and I said, you know, both Trump and Biden have put in a lot of tariffs.
	And so we kind of know exactly what's going to happen with this.
	We're just talking about, you know, the magnitude of it.
	Not how it's going to roll through, but we're just talking about the magnitude of the tariffs now.
	We know how they're going to propagate out in the economy, how they're going to cost people.
	And so this one organization says, well, a new set of tariffs, 10% across the board, and then some targeting China as much as 60% targeting China?
	It's going to raise prices for the average American family, an estimated $1,700 a year is what it'll cost you if Trump gets elected.
	He's taking the economic advantage that he has over Biden and squandering it.
	Trump's tax cuts were not a good thing.
	And of course, his last year with all the World Economic Forum policies that he implemented and the U.N. policies that Trump implemented and all of that stuff, World Health Organization's pandemic, all of that stuff that he did was horrific.
	But they said it'll cost Americans about $500 billion per year in general, about $1,700 per family.
	You got an extra $1,700 around that you want to give to him for this?
	It's a massive tax increase on foreign goods, so of course it is going to hurt people.
	Here's the thing. Why do they always do this?
	And why is Trump raising taxes?
	Is it because he's a New York Democrat, which he is?
	If you want to fight foreign imports, then take taxes off of anything that's made in America.
	Wouldn't that be better? Right?
	It wouldn't cost people anything.
	You could make the American goods more affordable by removing taxes or something like that.
	But no, they will add taxes to the foreign stuff, increasing the cost of everything to us.
	So that was one organization, said $1,700 a month.
	Another one that Reason says leans left as a think tank, they came up with $1,500 a year annually.
	Another one, the Tax Foundation estimated $300 billion.
	But this one said $500 billion and $1,700 per family.
	So it's pretty telling, says Reason, that the Trump campaign isn't even trying to engage in some kind of an intellectual gymnastics to justify his plan to hike taxes and prices on Americans.
	So when they contact him, they get this arrogant reply from a spokesman for the Trump campaign that says, American people don't need papers from alleged experts to know that they'll have more money in their pockets with President Trump, even though he's going to raise taxes up to 60% on goods coming in from China, which the globalists have already set this up.
	Pretty much everything we're buying right now is coming from China.
	You know, it's just like what Biden is doing.
	You've got to have EVs and you've got to have them now.
	We're not going to have any transition period.
	Well, that's what he's doing with this.
	And so Reason says, being a populist means never having to admit you're wrong.
	Because that's a true love story.
	And if someone demonstrates that you are, you can always just claim that they're bad because they know things.
	Yeah, that's basically where we are.
	Love means never having to say you're sorry.
	Especially if the MAGA cult loves you so much you never have to say you're sorry.
	Well, we don't have that song to play for you.
	we'll have to find something else and we'll be right back.
	So,
	so
	you're listening to the david knight show Well, we have Tony joining us in about 10 minutes.
	So let me go through some of the emails and letters that I've received here in the last couple of days.
	This is from listener Matt, subject Deutschland.
	He said, I heard you say yesterday's show, you've been to Germany several times.
	I'm going for the first time in about a month with my father.
	They're hosting the 2024 Euro Cup football, yeah, and I'm going to be flying in and out of Frankfurt.
	Visiting and seeing games in Dortmund and Cologne.
	Possibly Gelsenkirchen as well.
	Did you like it there?
	Where did you go and do you have any advice?
	I've never been out of the country unless you count Bermuda or Canada.
	I'm really looking forward to it. I'm sure you'll have a great time.
	Quite frankly, it's been a long time since I was in Germany proper.
	I went to Europe several times, but...
	It's been so long.
	Things have changed so much in Europe with all the open borders and stuff like that.
	I hesitate to take a stab at what I would guess that you're going to see.
	But I think you'll like it.
	Actually, most of the time that's been in Germany was about 51 years ago.
	And it was with a music high school group that I was with.
	We went through some of the bigger cities there, Munich and Stuttgart, and I was surprised at how modern they were.
	I had not really thought about it until that point, how close I was in time to World War II. I was born 10 years after World War II. And so, when I was there, it was 28 years after World War II had ended, and big cities like Munich and Stuttgart had been absolutely...
	And so they were all brand spanking new and very uninteresting, actually.
	And so we didn't spend a lot of time there.
	We did go to Heidelberg, which was spared, and it was an old walled city.
	And it was very nice.
	I liked that. And, you know, places like that, places like Liechtenstein, places when we went through Switzerland, it was Lucerne that we went to.
	Didn't go to big cities like Basel or Zurich.
	And I'm glad we didn't because Lucerne was really cool.
	It was, they had this 1500 year old, or not 1500 years, it was, I think it died in 1500, massive timbers.
	This wooden bridge that was there at the Lake Lucerne.
	And also on the lake, they had this massive statue.
	You should look it up on the internet. It's a really amazing statue of a lion that's been shot with a bunch of air.
	There's a dead lion that has a Swiss shield lying on it, and it was a reference to the Swiss mercenaries.
	You know, the Vatican still has a Swiss Guard, but that was an amazing statue.
	I really enjoyed Lucerne and the moral rule areas.
	But again, you know, it was kind of this, you know, one of these things, 12 countries in 10 days type of deal, you know, where you just...
	Running through all this stuff.
	We went back to some places.
	Took the kids to Austria in 2001.
	I wanted to see Vienna, and we went to Vienna and Salzburg and really enjoyed that.
	Boy, talk about a lot of culture and other things that are there.
	Truly is amazing. But I haven't actually traveled that much in the last several decades.
	I've gone on some business trips to Denmark and things like that for reporting, but I just haven't traveled that much, and I really don't like to travel on planes.
	I hate it. It used to be it was kind of nice before 2001, but after 2001, it got to be not so nice, and then it's...
	The last couple of years has really gotten to be dangerous.
	I mean, I never avoided flights because I thought I was going to crash.
	I think that would be something to think about.
	So hopefully you'll have a safe trip.
	We'll be praying for you. And then this was sent to me an ode to Klaus Schwab.
	This is from Alfred.
	He says, Answering ultimately to a non-human force.
	And then Alfred puts in parentheses the devil, worshippers, and Satanists.
	No, that's not what David Icke says.
	Look, I agree with David Icke on many, many, many things.
	But where we have a big disagreement is the fact that he believes that these are space aliens.
	He's a non-believer in God and Christ.
	He doesn't believe any of that stuff.
	So he doesn't see this as Satanist.
	He thinks that these are space aliens that have been misinterpreted.
	By the world's religions as satanic or as the Islamists say, gins, you know, some kind of a, you know, genie, evil genie or something like that, or we would say satanic demonic forces or something.
	But he just thinks that it's space aliens.
	And I think that's a really big deal.
	It's a really big disagreement that we have.
	So even though we may agree on pretty much all the stuff about government and everything, this is far more important.
	And so that's where our disagreement is.
	But he goes on to say that, and again, what he's saying is a non-human force.
	Lizard people or whatever he wants to describe it as.
	I do believe that it is a non-human force, but I think it's more specific.
	I would go with what the Bible has to say.
	And I think that since we don't fight against flesh and blood, but against principalities and powers, the evil rulers of this dark world.
	Who is that? The evil rulers of this dark world are not people like Trump and Biden.
	They're not in charge. It's not even the people like the CIA. But it's these non-human forces, these spiritual forces that are above them.
	And so, when people talk about the bloodlines of Illuminati and other things like that, and how, you know, you've got the Rockefeller Foundation that's passing it along, it's not that.
	It's not that. They may use some of the same people, but the reason that you have this very, very repeated pattern throughout different generations, people look at it and say, well, it's these families that are doing it.
	No. No. It's because we are against these undying, unseen, evil forces that are non-human.
	That's why you have this consistent march through this stuff that looks like a long-term conspiracy that people have said, well, it's a conspiracy of different families.
	No, it's not. Anyway, he says, David Icke is sharper than a butcher's knife.
	He's the ultimate investigative journalist, par excellent.
	Almost four years ago from the lockdown and all the COVID BS was happening, David Icke appeared on the Alex Jones Show and made the very bold statement that there is no virus.
	Well, I remember that very clearly.
	I had been saying that on my show, on the Alex Jones Network, at that point in time for, I think, three months.
	And I had not directly confronted Mike Adams on any of that stuff because Mike Adams was saying exactly the opposite, scaring everybody, so was Alex, to make money.
	And they made record profits.
	But I said, no, there is no basis for this pandemic.
	And as a matter of fact, even before it happened, the week that Trump did it on a Friday after my show, but earlier in the week, Gary Haven, who I really like.
	Gary Haven had Curves.
	He's a billionaire who did the franchises of Curves and everything.
	He came by, and he wanted to get on the Alex Jones Show, and he wanted to scare everybody about this.
	And he truly believed it. I mean, he wasn't doing it to make money like Alex was doing.
	I don't think Alex believed it.
	He was just doing it to make money.
	But Gary Haven really was scared to death.
	And he'd gone by and he'd talked to Governor Abbott.
	He said, he's got to lock this down.
	Everybody's going to die if you don't lock down right now.
	It's like, I don't think so.
	So I had said, instead of saying, well, Gary Haven says this, or Alex or Mike Adams said this, and I disagree with them.
	I didn't mention them by name.
	I just said, well, I don't believe such and such, which is what they were saying.
	And this is what I believe.
	But when David Icke came on, that really got Mike Adams angry.
	And he wrote a piece attacking David Icke for saying that there was no virus.
	And then talking about how he's the only person in alternative media that's got a science degree.
	And that was like, okay, okay.
	You want to measure up your science degree?
	He doesn't even put what his science degree is or where he went to school.
	Okay? So, anyway, he put that out there, and then at that point in time, I directly attacked Mike Adams by name.
	And then he attacked me directly by name on his website, and we were going back and forth, but that kind of kicked it off with David Icke coming there.
	So, yeah, he says...
	David Icke was immediately banned everywhere for these claims.
	He was banned before Alex Jones because if allowed to speak unchecked, it would have brought an untimely end to the COVID BS scam.
	Ultimately, he was proven right.
	Well, I was fired.
	For opposing this stuff.
	That put us on a bad footing, and then when the Trump stuff came around, I was fired for opposing that.
	But look, David Icke was right about it as well.
	I'm glad that he was. I'm glad that he had the boldness to say that.
	This is from...
	From a listener, Bev, and she says, there's a UK article, and she has a link to it, U.S. bird flu cause is chicken feces being fed as feed to U.S. cattle.
	She said, how disgusting is this?
	Well, it is very disgusting.
	How is bird flu crossing species to cattle?
	By cattle feed made of chicken feces.
	And see, I don't even know that it's crossing.
	The cattle are not sick.
	They're giving them these tests.
	And just as they said with a lot of wild animals, they said, you know, when you give the test to these animals, you're running this PCR test.
	And who knows what the magnification level is because they won't tell us, right?
	That's your clue as to what's going on.
	But if you have a fox or something that eats a dead bird that died of disease, do you think you might find fragments of that disease there, whether or not the fox is sick because they ate the fox?
	Do you think that they would find fragments of bird flu if fed birds that had it?
	If they would find it in the cattle, if they give them chicken feces?
	I said, what American company, what kind of state of mind is it that they put their brand on something where they decide they're going to feed their cattle with chicken feces?
	Well, that's the world that we live in.
	And just think about what they're going to put in your food if we let them do the lab meat.
	Again, they will do anything for money.
	Anything. And they do this kind of stuff because they're so big.
	If you've got an organic farmer, are they going to do that?
	No, because they don't want to give you substandard stuff that's going to blow back on them in a marketplace.
	If you go to a restaurant, for example, are they going to feed you the awful kinds of garbage that you're going to get in a fast food restaurant?
	No, because it isn't worth it for them to save a few bucks and to make something that is really, really poor quality.
	But it's worth it for McDonald's and all the rest of the fast food places.
	Why? Because if they can shave just a couple of pennies off of these things and then sell billions of them, that's a lot of money for them.
	And they're willing to cut the corners on this simply because it is centralized and because of the scale of this stuff.
	It's another argument for decentralization, and of course it's another argument for understanding what these people are putting into the food, and how they're running this game over and over again.
	There's absolutely no end To what they're doing.
	They're not telling us that we got a second human who is sick with bird flu.
	And guess what? Just like the first one, pink eye.
	Pink eye. Pink eye is not fatal.
	Pink eye doesn't do anything to your eyes.
	It's just an infection.
	It hurts and you get over it.
	And if you look up All of the medical journals and ophthalmology journals will tell you that you can get it from just having dirty hands and rubbing your eyes with it.
	The first guy, and probably the same thing with this other guy, the first guy had no fever, and he had no involvement with his lungs.
	So he didn't have flu.
	He had pink eye, and he could have gotten that.
	Both of them had been farm workers.
	Farm workers are working with all kinds of excrement to start with.
	Could have easily gotten that by just not having sanitary hands and touching his eyes.
	It's amazing how they continue to push this, and people will just go along with it.
	All right, so Tony is waiting.
	Let's take a quick break and we're going to be right back and we're going to talk a little bit about money The common man you They created common core to dumb down our children.
	They created common past to track and control us.
	Their commons project to make sure the commoners own nothing.
	And the communist future.
	They see the common man as simple, unsophisticated, ordinary.
	But each of us has worth and dignity created in the image of God.
	That is what we have in common.
	That is what they want to take away.
	Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation.
	They desire to know everything about us while they hide everything from us.
	It's time to turn that around and expose what they want to hide.
	Please share the information and links you'll find at TheDavidKnightShow.com Thank you for listening.
	Thank you for sharing.
	If you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers.
	TheDavidKnightShow.com Welcome back and joining us now is Tony Arben.
	It's always great talking to Tony.
	He has Wise Wolf Gold and Silver, and he has also set up davidknight.gold.
	That will take you to his website, and he sells gold and silver, small or large quantities.
	Also, you can sign up for Wolfpack, and you can get a large or small quantity on a monthly basis.
	And get the advantages of a group buying discount.
	So all that stuff is there at Wise Wolf.
	You can find it again with davidknight.gold.
	Let him know that you came to us.
	Good to have you on, Tony. Thanks for joining.
	Thanks for having me back, David. Always good to see you.
	We're talking off air.
	We can start by picking up where I was just talking about tariffs.
	What's your take on the tariff stuff here?
	Should we just add 10% or 60% as that Reason magazine said?
	You know, people are going to see the price of stuff going up.
	Does it really make any difference to them whether it's inflation or whether it's extra taxes?
	I mean, the bottom line is everything is more expensive, right?
	Right. And I was listening to the show.
	Great show, by the way. Thank you.
	This subject matter, and nobody's talking about it, seems it's just appeared out of nowhere, which is the most bizarre thing.
	And the tariffs are like a funhouse mirror version of what they actually were intended to be.
	If you know anything about the history of the United States, I mean, the second act out of Congress was the Tariff Act.
	All four presidents on Mount Rushmore, all the figures on our paper currency, all supported tariffs.
	There's no free traders in there.
	This is a 20th century concoction, especially post-World War II, to open up our markets after we destroyed Japan and Europe was in ruins, and we opened up our markets.
	So there's always been an argument against protectionism.
	Protectionism was isolationism, and isolationism was racist, and it's all these horrible things.
	You can't be an economic nationalist, and it's something that Pat Buchanan talked about.
	I started picking up as a teenager, I started looking into economic nationalism.
	I was fascinated by this.
	I'm like, is it really?
	So much of the majority, they're abandoning what worked?
	And over time, I came to the conclusion that they had.
	They abandoned what had built the country.
	What's so bizarre, David?
	I know a lot about this because when I ran for office, I was a pariah to the establishment and I'd go on talk radio.
	Even like the conservatives who I was on talk, the crop of conservatives I was with on talk radio, they've all gone on to syndication.
	But when I would talk about economic nationalism tariffs, they'd say, that's lib stuff.
	You're doing lib stuff.
	That's what liberals do.
	I'm like, no, that's part of our history.
	But I think the most fascinating part about it now...
	Is that you've got Joe Biden, who is an absolute free trader.
	NAFTA guy was for GATT, you know, the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs.
	CAFTA, the Central American Free Trade Agreement.
	TPP, this was Barack Obama's deal.
	Remember the Trans-Pacific Partnership was so good, you couldn't even read the bill.
	Paul Ryan wouldn't let you.
	You had to go into a secure basement.
	The Capitol, and you couldn't take pictures of it or leave with any paperwork if you were a member of Congress, but you were supposed to pass it because free trade works.
	So my big question now is, Joe Biden is talking about these tariffs.
	I mean, Trump put on some tariffs when he was president, and I thought that was kind of a natural extension of where the country was going, but now I'm just totally uncertain because it seems it's targeted.
	It has nothing to do with, you know, I think one of the main things about free trade is that if you can't make it here, then it should be free.
	If it can't be made here, then there should be no import taxes at all.
	So, but if it can be made here, then it needs to be strategic.
	But what are these people doing?
	Because the establishment has always reflexively shot down any sort of argument for tariffs.
	This has always been the establishment's goal is to make sure that isolationism and protectionism is dead.
	But now they're saying it's good.
	So I think this is the signpost, you know, the red flags that I look for in the headlines that are, to me, signaling that there's much more to this story.
	Obviously, I mean, I go back to just 10 years ago, my friend, Congressman Ralph Hall, who I worked for, I ran against him and I worked for him for a little while.
	He was the lone voice in Congress that was standing up for American steelworkers.
	He was one of the only members of Congress while at the same time the South Koreans were dumping in these giant swaths of steel into our market and aluminum.
	Mm-hmm. And I remember him being, there was nobody talking about putting tariffs on anywhere.
	There was, again, it was supposed to be a throwback.
	Now, I think the red flag, David, and I'd love to get your take on this.
	What is happening? You have, you know, I saw Biden giving this press conference today talking about tariffs.
	I know there's a trade war.
	It starts with a currency war.
	Again, we're in a fourth turning, as you talk about.
	There's massive shifts geopolitically going on, and the headlines don't necessarily mean what the mainstream media thinks they mean.
	So I'm looking at this totally differently.
	When you've got an establishment that has abandoned their own playbook in its silence, it's like you say, the Sherlock Holmes, the dog that didn't bark.
	I have not seen one talking head.
	Come out and condemn Biden for tariffs.
	I've not seen one. There might be.
	But I have not seen one headline, one pushback from all of the voices that, you know, if you 10 years ago, 15 years ago, you talk about this and you were, oh, that's just...
	That's just a bygone era.
	You know, we live in a modern global economy now.
	You would get that. You don't know what you're talking about.
	But now they're just throwing tariffs out there.
	So, again, I'm for tariffs.
	Well, I agree.
	And, you know, we've talked about this in the past, you know, Jefferson in his second inaugural address said, by eliminating useless offices and shrinking size of the government, I'm paraphrasing it here, we have eliminated all internal taxes from the federal government.
	So no farmer, no laborer, no mechanic knows the tax man.
	But you notice the first thing he did was he cut the size of government, right?
	That allowed him to cut the taxes.
	But then the taxes were at the border, and America was free of taxes except for what would happen at the state and local level.
	And then everything changed in 1913 when you had the Federal Reserve and the income tax, and then they started making this stuff, free trade and all that.
	And that was a big change right there, and I think we're in for another change.
	I think the common thing that I see...
	Is that both Trump and Biden are using these tariffs as an attack.
	This is not an economic argument about what would be best for the economy.
	They don't care what is best for the economy.
	They're using it to attack China, right?
	Trump says 10% across the board because, hey, we're Americans.
	I'm going to show you that I'm going to put America first.
	And then 60% for China, these goods.
	And Biden is using the tariffs and he's using sanctions and things like that as a prelude to war.
	And I think that's what that's really about.
	And so, to me, I look at it, you're talking about steel, right?
	We can't have steel if you're going to shut down energy, right?
	And that's what happened. They just had the last steel plant in the UK shut down.
	Why? Because they can't compete with anything in China.
	China's got cheap energy because they can build as many and as dirty coal-powered plants as they want.
	But they're shutting all that down in Europe and the United States, so we can't compete with the Chinese because that's one of the biggest cost factors going into the making of steel.
	So steel is going to shut down whether or not you put any tariffs at the border.
	You put tariffs at the border, you're still going to have no steel if you've got all kinds of restrictions on energy production.
	You're still not going to be able to make steel effectively.
	And if you do, it's going to be incredibly expensive.
	But then they'll put taxes on any steel that's coming across the border as well.
	It's just a way of strangling us, I think.
	I think both of these presidents, their policies are not about putting American interests and saving the American economy.
	I think it's about war.
	I think it's about pushing war.
	I think it's about going to war with other countries.
	And I think it's about going to war with the American people as well.
	I agree with you 1000%.
	These tariffs are acts of war.
	They have nothing to do with strengthening the economy.
	That's right. I remember when Trump was running for president the first time and he said, I'm going to build the wall and Mexico is going to pay for it.
	And I said, he can absolutely do that.
	He just has to put a 5% tariff on non-agricultural goods coming across the border.
	you pay for the wall over a five year period or something.
	He never made that argument.
	I kept wondering why his team didn't just tell him to say that.
	I could, cause the media would say, you can't do that.
	Mexico is not going to pay for it.
	They never made the argument.
	It was bizarre.
	And now you've got these, you're talking about 60% some odd tariffs.
	I will say China already has.
	They used our old playbook, kind of like the smooth Holly tariffs in the 1930s.
	They have 50% tariffs on a lot of stuff like incoming goods.
	You can't hardly get things into China.
	They, they propose free trade, um, but they don't practice it necessarily.
	But these, this is your exactly.
	We didn't set the conditions either.
	Or to give incentives to these companies, to build things here, to make things.
	We don't have these tax-free zones.
	So it's really just an act of war.
	Exactly. They're not doing anything to help our economy or to help our manufacturing whatsoever.
	If they want to do that, they would start reducing imposed costs, imposed regulations, prohibitions and bans and all the rest of the stuff.
	But now they keep layering those on.
	So it's like, okay, what's the real agenda here?
	Real agenda is to make us poor.
	It's to go to war with us and to go war with other countries via these economic measures, because that's the way the wars always start.
	I got some questions for you.
	A lot of people put some questions on here for you, Tony.
	On Rock Fan, a Syrian girl says, please ask Tony where he suggests people keep their metals seems like after CBDC hits, the government will raid the big custodial houses.
	Huge hit there. And certainly all safety deposit boxes.
	What do you think? Well, first of all, safety deposit box is a bad idea.
	Just a bad idea across the board.
	You've got your name or your company's name on a safety deposit box in the bank.
	You might have a great relationship with your bank.
	But those are all on the record.
	And you just don't want to do that.
	I think there's some good storage houses, but you're right.
	I mean, I use the storage house IDS and other places, Dylan Gage in Dallas and their networks.
	I use them for, and that's where the rich, you know, they don't keep their metals at home.
	They're very wealthy. They have off-site storage.
	You know, but again, unless you hold it in your hand and you've secured it, that's about the only true way to know I've got this gold or silver.
	So, I mean, nothing, I would never say, that's 100% safe over here.
	I mean, you've got degrees of safety, and I think that if it's a custodial storage facility that's outside of the banking system, which if you store your metals with me, like with the gold and silver IRAs, it's outside of the banking system.
	It's not linked to a bank.
	That's a good place to start.
	If you can secure them at home with a fireproof safe and you feel pretty good about, you know, having somebody watch it if you leave or anything like that, I mean, that's a good way to store it as well.
	That's a great question.
	I think the degrees of safety, you know, as you depart away from you holding it in your hand securely, those are going to change.
	And I think you have to do your own research on whichever you're comfortable with, and especially how much you have.
	Yeah, yeah. Buried in the yard.
	That's... But you can look that up.
	There's ways to do that. Yeah, that's right.
	Make sure that you know where it is.
	There's a lot of safes that are out there like that.
	I had some friends who did that back in North Carolina.
	And that's the first time I saw that.
	On Rockfin, Jason Barker.
	Good to see you, Jason. Asked Tony if a precious metal IRA will be taxed when it is drawn out.
	Many states have done away with taxing metals.
	Well, I think that's two different things, right?
	You've got sales tax, which a lot of them are getting rid of, but then of course the IRA, depending on what kind of IRA you've got, if you've deferred the taxes on it, yes, whenever you take money out in any form, they're going to tax it, right?
	Right.
	Well, that's per the regulations of the IRA themselves.
	It wouldn't matter if it's precious metals or you've got it tied to mutual funds or just paper or just in a savings account.
	It's all tied to the same taxing system and it's whether or not it's matured.
	And of course, the state you're living in, that's a good question.
	I think what he's referring to is the income tax of those states.
	That would pertain to the same thing, again, with the paper IRA, just regular IRA. That would be the same system of taxation.
	So you'd ask your CPA on that, but I'm not 100% sure on the states that actually tax income on precious metals.
	Yeah, there's like a Roth IRA where you can pay the taxes in the year that you make the money, and then you can put it in this IRA, and then you don't have to pay on the compounded gain, I think.
	I don't know. I'm not an accountant.
	Standard one, you deduct whatever you put into the IRA that year against your income taxes.
	So then you have to pay when you take it out.
	And as you said, that is there regardless of whether you've got stocks or bonds or metals or cash or whatever you've got in your IRA. That's a function of the IRA. On Rumble, AP Rumble Seat says, Can you ask Tony if he thinks he'll attempt taking the system down this year for digital currency?
	Taking the entire financial system down to CBDC? Yeah, this year.
	I hope not. I think it's always a possibility.
	I think the further we, the closer we get to any sort of kinetic war with an outside entity, and I'm praying that we don't do that, like if That's why I was talking at the beginning of our interview here about how strange it is on these tariffs.
	I mean, if you don't know history, if you haven't paid close attention to the financial history the last couple hundred years, then it doesn't seem all that out of sorts.
	But it is out of sorts.
	It's very strange. So these are kind of the signposts and things that are alarming me.
	So if we stay... Out of the box of having any sort of kinetic conflict that's major, I think we can continue a while.
	I think they'd like to have a smoother transition into CBDC. I think it'd be like, oh, and it will...
	Be precipitated by, I believe, a banking crisis, and it'll be a way for your safety, for you to opt into it.
	That's right. Some kind of stimulus money that's going to be tied to you accepting it.
	Because that's the plan that they used.
	Gates pushed that in India with their Adhar system.
	They got all the poor people to sign on it because, you know, hey, you want to get welfare, you want to get medical care, you've got to take a number and wait.
	But you take the mark of the beast and wait, that type of thing.
	So they'll bust stuff and then, oh, but we're here to help you, but you're going to have to get the ID. That's the only way you can process this.
	Yeah, I agree.
	I agree with that totally. And it'll be more of a soft thing than a complete demolition of the grid itself and then ordering you to.
	You have to accept it.
	I think part of this is on a spiritual level, like you were talking earlier about the spiritual entities, really, that guide the conspiracy.
	It's not like one family or two families.
	I mean, I think there are some linkages and bloodlines and things like that, but I think this is all spiritual.
	Yeah, yeah.
	And of course, people do pass their spirituality along, good or bad, to their kids in many ways.
	And you know, we're talking about the grid down scenario.
	One of the things we looked at this, and we say, well, you know, they're not going to take the grid down because they really need to have that grid for their own purposes and everything.
	But now we start to see that with artificial intelligence and with these other things, as they're destroying our grid, you've got Sam Altman, you've got Bezos, all these, you know, these artilike villains, they're setting up their own personal power stuff.
	You know, they're going to have their own nuclear reactors and things like that.
	So they're setting up a parallel grid.
	And, of course, the government's got its own as well.
	So they could very easily come in and say, you know, I'm really sorry, but, you know, we've just been hacked by the Russians, and they've completely destroyed the grid that y'all use.
	It's a good thing that we thought about having our own separate grid out here, and we're just fine.
	Thank you. And they'll keep their Internet, and they'll keep their surveillance stuff, and they'll keep all the things that they're doing, but they'll shut down the power to us.
	That's why that's one of the things that people need to think about in terms of preparing.
	You know, what are you going to do?
	How are you going to live without it?
	Can you come up with some kind of yourself power generation?
	Because they're setting up their own power generation that is off of the grid as well.
	Useless eaters of the world unite.
	That's right. We should set up a club.
	The Useless Eaters Club.
	Parallel economies, parallel systems.
	We set up our own. We set up our own.
	They want their own thing. They're all these Bond villains, globalists, Satanists.
	They set up their own. It's fine. But they still have to have people to run them.
	You know, the World Economic Forum, Klaus Schwabian, live in your pod, you'll own nothing and be happy.
	Here's some bugs from Greta.
	That future that they're proposing, nobody wants it.
	It's dead on arrival.
	Nobody wants it. And I love that he's finally stepped down.
	And of course, the World Economic Forum is just the same age as our fiat currency dollar.
	They kind of go together. 1971, they're on the same path.
	And fiat is fake.
	And again, that's... What they've proposed, nobody wants.
	The world that they've created is a hellhole.
	It's unstable. It's schizophrenic.
	It's dirty.
	We don't have the Jetsons future that we were promised.
	There's no flying cars.
	It doesn't look good.
	they've done their best to suppress the imagination and ingenuity and spirit of people in the United States especially to make sure that we just kind of like a we got this one one class of people that's our two classes of people at the super elite and then us the rest of us right there's almost no middle class they've done a pretty good job at that although make sure they've got their flying cars they just to make sure we don't have any access to them and I'm not necessarily certain that I would want to be on with their flying cars either if we take a
	look at the Cybertruck for example but another quick another couple of questions here on Rafael Michelle Obama Thank you for the tip. It says, I might be five kinds of wolf in six months depending on how much extra cash I'm working with.
	I change it all the time.
	Once you've sent me a little gold coin, I carry it sometimes and show people occasionally.
	People inspect, hold it as if it's a medieval sailing navigation apparatus.
	They have no idea...
	What is going on, or if it's real?
	So much fun. If not for WWG, Wise Wolf Gold, I would not be holding, and he says, Airborne.
	And then he also, I guess he was in Airborne as well.
	You were in that, right, Tony?
	Absolutely. Yeah, so I guess both of you were in Airborne.
	On Rockfin, Michelle Obama also writes, he says, Tony, regarding the color, Wise Wolf Gold flash sales, How does that work?
	Why isn't there ever any of those crazy, cool, space-looking Chinese coins from Wolf Classes, Flash...
	What is that?
	Salad? Okay. So, I don't know.
	Do you understand? I'm not sure I understand the question.
	Well, first of all, thank you.
	And I'm proud when I hear...
	That really gives me fuel to continue what I'm doing and try to find great products for people.
	When you say, well, I really love what you sent us...
	Because, again, I search weekly, you know, everywhere, all the nooks and crannies to get the best deals so I can put those in Wolfpack and give the variety.
	I'm very cognizant of every single item that goes in every invoice.
	So thank you for appreciating that.
	It's been interesting the last...
	Ten days, silver has gone up to highest it's been in the last 11 years.
	And, you know, it's broke $32 an ounce.
	We had a large silver buy the other day.
	And as I was building the lone wolf packages, I realized that I couldn't, with shipping and everything else, I couldn't give them just a regular silver round.
	I had to make something different.
	So what I did was I had bought...
	It's a giant thing. It was one of the largest things I've ever bought of silver dollars pre-1900 Morgan silver dollars.
	So if you're a lone wolf, you've got a real Morgan.
	I was able to buy them for a good amount where I saved enough I could pass it on to the customer.
	And we looked them up. Some of them are going to be worth more than even I thought they were going to be worth.
	So you're going to get a collectible if you're a lone wolf member.
	And that's going to last until I run out of these silver dollars.
	So everything is very thought out when it comes to Wolfpack.
	And the reason there's no flash sales and the website...
	You're echoing my frustration.
	If I just had another me...
	Now, I'm not proposing cloning or anything.
	I don't want to get on a Yuval Harari World Economic Forum thing that I'm hackable.
	But I wish I had more of...
	You know, my style of thinking, and I could duplicate that, but I'm just running into the wall every week.
	I mean, I'm just like every day is kind of bleeding into the next, and I can only get so far ahead.
	But we are going to do more flash sales, and, you know, there's going to be more updates to the website, so stand by on that.
	It's not going to be stagnant.
	I won't leave it there. Okay, great.
	Yeah, I remember the movie Multiplicity with Michael Keaton.
	Yeah. He kept making copies of himself, and it would just get one aspect of his personality, or if they did a copy of a copy, it got kind of blurry.
	You know, not too bright, kind of dim.
	I don't think the world needs any more of me, either.
	It was a funny movie.
	I don't know about the science involved in it, but it was a lot of fun.
	And let's see, another question here.
	And it's N-A-Y-T. Would that be Knight?
	Let's just say. Well, sorry if I mispronounce it.
	Anyway. Hey, Tony. Why is to invest in silver and gold jewelry?
	If you understand the purity of the jewelry you're looking at, and one of the things I would recommend is you understand like 10 karat gold is 39%, 14 karat gold is 59%, and so on and so forth.
	Look at 18 karat at 72%.
	Know the purity of the item that you're buying, how much it weighs in grams, and do the math.
	You know, there's 31.1 grams.
	I know I'm giving you a lot of math here.
	This is great to get all these questions, David.
	If I will add, on Saturday at 3 p.m., I have to record a show for a firm that I'm going to be doing podcasts with.
	They wanted me to do... Like an infomercial type show, not necessarily for my company, but to answer questions.
	So at 3pm on Saturday, on all my channels, pretty much, you can come find me, whether it's on Rockfin or even on YouTube.
	I have a Wise Wolf YouTube for now.
	And... We're going to do questions from the audience and questions that are already submitted.
	So 3 p.m. Central Time, if you want to join us for that.
	Great. Definitely do that.
	That's on Saturday. And, of course, you said you're on YouTube for now.
	I guess when they push CBDC through, it'll be illegal to talk about gold.
	It'll be the... It'll be the financial equivalent of ivermectin, I guess.
	I just always assume when I'm going to log in that it's gone because it happened to two of my other channels.
	I just assume. I'm like, oh, wow, it's still streaming.
	But to answer the question on gold and silver jewelry, just know how much weight you're looking at.
	Mm-hmm. And know about the purity.
	Sterling silver is 92.5%.
	So just go by that.
	Just don't overpay too much.
	There's some beautiful jewelry out there that you can get some jewelry value for, but the more that you do that, it's kind of like watches.
	Yeah. Watches are great. Rolex watches are great, but you have to know Exactly what you're doing.
	You have to know what's the store of value in that item.
	There's a lot of people that do 24-karat gold jewelry.
	You can get that from me, actually.
	You could get bracelets and necklaces, and they're not stylish per se, but you can get them from me.
	That's the stuff that you could wear out of the country or wear somewhere, and that's just housing your wealth.
	Another thing you can do, the ladies do, you could get a $20 gold piece, put it in a bezel, You don't want a 14-karat gold chain.
	That's $3,000 right there, or more, of just meltable value.
	Jewelry can be a good investment, but you have to know what you're doing as far as how much it weighs versus the price of the metal.
	Yeah, that'd be one way to travel with it.
	And of course, as you pointed out, just ordinary necklace or something like that.
	Some people will pay extra because of the aesthetics of it.
	And then you get into more of an issue if somebody else is going to be willing to pay for the aesthetics like you paid for it.
	Just keeping it there on the weight amount and the purity amount, that's a smart way to do that.
	I was looking at this, and of course we've had the interest rates.
	The Fed came out and they got hawkish.
	And so that drove down stocks, bonds, gold, and oil.
	And I thought, well, that's kind of interesting.
	And I looked at gold versus oil.
	And look at this chart, folks.
	The orange one there, I know you can't see this, Tony.
	But the orange is gold, and you can see that, and the blue one is oil.
	And so you can see that occasionally there's been some spikes up or down with either gold or with oil.
	But they've pretty much tracked each other.
	And they're being priced, and that's their price in the dollar.
	And so they pretty much go along.
	So what we're talking about is really whether or not the Fed's going to try to boost the dollar.
	That's what I find interesting about all this.
	But, you know, when we look at it, somebody, what made me look at this, Tony, was somebody said, get ready for $100 price.
	Oil, $100 a gallon oil at the pump someday, and maybe $130 if you want premium.
	And I thought, yeah, let me look and see how oil and gold have tracked, and they track each other pretty closely because they're real, versus the dollar, which is a fiat, and it's not real.
	And so what is happening with the hawkish Fed, And how they're manipulating these other financial instruments is simply about them boosting the dollar.
	Because as you were talking about, the Chinese have been moving their stuff out of the dollar significantly.
	They said in April, the Chinese boosted their gold holdings.
	They bought enough gold that was roughly equivalent to 5% of what they publicly said they had.
	So, you know, that's pretty significant.
	and they're dumping American financial instruments coming out of the Federal Reserve. So the question is this, what do you think Tony?
	We've always suggested and thought that they would be lowering interest rates, sacrificing having inflation in order to support Biden. And of course Biden has just completely emptied out one aspect of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to try to give an official high to the economy.
	But is the Fed going to support that?
	Or is the Fed's primary mission, you think, supporting this dollar, which is really under attack by China now, moving away from this, China and Russia, because it's weaponized by Biden, or, you know, they're going to do whatever they need to do to support that, regardless of what happens to Biden and politics?
	What do you think? Well, that is the question.
	You go back to interviews that we've had over the last couple of years, and as they've been raising interest rates faster than any time in history, I've often said, I think the economy is secondary to them, always.
	Do you think the central banksters care that deeply about the economy?
	No, they care about the supremacy of the currency they traffic in, and the way that you keep that supreme is you keep value in it.
	The way you keep value is you keep interest rates high, you keep what they would refer to as a strong dollar.
	Yeah.
	Yeah. Something is not right, and I would say that at the end of the day, they would sacrifice, because you and I both know, whoever wins in November, we lose.
	It doesn't really matter.
	The establishment goes on.
	You're going to get a warp speed.
	You're going to get a foreign war.
	You're going to have open borders.
	You might get some interesting tweets if Orange Man wins.
	You might get something like that, but you're not going to get...
	You're not going to get policy that's going to help the country.
	You're just not. Because we've already done this before, which is even the weirder part, because we're going to have to do it again, and the same people that live through it think that it's going to be different.
	So I really do believe that at the end of the day, if it comes down to it, if they lower rates...
	that it'll goose the economy and give them a sugar high, but that will hurt their standing as the world's reserve currency and their ability to project power will wane, I think they'll choose high interest rates. I think they'll choose raising rates.
	I think they'll step away from quantitative easing.
	Again, because I think no matter what happens in November, they need to continue.
	That's how they reign supreme.
	The Pentagon, you know, I said this many times, the Pentagon, what, three years ago, ran a Gen Z Bitcoin revolt scenario on how to combat the younger generation moving away from the dollars.
	So they know where their lifeblood comes from.
	The lifeblood of the military-industrial complex is the United States dollar.
	I agree. Yeah, and I think Biden is expendable, non-essential in that regard.
	Non-essential? Yeah.
	Now his job's been declared non-essential.
	And Trump as well. Because, like you said, they don't care about the economy.
	They care about their dollar, which is their superpower.
	And I don't think that they care about Biden.
	Typically, they would do things to make him look good.
	But I don't think they care about that either.
	So I'm not quite so sure they're going to be doing any interest rate cuts before.
	But the bottom line is, you get into gold because it's insurance.
	It's insurance against their economic policies and the chaos that they want to create, and it's insurance against their CBDC trap.
	And so for all those reasons, get out of their system, have some things out of their system, just like we're talking about how they're creating their own power grid and all the rest of the stuff, which they're not going to share with us.
	I'm sorry, there's not enough power.
	We've got to run the artificial intelligence and the surveillance stuff, so we don't have any left for you.
	So make sure you've got your stuff on your own, your food production, all the rest of the stuff.
	We're going to have to do as much as we can to get as far away from their locked-in system as we can.
	I think that's true of the money as well.
	I think so. Gold and silver are money.
	Honestly, I'm not in the investment game, but I do trade fake Luciferian bankster notes and transmute those into real money, and that's gold and silver.
	Always a good idea to have physical.
	That's part of I think what's happening, the revolution in currency that we're seeing, this big shift that's going, even Steve Forbes put out an article about how the world's reserve currency is going to be gold again.
	It's just going to shift away from the dollar.
	It's not going to be like the bricks.
	It's not going to be the Chinese yuan.
	It's not going to be any of that. It'll be gold again.
	That'll be the world's reserve currency.
	I agree. Yeah. And troubled, uncertain crisis times.
	That's what's going to happen.
	He understands it. And I think some people are starting to get it outside of the levers of power in the central banks.
	Thank you so much for coming on, Tony.
	Thank you for what you do to support the show.
	And folks, again, you can get to Tony's Wise Wolf through davidknight.gold.
	Wait a minute, there's a couple more questions.
	Have we got a moment?
	You got it, go ahead.
	OK.
	Unrumbled.
	Texas JFK mindset.
	Can you guys talk about the real estate investment predictions, both residential and commercial?
	Well, I think you can see where inflation is.
	It's in the home prices.
	I was in real estate for many years.
	I had a real estate brokerage when I got out of the military.
	It was one of the first things I got interested in.
	I love real estate, but I think that we're in a...
	It's so fake, it's hard to see where the value is, what's up or down, what's the true value of any of these things, especially the housing market.
	And I think Gerald Salente is right.
	I mean, you start looking at the vacancy rates of these major cities with these office buildings.
	Yeah. You want to see, like, a bomb that's about to go off?
	That's going to be... So, I don't...
	I think that we're going to see lower prices.
	Like, if you can hold for a while, like, if you're going to go pick up some...
	There's going to be a...
	In my opinion, there will be a housing crisis of some kind with not only, you know, availability, but the ability to obtain the homes...
	And it's going to be bad for values.
	I agree. When you look at it, we're really entering another one of these financializations of the residential marketplace again, like we did before, but in a different way.
	You know, it's not exactly repeating, but it does rhyme with it, because what are we seeing now?
	We're seeing that only these...
	Wall Street and hedge fund people have the liquidity to buy houses at this price.
	They don't have to worry so much about the interest rates because they're paying cash for it.
	So they've got the money to buy this stuff, but then, you know, what do we do with that?
	So that's the real big issue, and then there's the generational issues with it.
	After Tony goes, I've got something to say about the financialization of farmlands.
	As part of the war on food and on farming, because now the big real estate people are getting in, it's not just commercial real estate, which is going belly up and a threat to the banking industry, as Gerald says, because of the lockdowns and things like that.
	And it's not just because of the inflation and housing and the high interest rates that's You know, causing the financialization of homes where they want to make sure that all of us are renters.
	But it's also the financialization of farmland.
	So we'll talk about that when we come back as well.
	Let's see. Comment from Northwest Free Zone.
	Bricks will destroy the dollar.
	Yeah, I think so. And on Sprumford yesterday, Massey was on Sirius Patriot Channel being interviewed by Ron DeSantis.
	As soon as Massey brought up ending the Fed, because he introduced a bill to end the Fed.
	Good guy, Massey. DeSantis went to a commercial.
	Brought to you by Pfizer.
	No, wait, the Federal Reserve. Also, why does the government only put $50 value on a gold eagle when they're obviously worth way more?
	Yeah, what does that, does that value mean anything?
	To hide their shame.
	That's the... They've already crossed that threshold.
	It went from $20 an ounce, and of course, Franklin Roosevelt made it $35 an ounce after he told you to turn the gold in.
	I have a lot of those $20 gold pieces here in the shop.
	So they moved to the $35 an ounce.
	So $50 under Reagan, that's when they came back with the relaunch of the one-ounce gold eagle and the silver eagle.
	That was just a way of...
	Kind of giving a wink and a nod to the way things used to be when there was value in our currency.
	That's all that is. Wishful thinking.
	Yeah, yeah. It's just a nostalgic engraving that's on it, isn't it?
	I guess. If they put the actual value of dollars on there, that'd be a different ballgame, wouldn't it?
	It would look really strange to the average person.
	That's right. Chevron 321.
	Where would gold and silver be considered legal tender?
	Lots of states here in the Union, for sure.
	There's other countries that also have gold as legal tender, gold mostly as legal tender, but all over the United States.
	That's a question. We've had a lot of these states now, several of them, I've talked about it, have said through the UCC Code, the Universal Commercial Code, So the UCC, they've said that they would recognize cryptocurrency, not recognize a central bank digital currency, foreign or domestic. Do they ever say anything in the UCC about gold and silver?
	Not that I'm aware of. Interesting.
	I'm not sure of that.
	I do know a lot of these states have just gone ahead and said, you know, gold and silver are legal tender.
	You can use the American Gold Eagle and the American Silver Eagle.
	But you have to remember, too, that gold and silver are very liquid.
	So if you've just got a dealer like me or a gold and silver exchange or just...
	Putting it out to the public, you can sell it yourself.
	It's very easy to get in and out of gold and silver.
	So gold and silver just really, to me, are a better form of money.
	And of course, you know, we get into a situation where we've got gray markets or black markets or something like that, which I'm assuming that's what's going to be in the future.
	Then that all is going to work its way out.
	Yeah. You know, because people figured out, and they will do it pretty quickly, how to determine the value of the gold coins.
	Of course, we used to have people who would shave off the edges.
	That's why they've got the ridges on there, you know, just shave a little bit off so they could gradually accumulate it.
	But it's a better way to gradually accumulate and an honest way to gradually accumulate it by going to Wolfpack at WiseWolfGold through DavidKnight.Gold.
	Thank you so much for coming on, Tony.
	Do you have a program today following this show?
	I do. I have the Arterburn radio transmission at 11 a.m.
	Central Time. If you want to join me over on Rockfin or on my Twitter at Tony Arterburn, we'll be broadcasting live.
	Great, great. And bring your questions.
	All right, yeah, we'll continue the questions there.
	Thank you so much, Tony.
	Thanks for coming on, and thanks for all that you do to support the broadcast.
	We really do appreciate it.
	Thank you. All right, folks, take a quick break, and we'll be right back.
	Unlike most revolutions, where the people rise against a real economic oppression...
	In our case here in Boston, we are fighting for purely an abstract principle.
	It is, however, not nearly so abstract as the young gentleman supposes.
	The issue involved here is one of monopoly.
	Today the British government will monopolize the sale of tea in our country.
	Tomorrow it will be something else.
	I'm going to be a good boy.
	It's your move.
	Move.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Right, and a couple of comments here.
	I'm going to talk about the financialization of farmland as part of the war on food, but a couple of comments here.
	Like Maragon said, prepare for the worst, hope for the best, trust in Jesus.
	Yes, absolutely. On Rumble, no truth in them says, well, either way, David, I'm going to stop eating chicken poop just to be safe.
	That's right, because you might get some bird flu if you do that.
	Might happen to get some other things as well.
	I don't know. They will just, just anything to make a buck, won't they?
	And there's no oversight from the FDA? From the USDA, they have no problem with that.
	Feeding chicken poop to cows and then feeding the cows to you.
	The financialization of farmland.
	This is something from Off Guardian.
	You can also find it at Free Thought Project.
	They picked up the Off Guardian article.
	Between 2008 and 2022, land prices nearly doubled throughout the world.
	They tripled in Central Eastern Europe.
	In the UK, an influx of investment from pension funds and private wealth contributed to a doubling of farmland prices from 2010 to 2015.
	Land prices in the US agricultural heartlands of Iowa quadrupled between 2002 and 2020.
	Agricultural investment funds rose tenfold between 2005 and 2018.
	So U.S. investors are doubling their stake in farmland since 2020.
	Meanwhile, agricultural commodity traders are speculating on farmland through their own private equity subsidiaries, while new financial derivatives are allowing speculators to accrue land parcels and lease them back to struggling farmers.
	This is like the housing thing, and we're going to wind up having, you know, they go in and they're making a lot of money buying up residential housing because they're the only ones that got the money to be able to afford prices, afford the houses at this price.
	They'll then turn back and lease them to us.
	They'll create these financial derivatives, and we know what happens when they create these new financial instruments, That are always a scam.
	I mean, we've seen this so many times.
	They keep doing this over and over again, creating these derivative markets, which is what they did with housing once before.
	But now doing it with farmland.
	And of course, I think they'll do it with housing as well.
	Top-down green grabs.
	We're now accounting for 20% of large-scale land deals.
	You want to know why Bill Gates is grabbing up all this farmland and everything?
	That's part of it.
	And it's also part of it is, of course, the war on food.
	That is very obvious. But the tremendous economic advantage that's there is something we really haven't talked about.
	I did not realize, for example, that things had doubled or tripled or quadrupled in all these different geographical areas.
	It's a smart investment for them to make, even if they didn't want to starve and kill us.
	But hey, you know, I mean, it's a win-win situation for somebody like Bill Gates.
	He can make lots of money and starve and kill us.
	That's exactly what they want to do.
	So there have been government pledges for land-based carbon removal alone that add up to almost 1.2 billion hectares, equivalent to the total global crop land.
	Think about that. And, of course, a lot of these conservation easements, which is last time I had on Senator Nicely, he was talking about that, how that's been a trap for a lot of people.
	They are laying traps for everybody with things like conservation easements, things like, you know, as they see the price of land going up, they can get into these derivative instruments.
	The report says that agricultural land is increasingly being turned into a financial asset And of course, doing it at the expense of small and medium-sized farms.
	However, despite skyrocketing food prices, there was, according to the IPES in 2022, that's an international panel of experts on sustainable food systems.
	This is a non-profit think tank that's actually kind of on our side.
	They're against big agricultural concerns, against consolidation, centralization of food production.
	So the IPES says sufficient food and no risk of global food supply shortages, despite the skyrocketing prices.
	Despite the self-serving narrative being pushed by big agribusiness and land investors, they said there was no food shortage.
	So now we need to have the bird flu so that we can do things to destroy that.
	The increased prices were due to speculation on food commodities, corporate profiteering, and a heavy reliance on food imports.
	And of course, it's not just meat and dairy.
	As I pointed out, these green goblins, that's what we should call them, the green goblins, They're villains.
	They're gobbling up our land.
	They want to gobble up our food and make sure we don't have any.
	So the green goblins are out there even after rice.
	Oh, sorry. It's got CO2 or methane or nitrogen.
	They'll come up with something that is ubiquitous so they can shut it down.
	It doesn't really matter. None of this stuff is true.
	The climate alarmism is not true.
	All the concern about natural substances like CO2, methane, and nitrogen is not of any concern.
	So they could call it anything they want and use that as a pretext to shut people's food down.
	You know, in other parts of the world, we're not using meat and dairy so much they use rice.
	Well, we've got to shut that down, too, to save the planet.
	An expert warns that Sweden is on the brink of a civil war as a country is gripped by migrant violence.
	I talked about this briefly the other day, and of course, that is the whole point, to get people to beg for IDs.
	Because ultimately, regardless of which one of these crises they tell you that they're solving, it always goes back to the ID. That's what central bank digital currencies are about.
	That's what all this stuff is about.
	I'm going to take a quick break here, and when we come back, we're going to talk about...
	Something in terms of how artificial intelligence is going to impact our lives in a little bit different way.
	I talked about this a little bit yesterday in terms of Scarlett Johansson and this voice that they tried to buy her voice and she didn't want to do it, so they copied it anyway because, you know, that's what artificial intelligence does.
	It's all built on copyright and intellectual property theft, just like YouTube.
	But there's something else in it.
	There's a movie that came out 11 years ago, that precisely predicted all of this and what was going to be happening within the entertainment business.
	And we'll talk about that when we come back.
	Stay with us
	How to make a paper airplane
	Alright, and welcome back.
	Yesterday we talked about, you know, this interesting thing that's put out by OpenAI.
	They call it Chat 4-0, as in Omni.
	And that was a little chatty, I found it to be very annoying, voice that was there.
	But it was, it did sound like A good deal like Scarlett Johansson.
	And she came out and said, yeah, they tried to do a contract with me.
	I said, no. They went ahead and did anyway.
	She sent them lawyers, sent letters to them.
	They took it down. But this is broader than just this one particular incident.
	Because as Hollywood Reporter says, battle lines are being drawn over the use of AI tools in Hollywood.
	Actors may be the next group of creators to open another front in what could be an industry defining legal battle against AI firms over the use of copyrighted works and personal data in order to power their human mimicking chatbots.
	So again, they're stealing intellectual property.
	They're stealing people's appearances.
	They're stealing people's voices.
	They use it for their own stuff.
	But it's based on theft.
	It's based on imitation, repackaging.
	It's very deceptive.
	And when we look at it, the reason I criticize it is not even for that, but because of what I think it was specifically designed for, and that is for surveillance.
	And for pattern matching, you know, to be able to instantly identify us, just as 5G is a fundamental technology that must be there, regardless of the consequences to us and to our health, it must be there as a substrate for the kind of surveillance state that they want.
	So must you have artificial intelligence to make use of all that data.
	So again, she alleged that they were copying and imitating her voice after she refused to license it to the company.
	And I think they can make a pretty strong case for it.
	But this is actually something that was shown and predicted 11 years ago in a movie that really wasn't very good.
	It had Robin Wright in it, you know, from The Princess Bride.
	And she was actually playing herself.
	And it was actually about the decision of an actress who, in the movie, Robin Wright has a child who's got real health issues.
	That's created financial strain for her to give the incentive for her to sign over her entire persona.
	To this company that then takes it and she doesn't act anymore.
	And that's really what would have happened with Scarlett Johansson.
	It would have damaged her career from overexposure.
	And no matter how much compensation she got for it, and I'm sure that they would not have given her some kind of a royalty every time the thing spoke, that would be unworkable.
	But I want to play for you a little bit of the trailer for this movie that came out 11 years ago.
	It was called The Congress.
	And then we'll talk about what it was actually showing.
	If I can find it on here, here it is.
	You had it all, Robin.
	Movie Queen at 24.
	And you slammed all the open doors, crushed all the dreams.
	Then Aaron's condition started going downhill.
	Eventually, you will be completely blind.
	This proposal won't be on the table again.
	Robin Wright for Jeff Green.
	A princess bride.
	And now I'm in this situation.
	What situation are you in, Jeff?
	A situation of offering you the last contract that you'll ever have.
	We want to scan you.
	All of you, your body, your face, your emotions, your laughter, your tears.
	And we want to own this thing called Robin Wright.
	I have to take care of my son.
	Robin, things are changing quickly.
	You're entering a new age.
	Once we've scanned you, there's no going back.
	Welcome to the Futurist Congress.
	Okay, so that's where it gets weird, and that's where they lost me, and that's why it's got very, very low ratings.
	I'm not recommending that you watch it.
	The first part of it actually was really good.
	And in this review 11 years ago, almost exactly 11 years ago, May 16, 2013, what they said was in the Congress, Robin Wright plays herself in a trippy, cautionary tale about where society is headed, and we're there today. Assuming that movie stars license their essence to studios and audiences, abandon cinema in favor of chemical cocktails that allow them to experience life as their celebrity of choice, virtual reality.
	So you can go in and you can, not even that they're looking at movies where they have recreated this, you know, Robin Wright or any other actor, but it's going to be an immersive virtual reality experience.
	All of the stuff is coming together You would just be able to instead of being a furry or some fictional character like you could be a particular actor or actress This live tune live and cartoon hybrid ideal for midnight crowds and psychedelic enthusiasts But they didn't like it too much and neither did I they said the beginning of it Would make a really good hour-long episode of the Twilight Zone and that was the part of the trailer that I showed you
	there After that, it goes into the production values were not very good in terms of the animated stuff.
	They said the remainder of the film functions as an adaptation in spirit only of Stanislaw Lim's The Futurological Congress.
	That's why they called it The Congress.
	But it redirects the classic sci-fi novels anti-communist satire, without any humor, it takes all the humor out of his satire, toward a society dominated by drug companies and Hollywood studios, two industries that make decidedly strange bedfellows.
	Except not really.
	You know, they're pushing everything, and Yuval Harari has said, it's his desire to make sure that we drop out, that we play video games, that we do drugs, anything to keep us away from reality.
	Virtual reality, whatever, you know, to keep us in the, you know, locked in our room, in a fantasy world, they'll do that.
	And of course, Hollywood will be a part of that, as Hollywood is tied in with video games as it is now.
	But I think also drugs.
	And I think there's also a place there for them to bring in these personalities.
	It'll be iconic.
	And it's already begun in terms of going in and mapping people's appearances and being able to get them to move and speak.
	It's only going to get much, much better in a very, very short period of time.
	I think we're going to see that.
	And they talked about that 11 years ago.
	It seemed kind of strange, but they could see that that was where it was headed.
	Brian Shulhavi talked about AI. He said, if you want to take a look at Boeing, he thinks that perhaps what is happening there is the results of your faith in AI technology.
	He said, behold the results of your faith in AI technology, the Boeing example of failure.
	Brian Shalhavi, Health Impact News.
	And he quotes one of the whistlebowers, John Barnett, who was found dead.
	As a quality manager at Boeing, you're the last line of defense before a defect makes it out to the flying public.
	And I haven't seen a plane out of Charleston yet that I'd put my name on saying that it is safe and airworthy.
	So Brian says, so far I've not found anybody investigating what I've investigated today.
	That's why I'm going to report on it in this article, and that is a fact that while Boeing has an annual budget of $6.4 billion, with a B, for developing AI and technology, and that while it has invested in AI technology for over a decade now,
	Not only are their planes not becoming safer and more advanced due to this newer technology, but they're becoming more dangerous and less advanced than older planes were before the rapid development of all this AI technology.
	At the very least, we can say that all the billions that were spent on AI and technology by Boeing over the past decade plus have not made their planes safer.
	So even if it isn't the cause of these increased accidents, he said certainly it hasn't made them safer.
	So it's been money that's been wasted.
	And he said just like we saw all these movements to make autonomous self-driving cars and how that was a lot of wasted money.
	Billions poured down the drain.
	And Brian Shalhavi has said for the longest time that he thinks that this is going to be a third wave Of Hopium about artificial intelligence, that it's not going to fulfill the promises that it's made before.
	I don't know about that.
	I think that it'll be deceptive enough that people will buy into it.
	And I think that part of the deception is for us to think that it's about making things for us.
	It may be there to distract and to entertain, to mislead and misdirect us.
	It is not there to serve us.
	It is part of the CERV state, the surveillance state.
	And I think that when we look at the impact one way or the other as to what it's having on, let's say, Boeing, where they put $6.5 billion in, to me, I think the real issue...
	I'm not surprised to see Sam Altman and Jeffrey Hinton and these other people who are essentially the founding fathers of this artificial intelligence stuff.
	I'm not surprised to see them Teaming it up with universal basic income.
	And not just because for, you know, 15 or so years they've been talking about how they're going to replace people with artificial intelligence and robotics and things like that.
	Not simply because it's a pacification, not simply to pacify us with universal basic income, but the fact that universal basic income is welfare, which pacifies people.
	And artificial intelligence is there in the same way to make us, as I said yesterday, Eloy.
	To make us dependent on this centrally provided stuff so we can't do things for ourselves.
	So we don't have to grow or build or repair things.
	We rely on artificial intelligence.
	That has been one of the big negatives of technology all along.
	I mean, it's great to have these, you know, directions given to you, for example, to just take one example, have directions given to you, but there is a price when we lose that ability to find our way, to be able to read maps well.
	We had, for the love of the road, who does trucks, he said, yeah, you asked what's going to happen to trucking if GPS goes down.
	Actually, it was Freight Waves who...
	I kind of asked that question.
	I said, do we still have any maps that are even current anymore in any place?
	And he goes, yeah, we do. And of course, you can always pick up the phone and call somebody and ask them, assuming that we've got phone lines that are working, if the GPS is not working.
	But nevertheless, when you look at, and I've noticed it with myself, you know, I, especially there in Austin, they have a very strange patterns.
	They got a lot of crisscrosses and flyovers and all that kind of stuff, and a lot of one-way streets everywhere.
	That's kind of a unique thing that they do in Texas.
	One-way streets that are on either side of the interstate.
	Most other places that I've lived, typically you only have one-way streets around downtown because when you get around the seat of government, they wanna start telling you which way you can drive even, you know.
	But most everything else is a two-way road, but in Texas, so many one-way roads that it was really difficult just to go to an area that you don't typically travel to that you don't know and to try to find your way around even by dead reckoning.
	We talked earlier about the trip I took with a bunch of high school students to go to Europe and We were on a bus and there was a woman who was kind of our guide and...
	She was always lost as to where the bus was and where we needed to go to get to this other thing.
	And everybody, high school kids, but we were driving cars for the most part in those days, even in high school.
	And she'd say, well, let's go over there.
	No, no, it's this way. And she goes, Americans always seem to know where to go.
	I'm always so confused. Because she was always just getting on public transportation and not thinking about where she was going.
	And we were used to driving our own cars, and now we're getting less that way with the GPS that is there.
	And if you look, they talked about this significantly, about the effect that it has on us when this technology first started coming out.
	They talked about the London cab drivers.
	They would have to do the knowledge, and it's incredibly complicated.
	The roads in London have evolved over centuries.
	You'll go along and the road will be called one name for a few blocks, and all of a sudden it changes to another name and then to another name, and it's this hodgepodge of stuff.
	And these people would ride around, these London cabbies would ride around on bicycles doing the knowledge, basically learning, building a map of London in their head and memorizing all these different street names and locations and getting that relationship there.
	And they could actually measure one part of the brain on these London cab drivers that was highly developed because they were exercising it.
	And by the same token, if you don't exercise your brain just like any muscle, it atrophies.
	And so that's one of the big things.
	You know, these tools, as useful as they are, can lead to atrophy.
	And I see that coming in steroids with artificial intelligence.
	Beyond the waste of spending billions of dollars on technology that is mostly science fiction, is the over-reliance on this technology actually leading to decreased performance and safety that's primarily behind the cause for these failures at Boeing, he asks.
	I ask Brian. And I think that is true.
	I think its key thing is as a surveillance tool.
	I think that when we look at using it for art and science and things like that, it's going to make us weaker, not stronger.
	It's going to make us more dependent on this system that we don't control.
	And I really think that we need to think about that.
	In the same way that the Amish, why do they have horse and buggy stuff?
	And why do they build their buildings themselves, the tools that are 150, 200 years old or whatever?
	It's because they want to have that self-sufficiency.
	They don't want to be dependent on the outside world.
	All of this technology, just like universal basic income, is making us dependent on them.
	Now, I see Jason Barker says he's going to be covering AI and the arts this weekend on Knights of the Storm.
	So tune in there. More on the music side, he said.
	I've got two guests who are coming on.
	Well, that'll be really good. And that's my feeling about music as well, of course.
	It's a very different way that you create music now with some of these new programs.
	You would go in and you would type a description of what you would want to have for the music in the same way that instead of being directly involved in creating the artwork and some of these art programs like Dolly and things like that, you would type a description of what you want to have.
	Or the other one that did the movies.
	Was it Sora or Sura or something like that?
	Again, you're typing a description about what you want to see.
	And so if you're really good at typing descriptions, if you're a novelist or something like that, you can type a very detailed paragraph.
	It gives you very complex, interesting images and things, and you give it some general idea about how you want the camera moved and things like that.
	But you don't actually do anything other than just describe what you want to see.
	Same thing is true of the music.
	You're just kind of generally describing the styles and maybe the style of the music and maybe the style of the singers and stuff like that, a I just don't find that to be very creative.
	I don't find it to be very satisfying.
	I mean, there's a whole spectrum there from learning an instrument, playing it live, and playing with other human beings, and then from that you can move to a situation, which is what I do for the music on the show, where I get virtual musical instruments, and you play those musical instruments, and you play them, all the parts in an ensemble or something.
	Or you can sit down and type in a paragraph, And say, well, this is what I'd like to see.
	I just don't find that to be at all interesting, a way to do any of that stuff.
	And in each of these, there is...
	You know, you could argue that going from a situation where we're playing a single instrument...
	To a situation where you are combining all these different instruments and playing each of them and putting them together.
	Then that becomes like a musical arrangement type of thing, and there's some creativity involved in that.
	Also, you're mixing the different sounds together to get the sound that you want and to bring out the lines that you want and the instruments that you want.
	So there's a lot more of a creative process.
	It's a different process than playing the instrument yourself.
	You know, live or with other people.
	But it's still very much a music experience.
	Whereas these new programs where you just type in what you want to see, I don't see that as music at all.
	But, you know, people will be able to use it to create background stuff.
	And I think a lot of people who are getting pre-programmed background music to use for stuff, I think it's going to be a real threat.
	To the companies that would sell that kind of stuff.
	We're gonna take a quick break and we'll be right back.
	♪♪♪
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Alright, welcome back on Rumble.
	Boondock, 84.
	Thank you for the tip. I remember one-way aisles at the grocery store in 2020.
	Yeah, I'm afraid I do, too.
	Etched forever in my memory.
	I'll tell you what, those days.
	Well, let's talk a little bit about some of the issues facing us here in terms of privileges.
	You know, we've got some real privileged people out there, don't we?
	Yeah, that's a favorite term of the left.
	And this article from LifeSite News says, why the madness of preferred pronouns doesn't deserve to be tolerated.
	Well, I think that we need to stop calling them preferred pronouns for starters.
	They have their preferences.
	I've got my preferences.
	My preferences don't matter.
	So their pronouns are not simply preferred.
	The pronouns that I prefer are he and him or she and her.
	They don't care that that's what I want to use.
	So their constellation of all these different made-up pronouns and everything, those are privileged pronouns because they've got special privileges.
	They have the privilege to tell me that I have to do what they prefer.
	And what I prefer doesn't matter.
	They are privileged.
	And I think we need to start calling them privileged pronouns.
	As a direct challenge to these people on the left who are always privileged this and privileged that and racist this and racist that, I'm sick of all that.
	LifeSite News says, are you offended?
	Well, yeah, me too. And we can both live with it.
	It's not so bad, especially if we're expected to be diverse.
	They don't want diversity, do they?
	And equity is not equality either.
	You can spare me the sign off of your signature that might go he slash him or she slash her or they slash them.
	I'm not familiar with all the jargon, and I don't want to be.
	I can think for myself.
	So again, they're going to push their preferences on us, but my preferences don't matter at all to them.
	This is a game of power.
	And it's a game of privilege, and they're the ones who have the privilege, they think, and we don't need to play that game with them.
	How could an advanced, sophisticated culture, apparently devoted to science, be so unscientific?
	And how could we have ghouls who are mutilating children under the guise of a false compassion?
	That's right. Lockdown.
	That's a term of imprisonment.
	And they began it in the schools for kids to condition them.
	They have planned this for so long.
	They chose their terms.
	They accustomed us to their terms, and they gradually nudged us down that path.
	Well, they had lockdowns in schools, and they did every lockdown.
	And a lot of these people had already gone through the whole school system.
	They knew exactly what to do.
	Oh, lockdown, that means I don't go anywhere.
	They masked kids.
	They isolated kids.
	And they have the audacity to talk to us about socialization.
	Here's what one homeschooling dad had to say on social media.
	You know, the most common question you get asked as a homeschool parent is, what about socialization?
	And I've got to tell you, it's a great question, because it is almost impossible to do it the way the public school system does.
	I mean, every single time my kids leave the house to go to, you know, church or a sporting event or a festival or a parade or the theater or the movies, I've got to remind them, hey, remember...
	Only associate with people roughly within your same age group and make sure you're only talking when given permission or else you'll be punished.
	Replicating that kind of model, which takes place nowhere else in society, it's tough.
	That was always the question.
	That's why, you know, when you look at this, abortion was always my body, my choice.
	And these people, no, you're going to have to wear a mask.
	No, you're going to have to get a vaccine.
	They don't care about your body and your choice.
	An abortion was never about your body.
	It's about somebody else. And then when you talk about socialization, oh, well, you've got to send your kids to school.
	I would always say, well, wait a minute.
	I've been in school. I know that we had to sit there and be quiet.
	I know that we had to do exactly as we were told.
	We had to defer to, you know, the teacher.
	I know that when I was in school, if somebody was in elementary school, somebody is a year older than you, ooh, that's a big deal.
	If they're a couple of years younger than you, they're nothing.
	You know, that type of thing. And that rigid segregation by age.
	And so I knew the socialization stuff was nonsense, just like I knew the My Body, My Choice stuff was nonsense.
	But then when we saw what happened with the medical martial law of Trump and Biden, the fact that they would lock these kids down, that mask them, that isolate them, that bully them.
	Bullying! Bullying! We've got to have all the kids of different gender because of bullying.
	And yet, who is doing the bullying throughout all this stuff?
	So, yeah, we don't need to play that game.
	We understand it is a game.
	It's a power game.
	And it's a lie. And if you use their pronouns that they demand that you use, then they'll find something else to push you around with.
	Now, you may decide that you will just plow ahead and do things on your own way, which is fine.
	But then, says this writer, so will I. If the politically correct sign-offs continue, expect a reply.
	And I want to also encourage those who are not mad to begin their existence by doing the same thing.
	It will help the mad people to return to their senses.
	And it truly is more compassionate than pandering to it.
	And so George Barna, who...
	I had the pleasure of interviewing George Barna.
	I've looked at his studies for a long time.
	And... He's always looked at worldviews, and especially the Christian stuff.
	Where are Christians in this society?
	What are they really thinking about?
	And he says, you know, we've reached a time of Christian invisibility, he calls it.
	And he said there's been a steady decrease in biblical worldview.
	When we talk about worldview, in other words, how do you view the world?
	There's so many different worldviews.
	Everybody's got one.
	It may be a mixture of different religions.
	It may be a mixture of religion and secularism or different political philosophies or whatever.
	But it is going to be how you view the world.
	And it will also contain things like, you know, what is right and what is wrong and Things that you should do, things that you must do.
	These are all part of the worldview.
	I mean, just look at the reaction of all these people to that NFL kicker.
	They're showing their worldview.
	They're demanding that he conform to their worldview.
	And so he said, we've got a steady decrease in a biblical worldview and also a dwindling concern for spiritual formation.
	With Christians, because that's who he typically looks at.
	He typically asks people who identify, self-identify as Christians.
	He said we're at a time of Christian invisibility in our culture.
	And so we could call it the Ichabod era, right?
	The spirit has departed.
	It's the same thing that, you know, when Hophni and Phinehas, I forget which one of them's wife was pregnant, and the ark was captured, and You know, they're killed in the battle, and then when the father hears it, he falls over backwards and he dies, and she's dying in childbirth, and she calls her child Ichabod, which is the spirit as the glory has departed, right?
	And really, it has.
	It really has. We're at that kind of a juncture, I think.
	And how did we get there?
	same way they did by thumbing our nose at God and rebelling against him. He said people have become more selfish, churches have become less influential, pastors have become less centered on the Bible. He said families have invested less of their time and energy in spiritual growth, particularly for their children.
	The media now influences the church more than the church influences the media or the culture for that matter.
	The Christian body tends to get off track arguing about a lot of things that really don't matter.
	And I would say, like pronouns.
	I don't need to argue with these people.
	I'm not playing their game. And I don't need to argue with you about the reality that we're created, male and female.
	It's ridiculous. It's self-evident.
	It's a self-evident truth.
	It's also self-evident that you're playing a power game if you're trying to use your privileges to impose your pronouns on me.
	Now, they've got the force of the government backing them up.
	Just another reason for us to push back against that, I guess.
	To address these issues, Barna advocated for a radical return to biblical roots.
	But that, he said, might require rethinking the modern church.
	He said, if we were to go back to the Bible, I think we'd recognize the local church, the institutional church, as we have created it, is man-made.
	It's not in the scriptures, the programs, the titles, the buildings, all the stuff that's become sacrosanct in American Christian culture and around the world is not necessarily biblical.
	He said, Jesus didn't come to build institutions.
	He came to build people.
	He devoted the ministry of his portion of his life to investing in individuals, and that's what each of us who are followers of Christ need to be doing.
	Do you want to build your children up?
	We should be looking at that, right?
	That should be your focus.
	Instead of focusing on programs and buildings, Barna, who is a father and grandfather, urged believers to invest in children that he sees as the future.
	This includes prioritizing spiritual education, modeling biblical principles, creating accountability structures within the family.
	He said we make a huge mistake by simply using children as bait rather than as the primary focus of who we want to build up through whatever ministry impact or influence we can have.
	What does he mean by that, using them as bait?
	I think what he means by that is having a whole bunch of children's programs.
	So it's like, you know, bring your kids here.
	We'll entertain them.
	We'll keep them happy. I told a story before about how in my in-law's 50th anniversary they decided that they would have all of their kids and spouses and grandkids go with them on a Disney cruise.
	I've also talked about how I loathe cruises.
	It always gets Karen angry about it.
	But, yeah, I don't like being on cruises.
	It was a Disney cruise, and we go in there and had my sons at the time.
	They were young, and they wanted to put a bracelet on them.
	Travis really hated having that bracelet on them.
	But the reason they wanted to put a bracelet on them to track them was because the idea was that this Disney family cruise, we're going to turn our kids over to them so we can go do our own thing.
	And they couldn't believe it that we weren't going to do that.
	I said, well, okay, you've got some kids' activities.
	We'll come along. We're not really set up for the parents to accompany the kids.
	And I'm like, no, we're going to definitely go because I find that to be really strange.
	But I guess we were the only parents who were there.
	None of the other parents wanted to accompany their kids to see what total strangers are going to be doing with them.
	I mean, they're Disney employees.
	They're perfectly safe.
	Exactly. Disney would never do anything strange to your kids.
	You know, at that time, I would have never thought, you know, this is the early 90s or mid-90s.
	I would have never thought that there would be some guy as an evil queen.
	But that's the way Disney rolls now.
	But, yeah, we're going to go with them.
	We're going to watch what they're doing because it wasn't just that we didn't trust them.
	We just wanted to be with our kids.
	And, you know, see what they're doing.
	Have fun with them. So we did the races with the pieces of soap that we built and things like that.
	Anyway, you know, but when you look at it, the church does that a lot, right?
	Just bring the kids in.
	We got all these programs. Now you can go off and do your own thing.
	And parents are like, great, I don't have to bother with these kids anymore.
	If you have that kind of attitude, it's going to be bad for you, bad for the kids, right?
	You need to look at them not as the churches and institutions don't need to look at the kids as bait like a Disney cruise or something.
	We've got all kinds of stuff to keep your kids happy and occupied.
	No, you need to look at them as something that you want to build.
	So we need to back up and we need to recognize that it starts with families.
	Parents have the primary responsibility to raise their children to become spiritual champions.
	Local churches need to support parents in that endeavor.
	Our primary focus needs to be on children.
	It needs to be on growing their biblical worldview.
	If we do that, we'll be able to grow the 3% of adults who are disciples in America today to a larger proportion.
	He said, when I first got started, I was trying to figure out how I could add value to what was happening in the church across the country.
	He said, there didn't seem to be a lot of trend-oriented information relating to the depth of people's faith.
	So one trend that he says he's concerned about is the potential negative impact of artificial intelligence.
	He said, we're already seeing an impact on sermons across the country.
	He said, and it could be because the pastor wants to do a good job, or it could be simply because the pastor is lazy, but they're having AI help them to write a better sermon.
	See, it doesn't matter whether you are, you know, trying to do something better, or you're just simply lazy.
	You're going to have the AI write the stuff for you, whether it's a sermon, or whether it's a piece of music, or whether it's a book.
	And you're just, you're losing your ability.
	And it's gonna misdirect you into other things as well.
	He says that the body of Christ, we gotta be suspicious of and careful about anything that ever labels itself artificial, because that means fake, doesn't it?
	It's probably not good for our mental health.
	It's probably not good for our physical health or for our spiritual health.
	I just encourage genuine leaders to be very cautious about inviting any of that into our lives, and particularly in how we're going to take that and then influence other people's lives.
	He said, parents are the gatekeepers.
	They act like a leader.
	They take the lead. They make the tough choices.
	You know, it's interesting. I saw this thing.
	Candace Owen put it out. She was pushing, you know, we've got to ban pornography.
	And it's like, okay, do you understand that every problem that is important doesn't need to be solved by government?
	Is that something that we would expect that conservatives would understand?
	But they don't. You know, Candace Owen, I'm not picking on Candace Owen.
	She's typical. Everybody, if they look at it, as I've said many times, it used to be when I was a kid, you know, say, well, can I do this?
	Hey, it's a free country. You don't hear anybody say that anymore.
	And so when you complain about something, you know, when I was a kid, people say, hey, don't make a federal case out of it.
	Now everybody, including conservatives, want to make a federal case literally out of everything, including pornography.
	I don't support that.
	I don't support marijuana. But I know how alcohol and drug prohibition has not worked.
	I know that when we offload and outsource drugs, Our spiritual issues and our morality and other things like that to law enforcement or to artificial intelligence, that's a foolish thing to do.
	These things are too important to offload to government to do because government never does a good job.
	They never do the right thing.
	Why would we want them to be in charge of pornography when they're probably some of the most perverted people in the country up in Washington, D.C.? No, I think, you know, we need to think about...
	People talk about carpe diem, you know?
	Seize the day. Maybe what we need to think about is how we seize power.
	The power over our own life, over our own family, over our own decisions.
	What would that be? Carpe Dynamo or something?
	Carpe Dynamo! We could make like a Superman shirt with that or something.
	Carpe Dynamo! I don't know.
	Something like that. That's where they got dynamite from.
	The path to the thriving Christian community lies in returning to core biblical principles, the empowerment of parents.
	We've got the power.
	We just need to take it. You know, God has left that door open even with all of the other doors to freedom shut.
	God has left that door open for us to do with our kids educationally as we wish.
	We have to take that power and use it.
	Thank you for joining us.
	Let me tell you, The David Knight Show, you can listen to with your ears.
	You can even watch it by using your eyes.
	In fact, if you can hear me, that means you're listening to The David Knight Show right now.
	Yeah, good job.
	Ha ha ha! And you want to know something else?

▲