Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 2, 2024 - The David Knight Show

03:01:54

The David Knight Show - 07/02/2024

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	you
	using free speech to free minds
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	As the clock strikes 13, it's Tuesday, the 2nd of July.
	Hear of our Lord, 2024.
	Well, today we're going to take a look at Civil War.
	Is this what the great replacement about Biden is really about?
	These two guys have been channeled through the system without any debates, without any primaries.
	They have a debate before we've ever had a debate before.
	They become the nominees.
	What kind of a selection process are we in?
	As we see, Trump has created a civil war within the Republican Party.
	Now Biden is doing the same thing within the Democrat Party.
	But is there, as we look at these rulings coming out of the Supreme Court, are they setting everybody up for an expectation?
	And they're going to be so disappointed if they don't get their way?
	I mean, now everybody's even more certain that Trump is going to win.
	So we're going to take a look at that.
	We're also going to take a look at some updates with pharmaceuticals.
	There may be something that can be done about autism.
	There's some hope with that.
	We'll take a look at the Supreme Court decisions.
	And we have Eric Peters, who is going to be joining us in the third hour.
	A lot of things to talk about.
	We'll be right back. Yeah, last night I was on late with...
	Clyde Lewis, he's on the West Coast, and he's in the late evening, and so it was after midnight for me.
	So if I have some Biden moments here...
	What's going on with this stuff?
	I had like two or three hours of sleep last night.
	But as we were talking, and he was going through the different angles with what is happening with the Great Replacement, let's just call it that, right?
	I said, oh, Great Replacement, that was a conspiracy.
	Well, no, we know there is a conspiracy.
	They are breathing together.
	And all these different globalist organizations, whether it's World Economic Forum or the UN or these other things, they want to replace indigenous people.
	And all of the different countries, they want to replace them with somebody else.
	They want to bring in a lot of different ethnic groups in large numbers so we fight amongst ourselves.
	They've got us fighting amongst ourselves now within the political parties as well.
	So you've got to fight within the Democrats.
	So it is kind of interesting.
	And I see Trump, as I've said many times, as the Mason-Dixon line.
	That was going to be the line that's going to divide the two different parties, right?
	And he has been the line that divides these two different parties.
	And so when you look at this long-term selection, and that's what it is, folks.
	That's why I talk about this.
	I don't want you to get caught up into this show, into this production, into the mythology of the all-powerful and benevolent president who's going to fix everything.
	Don't get caught up into that.
	Don't follow into that.
	And we see this really happening a lot at this point in time.
	We've got Trump amplifying calls to jail top elected officials.
	Doing this on his Truth Social.
	You got a lot of people out there saying, jail them all, jail them all.
	Of course, that's what Bannon is saying.
	Bannon is a very, very dangerous grifter.
	He and Jack Basobiet, Alex Jones, people of that ilk, what they're doing is the same thing they did four years ago.
	And I've played for you the clips of Bannon talking to some Chinese investors around this guy.
	Is he a fraudster?
	Is he a whistleblower?
	Is he a freedom fighter, this Guo guy that Bannon hangs out with?
	He attaches himself to these powerful billionaires, and he's already been caught committing fraud.
	He was the only one that got pardoned by Trump, so he knows how to attach himself to powerful people to get what he wants.
	All the rest of the people who were involved in that Bill the Wall grift are in prison.
	But Bannon's not in prison for that.
	And so they're making all these statements.
	Arrest them all. Exit these people.
	There's not anybody on the Trump side that's saying, you know, this lawfare is wrong, and we're going to put some reforms in so this doesn't happen again.
	We kind of got that with the Supreme Court decision yesterday, but that's not coming from the political operatives in the Republican Party at all.
	No, they're out there saying, we're going to get those guys.
	We're going to get them. We're going to do the same thing to them they're trying to do to us and worse, right?
	That's the problem, you see.
	That's the problem. They want revenge, not reform.
	That's the issue. And I'm not going to support them on that.
	And you understand why they're doing this.
	You need to be very careful.
	Keep your distance, emotionally, intellectually, physically, especially, from people like Steve Bannon, Jack Posobiec, Alex Jones.
	Don't let them do another January the 6th to you.
	And Trump is at the top of it.
	Passive. Passive-aggressive at the top, doing all this stuff.
	And so, on Truth Social...
	Some people put out stuff about arresting everybody, and he retweets it.
	And so the New York Times writes a post about it.
	Drudge puts it at the top of the Drudge Report.
	This is fuel to the fire for the Civil War.
	Does Trump not know that? Does he not know that if he reposts these threats against people, that that's going to escalate the tensions?
	Does he want a Civil War to the people who run him?
	He's run, you know.
	He's run by the CIA. He's run by different factions.
	And so is Biden.
	Is this why these two guys have been picked?
	You think about it, as I said before, whether Trump gets in or gets out, it doesn't make it.
	Either way, there's going to be a large segment of the country that wants to fight about it.
	Already. Already.
	And so, perhaps this is why, you know, if you look at what, everybody wants to look at this debate that happened last Thursday.
	Yeah, it is interesting, as I said, take a look at how they cleared the decks for these guys, how they had the debate before the nominating conventions and all the rest of the stuff, but do you realize, just look at how abnormal this whole cycle has been.
	Trump was able to skip all debates.
	Why? Because of lawfare.
	The lawfare cleared the decks for him.
	He wasn't a victim of lawfare.
	He was a beneficiary of lawfare.
	Could it be that the people who are running this selection, the CIA, wanted to put him forward?
	They didn't want to have a discussion of issues?
	They didn't want to have questioned what was done the last four years.
	And of course, when you look at the debate, there was no questioning of any of the dictates and edicts and executive orders.
	Don't talk to me about a president as king.
	Sotomayor is wringing her hands about this kind of stuff.
	Where were you four years ago when this stuff was happening?
	You didn't care about any of that.
	And the Supreme Court rubber-stamped that stuff.
	Now they want to say, oh, the President is King.
	Executive order after executive order, now they notice?
	Because it's specific to their little lawfare thing.
	They have greased the skids for both Biden, shutting down primaries, not having any debates.
	Same thing with Trump, and it was the Democrats' lawfare that did that.
	Everybody saw it. Carville saw it.
	I saw it. Everybody on left and right, all of the opponents of Trump.
	And the Republican Party were saying, what's going on?
	I mean, they're making a hero out of him.
	I'll never forget the press conference that DeSantis had to talk about CBDC. Digital Big Brother, he said with a sign that was there.
	He spends 20 minutes talking about the evils of CBDC and what he's doing at the state level to stop it.
	Then they go to questions.
	First question, what about Trump and this Manhattan district attorney?
	Nobody wanted to talk about any issue.
	That became the issue.
	The lawfare that they did against Trump shut down any discussion of the past four years about the martial law, about the vaccines, about the deaths.
	Shut all that stuff down.
	Silenced all of their opponents and put them through.
	So, yeah, I see a rig going on here.
	It's not just that this debate was set up and rigged, and, you know, as Dr.
	Shiva pointed out yesterday, so suddenly they gave him all of his puppy uppers, and he was just fine, Biden was, the next day or so when he had that next rally.
	He's missing for an entire week.
	Who's running the government?
	Is our king running the government?
	How does the government run without a president?
	How do we all survive? I don't know how I survived for a week without Biden in the White House issuing orders and commands.
	How did you survive?
	God bless and keep the czar far away from us.
	I'm fiddling on the roof.
	Yeah, that's the prayer for the czar, the prayer for the emperor.
	God bless and keep Biden far away from us and Trump.
	And this imperial presidency and everybody in Washington.
	But look, the whole thing is rigged to push these guys forward.
	That's what you should be concerned about.
	And think about the fact that they keep reasserting 2030, 2030, 2030.
	They're now saying, even with some of these actions, you've got to accelerate this.
	We've got to be done by 2030.
	Do this faster. We're seeing this type of stuff coming out of multiple issues from the UN. Well, what gets us to 2030?
	Well, this next presidency is going to go from 2025 to 2029.
	That's when everything's going to accelerate.
	And it's going to be one of these two guys.
	It's going to be a disgruntled, divided America that they're creating here.
	And who knows what they're going to do with World War III as well.
	So, Trump amplifies the calls to jail.
	Top elected officials invokes military tribunals, says the New York Times.
	Trump over the weekend escalated his vows to prosecute his political opponents.
	Circulating posts on his social media website invoking, quote, televised military tribunals.
	Calling for the jailing of Biden, Lala Harris, Mitch McConnell, Chuck Schumer, Mike Pence, and many other people.
	His account promoted two posts from other users of the site that call for the jailing of perceived political enemies.
	But it's not even that.
	It's the rhetoric of people like Bannon, who just went to jail, and before he goes to jail, he's out there saying, we're going to get all these guys, we're going to throw them in jail, you watch, we're going to get them all, and yeah, that type of thing.
	Full of hubris. Totally ignorant.
	Look, if you want to go into a civil war, do you want to get somebody that doesn't know how to do anything?
	Well, then let Bannon and Trump run the civil war for you, right?
	You're going to go into a civil war with two of the worst generals ever?
	Trump, who doesn't know that Gina Haspel, but he's put in the CIA, is stabbing in the back or pulling his strings or however you want to view it.
	He doesn't know any of that?
	He's totally clueless about that?
	He's totally clueless about Robert Barr.
	He doesn't understand. And these Goldman Sachs bankers and the military industrial complex generals.
	He doesn't know any of that kind of stuff.
	And you got Steve Bannon out there who doesn't have the intelligence to go to a hearing and to plead the fifth.
	That's all he had to do.
	Well, I got bad advice from my lawyer.
	Oh, okay, so you don't know anything then?
	You know nothing? I didn't need advice from a lawyer to know that you just show up at the trial and plead the fifth?
	Stupid. He didn't do it because he got bad advice.
	He did it because he wanted to be a big guy.
	And now he got what he wanted.
	He's a martyr now for manga.
	And again, there is a double standard.
	Hunter Biden did exactly the same thing.
	There's no indictment or anything coming, even from the Republicans who are in the majority now.
	They're not going to do that. But the perception is that Trump will do that.
	That he will respond in kind, that he will escalate it.
	In the same way, that he was all against these different voting measures.
	Now they're going to jump in and do it even better than the other guys did.
	So, Liz Cheney, guilty of treason, said the post, retruth it if you want televised military tribunals.
	And so, Trump retruthed it.
	The separate post included photos of 15 current former elected officials.
	In all capital letters, they should be the ones going to jail on Monday, not Steve Bannon.
	And so, it had all the people from the January 6th committee in it.
	And a statement of the Trump campaign did not address Mr.
	Trump's posts when they were contacted by the New York Times.
	Shouldn't we have a leader who's trying to bring people together?
	Isn't that what they say they always want to do?
	They don't even pay lip service to that anymore.
	No, he wants to divide people.
	Biden wants to divide people.
	Both of these guys that they have greased the skids for...
	Both of them want division chaos.
	Warfare. Civil warfare.
	And a statement of the Trump campaign did not address these posts, instead repeating allegations of misconduct by members of the committee.
	The Trump campaign said, Liz Cheney and the sham January 6th committee banned key witnesses, shielded important evidence, and destroyed documents.
	So they kind of doubled down on it.
	Do you really want to put her in jail?
	Well, Liz Cheney did all these things, so yeah.
	The Biden campaign said Trump is doubling down on the threats to our democracy so they can present themselves as conciliatory when they're not.
	They're not at all. So, is the New York Times exaggerating this?
	Well, yes, to some degree.
	But again, he's pushing revenge instead of reform.
	And he's doing it through Bannon.
	He's doing it through other surrogates.
	And what Bannon has said is far more threatening than what was done in these posts that were retweeted.
	These people are not fit for leadership.
	They don't have the temperament for leadership.
	They don't have the judgment for leadership.
	Do not follow them.
	I hope people can see this and see how you will be abandoned and thrown under the bus just like they did to all their followers on January the 6th.
	Not a pardon for any of them.
	Again, Trump could have preemptively pardoned all of them as a class.
	Andrew Jackson did it for hundreds of thousands.
	Not Andrew Jackson. Andrew Johnson did it for hundreds of thousands of Confederate soldiers because he wanted the Civil War to stop.
	These guys do not want a civil war to be headed off.
	They want to stoke it.
	So, what is happening with the Great Replacement?
	Well, you have polls coming out.
	This one is from something called SurveyUSA, which I don't recall seeing them too much.
	But they claim that the majority of Democrats want to keep Biden on the ticket.
	Like I said, there's something of a civil war there.
	So you see James Carville making the rounds on CNN. He's exasperated.
	He is exasperating as well, but he himself is exasperating this time.
	Carville began by citing a recent polling saying that 72% of Americans didn't believe Biden had the mental and cognitive health to be president.
	We got a country 72% want something different.
	If the Democrat Party can't produce something different than 72% of people want, why do we exist?
	What are we here for?
	I've been asking that about Democrats all my life.
	What? Why do they exist?
	What are they here for? They hate all the principles that America was founded on.
	Just go to a communist country.
	You don't have to make this country communist.
	There's plenty of communist authoritarian countries for you Democrats, you know.
	You don't have to...
	You don't have to do this to America.
	I mean, the country's clamoring for change.
	Why are they going to offer them the same old stuff?
	He said, so, you know.
	He said, if the Democrat Party is so committed to status quo, so committed to sticking with something that three-quarters of the country doesn't even want, then we have to say, why do we exist?
	And then they moved on to how they would replace Biden.
	How would you do that? Since you shut down all the other candidates, since you shut down the primaries, you shut down the debates, you pushed RFK Jr.
	out, he's out there trying to run as an independent, other people who wanted to run got shut down.
	Same thing on the Republican side.
	Same thing. Shut down by the lawfare making Trump a martyr, a hero to his people.
	So what are they going to do? Are they going to have open forums around the country?
	Yeah, we used to call those debates.
	We used to have primaries.
	Here's the Democrats. They don't want to have any voting in their primaries.
	Yeah, what are you there for?
	They don't even want democracy.
	They want dictatorship.
	Anyway, he's scoffing at the arguments that Biden had just had a bad night or a cold or the staff had overworked him.
	He hadn't been anywhere for seven days.
	That's all utter nonsense we're hearing.
	President Biden is a great guy, and I'm a great guy too, but I don't have any business running any campaigns anymore, he said.
	And he's getting pretty old.
	And so, when we look at what is coming up in the future, we look at the corruption, especially, you know, Biden.
	The tens of millions, perhaps, as John Solomon's investigation showed, 120 million.
	As I mentioned, the money laundering and how they refinanced this house that they got for...
	It's like $350,000, $390,000 or something 20 years ago.
	They've been refinancing it about every year and a half.
	They've done about 15 of these things or something.
	And so they bought this house for $350,000.
	They've now got $4 million in refinancing in it.
	Isn't that strange? I mean, do you refinance your house every year and a half on a regular basis for a couple of decades?
	That is a technique that some people have used to launder money.
	So we've got all this corruption on the Democrat side.
	It's not just the $10 million and Hunter's laptop and the 10% for the big guy and all the rest of the stuff.
	Massive amounts of corruption, but they're not going to do anything about it.
	And then on the Trump side, Trump Tower is going to be going to Saudi Arabia.
	Trump Organization revealed plans yesterday to develop a luxury Trump Tower in Saudi Arabia.
	Is this a fallback position now that the line is not going to be built anymore?
	Yeah, they're going to put it in Jeddah.
	It's going to be their first major project in Saudi Arabia, but the Trump Organization has already done one in Oman.
	And I guess as people look at it and say, oh man.
	But, you know, Jared Kushner After he was out of...
	Trump was out of office for six months, Jared Kushner was given $2 billion by the Saudis, and it was by Mohammed bin Salman.
	It came from the Sovereign Wealth Fund.
	The Sovereign Wealth Fund. This is what, you know, the royal family, quote-unquote, in Saudi Arabia, King Faisal, that mob...
	They've got a massive amount of money.
	They put it into this investment fund.
	They decided they'd invest in Jared Kushner and Trump.
	And so, $2 billion there, coming out of MBS's fund.
	So, this new project in Saudi Arabia comes just days after the Trump Organization unveiled a half-a-billion-dollar Trump International Hotel Complex in Oman.
	Saudi Arabia has a long history of trying to influence Donald Trump, said one person.
	You remember back when we saw him doing the sword dance?
	There we go. That cringe moment where you got, there's Wilbur Ross.
	There's Rex Tillerson, Secretary of State.
	They look real comfortable doing that, don't they?
	Yeah. They don't have the backbone to say no to something like that.
	And then, this ominous picture of Trump with his Saudi visit.
	This is when they were unveiling the surveillance network technology that they're putting in Saudi Arabia.
	Because, you know, that's such a democratic regime, so respectful of human rights.
	Look at this.
	Is that the Palantir there?
	They got that glowing orb.
	They all got their hands on it.
	It's like the Palantir.
	Because Palantir is really running our data mining, spying stuff with our government.
	I am Data. I work as a content developer.
	We develop videos, infographics, and motion graphics to combat extremist content.
	Yeah, extremist. Yeah, combat extremist content.
	I guess that'd be everything in Saudi Arabia.
	Do you have a Bible?
	You're an extremist in Saudi Arabia.
	Well, you get the idea.
	And there he is. He's got his hand right there.
	Hand in hand with the Saudis.
	Got their hands on that glowing orb.
	It's just 4-D chess, folks.
	Nothing to be concerned about.
	He knows exactly what he's doing.
	I'm afraid maybe he does.
	We're going to take a quick break and we'll be right back.
	I'm sorry.
	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 Well,
	let's talk about the Supreme Court case about immunity.
	Of course, this is a big one that everybody was waiting for.
	I really thought they were going to release it on Friday, because typically what they do is release this stuff at the end of June.
	That was the end of June.
	I didn't think they were going to release it before the debate, especially with it being so close.
	But I was really pretty surprised that they didn't release it on Friday.
	But they did release it yesterday.
	So the Supreme Court rules that Trump has some immunity from prosecution.
	And they sent this January the 6th case back to the lower court.
	So, basically, this is going to move past the election.
	As LifeSite News says, and perhaps its most consequential ruling of its current session, this is one that all the people were looking for in the mainstream media, as well as politics.
	They said that presidents have, quote, absolute immunity from prosecution regarding their core constitutional powers, but that they are not entitled to immunity for actions undertaken in private.
	And so this begs the question, what is an official act and what is an unofficial act?
	And so we get some hints here and there in terms of this decision.
	Most people see it as a pushback against the lawfare of the Biden administration.
	But of course, the three liberal justices, two from Obama, one from Biden, see this as the end of the world.
	The immunity applies equally to all occupants of the Oval Office, they said.
	Sonia Sotomayor.
	I had a searing, dissenting opinion.
	She said, let the president violate the law.
	Where was she, again, in 2020 and 2021, when both of these presidents were doing that kind of stuff?
	Didn't have a problem with that at all.
	Let the president violate the law.
	Let him exploit the trappings of his office for personal gain, like both Trump and Biden.
	Let him use his official power for evil ends, because if he knew that he might one day face liability for breaking the law, he might not be as bold and fearless as we would like him to be, she said sarcastically.
	That's the majority's message today, even if these nightmare scenarios never play out, and I pray they never do.
	The damage has been done.
	The relationship between the president and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably.
	The president is now a king above the law.
	If he wants to order the Navy SEAL Team 6 to assassinate a political rival, immune.
	Organizes a military coup to hold onto power, immune.
	Takes a bribe in exchange for a pardon, immune, immune, immune, immune, she writes.
	She's having a fit.
	AOC did too. Occasional cortex.
	Yeah, her brain was firing, but in the wrong direction.
	Let the president violate the law.
	Let him exploit the trappings of his office for personal gain.
	Let him use his official power for evil ends because he will be able to do whatever he wishes.
	That's the majority's message today, she said.
	Well, again, you know, when we have...
	When we use Ukraine or Afghanistan as a site for money laundering, when we use Afghanistan as the hub for massive drug trafficking and manufacturing, if it's done as an official act, I mean,
	it's just, it's okay. And so, I'm not completely on board with what these guys do, but part of this is Is that you don't remove a president, and this question about assassinating a rival with SEAL Team 6, the remedy has always been that you remove the president from office by impeaching him.
	And then after he is removed, after that impeachment is successful, then you can try them for the crimes that they have committed.
	And so, in one sense, it seems like what they'd had before, but it is a bit different.
	The president has duties of unrivaled gravity and breadth, wrote the majority.
	His authority to act necessarily stems either from an act of Congress or from the Constitution itself.
	So what happens when they do something like the lockdown and the warp speed stuff and the mandates and the other things like that?
	Is that okay? Certainly isn't okay with me.
	Crux of the fight was described earlier by a former attorney general from Arizona who said, I think the court recognizes it might be a dangerous precedent if future presidents can prosecute their political rivals.
	That's what this is really trying to address.
	That's what Biden is obviously doing.
	Everybody sees that.
	They will set a limiting principle because under the prosecutor's theory, future prosecutors would have a lot of power to persecute their rivals.
	And so the question now is, what is an official act and what is an unofficial act?
	Well, this is what the court said.
	Nor may the courts deem an action unofficial merely because it allegedly violates a generally applicable law.
	Otherwise, presidents would be subject to trial on every allegation that an action was unlawful.
	The court said, for example, the indictment alleges that as part of their conspiracy to overturn the legitimate results of the 2020 presidential election, Trump and his co-conspirators attempted to leverage the Justice Department's power and authority to convince certain states to replace their legitimate electors with Trump's fraudulent slates of electors.
	According to the indictment, Trump met with the acting attorney general and other senior Justice Department and White House officials to discuss investigating purported election fraud and sending a letter from the department to those states regarding such fraud.
	The executive branch has exclusive authority and absolute discretion to decide which crimes to investigate and to prosecute, including with respect to allegations of election crime.
	So what they're saying is that was within his purview to do that.
	And they went on to say the indictments allegations that the requested investigations were shams or proposed for an improper purpose.
	Do not divest the president of exclusive authority over the investigative and prosecutorial functions of the Justice Department and its officials.
	Because the president cannot be prosecuted for conduct within his exclusive constitutional authority, in other words, telling the Department of Justice to investigate this or that.
	Trump is absolutely immune from prosecution for alleged conduct involving his discussions with Justice Department officials.
	I'm kind of surprised that the Democrats would take exception to this, because what this does is this gives Biden immunity from using Merrick Garland to attack his political enemies.
	He's just directing his attorney general to go after his political enemies.
	What's wrong with that? What's wrong with using the IRS to go after your political enemies?
	And on and on and on.
	I understand that you don't want the president tied down with one allegation after the other, saying that what they did was illegal.
	But again, I think the appropriate response is not to hold them harmless, but I think the appropriate response is the impeachment process.
	And of course, I think it did what it should have done.
	You had a partisan impeachment, a partisan indictment in the House, and yet when it went to the Senate, they couldn't get a conviction in the Senate.
	So it's done. It's a moot issue then.
	He was not found guilty.
	AOC melts down over the latest SCOTUS ruling.
	Her response is, impeach the court!
	That's to get those guys on the court now.
	Just keeps getting bigger and bigger, these Jacobins out there.
	And their pseudo-French revolution.
	She files articles of impeachment against the Supreme Court justices.
	Wait a minute. Weren't they acting officially?
	This is how messed up...
	There isn't anybody who wants...
	You know, can't we all just get along?
	The Rodney King thing.
	Can't we all just get along?
	There isn't anybody in Washington who wants to get along anymore.
	They don't want to have any, you know, congeniality there.
	They want to just lock up or kill their opposition.
	And that's where this is all, the spirit of this is all coming from.
	And so, as we look at that, and again, we'll have to see how this plays out.
	But for the most part, they've certainly given a victory to Trump in terms of the time frame that is there.
	And it looks like they're going to shut down anything and everything they had to do around January the 6th.
	You still have the documents case, I guess.
	The question would be whether or not him taking these documents after he's out of office, whether that's an official act.
	But again, look at the fact that Biden did the same thing as a vice president.
	He just takes these documents and sticks them in his garage behind his Corvette.
	Mike Pence did the same thing and so forth.
	This is a crime that they are selectively prosecuting.
	Everybody sees it. In the same way that when you look at Bannon and you look at Hunter Biden, they are selective in their prosecution.
	We all know that this is political lawfare.
	It's persecution of their opponents.
	And so, in that sense, I think the Supreme Court decided they had to do something about it.
	But anyway, they have had yet another bad decision about free speech.
	You know, Amy Coney Barrett just doesn't get it.
	She didn't get it ever.
	She didn't get it when she was being questioned.
	She doesn't understand the context, the importance, the absolute fundamental importance of free speech.
	She doesn't understand government-directed censorship.
	And now we've had that case go through.
	And again, yesterday we had Dr.
	Shiva Ayyadurai. If you haven't seen the interview, it's interesting because we spent most of the time talking about that particular case and how he had a much better case.
	And of course, RFK Jr.
	also has a much better case.
	They went with this other case.
	And even though they didn't side in the other direction, they sent it back saying you don't have standing.
	Well, clearly he did.
	Clearly he had a win with that.
	And Massachusetts, they should pay attention to that case.
	But RFK Jr.
	is going to be bringing a case up.
	Nobody, when they argue these cases, nobody talks about the absolute...
	Freedom of speech that was respected as recently as 1946.
	Yeah, I know, 80 years ago.
	However, we used to at one point in time respect the Constitution in this country.
	And when you look at Marsh v.
	Alabama, they said even if you privately own the public square, you can't censor people in a public square.
	That's what these social media sites are.
	They're digital public squares.
	It amazes me. That nobody brings that up.
	And I know they say, well, that's been overturned by laws about people trying to do free speech in malls, and that's a different thing.
	Different thing entirely. A mall is a private space, but it's not the town square, it's retail space.
	That's a very different thing.
	Anyway, the Supreme Court on July 1st sent legal challenges to laws in Florida and Texas that regulate how social media platforms moderate content back to lower courts.
	So, they have not done anything to shut down...
	They said, we don't have standing, so they punted on it.
	But in that particular case, as well as Shiva's case, as well as RFK Jr.'s case, we all know, we knew, before we had documents, and of course, Shiva has got really the smoking documents of the best of all of them.
	But we know this stuff was being directed by government officials.
	It was government officials who were telling these corporations to do what they wanted them to do, which was to censor.
	It's like, come on, can't we acknowledge that and stop that?
	Such a sham.
	And it has been from the very beginning.
	And so they declined to do anything about the federal government directing these social media companies to censor.
	And again, Clarence Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, so disgusted they sat there with their face in their hand, you know, the desk.
	Gorsuch didn't even show up for the reading of that.
	And so now we've got it the other direction.
	You've got Florida and Texas trying to protect our speech on these social media sites.
	And actually, they're not even talking about protecting our speech.
	The law in Florida protected the speech of political candidates.
	Not you and I. Not the free press.
	Not free speech of citizens.
	But the free speech of a political candidate.
	And even that...
	It was not enough for the Supreme Court.
	They sent the case back to the lower courts.
	Again, nine to nothing. They didn't want to have anything to do with it.
	And so this is the first time the Supreme Court has looked at any of these state laws that are trying to protect free speech from the technocracy, from the fascist corporate and corporate government partnership that is doing this.
	Censorship. These laws that deem social media companies to be common carriers.
	That's a very different thing than to say that it's the public square.
	And again, I think they should have used the 1946 Marsh thing.
	At stake, they said, this is coming from Zero Hedge, their take on it, is they said at stake is the right of individual Americans to freely express themselves online and the right of social media platforms to make editorial decisions about the content that they host.
	Well, again, as we said yesterday, and we had a couple of listeners who pointed it out, I disagreed with Shiva in the sense that corporations don't have rights.
	Governments don't have rights.
	Rights are there because we're created in the image of God.
	That's the fundamental idea behind the Declaration of Independence.
	That's what's different about rights and privileges and powers.
	So these institutions that are created and have certain powers delegated to them, that's all spelled out in the Tenth Amendment.
	You know, we have the federal government has certain powers delegated to it.
	The state governments have certain powers delegated to it.
	The people and the states have retained the powers that they've not specifically delegated to the federal government.
	It's not rights.
	We don't have states' rights.
	And we don't have corporate rights.
	Corporations are creatures of the government.
	And they are granted privileges.
	You know, when you set up a corporation or you start to do business in a jurisdiction, you have to buy a privilege license.
	And you get incorporated by the state.
	So they're creatures of the state.
	They don't have fundamental rights, and we need to really clarify this understanding of the difference between privileges and rights.
	And so we don't have...
	This Zero Hedge article was written by Epoch Times.
	Epoch Times is wrong.
	We don't have competing rights, because corporations don't have rights, and governments don't have rights.
	What they're doing is the two of them are conspiring together to destroy our rights.
	And we're the only people, only people have rights.
	So these competing rights are both protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
	No. It is not fundamentally, you have to understand, it's not competing rights.
	We're talking about censorship.
	End of story!
	It's the government in a very subversive way.
	In a very devious way.
	Doing government censorship.
	In the same way that people can't get their head around the fact that it was Trump and Biden who are paying the states to do certain things.
	You know, you do this and we'll give you some money.
	That's exactly what's going on with the censorship.
	It's amazing to me to see that you only have to have one level of obfuscation in order for people not to be able to see through what's going on here.
	When the federal government pays people to do X and threatens to take away their money if they don't do X, the federal government is really calling the shots here.
	Same thing is true of these social media companies.
	And sometimes it involves money.
	Sometimes it involves money.
	Preferential treatment or government contracts or whatever is down the line.
	The Florida law made it a violation for a social media platform to deplatform a political candidate.
	But of course, they could still censor your speech or my speech on politics.
	They could still censor your speech or my speech on religion.
	The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit halted part of the Florida law, and Florida appealed to the Supreme Court.
	The Circuit Court struck down part of the Florida statute, finding that, quote, with minor exceptions, the government can't tell a person, a private person or an entity, what to say or how to say it.
	Except that's exactly what they did.
	That's exactly what they supported.
	First of all, A private person is the only one that has rights.
	The entity doesn't have the rights.
	But the federal government is telling the entity to tell a person what they can or cannot say.
	It's frustrating.
	I feel like I'm beating my head against the wall.
	I know you understand it.
	Even the biggest platforms are private actors whose rights the First Amendment protects.
	No. No.
	Each and every one of these persons, the CEO of Twitter or Facebook or Zuckerberg or Musk, they can say whatever they want, right?
	But when the corporations start shutting down other people's speech...
	Because they're being coerced and told to by the government.
	That's simply censorship.
	And the rest of this stuff is just obfuscation trickery.
	Their so-called content moderation decisions constitute protected exercises of editorial judgment.
	You see, they were given Section 230.
	To say they were a third party public.
	They were not publishing the stuff.
	They were just a public square where things were going up.
	And they were not going to be held responsible for anything that was said on their site.
	But then that Section 230 that was supposed to protect them as a free speech public square was used by the government.
	Even that was used by the government as a threat.
	You don't always say we're going to take away your Section 230 protections.
	It is a digital public square.
	End of story. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit took the Texas anti-deplatforming law.
	They found it to be constitutional, and they rejected the idea that corporations have a freewheeling First Amendment right to censor what people say.
	So the Fifth Circuit Court got it right.
	The Eleventh Circuit got it wrong.
	And they have competing opinions here.
	And the Supreme Court doesn't want to rule on that.
	I'm telling you, this whole idea of judicial supremacy, this whole idea of the Supreme Court...
	Marbury vs. Madison and all the rest of this stuff.
	Jefferson was right.
	That's the end of our government as long as we allow the Supreme Court to have the final say on these things.
	We could fix this problem.
	If Florida and Texas were to say, well, we're not going to pay attention to what the Supreme Court says.
	Problem is that these sites stretch over interstate lines.
	So that creates a problem.
	It'll be interesting to see.
	What happens when Ireland or some other dictatorship decides that they're going to shut down free speech entirely and criminalize behavior and threaten these social media companies with penalties, including imprisonment, if they allow people to say certain things?
	So that's the next step.
	Not just banning somebody, not just censoring somebody's speech, but imposing massive fines or locking up the social media site if they allow free speech.
	So you'll shut down who we say, or we're going to lock you up or fine you massively.
	And that's going to have international issues.
	It's not just like, you know, here's Florida and Texas and they're talking about you can't censor this and you can't censor that.
	Oh, we can't have that because people in California and New York want censorship.
	Well, what about when Ireland demands censorship?
	Both state laws require platforms to explain their content moderation decisions.
	They mandate that the platforms consider to be overly burdensome.
	Again, they don't have to do content moderation.
	They're only doing it because the federal government is holding a gun to their head.
	So if they were to not censorship at all, if they were to not do content moderation, you'd be back to these things as a digital public square.
	And then we, just to go back and take a look at the civil asset forfeiture case, a reason headline, we talked about this last week, so I'm not going to go back into it.
	Supreme Court issues flawed ruling in an asset forfeiture case.
	Gorsuch's concurring opinion suggests, though, that the court may curb asset forfeiture in the future.
	Why not now? You see, what was at issue was the governments would come in and they would steal property, typically property that was about $1,000 while they charged them $1,000 to challenge the theft of their property.
	They didn't even charge anybody with a crime, let alone find them guilty.
	And as I said before due process means that the process is due Before you access a penalty It isn't due process if you take the guns and do the due process later No the due process has to be done before you take the gun before you take the car before you take the house or the cash or The plane or whatever it is that you're gonna steal as a penalty and then of course We've already had the Supreme Court come in and rule on
	somebody's car being stolen.
	They said that's an excessive, unproportional penalty for that.
	That's another part of the due process, that you don't have excessive penalties.
	The due process is due when it's due, and that's before any punishment, before any confiscation.
	In this particular case, they were taking property from people, And then they were taking years to go through the process.
	And they said, no, you've got to do it faster.
	And the court said, no, they don't have to at all.
	They have to do it faster.
	I mean, this Supreme Court has...
	I don't know why MAGA would listen to Trump bragging about his Supreme Court appointments at all.
	On Rumble, Dr. Freeze, thank you very much for the tip.
	He says, make the Constitution law and punishable by law.
	Hello, David. I've been to the Virginia Bilderberg protests with you.
	Well, good. That was a frustrating one.
	I really didn't like that.
	Especially because the first one that I went to was in Denmark.
	And for the people who had gone to the Bilderberg things, they were always frustrated, kept at such a distance.
	Couldn't see anything at all.
	And we're just right across a four-lane road from the entrance into the hotel, which was right at the edge of the road.
	I mean, there wasn't even a long driveway to it.
	You could see everything that was going on.
	And to keep people from taking pictures through the windows, I mean, you could get up within about 20, 30 feet of the hotel.
	And take pictures of the windows.
	So the day before everybody started their meetings, the hotel went around and put up dark film on all the windows.
	Kind of like a polarized film that they could see out, but you couldn't see in type of thing.
	So it was really frustrating in Virginia.
	About the only thing we could do was to...
	Play Monty Python's song about Henry Kissinger on a bullhorn to Henry Kissinger.
	I'm sure he's heard that before.
	On Rockfordhead, Sulik at 1980.
	So, U.S. presidents have immunity from prosecution for their war crimes, too.
	They will not escape justice from God's wrath.
	That's right. Yeah, I mean, you know, when Sotomayor was saying, you know, he could use SEAL Team 6 to assassinate his political rival, what about his geopolitical rival in Iran?
	Or anywhere else, for that matter.
	Oh, well, no. Assassinations and coups.
	Wars. Those are all fine.
	Those are just fine.
	Rumble. Sigmund was a Freud.
	A fraud, rather.
	He was a Freud as well, but he was also a fraud.
	Property tax is the ultimate proof that we own nothing.
	That's right. We're ultimately renters.
	And property tax proves that.
	Well, we're going to take a quick break, and we'll be right back.
	I guess they were talking about Civil War.
	world play Shenandoah.
	The world play Shenandoah.
	Go.
	you Well, one other thing I didn't mention with the Supreme Court stuff, the Chevron case, which I've really not talked about a great deal, that might have some positive influences in terms of pulling back the regulatory state that does regulation without representation and all the rest of the stuff.
	But again, it remains to be seen.
	When you look at something like the FISA Act that was put in after the church committee hearings and the Pike committee hearings in the House, immediately after their creation, both the CIA and the NSA began spying on Americans unconstitutionally.
	And so that's why they had those cases.
	They then spun it to make it about heart attack guns and other things like that, assassinations and coups, the sensational stuff.
	And yet, the legislation that came out of it was still about Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, still about trying to limit the CIA and the NSA from spying on Americans.
	But then they turned, and that was pretty clear what that was about.
	And yet, these organizations turned that around for their own purposes and used it to give themselves legal cover to spy on people.
	So, it's hard to say that the Chevron case or any of these other cases are a win or a defeat.
	Until we see how these somewhat vague principles that they have mentioned in here, how they're going to roll out.
	Anything that clips the wings, even a little bit, of the bureaucracies, I think is a good idea, because these things are unconstitutional to begin with.
	And they've become cancers upon this land.
	Let's talk a little bit about the pharmaceutical stuff.
	We had a Tennessee woman who was fired by Blue Cross Blue Shield of Tennessee because she wouldn't take the vaccine.
	She has now won in court a $700,000 judgment.
	Good for her. As I've said over and over again, the fraud, the criminal fraud that is a part of this vaccine stuff, something they didn't want to talk about.
	And the debates, of course, because CNN is brought to you by Pfizer, they didn't want to bring up the vaccine.
	Trump brought it up briefly when they started to blame the massive deficits that we have on Trump's tax code.
	When you think about that, that's a typical Democrat approach.
	Nothing that the government spends.
	They don't care about the war in Ukraine, the money spent there, or in Israel, or whatever.
	They don't care about Biden handing out, trying to buy votes with student loan forgiveness.
	They don't care about any of that stuff.
	They don't care about the PPP or the CARES Act or Biden's equivalence of that.
	They don't care about any of that stuff.
	That's the tax cuts.
	That's what it was all about.
	No, we didn't get that big a tax cut.
	Even the corporations didn't get that big a tax cut.
	There was the trillions of dollars that they spent over this so-called pandemic stuff.
	And so Trump brings that up and he talks about the vaccine, but only about the vaccine mandate.
	And then they dropped it. Biden didn't want to say anything about it.
	There was no follow-up from CNN. They're not going to talk about the vaccines.
	But it is fraud.
	And it is murder.
	And that's what we should be concerned about.
	A federal jury has determined that a woman who was fired for refusing to get a COVID vaccine, a Trump shot, mandated by her employer, got $700,000.
	The jury found that her refusal to get the shot was, quote, based on a sincerely held religious belief.
	Her federal lawsuit said it was not part of her job to regularly come into contact with people.
	She hardly ever had any contact with people to begin with.
	And then for a year and a half, she was able to do her job from home.
	And she was still going to be doing her job from home.
	But Blue Cross Blue Shield said you're going to get the jab even if you're going to work from home.
	She said she had a portfolio of 10 to 12 clients each year with whom she only interacted with infrequently and sometimes not in person.
	They also pointed out that she never came into contact with any patients as part of her job.
	But of course... All this is really irrelevant since these Trump shots never prevented illness or transmission.
	Like many others, the pandemic changed her job.
	She worked from home for nearly a year and a half.
	But then when Blue Cross Blue Shield announced that it would require vaccines for all employees, she refused.
	She said in her lawsuit, she firmly believes that all COVID-19 vaccines are derived from aborted fetus cell lines.
	They are tested with them.
	So, in a sense, they are derived from that.
	She said, I cannot in good conscience consume the vaccine, which would not only defile my body, but it would also anger and dishonor God.
	Blue Cross Blue Shield, Tennessee, denied her request, saying she could not continue her job as a biostatistical research scientist.
	She appealed. They ultimately fired her.
	She filed a lawsuit. The vaccine requirement was the best decision, says Blue Cross Blue Shield, for the health and the safety of our employees and members, some of whom are the most vulnerable in the state and our communities.
	Well, if that's what this health insurance company says...
	You really got to question their medical judgment and their sanity, don't you?
	They're still holding to that.
	And this is 2024.
	Anyway, they gave her $177,000 in back pay, $10,000 in compensatory damages, and $500,000 in punitive damages.
	So, good for her.
	And then there's a follow-up article from Brian Shulhavi at Health Impact News.
	I talked about his previous article about Robert Redfield, Trump's CDC director, how this guy has become the chicken little of bird flu.
	The sky has fallen, the sky has fallen, and we're all going to die, you know?
	That's Robert Redfield, the chicken little.
	And he's doing it for money.
	And it truly is amazing.
	When Brian Shohavi at Health Impact News, the previous article that he did, he looked at the financial connections between Robert Redfield and this company that had created a testing device.
	This testing device that they wanted to push out, they would test not just for COVID, but it would test for RSV, and it would test for bird flu, presumably other things as well.
	So, you know, new and improved abuse of the PCR test.
	Because that's what this is.
	It's nonsense.
	Yeah, we got something that'll lie to you about several different respiratory viruses now, not just one.
	And so he found that financial connection, but he said the financial statements that are due on a regular basis, the site that publishes Who's getting paid?
	What? These current former officials are getting paid.
	It's called openpaymentsdata.cms.gov.
	They had not updated that, and he said, I want to see if there's something else going on.
	Well, it turns out that he went back and checked, and yes, there is something else going on.
	He's been predicting this bird flu thing now for three years.
	The previous thing was he got $360,000 in consulting fees from Roche Diagnostics Corporation.
	Maybe you ought to pronounce that Roche.
	From 2020 through 2022, same time that he's going around there as Mr.
	Chicken Little with the bird flu.
	He also reported that they're working on a new PCR test.
	They can test multiple respiratory viruses.
	So... He says, as I mentioned in that article, the data for 2023 had not been published yet.
	So he only had stuff going back to 2022.
	And so now openpaymentsdata.cms.gov updated the 2023 statistics this week.
	He goes to look at it, and voila, what we see is it's not just the PCR test company that he's making money from.
	But he's also being paid by one of the vaccine companies, Novavax.
	He got $160,000 in consulting fees last year from Novavax, and he also got another $180,000 from Roche that he'd already previously gotten $360,000 from.
	Novavax didn't really get any successful product out during the, as he calls it, the vaccine bonanza under Trump.
	And that's what it was.
	It was a gold rush, wasn't it?
	So he said, I searched to see if Novavax has a bird flu vaccine in the works, and apparently they do.
	Imagine that. And so he said, well, these biotechs, Their stocks are surging the end of May, as we remember the panic about, oh, look, we found somebody in Australia that tested positive with a PCR test.
	Remember these PCR tests now?
	The magnification is even greater than it was with the absurd 40 cycles.
	You can find anything with 40 cycles.
	And so... They now have a digital version of the PCR thing that does even more magnification than 1.1 trillion times.
	And so, at the end of May, when they said, oh, we got somebody who has bird flu in Australia.
	Do you really? Do you really?
	I don't think so.
	But the news sent the stock up of a lot of these companies.
	BioNTech.com.
	Working with Pfizer on the previous COVID shot.
	Their stock went up 11%.
	Novavax stock rose 5%.
	Up to $15.70.
	But then in a statement, Novavax told the Financial Times that its vaccine platform could be an attractive asset from a pandemic preparedness perspective because the currently available avian influenza vaccines, bird flu, produce limited immune response.
	And so then earlier this month, About the same time Redfield is making all the rounds and corporate news and predicting that it's inevitable that it's going to get to humans, and when it does, 25 to 50% of us are going to die.
	That kind of absurd...
	That's why I call him Chicken Little Redfield.
	That is so patently absurd and unscientific.
	No proof whatsoever.
	This guy is as untrustworthy in his predictions as Julie Green...
	And to be ignored in the same way.
	Anyway, after that latest round in June, their stock went up from $15.70 to $27.
	They had an 80% increase in just one month in their stock.
	But it's even more than that.
	If you go back a couple of months and look to see where their stock was, it was down at $8.60 per share just a couple of months ago.
	Now it's up to $27 per share.
	Three times.
	Three times. More than three times.
	So, with all this bird flu stuff.
	So, Redfield is really working out well for them.
	They're just propagandists.
	And as Brian Shalhavi points out, just look at the stream of people that went from the Trump administration and to these vaccine companies.
	He talks about Scott Gottlieb.
	But of course, you also have the guy that replaced Gottlieb.
	You know, Gottlieb went with Pfizer.
	The other guy went with Moderna.
	Are we perhaps beginning to see a repeat of what happened in 2020, where former Trump government health officials joined vaccine manufacturers and got billions of dollars to develop COVID vaccines?
	And so, after Scott Gottlieb left, he got $2 billion from the Trump administration for his company.
	And Brian has written articles, like, is Trump the most pro-pharma president in history?
	Well, demonstrably yes.
	He says he even pardoned big pharma executives who were serving prison terms for committing fraud against the U.S. government on his last day in office, when many of his supporters foolishly thought that he was going to pardon Julian Assange or Ed Snowden.
	Why'd they think that? Well, Alex is saying that.
	Alex Jones said, yeah, Trump, I got it from inside source.
	He's going to pardon Julian Assange before midnight, before his term expires.
	Well, it didn't happen, did it?
	Trump pardons included health care executives behind these massive frauds.
	His personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, selling pardons to people.
	He wanted to sell it to John Kiriakou for a million some people.
	He asked $2 million for it.
	After leaving the FDA in 2019, Gottlieb joined the board of directors of Pfizer just two months later, then helped them to secure $2 billion from Trump to develop the vaccine.
	That's just to develop it, of course, then he bought it, delivered it, all the rest of the stuff.
	Former FDA director Gottlieb is now a Pfizer board member.
	He said the U.S. government's alphabet health agencies serve big pharma, not the American public.
	And you have people like Robert Redfield.
	Scott Gottlieb and Cohen and all the rest of these, making these media appearances, getting everybody worked up, and causing the stock to triple.
	He says, don't fall for it.
	Don't fall for the political entertainment industry, which wants the American public to continue to believe that they actually have the power to vote somebody into office as the next president.
	It's all just show.
	To keep a highly medicated society engaged in meaningless gossip.
	That's what this is. Look at the current two choices.
	They're the same two men who have served the Wall Street and Silicon Valley billionaires since 2020.
	And they started all this stuff.
	So, who's really running the country?
	Well, just take a look at who's making the money behind it.
	And the report that was censored, and now it's back up, 74% of the autopsies, that had 325 autopsies, and 74% of the people died from the vaccine.
	And so that was put up, Lancet took it down, and now it is back up again.
	But 74% of the people that they looked at, 325 deaths, 74% of them killed by the Trump shots.
	The main cause of death, of course, in these things was heart attack and clots, all the usual things that we see all the time.
	So... The good news is that there are some things that can be done, as a matter of fact.
	And I'm going to get to that in a moment, if I can find this.
	Here we go. If we look at a case of autism...
	I had two twin girls, and they're now four years old.
	This is a case that was reported by Children's Health Defense.
	It was a case study that showed that they could actually reverse a lot of these problems.
	But it's also interesting, I think, in terms of when this manifested.
	They apparently were okay until they were about 20 months old.
	And so I thought, I wonder how many vaccines kids get by the time they're 20 months old.
	Well, they have it set up like 3, 6, 9, 18 months and things like that.
	I counted them up.
	30 shots. If you follow the government's vaccine schedule, the CDC's vaccine schedule, because the CDC is selling these vaccines, 30 shots by the age of 18 months.
	And many of these shots are a second, a third, a fourth shot.
	For some of these things, they give them four shots before they're two years old.
	And so, these are two twins that are not identical twins.
	They're fraternal twins.
	And so, the twins received routine vaccinations at three and at six months.
	But they didn't get any more vaccines until they got to 14 months because of the COVID lockdown.
	And then they caught them up.
	Because, you know, they don't care if they give you, you know, 20 of them all at once, I guess.
	So then they caught them up.
	Then they started to have some problems.
	So, you know, even if you went to three and six months, I went back and looked at that as well.
	You get 16 doses shots by the sixth month.
	And again, many of those are three times of the same shot.
	This is just criminal. People in the future are going to criticize those of us at this time.
	How could people do this to their own children?
	How could they let this happen?
	Don't let it happen to your kids or your grandkids.
	Anyway, so after they got them caught up, At 14 months.
	One twin had sensitivity to changes, had eczema, digestive issues.
	Another one had problems making eye contact, babbling communication, difficulty breastfeeding, decreased muscle tone.
	In March of 2021, the girls received a series of vaccines that have been delayed due to the pandemic.
	After this round of vaccinations, their parents noticed a worsening of some symptoms, including significant language loss for one of the girls, who then became communicating only in one single word.
	Due to the worsening symptoms, the twins were evaluated for autism, and they met the criteria.
	So, what is the happy ending to this?
	Well, it turns out that they went to child health inventory for resilience.
	And they started making dietary changes.
	They started getting very careful about things that they're exposed to and their environment.
	They followed their reduced excitatory inflammatory diet, eliminating glutamate, gluten, casein, sugar, artificial colors, processed foods.
	They focused on organic, fresh, home-cooked meals from local sources.
	Let your food be your medicine.
	That was the wisdom from Greek physicians.
	Let food be your medicine.
	They incorporated dietary supplements.
	The girls took supplements that included omega-3 fatty acids, vitamins, homeopathic remedies and they have had some really good results.
	Due primarily to the implementation of lifestyle and environmental changes over two years, the twins achieved a reversal of their diagnosis of level 3 autism spectrum disorder.
	They said both twins improved dramatically, with one going from a score of 76 to 36 in seven months.
	The other one went from 43 to 4 over the same period.
	They said the improvements were so profound that the pediatrician exclaimed that one of the girls had undergone some kind of miracle.
	Some kind of miracle. Just getting rid of the toxic stuff in our environment.
	I've mentioned before, when Karen and I went to the UK, I mean, on our honeymoon, we stayed there for about six weeks because I graduated in December.
	I didn't start my job until March.
	And so we didn't have any money, but we were just going from one free museum to the other.
	You know, we spent the time in museums.
	And so there was a class of kids and I think it was at the Victorian Albert because they focus on clothing and how people lived, architecture, things like that.
	And so they had a class there and had some kids that, you know, they put them in these Elizabethan clothes and they have a Velcro in the back to, you know, get it on them really quickly.
	And so they were going through the different stuff they had, and they talked about the fact they're eating off of lead plates.
	How do you think it'd make you feel if you ate off a lead plate?
	One of the kids says, heavy.
	You look at the expression on his face.
	I really think he was kind of serious about that, but we've always laughed about that.
	But, you know, people, the common people would eat off of lead plates, and they would drink out of lead containers, just like we do the same thing with plastic today.
	And people look at that in the future.
	How do you think you would feel if you drank corrosive drinks that have been stored in plastic for a long time?
	But of course, the really rich people ate off of silver.
	Which not only did not do anything negative to them, but it protected them against bacteria and things like that.
	So, you know, big difference.
	People in the future are going to look at what we're doing and with the same astonishment we look back.
	They're going to look at modern medicine with the same astonishment that we look at the physicians who attended George Washington when he got the flu.
	And killed him with leeches and mercury.
	And that's what our doctors today are doing.
	Dramatic improvement and reversal of autism for the twins.
	The executive director of Epidemic Answers, this is something you might look for for resources, Epidemic Answers, said we're trying to create a platform where we can give solutions to parents.
	We're trying to educate them, and we have an online community.
	Okay, we're going to take a quick break.
	Before we do, a couple of comments here.
	Rockfin, a Syrian girl.
	Pharma is getting pretty slick with its verbiage.
	Their products will now give us limited immune response.
	Notice that they don't say prevent anymore.
	Yeah, it either works or doesn't work.
	Oh, but it doesn't work.
	It's your neighbor's vaccine that works for you, right?
	Never forget that.
	Never forget how they did that for years with all these childhood vaccines and how they did that with the masks.
	And we knew they were going to do it with the Trump shots as well.
	And on Rockfin, Dustin Helm, thank you very much for the tip.
	I really do appreciate that.
	We're going to take a quick break and we'll be right back.
	So...
	♪♪♪
	Thank you very much.
	Thank you.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Let's take a look at the technocracy.
	We spent a couple of days, everybody wants to talk about all this obvious rigging of this so-called election again.
	It's never been more obvious that these elections are selections, that they are pageants, wag the dog type of pageants.
	And so it's important to talk about that.
	It's important to talk about the fact that these people have got this whole thing so corrupt, so controlled, You're not going to get anything out of Washington that's going to protect yourself or your family.
	You've got to do that from the ground up.
	That's one of the things I really liked about Shiva's message.
	The fact that he's trying to encourage people.
	And I think that's a point to meet them, right?
	People want, oh, well, who are we going to have in this president?
	Let's talk about me running as president.
	And then he gets them to talk about fixing things from the ground up.
	I think that's a positive thing.
	Anyway, let's talk about IDs.
	And of course, Elon Musk is now talking about using digital ID verification for people to use X. He has at first selected a company out of Israel, but the Israeli identity verification company, Seemed to have a data leak.
	Nice way of saying that they got hacked.
	And so he dropped them, but he did not drop the idea of a digital ID system.
	He just switched companies.
	And so as Winepress reports that X now works with Stripe, To identify your identity.
	You can scan a valid photo ID, then take a selfie to make sure that it's yours.
	X will only have access to this verification data.
	Stripe uses biometric technology on your images to make sure that it is you.
	And you can delete your data at any time.
	Isn't that nice? Mr.
	Free Speech. No, actually he's Mr.
	Technocracy. Starting to introduce digital IDs for social media use can severely inhibit free speech by stripping away the protective layer of anonymity and pseudonymity.
	Yeah, I don't like anonymous trolls, but hey, I like it even less.
	We've got to prove ourselves to these people that they require identification.
	So I think that's the greater problem, frankly.
	It does affect people.
	If they know that they're anonymous and you don't know who they are, they can get really nasty.
	But people get really nasty anyway, even if you know who they are.
	So it says on Winepress, our previous reported Musk has said he wants to turn Twitter into an emulation of China's surveillance state all-in-one app.
	That's WeChat. WeChat.
	And so that's what this digital ID stuff is truly about.
	He wants to make it into a financial system.
	He wants to grow X and attach different modules, different functions to it.
	And of course, in Ukraine, and we talked about this before, But now they're taking another step towards having digital ID for everybody in Ukraine.
	They want to allow veterans access to services and to receive benefits via digital ID. I think it's important to take a look at Ukraine.
	Because Ukraine is going to kind of roll this out in a subtle way, in the same way the United States will.
	As I said before, it'll begin not with a mandate.
	Well, okay, as of tomorrow, you've got to have a digital ID in order to get your VA benefits or to get Social Security.
	They're not going to do it that way.
	First, they're going to come out and say, well, you know, we now accept a digital ID, and they'll do that for a few years as people get used to it.
	And then they will drop the hammer.
	You know, we're just not gonna do paper IDs or physical ID anymore.
	It's all gonna be digital ID.
	And going back now two years, this was put out by Ukraine in 2022 as the war was beginning.
	They said, you know, in eight years, what's that 2030?
	In eight years, this war is all over.
	We've got our UN utopia.
	This is what it's going to look like in Ukraine.
	Let's look eight years ahead.
	2030.
	The history of the new Ukraine is studied all over the globe.
	Why?
	Because Ukraine became the most digital and convenient country in the world.
	Scripts have replaced bureaucrats.
	500,000 former public servants are successfully integrated in the new economy.
	No more red tape, but paperless.
	No more bank notes, but cashless.
	Yes, this is all what the US government wants to abandon paper money.
	They are the beta test site.
	...the best tech system for the IT industry and the most affordable e-residency.
	Thanks to Ukrainian engineers and programmers, the R&D centers of the world's top technology companies operate successfully, and Ukraine ranks first in the world by the number of startups per capita.
	Ukrainian courts are guided by artificial intelligence, and all notarial acts take place online.
	Ukrainian Customs is fully automatic and the fastest in the world.
	Customs clearance and car...
	That's exactly what you want, isn't it?
	A hallucinating judge.
	I think many of us have seen many cases where we think the judge was hallucinating, but of course it'll be actually literally happening.
	Yeah, what are we fighting for?
	Don't ask me. I don't give a...
	But, yeah, that's what they're fighting for there.
	They're fighting for the 2030 dystopia pushed by the UN in World Economic Forum.
	They're fighting for the nightmare society that these people want to impose.
	Of course, they're fighting for the LGBT agenda.
	We saw that from the NATO officials, especially the UK and the United States.
	This is your flag that you're fighting under, the rainbow flag.
	So they're fighting for the rainbow flag and for pride, and they're fighting for the 2030 dystopia.
	We're going to make the world safe for technocracy.
	Currently, a paper ID card is mandatory.
	In the future, the electronic document will be created automatically, and the physical document will become additional.
	On Rumble, Atomic Dog says, Huxley's Dystopia, coming in 2030.
	Yeah, just make it easy for you, right?
	And that's really, when you look at Huxley's position, he's going to control people by making things easy for them.
	His thing was sex and drugs, how he's going to control people.
	And break up the family by having hatcheries rather than families, that type of thing.
	But control them with pleasure.
	And so, you know, you have this debate back and forth.
	So, is the future of these people trying to set up Orwell's 1984?
	They're trying to set up Huxley's Brave New World.
	Well, I think the vast majority of people can be conquered with Huxley's Brave New World approach.
	We're just going to make this easier for you.
	You don't have to carry around paper ID anymore.
	We'll just scan your face, all the rest of this stuff.
	Well, that's going to be the effective thing for most people.
	The people who... Don't want that.
	The people who see through that, they will get the 1984 treatment.
	I really do believe that.
	So, the document can be checked by QR code in just one click.
	This protects against counterfeit or outdated paper documents.
	Certificates will always be at hand, but this biometric thing cannot be forgotten, lost, or damaged.
	But it can be stolen.
	You notice that they don't say that?
	Isn't that interesting? It can be stolen.
	Again, this is from Wine Press, and the original document that they reference is coming from the Ukrainian government, and also a document from the UN, because this was jointly constructed with the aid of the UN. They said, we're waiting for Parliament to approve this.
	But it's coming from the globalists.
	The UN is coming from America, and that's what you're going to see rolling out.
	Google, by the way, oh, by the way, before we move on, like I said, it can be stolen.
	You can't lose it, but somebody can steal it.
	And once they steal your biometric data, what do you do at that point?
	If they steal your credit card or some other form of ID, that can be canceled.
	They can issue you another one.
	What are they going to do with your face and other biometric parameters that can't change once that information is stolen?
	That's perhaps going to be our salvation, maybe.
	I don't know. We'll see.
	Google, though, is now pushing facial recognition for employees and there is no opt-out.
	Google is guinea-pigging its own employees, part of a wider push by the corporation to position itself in the expanding AI-driven surveillance development and deployment, regardless of this being yet another privacy controversy being added to Google's already existing huge privacy controversy portfolio.
	They're going to use their own employees.
	As guinea pigs.
	And so the question is, you know, what about artificial intelligence and the Tower of Babel, for example?
	As a title of an article from David Bonson, who is a financial advisor, his father, you might remember, was a very intelligent Christian apologetic debater, Greg Bonson.
	But he died at an early age.
	David Monson is focused on financial advising, but he is a Christian.
	And so he says, when it comes to artificial intelligence, he said, it's kind of another Tower of Babel, isn't it?
	He said, we can debate if chat, GPT, and other language learning models can even do the transactional and generative work they're said to be doing.
	He said, so far I'm skeptical of a lot of this stuff, but he said, there is no scenario whereby the virtue and the humanity of market activity are going to be disintermediated by computers.
	To suggest otherwise would make God a liar.
	And to believe that an entire reordering of God's creation is underway.
	That's what the World Economic Forum tells us.
	That's what Yuval Harari tells us all the time.
	But it's not. It's not underway. He said, From the Tower of Babel forward there's been no shortage of high-profile incidents of mankind wanting to play God. Indeed, modern technology has always faced a certain godlike aspiration from some of its more arrogant zealots, as even leading industrialists in the pre-digital era fancied themselves to be miniature deities on occasion. The AI moment is an odd twist to this Babel-
	idolatrous tendency.
	Rather than elevate humans to the role of God, some believe that machines can be elevated to the role of humans.
	And of course he doesn't say it, but these people like Kurzweil and others believe that they are going to merge with the machine.
	Musk believes that.
	Peter Thiel believes that.
	Peter Thiel is one of the major sponsors of the singularity, the merging of man and machine.
	They see that as their ability to live forever.
	They think they're going to be merging with the machine somehow.
	They don't even know what they are.
	As I've said before, when I talk to these people, I talk to Zoltan Isvan, who started the Transhumanist Party.
	He's written some fiction books that he wanted to push, and he started a party, the Transhumanist Party.
	They never got on the ballot anywhere, but he was making a tour through Austin.
	And so I interviewed him.
	I said, so what is man?
	What is man? You know, when you transfer yourself into one of these machines, what are you transferring?
	Are you making a copy of yourself or are you actually transferring something in?
	If you're transferring something in, then there's something about you, fundamentally about you, that is immaterial, right?
	So what is that?
	Is it a spirit as a soul?
	Or are you just a collection of binary, some kind of approximation of like a computer memory or something like that that's being transferred in?
	What is your essence?
	Well, David Bonson said, it all ends in the same place, with God on the throne and humans as his subjects.
	So you choose today whom you will serve and who you will trust.
	Zuckerberg, however, is warning AI companies that they are trying to create God.
	And he's kind of putting himself in a position to save us from these people who imagine themselves to be God.
	It's a common thing.
	It's not just the technocrats.
	It's not just the captains of industry, of course, but it's also all the dictators of history in the past.
	When you look at Mao or Stalin, Hitler, where you can go back to Herod or whatever, they think that they are God.
	And that has always been a common self-deception of these people.
	It's a tragic comedy.
	Says Technocracy News in their comments in this article.
	Zuckerberg seems jealous that his industry cohorts are creating God without him, not casting him in the role of Messiah.
	Well, he's pretty sure that he can save us from being misled because his AI is inspired far beyond the others.
	His holographic Google-wearing future, goggle-wearing future, rather, promises we can all be successful YouTube or Instagram creators.
	Isn't that what we all want to do?
	So, he says he's got a different approach.
	He said, we need to have different approaches.
	All these different AI need to be specialized in some way.
	There needs to be a lot of different AIs that get created to reflect people's different aspirations.
	But he said, I find it a pretty big turnoff when people in the tech industry kind of talk about building this one true AI. It's almost as if they think that they're creating God or something, and it's like, that's not what we're doing.
	Well, tell that to Yuval Harari.
	Tell that to Ray Kurzweil and all the rest of this stuff.
	You know, you talk about somebody wanting to be God.
	Zuckerberg, there was even a cover, I think it was Time Magazine, about eight or nine years ago.
	They said he has this obsession with Caesar Augustus.
	He even named his daughter some derivative of Augusta or something like that.
	And so they dressed him up, put him in a toga, put a wreath on his head, you know, seated on a chair with his arm out like he is Caesar Augustus.
	And he's gone to Rome and he's really studied Caesar Augustus.
	And he tried to put out the first global ID. He also tried to put out a global currency, Libra.
	Do you remember that? He did a white paper, and there was one line in that white paper.
	He's trying to tell all the central banks of the world, look, I can do this for you.
	Of course, you know, the Bank of International Settlements, the central bank of the central banks, is already working on that.
	But he said, I can do this for you.
	And there was one sentence in that white paper.
	He said, if we create a global digital currency, it can be used as a de facto digital ID for everybody.
	So we know what his aspirations were and have been for the longest time.
	And when you look at where they want to go with this, again, as I've said over and over again, what can you do to prepare against this?
	Well, there's going to be a lot of coercion.
	Try to get independent. Try to get off the grid as much as you can, but also make sure that you've got some way that you can have financial transactions that is independent of their net, of their grid, of their entrapment.
	And, of course, that's gold and silver is one thing that's really going to, I think, be very valuable from that perspective.
	It may help it to increase in value.
	Because it'll be an antidote to this global digital ID to the CBDC. If you want to do that, you can go to davidknight.gold.
	I'll take you to Tony Arterman's Wise Wolf Gold.
	It can help you with any transactions of silver or gold, small or large, as well as help you to accumulate it on a regular basis.
	You can join Wolfpack from $50 a month.
	On up, you can gradually begin accumulating gold and silver, and as part of the buying group, you can get a better price on it than you would if you bought it individually.
	But he can also sell you gold, small or large amount. He can help you with metal, IRA, all those things.
	At DavidKnight.Gold, we really do appreciate Tony's support of this program. He's been a long-term supporter.
	And then finally, let's close this out.
	We have, when we talk about the anthropomorphism, you know, trying to pretend that these, that robots are conscious, that they're like human beings, that the AI and the chat programs are like us and all the rest of this stuff.
	This is being pushed, especially by a lot of the tabloid press.
	But I saw this article picked up by a lot of different places.
	This particular one was picked up by a tabloid in the UK Daily Star.
	And I think they're probably the most ridiculous in terms of their anthropomorphism.
	Depressed slave robot hurls itself down the stairs in a shocking bid to end its life.
	It wasn't even a lie.
	A South Korean civil servant slave cyborg, which was designed to deliver documents, flung itself over a stairwell, apparently to escape the boredom of working for a city council.
	Maybe these people watch Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, Marvin the Robot.
	I think you ought to know I'm feeling very depressed.
	And pick up our stowaways and bring them up here.
	Just that. I won't enjoy it.
	Yeah, well, that's life.
	Life? Don't talk to me about life.
	Here I am, brain the size of a planet, and they ask me to take you up to the bridge.
	Call that job satisfaction, because I don't.
	You can thank the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation for building robots with GPP. What's GPP? Genuine people, personalities.
	I'm a personality prototype.
	You can tell, can't you?
	Yeah, our entire future was already scripted in the movies a long time ago, wasn't it?
	A depressed slave robot feared to have committed suicide by hurling itself down a flight of stairs, a civil service cyborg, which looked like a white trash can.
	Was it white trash?
	Was that what it was upset about?
	Everybody calls me white trash.
	With a screen on its side, designed just to deliver documents.
	Witnesses said it was found smashed up after they saw it circling in one spot as if someone were there.
	They said pieces have been collected and they will be analyzed.
	So I guess they will do some kind of a post-mortem bot topsy or something.
	It was one of us, said one of the people working there in civil service.
	We're all robots, I guess.
	It was one of us.
	It worked diligently.
	It was designed to be smart enough to call an elevator to move between floors by itself.
	South Korea has the highest robot density in the world, with one robot for every ten employees.
	You know, it was...
	Let's see.
	It would have been...
	A few years before 2018, maybe going back to about 2015 or so, they were talking about what South Korea's job market was going to look like by 2030.
	And they said, with artificial intelligence and robotics, we think that...
	And they went down profession by profession.
	And the professions that had the least amount of replacement by robots...
	With things like delivery drivers and truck drivers and things like that.
	So they're kind of spot on because everybody here in the United States is saying, oh, well, they're going to replace all the drivers first.
	It's like, no, that's actually a pretty difficult thing to do.
	But in South Korea, they said that was going to be about 50% of people in transportation, shipping-related industries would lose their job.
	But they said that the white-collar jobs, doctors, lawyers, other things like that, they would lose about 70% of their jobs.
	And that seems to be more along the lines of what we're seeing here.
	On Rumble, Atomic Dog...
	Oh, I read that one.
	Stella39, thank you very much for the tip.
	Bye-bye X. Yeah, if they're going to require digital ID to do it, forget about it.
	I mean, I have been, as I said yesterday, I've been frozen there for the last six years.
	And so when I did that search...
	And somebody, the search engine on Brave, pulled up David Knight, who is a journalist professor in the Pacific Northwest.
	And they pulled him up, but it didn't pull up me.
	And it's like, okay, so where's the hiding going on?
	Is it going on in their search thing, or is it going on from X? Because he had 950 people following him.
	I had, six years ago, 136,000.
	I haven't changed since then.
	So where is it being canned?
	But the same type of thing happened.
	It didn't even show up that guy on the Google search engine.
	So I don't know if it's X or if it's something else, but yeah.
	What do you expect from a guy who puts himself in a Baphomet costume, number one?
	Number two, likes that so much that he makes that his profile picture.
	What does that tell you? On Rumble, AP Rumble Seat, they had a tremendous problem with malfunctions and fraud when Gates pulled this in India as a beta test.
	Yeah, the Adhar system.
	And of course, the way they did it was coercion.
	You want to get welfare?
	You want to get health care?
	Take the number. Yes, they did it to the poorest people.
	And they still had a lot of problems.
	A lot of problems with that.
	By the way, you know, Gates never stops talking about how he is going to redesign everything to put us in some kind of a techno-hell.
	And so now he's back talking about how he's got to redesign cows.
	God just didn't do it right.
	Isn't it funny, you know, we have, it's become a thing since Watergate, every time there's some kind of a scandal.
	Somebody says, it's such and such gate, such and such a gate.
	Well, I think we need to start doing that with Bill Gates.
	Instead of it being gate gates, or gates gate, I think we just have to say that when he starts talking about getting rid of livestock and cattle and meat and dairy and things like that, we should call this...
	We should call this fart gate.
	Cows and other grass-eating species have a digestion system that emits methane.
	And methane is a very powerful greenhouse gas.
	And so cows alone account for about 6% of global emissions.
	And so we need to change.
	Cows? Cows.
	Just cows alone. How are we going to do that?
	Well, actually of all the categories, the one that has gone better than I would have expected five years ago is this work to make what's called artificial meat.
	And so you have people like Impossible or Beyond Meat, both of which I invested in.
	Do you eat it as well? Absolutely.
	Absolutely. You can go to Burger King and buy the Impossible Burger.
	Is it healthier for you or just healthier for the atmosphere?
	It's slightly healthier for you in terms of less cholesterol.
	It's, of course, dramatic reduction in methane emissions, animal cruelty, manure management, and the pressure that meat consumption puts on land use.
	The main reason why we need to increase the agricultural output over the rest of this century is not the population increase.
	It's that as countries get richer, they eat more meat.
	And meat is a very inefficient way of creating calories.
	No, it's very efficient.
	And you get a lot of nutrients in the meat that you don't get in anything else.
	We'll talk more about this when we come back.
	♪♪
	....
	the
	Defending the American Dream.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Of course, what Bill Gates conveniently ignores is the fact that man-made and even cattle-made CO2, what it reminds me of, when I look at that, I was talking to a friend over the weekend.
	He said, why these people never talk about how many tens of millions of bison We're roaming the country before we had the Industrial Revolution, right?
	So if cattle are really a big problem, if they're right up there along with a private car, we've got to get rid of them.
	And why, you know, that's not what these people want.
	They don't want to just get rid of the industrialized society.
	They want to get rid of the agrarian society as well.
	They want to get rid of the animals.
	They want to get rid of everything. They're nihilists.
	They're not alarmists. They're not grifters.
	They're nihilists. They want to kill everybody.
	Gates coming from a family that's always focused on abortion and the rest of this stuff.
	So, yeah, when we look at that, here's where they're headed.
	And it's very concerning.
	If you look at the number of bison, estimates range from 30 to 60 million before they started taking them down.
	They're very easy to hunt, and they nearly hunted them to extinction.
	And you find them now predominantly around the Yellowstone area that we're just looking at there.
	But we've had these types of things for a long time.
	I remember when they were trying to focus, On fine particulate matter.
	And to say we've got to eliminate diesel engines.
	We've got to eliminate fireplaces.
	We've got to eliminate outdoor grills and all the rest of this stuff.
	If you went to the EPA's website, they actually showed a picture of the Smokies.
	It's like, well, you do realize that the Smokies, that's not why they're smoky, and it's because of clouds and things like that, and it was always that way, even before there was any industrialization, even before Europeans came to this area.
	The Indians called it something equivalent to that.
	But here's where they're rolling this out, and it truly is amazing.
	To look at the schemes of these people.
	And I think they can be easily defeated.
	We've seen defeats of them, and yet, when you see people like Mark Ruda, who tried to shut down all the farms in the Netherlands and tried to control food distribution as well, again, with Gates, he got voted out.
	But then what did they do?
	The globalists put him in in charge of NATO. He's going to take Jen Stoltenberger's place at NATO. He's going to be our wartime concierge.
	These people always have a backup position, even if they get thrown out.
	But we still don't have to let them get away with what they're doing.
	One Health is something that is being sold to us by the globalists, the One Health agenda.
	And here's the key thing.
	They're talking about having doctors writing grocery prescriptions.
	And of course, it'll be through your CBDC, that type of thing.
	They have plans for doctors to write prescriptions based on what you are allowed to have, but it's not even really about your health.
	It's about the health of the planet.
	I'm sorry, you've had too much protein or whatever.
	We're going to have to cut it back.
	And it's not just the bugs.
	DARPA wants you to eat plastic now.
	One Health Framework extends beyond healthcare, infiltrating all aspects of life.
	Central Bank digital currencies and a totalitarian biosecurity system could dictate where individuals live, travel, what they buy, how they spend their money, what they eat.
	The combination of these control measures with genetic manipulation of the food supply raises the alarm further.
	You see, all of these things converge.
	They can come up with different justifications, different MacGuffins.
	They can say that we've got to have complete centralized control, total surveillance of everybody's movement because of the pandemic.
	Or we've got to do it because we've got to save the planet.
	Or we've got to do it because we've got to control the food supply.
	But One Health, interestingly enough, goes back to the first SARS outbreak in the early 2000s.
	And that's when they started talking about planetary health.
	And so they started talking about this as a holistic solution to everything, but it's all the usual suspects.
	It's the WHO, it's Bill Gates, it's the World Bank, it's the Rockefellers, it's the NIH, the CDC, the USDA, the FDA, all of the usual suspects that are there.
	And these are going to be the same people who told you, well, you can't have ivermectin, you can't have HCQ, They're going to tell you you can't have meat, you can't have dairy.
	You're going to eat whatever I tell you to do.
	So how do we stop this?
	Well, you know, that's a key thing.
	The elections are not useless.
	We still need to vote.
	Even in the UK, at Expose News, they're saying you need to vote to stop these politicians and corporations from meddling in food production and from shutting down farmers.
	And from letting them, you know, interact with people directly.
	And I don't know how the UK is set up, but I know that that's only going to happen in the United States at the local and the state level.
	And so it's very important for us to identify who supports this in terms of local politicians.
	That is a really important thing.
	You know, the elections are not unimportant.
	The presidential and federal elections are unimportant because you don't really have a choice.
	Even if the vote is counted honestly, they don't give you a choice.
	They manipulate it, as we're seeing with a presidential election.
	The most obvious manipulation we've ever seen.
	But at the local level, you do have a choice, and we're going to have to support politicians who support our ability to be able to grow our own food and to buy our food without going through the USDA's tracking system, without having to have it go through their slaughtering system.
	So we have to stand up for local farmers.
	We have to make connections with local farmers, not just with local politicians at this point in time.
	And I think these things are really going to accelerate, especially in the next four years.
	And this next, whoever is president, things are going to rapidly accelerate toward the 2030 agenda, towards this one health agenda.
	You know, they can't even, at McDonald's, they're dropping their fake meat burgers.
	People don't like the way they taste.
	They are having issues with it and they've got a lot of a lot of garbage in it.
	McPlant and other plant based proteins of McDonald's are just being rejected outright by customers.
	Beyond Meat, which partnered with McDonald's to sell fake burger patties, So as shares drop as much as 5% after comments about the customers and what was happening at McDonald's got through.
	And of course, these are the types of things, as Bill Gates said, you know, he's got partnerships in these different organizations.
	He wants to do genetic modification of cows in order to kill them and to destroy them.
	And he wants to vaccinate them so they don't have methane and all the rest of this stuff.
	It's just insane what he's trying to do.
	There was a very good article from Axios about homesteading and how it's growing.
	You know, you can do some of this stuff yourself.
	And they talk about people who live in urban areas, some people who are in Denver, some people in other places.
	They said one couple that they talked to in this particular article.
	So they started with a couple of chickens and a small vegetable garden back in 2017.
	Now they get 80% of their food and their daily meals from that harvest.
	And they said, you don't have to be Laura Ingalls Wilder, you know, Little House on the Prairie.
	You don't have to be her in order to be a homesteader.
	You can grow tomatoes on your balcony.
	They put out a book, Shelter from the Machine.
	I guess from Gates.
	Homesteaders in the Age of Capitalism.
	And so this one guy says, you know, I can supply all the food that my family needs on just a quarter acre.
	And another guy says, his name is Castillo, he says you can grow more food than you can eat in a 10x10 space.
	A lot of this is just educating ourselves as to what we need to do.
	That's what we're trying to do as a family.
	We're trying to figure out how to grow food, which we've never done before.
	And so far we've had some good success with vegetables and things like that that we're doing.
	But it is finding farmers in your area that It is learning how to do it yourself, but it's also finding some politicians who are going to stay in the gap.
	And if the USDA decides that they want to tag and bag each and every animal, every chicken, every cow, make sure they've been vaccinated and all the rest of the stuff, we say no.
	We say no to that kind of thing.
	You have to stop this.
	They have to implement it at the local level.
	And the local level is where we stop their implementation.
	And we can do that. We don't need to be concerned about that.
	We're going to take a quick break, and when we come back, we're going to be talking to Eric Peters, and it's been a while since we've talked to Eric.
	We've got a lot of really fascinating things to talk about.
	So we're going to take a quick break and we'll be right back Music playing. So we're going to take a quick break and we'll be right back.
	Music playing.
	Ya want it.
	2
	You're listening to The David Knight Show!
	All right. Welcome back. And joining us now is Eric Peters of ericpetersautos.com.
	And I saw Eric's article about a $13,000 Toyota pickup you can't buy here.
	And that got my attention.
	That got picked up in a lot of different places.
	I saw that article a lot of different places.
	But again, if you go to ericpetersautos.com, you're going to find a lot of articles there about mobility, about freedom.
	Excellent site. Excellent site.
	Thank you for joining us there. Oh, thank you for having me on again, David.
	I appreciate it. Oh, thank you.
	Yeah, let's talk about this. What is this $13,000 Toyota pickup?
	Well, it's called the Hilux Champ, and it's available pretty much everywhere except here, which is a really interesting thing.
	And unlike the Kia, or I always mispronounce it, K-E-I-K-I, I have difficulty with that word, the little vehicles that you and I have talked about before that are available in Japan.
	Oh, you're not talking about the Kia.
	You're talking about something that...
	Yeah, they're essentially little boxcars that you've probably seen if you looked at the Japanese market.
	This is a no-frills derivation of the Hilux that is available in Japan and other markets.
	It's a midsize, not a compact.
	It's a midsize pickup truck, and it's designed with the ethos of simplicity and affordability in mind.
	It starts at $13,000, available with a diesel engine, comes standard with a manual transmission, and Toyota very thoughtfully arranges it so that it's got the ability to be configured any way you'd like it.
	It's designed to have a box put on the back of it, a state kit, whatever you'd like, if you want to turn it into an RV, and that'll put you in touch with third-party suppliers.
	But the take-home point is this is something that starts at $13,000.
	You can't buy a little car in this country anymore for anywhere near $13,000, let alone a truck.
	And so why are we allowed to have it?
	It's not because it's unsafe, and it's certainly not because it pollutes.
	The thing actually meets the current Euro Tier 5 specifications, which are pretty stringent.
	It just doesn't quite meet the latest Biden-imposed emissions requirements in this country.
	So, you know, it's not about safety and it's not about emissions.
	What it's about fundamentally, in my view, is to deny people access to an affordable vehicle so that they do not have the ability to accumulate capital.
	That is to have wealth and money so that they are not dependent.
	That's the key. They want us all living hand to mouth and paycheck to paycheck.
	And that's why you're not allowed to have this vehicle, which most people aren't even aware exists.
	Yeah. Yeah, and I think that's really the point of the income tax at this point.
	Obviously, they don't care about deficits.
	I've mentioned this many times.
	We're going to add another trillion dollars to the deficit every hundred days.
	They obviously don't care about it.
	If you look at their modern monetary theory, it's Keynesian economics on steroids.
	They really don't care about deficits.
	So why have an income tax?
	It's to kneecap us, just as you talked about.
	It's right there in the Communist Manifesto.
	Effectively, it's the abolition of private property.
	Right. And nobody can just take it from me if I don't pay them for the privilege of being allowed to remain on the land.
	Absolutely right. Yeah, you know, when I saw that it was a Toyota Hilux, that got my attention because I remember Top Gear.
	And they had an old Toyota Hilux pickup truck that was not available in the U.S. at that point in time either.
	It was a diesel, and it was so incredibly reliable, they did an episode where they tried to destroy this thing.
	And they couldn't destroy it.
	After they had beat this thing to death, they wound up eventually putting it in their studio, like hanging it from the ceiling.
	It's kind of a monument to its ability to withstand all this stuff.
	Great car and not ever available in the United States.
	Yeah, for people who don't realize, well, a version of it is available.
	You can get a Tacoma or a 4Runner in the United States.
	It's essentially the same vehicle, but you can only get it with US configured drive trains, which precludes the diesel engine and the manual transmission that's available in all these other markets.
	And also the stripped down version of it, which is what the Champ is, which is designed, again, to be what trucks used to be.
	There was a time, you and I are old enough to remember, when trucks cost less than cars, when they were supposed to be affordable alternative to cars.
	Now it's exactly the reverse.
	You know, I get so depressed when I get a new half-ton truck to test drive because on the low end, you know, the entry-level trim 1500 series half-ton truck typically costs around $40-something thousand.
	By the time you add four-wheel drive and a few other essential options, you're looking at $50,000 for a half-ton truck.
	You know, it's no wonder everybody's broke.
	It's insane. Yeah. It is.
	It absolutely is. But you've got to work around about how somebody can get a Hilux.
	Tell us about that. It's immigration on four wheels.
	That's your article. Well, it's more of a suggestion.
	I, like so many people, am really getting tired of, on the one hand, this idea that we can't control the border and that anybody who'd like to come into the United States from wherever can just essentially walk into the United States because they're being encouraged to come to the United States.
	Now, on a human level...
	I don't fault those people.
	They're trying to better themselves materially.
	But why can't the same apply to Americans?
	You could go across the border into Mexico, and I've got an article about this along with some links and some pictures, where you can buy a brand new vehicle for $10,000.
	You know, a nice little economy car.
	There are all sorts of vehicles you can buy south of the border.
	I suggest that all Americans who need an affordable car maybe take a little trip down south of the border and buy themselves a car over there and then just drive it back.
	Can you imagine if thousands, let alone tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of us did exactly that?
	I mean, let's have an open border.
	You know, the problem is we have an open border, all right, but just for one side, not for Americans.
	And I think it's time that we push back against that.
	That's right. Yeah, it's America last.
	Everything for everybody first, but not anything for us.
	And so it is kind of interesting what you're talking about there.
	It kind of reminds me of the old joke about the guy who every day he would cross the border and the border guards were suspicious of him.
	They thought he was up to something. They'd always search and they couldn't figure out what it was that he was smuggling in until they finally realized that what he was smuggling in was a bicycle that he was riding.
	Exactly right. Exactly right.
	You and I have talked for a long time about what the long-term game is for trying to get everything on the grid.
	We knew for a long time that they were going to put everything on the grid, all the cars on the grid, and we could see that they were shutting the grid down.
	Now that's become a reality with the EPA and its new rules and all these other things that are out there.
	They put out new rules for emissions for cars.
	They put out new rules coming out of the Department of Transportation about fuel economy, just ratcheting it up massively.
	That was kind of in reaction, I guess, to the reports that consumers didn't want Biden's mandated EVs and all the rest of the stuff.
	But now the EPA is putting emission controls on the power plants to shut them down.
	And you and I saw that a long time ago.
	We said, yeah, they're going to force everything on the grid, but they're also shutting the grid down.
	And so what they want to do is they want to shut down all of our transportation.
	That's been the case for the longest time, hasn't it?
	It's a constant whack-a-mole, shuck-and-jive kind of operation.
	They won't come out forthrightly and say, well, we are going to outlaw cars with gas engines or diesel engines.
	What they'll do is impose regulations that are essentially impossible to comply with, which is what they've done.
	Now, that brings up something interesting, which I'm sure you've been following.
	It's the recent Supreme Court decision, the vernacular, the Chevron decision.
	Mm-hmm. We talked about the powers of the regulatory apparat, which is what we're dealing with in this country.
	The regulatory apparat has become kind of the fourth branch of government.
	It operates as a de facto legislature.
	It has legislative powers for all practical purposes.
	And that was the gist of what was being examined by the court.
	And the court ostensibly is going to rein that in.
	The problem is that instead of having the regulatory apparat decide the extent of its own powers, now it's going to be the courts.
	And essentially it's the same thing, because the courts, especially at the higher level, these are not elected judges.
	They're appointed judges, and so we're going to have rule by decree from the judiciary now, rather than from the regulatory apparatus.
	But having said that, I do think it's good in the sense that Once again, awareness is dawning about the nature of the situation.
	People are beginning to ask, who are these people?
	Who are these regulators that somehow have acquired the power to tell me what I'm allowed to buy?
	Who are going to make these cost-benefit and risk-reward decisions on my behalf as if I'm some sort of an idiot child, and I can't do that for myself?
	I think that's beginning to percolate upward, and I think that's a very healthy and very positive thing.
	I've said for the longest time, you know, what we have here with the bureaucracy is ruled by the bureaucracy.
	We had a revolution because they didn't want taxation without representation.
	I said what we've got now is taxation and regulation without representation.
	But as you point out, if the courts are going to do it, we're still going to have regulation without representation.
	We're still going to have politically appointed people.
	And so, you know, it's essentially going to be the same.
	There may be some difference.
	These unconstitutional regulatory alphabet agencies that are out there, they're operating in their own interest in terms of trying to create a regulatory empire.
	And so there might be a little bit of a balance on it, but it still isn't the system that we need.
	This reform really does need to come from Congress, but both Congress and even the President.
	Have abdicated a lot of their powers to these regulatory agencies or to the courts.
	They don't really want to deal with it.
	It's like Trump and DACA. That was going to be a messy thing to try to figure out who they're going to deport and all the rest of the stuff.
	And so he just kicked it over to the Supreme Court and they said, no, you can't get rid of Obama's executive order.
	I don't have to do anything at all then.
	So, you know, they use it as an excuse.
	And so does Congress.
	That's why Nancy Pelosi said we'll have to pass it to find out what's in it.
	Sure, but, you know, the broader implication here is I think that the legitimacy of the regulatory apparat is beginning to be eroded for many, many years, for decades.
	We've lived with it, we've put up with it, because incrementally, one at a time, considered in isolation, these impositions were...
	Annoying, but not an existential threat.
	But now, collectively, cumulatively, we've arrived at a point where we're dealing with an existential threat to our way of life as a result of this.
	And it's beginning to dawn on people.
	I talk to people about vehicles all the time, and I say, why in the world does it cost $50,000 to buy a pickup truck?
	You know, why can't I get a family car for $25,000 anymore?
	What happened to V8 engines?
	What happened to V6 engines?
	You know, they're starting to figure it out.
	And, you know, if we can just buy enough time, God willing, you know, for enough people to begin to realize this, I think we stand a chance of putting a stop to it, I hope.
	Yeah, I hope so.
	Well, you know, as we look at this, and you and I have been talking about how they're overloading the grid.
	At the same time, they're trying to deconstruct the grid.
	And people have talked about the fact that the Biden administration said, we're going to spend $8 billion on building charging stations, because that's everybody's big objection.
	All seven of them.
	Yeah, exactly. They've got seven of them.
	And so now there's an article out here.
	Three out of four EV charging developers say they can't get enough electricity for their stations.
	They've already shut down.
	I mean, they're choking off our grid very, very quickly, even to the extent that you now have these heavy electricity users like the large language models that they're using to train the AI and stuff like that.
	They're saying, we're going to get into the power business.
	We're going to start... Making small nuclear power stations.
	So people are seeing what is happening now, and even Gates and the rest of these people are now jumping onto that.
	They see that as a big moneymaker for them.
	So as they shut down our affordable energy, they're going to have probably a lot more expensive energy, and it's going to be a smaller amount, and it's going to be tightly controlled by them and prioritized for their use for artificial intelligence.
	It's going to be about surveillance.
	And it's gonna be used for the surveillance state as well.
	They'll get first dibs on all the electricity.
	Sure, inevitably this is going to result in a winnowing down of affordable power for most people, which is ultimately what the point of all of this is.
	There was a very, very interesting exchange a few months back between Thomas Massey and our friend Pete Buttigieg, the current Secretary of Transportation.
	Massey's background is in electrical engineering, so he knows what he's talking about.
	And he started querying Buttigieg about the power load and the demand.
	That would potentially be imposed by the replacement one-for-one of the current vehicle fleet with electric vehicles.
	It's just the infrastructure is not there and the infrastructure will never be there, at least not without an effort that is almost inconceivable in terms of what it would cost.
	They know this.
	They're well aware of this.
	It's the point of all of this.
	They know that, for example, to provide the electricity at a large truck stop, let's say a highway truck stop that would serve over the road trucks, big rigs, commercial trucks, you'd need to have the generating capacity that would be comparable to that which you need to provide electricity to a small town.
	Where's it going to come from?
	And they know they're not idiots.
	They're evil, but they're generally not idiots.
	And they are perfectly aware of that.
	And their hope is that people, generally speaking, who don't have a lot of knowledge about electricity and engineering and so on, are going to be too distracted by various other things to even think about this very much until it's too late to do anything about it.
	Oh, I agree. Absolutely.
	And, you know, as we look at the—it's not just the electricity.
	There's not enough electricity, but there's also not enough lithium.
	There's not enough cobalt. There's not enough of these things that they need to make the batteries and other stuff like that.
	There was an article I covered yesterday talking about lithium, and they said even though They can mine it. It's a very environmentally polluting you know really awful process that is there destroys everything around it and Even though there's a lot of lithium in Australia, and I think it was South America Almost all the processing is done in China And why is that? Well, because they've got almost all the affordable energy.
	So all manufacturing is shutting down and going to China because they're allowed to build as many coal plants as they want without any pollution controls whatsoever.
	It's actually, that's one of the most absurd things about this whole climate alarmism is the Paris Climate Accord that allows that from China and from India.
	Part of this is the shifting of wealth away from the West.
	That's exactly it. And interestingly, to get back to this stuff with Toyota and the Hilux Champ, the Toyota, I can't remember the guy's name, but the representative who gave the presentation when the vehicle was revealed to the public said, You know, talked about how in the developing world, this is a way for people to get a leg up, you know, to get their first vehicle, for small businesses to develop wealth.
	And you never hear that in this country anymore, ever, in a commercial from a vehicle manufacturer.
	You know, it's all about this political stuff.
	It's never about, hey, this is going to save you money.
	This is going to improve your life.
	It's all this political stuff.
	And there's a reason for it. They're gaslighting us.
	Somehow it's terrible for a young person to want to improve their material well-being and get into a position where perhaps they'll be able to get married and afford to have a family.
	They don't want that for us.
	That's right. It's allowed for other people in other countries to improve their life, but for us...
	They have to destroy our standard of living.
	And it's never been more clear.
	You know, when you look at what happened in Kenya, they had riots there because massive new tax structure, and it was all justified by the IMF telling them, First of all, the IMF got them in debt with a lot of stuff.
	And then the globalists come in and start dictating an environmental and ecological agenda to them.
	And it was focusing on plastics.
	But it's not going to be limited, of course, to one developing country like Kenya.
	And, of course, they had riots in the street.
	They chased the people out of the parliament building.
	They set it on fire.
	The police were shooting live ammunition and killing people in the streets.
	And this was all over an environmental tax on plastics.
	And now what they're saying, Children's Health Defense says, here come the lawsuits.
	Plastic manufacturers could be held legally liable for pollution, which is exactly the globalist plan in Kenya.
	Here it'll be done with lawsuits instead of with taxes, I guess.
	Maybe the taxes will come later.
	Actually, I believe there is a case afoot that intends to do exactly that, to attempt to apply the same case law that was used to go after the cigarette manufacturers, to go after the oil companies.
	Their products are hazardous.
	They're creating a problem of the commons and pollution, and it has to be addressed in that.
	They're absolutely desperate.
	They have to do this. They have to shut it down, and they have to shut it down urgently because people are beginning to reject it.
	I came across a really interesting stat the other day Did we lose, David?
	No, I'm here. I'm here.
	Sorry. Okay. I came across a very interesting piece of information the other day about EV ownership, first-time EV buyers.
	Roughly half of them, something in the 43% range, have decided that they don't want an EV anymore, and they've traded in their EV to get something that isn't an EV. Go ahead.
	Sorry. They've traded in their EV to get something that's not an EV. And, you know, that essentially, that's all of the early adopters, the people who really were interested in having an EV pretty much have already bought one.
	The rest of us want no part of it.
	The whole EV thing is completely imploding.
	And, you know, if they don't do something very quickly, it's going to be irrecoverable for them, I think.
	Yeah, exactly. And as this is happening, the people who went out and adopted them, a lot of them want to go back with their next car.
	They want to go back to having a car.
	I was telling Travis, you thought we'd lost connection.
	I was telling him I wanted to pull up his next article about the old ad that you had about car painting.
	But the people who have adopted it don't like the charging issue and everything.
	Again, $8 billion and they get seven or eight charging stations.
	What's the problem? Why do people who have the means fly first class?
	Part of the reason is you get a bigger seat, obviously, but I think the main reason is you don't have to stand in the cattle queue.
	You get to board first, you get to board faster, right?
	That's the perk of having money.
	So even leftists, even the woke people, when they buy one of these EVs and they find they're going to end up having to sit in a sheets for a half an hour, you know, when you and I in the proletariat, you know, I can fuel up my 22 year old truck and be out of there in two or three minutes, that kind of annoys them.
	They don't like that.
	So even they've had enough of this.
	But I think, you know, it shows that they will subordinate everything, our liberties, practical use of a device and everything, they'll support it to their desire to centrally control and ration everything.
	That's why the only thing that is allowed is an electric car that is battery operated and charges over a very long time off the grid.
	It could have an electric car that was hydrogen or a lot of other technologies that they could work on, and yet that would have a situation where they couldn't track everything that easily.
	And so I think that's a big part of it.
	But even with that, the people who have the cars, I think about half of them want to get rid of them because of the charging issues, the availability, as well as the amount of time that it takes.
	It's immensely inconvenient.
	I have driven dozens of EVs, and every single time I get one to test drive, I have to go through this rigmarole of constantly thinking about, okay, how much charge have I got left?
	And of course, that's not even accurate.
	You have to guess, because it depends on the weather.
	It depends on how you drive.
	All these factors that are largely out of your control, so you always have to put a cushion of about 20% into whatever that range is.
	It says it is because what it actually is is probably going to be different.
	And then you have to think, okay, have I got time to sit around at that fast charger downtown?
	All right, I'll bring it home.
	Hopefully, I'll get it home. And, you know, I guess I'll drive it the day after because I'll leave it on the hookup for a day and then I can probably drive it.
	It's ridiculous, you know, just as opposed to being able to just say, okay, I need to go get something at the store.
	I'm just going to jump on my... Yeah, they're always needlessly complicating our lives.
	And of course, destroying the value of our money.
	I saw this article at your site, I'll paint any car, any color, for just $29.95.
	And I saw...
	Remember Earl Scheib? I don't.
	I don't remember that. You don't remember Earl Scheib?
	No, I don't. I don't remember him.
	Oh, those commercials, they were so obnoxious, but because they were so obnoxious, they were really memorable.
	He was sort of this quasi-sleazy pitchman, and I've got some of the old commercials linked in the article if anybody who's listening to this would like to see it.
	Yeah, you got one of them. Any color for $29.95!
	You know, they were pretty shoddy.
	You know, they would paint right over your emblems and all.
	But, you know, $29.95.
	And the standing joke was, you know, don't slam your door too hard because the paint will fall off afterwards.
	But the take-home point was that you used to be able to get your car painted for very little money.
	And if you were a little bit industrious, if you did the prep work, the paint actually wasn't that bad.
	The reason it was so cheap is that they did almost no prep work.
	You know, they didn't do any body work.
	They didn't sand the car.
	They didn't tape the car.
	I did this myself back in the day.
	If you took your car, sanded it, and masked off things, and you know, took the trim off and took it down there ready to paint, and then they sprayed it for you, the end result was actually pretty nice.
	Yeah. Yeah. The OSHA stuff, the EPA stuff, and then the paint, a gallon of paint now on the low end, one gallon of paint, automotive paint, is something like $100, and some of the colors can be $300 for a gallon of paint.
	And that's not counting all the other supplies and materials you need.
	So that's one of the reasons why insurance costs are so high.
	You get into a fender bender now, and what used to be a couple hundred bucks to put some paint on it, Found the car and is now potentially $3,000 to paint the car.
	Wow. Wow. That's crazy. And as you point out, ramping that up from 1969, when it was $29, you said adjusted for inflation would be about $300 today.
	But that's still a drop in the bucket because there's so much regulation for this stuff.
	And they're just... You know, trying to shut everything in our lives down.
	That is absolutely what I call them.
	Not climate alarmist.
	You know, I've talked about how the MacGuffin, they got different scary things that we're supposed to be afraid of, so we shut things down.
	But it really is nihilism, I think.
	It's not even alarmism.
	It's just nihilism. They want zero everything.
	It's nihilism, I think, for the useful idiots who bought into this and don't understand what's in store for them.
	But I do think there's something much more malicious at the higher levels.
	There's a sadism and there's an attempt for peace.
	It's a kind of a death cult.
	They want us gone.
	They despise us.
	They consider themselves to be superior beings and we're cattle to be exposed to.
	We're in their way. They don't like the fact that...
	What they consider to be their resources are being trampled upon by us.
	They would like to have the open spaces, the parks to themselves.
	They would like to not have to see us when they go out on the roads.
	That's what's driving a lot of this.
	That's right. Yeah, and depopulation.
	That has been at the heart of the environmental and climate movement from the very beginning, depopulation.
	They really do despise other people.
	I think Gates is probably more...
	It's more obvious than any one of these other ones.
	And of course, I love, you see it from time to time, the meme where he's going to one of these hearings about antitrust early on when he's still pretty young.
	And as he's walking up for the hearing, somebody runs around and hits him in the face with a pie.
	And it says, this is the moment at which Bill Gates decided that he's going to destroy all mankind.
	I'm glad you brought that up.
	Because younger viewers, younger people who are listening to this may not remember, Gates got into a lot of trouble back in the 90s for his unsavory business practices, and he had to do some whitewashing.
	He consulted with some PR people, and he became a philanthropist instead of a greed-head crony capitalist who used Microsoft to enrich himself in ways that are unethical and immoral, too.
	So, he repositioned himself and rebranded himself as a philanthropist, just a really benevolent rich guy who just wants to make sure people get vaccinated and have access to clean water and all of these other things.
	He's a really, really nefarious character.
	If you look into his background a little bit, and I know you have, you'll know all about that.
	Yeah, and you look at, you also positioned Microsoft, which is under threat of being broken up.
	You also positioned that as a partner to DARPA. They have been partnering with them.
	When you look at NewsGuard, ElectionGuard, and so many different other things, they have the Coalition for Content, Providence, and Authentication to identify every single thing that we create, whether it is a single picture, a still picture, or it's an article, or it's video, or it's audio.
	They want to mark And I think that goes back to his antitrust hearings as well.
	Absolutely. And another thing about Microsoft, he was, if not the one, he was one of the ones who developed that business model of not owning things.
	Remember when you used to be able to buy software in the box, and once you bought it, it was your software.
	You got a disk, and it was yours, and maybe it got outdated after a few years, but nonetheless, it was yours.
	And you could transfer it to another computer.
	You could give it to your kid or whatever.
	And then they could use it.
	Instead, you now buy a license to use the software for a period of time.
	And you have to continue to pay if you want to be able to use it.
	And that business model now is being elaborated generally.
	This is the business model that the car industry wants to use going forward.
	They don't want to sell you a car anymore.
	They want to sell you transportation as a service.
	And they want you making payments in perpetuity.
	You never pay anything off. You just pay to use the vehicle.
	That's right. Yeah, yeah.
	You'll own nothing, and you'll eat the bugs or you'll eat the plastic, you know?
	Now they want us to eat plastic.
	That's the latest thing out of DARPA. They want edible plastic, you know?
	But let's switch to politics.
	You know, we had this, you got an article, Big Mike is coming.
	Oh, yes. Somebody's coming.
	I mean, what a ridiculous election cycle this is.
	They're not even pretending to have any kind of election.
	It's obviously a selection.
	We've had the lawfare against Trump.
	We've had both Trump and Biden skate through this whole process without having to do a debate with any competitors within their party.
	They haven't even been nominated yet now.
	They've got this early debate that's all there.
	All of it is highly suspicious.
	And all of this, I think, I keep telling everybody, telling my audience, stop focusing on what's happening in Washington.
	Start focusing on what's happening locally.
	And I said, this just really underscores how hopelessly corrupt this all is.
	What's your take on things that have happened?
	Well, I've got several takes, but you know, there's one, and this is maybe a hopeful take, if it's albeit a cynical take.
	As Don and I were watching that debate, I thought to myself, you know, at least thank God we've got these two clowns put forward as contenders for the office because they are clowns and it's laughable.
	And when we can laugh, we're a little bit better off than we would be if we had something deadly serious to worry about, like a Stalin, let's say, who isn't the least bit funny, you know, and was smart and cold and calculated.
	I'd far rather have the the the buffoon on the one hand and then the senile grifter on the other hand, because it helps to delegitimize the authority of the federal apparatus. It makes them look ridiculous because they are ridiculous.
	And I think that benefits us.
	Yeah, I agree. I talked this week, I talked yesterday, as a matter of fact, about Brezhnev.
	People in Russia said that he had a stroke about six years before he died.
	In the last six years, he was just kind of, you know, weekend with Vlad type of thing, or weekend with Brezhnev.
	Where they propped this guy up.
	And it's really the calculating people around him, the small group of people, the cabal that's running the country.
	I think that's what we're seeing now with Biden, for sure.
	And the problem is, when you've got everything highly centralized, as in the Soviet Union, or as in Washington today, you can have these people, the way McGregor put it, Colonel McGregor, he said, it's become very clear, We're not allowed to see who the real leader is,
	but we can see what the product of it is.
	Well, I agree. And I'll make another remark.
	Of course, I was young back when Brezhnev was still around, but I have some memories of Brezhnev and the old Soviet ruling clack.
	And my sense of Brezhnev, and especially having read about Brezhnev, he was just kind of a genial hack.
	I don't think Brezhnev was a sociopath in the way that Biden is and the way that the people who run the regime in this country are.
	They were just sort of an ossified ruling clack.
	I think that's infinitely worse than what the Soviet people had to deal with back in the day.
	I agree. Yeah, at least Brezhnev liked Westerns.
	The rifleman was his favorite Western.
	Biden would want to take the gun away from the rifleman.
	Right. I think Brezhnev had a sense of humor.
	You know, he wasn't a completely joyless, awful human being, as opposed to what this Biden creature is.
	Yeah. Whatever's left of him.
	You've run, since all this COVID stuff has happened, and you talked a lot about the Gesundheit Fures, and boy, is that not a great way to describe these people.
	But you also have... The diaper report at Eric Piazzato's.
	And you got one for yesterday here.
	Where do you see the diaper thing?
	Coming back with bird flu.
	I mean, I said earlier, we got Robert Redfield who's running around.
	He wants to be the chicken little of the bird flu pandemic.
	He's trying to hype this fear everywhere he goes.
	What do you see in your diaper report?
	Well, let's see. The pathological hypochondria that was instilled in the population four years ago has not been cured.
	There are still a lot of very pathological, traumatized people out there.
	I see people still wearing masks, you know, not the majority by any means, but I still regularly see people wearing masks.
	And I don't think most of them are doing it for political reasons.
	I think they're genuinely terrified.
	Yeah, it reminds me of it.
	It reminds me of that movie that had Bruce Willis in it.
	I can't remember. The little kid says, I see dead people everywhere.
	Yes. I see dead people, brain-dead people everywhere with a mask on.
	So there's that. But the thing that I wrote about the other day has to do with a good friend of mine.
	And this is a guy that I've known for 20 years.
	He and I work out sometimes together.
	And he's a nurse.
	And he just, guess what, got COVID. Or at least they say that he got COVID. Anyway, he's very ill right now.
	He's bedridden right now.
	He's a big strapping guy.
	He got vaccinated because he was given that Hobson's choice during the pandemic of, hey, you want to keep your job?
	You've got to get vaccinated.
	And he's a single dad. He's got a teenage daughter, and he felt compelled to keep his job.
	And I'm not going to condemn him for that.
	I understand the pressure that he was under.
	But it just infuriates and saddens me.
	It's not just him, by the way.
	He and I have talked over the last couple of days.
	Pretty much the entire floor of people that he works with They're out with this illness.
	Now, really this, I didn't get the shot and I'm fine.
	I've had no problems.
	This guy, you know, he gets the shot and he's sick.
	And I know so many people who have gotten the shot who are perpetually getting sick and not just getting a cold, but But getting really sick, like bedridden, incapacitated sick, not just sniffles and, oh, I don't feel so good today, but badly sick.
	I don't know whether it has been established as a fact yet, but there is the assertion, and I think it's not an unreasonable one, that these shots have damaged, compromised these people's immune systems to such an extent that, A, they're more likely to get sick, and when they do get sick, they get much sicker than they otherwise would have.
	Oh, yeah. And then, of course, it's the fact that we now have, as a regular feature of childhood, heart attacks.
	This is something we never had before.
	We never had to have kids have an EKG before they could participate in sports.
	That's what I think is such a damning indictment of both Trump and Biden, something like that.
	But, you know, you're talking about your friend there who...
	I had to get the shot.
	And of course, we understand that coercion.
	People really don't understand the mechanism.
	You know, when I talk to Trump supporters, they really don't understand how the coercion was going to run out through the employers.
	If you do business with Washington, you're going to have to get your people shot.
	And that's what they were doing, especially to the hospitals.
	Trump had given them such largesse through these bonuses for identifying people as COVID, for putting them on ventilators and so forth, giving them a 20% bonus for everything they did.
	And then Biden comes along and he says, if you don't get your staff vaccinated, we're gonna not only take away all those bonuses that you got through CMS, but we're gonna take away Medicare and Medicaid.
	People don't realize how they used Trump and Biden, whoever it is that's controlling the country, they use Trump and Biden as a one step, two step thing, left, right, to control people.
	And then to, you know, if you had this all done under one person, then they could take all the blame.
	But this allows them to distribute the blame.
	It allows each party to have plausible deniability, and that's what they're using with all this stuff.
	And this gets back to what you and I were talking about a little while ago with your part to the federal elections and the government in general.
	And the way that we can defend ourselves against this is to be independent of them to the extent that it's possible.
	I was fortunate you were probably in the same position when all of this occurred to be self-employed.
	I didn't have a boss telling me, look, if you want to continue to work and get a paycheck, you're going to get this jab.
	My friend, unfortunately, was in a different position.
	So I encourage everybody listening to us right now to think about that very seriously and think about figuring out a way to earn a living that doesn't put you at the mercy of these corporations, which are then beholden to the government or might as well be the government.
	That can just dictate to you what to do because the choice is, all right, I'm going to either obey or I'm going to lose everything.
	I'm going to lose my home.
	I'm going to lose my ability to feed my family.
	These are choices that most people will end up having to bow to because they're not going to put their kids out on the street.
	That's right. And it's kind of like before you came on, I was talking about homesteading.
	You know, putting up something there so that you can at least eat.
	Having some kind of a place that is not super expensive so that you can keep a roof over your head.
	Different things like that can help to take away some of that coercive pressure that they put on people.
	Earlier in the program, Eric, I talked about a woman who got fired from Blue Cross Blue Shield here in Tennessee, and because she wouldn't take the jab, she didn't even have a job where she met with anybody.
	For a year and a half, she'd been working at home and so forth, but even before that, she didn't come in contact with people.
	And so they required her to do it.
	She had religious objections to it.
	And she just won $700,000 in a lawsuit against them.
	And I've seen a lot of these types of things.
	I've talked to a lot of people who went to the mat for this, got fired, and started their own business and had a successful business.
	So there are things that people can do.
	We understand what the coercion is, and we understand that kind of coercion is going to come again for people with a lot of things.
	And I think the other part of it is, just like you're talking about your nurse friend, Karen, my wife, was...
	I talked to someone in a store who was clerking in the store, and her husband had just died.
	She said from COVID. And so Karen said, did he get the vaccine?
	And she said, yes, can you believe it?
	And he got blood clots all in his legs.
	She thinks that COVID gave him the blood clots.
	People have done such a good job of censorship and propaganda that people are attributing all this stuff to COVID rather than to the shots.
	No, it is...
	Parallel, as far as I can tell.
	You'd have to go back to the Stalin era and the old Soviet Union to come up with something that's comparable to this.
	It's not just the body count.
	It's the way they have psychologically assaulted people to make people feel both a combination of afraid and guilty.
	You remember Granny might die?
	People who had questions about whether I should put on this mask and whether I should stay home and whether I should get this vaccine.
	Well, if you don't do that, you're going to kill Granny.
	What a wild, despicable thing to do to people.
	Yeah, well, I agree. I agree.
	And it makes me concerned when I see how rigged and manipulated this whole process is.
	I'm looking at this and saying, okay, so are they going to come back again with another pandemic or something similar to that?
	And are they going to use Trump to...
	To get people to go along with it, as they did in 2020.
	A lot of people were told, hey, it's 4-D chess.
	They thought Trump was going to take care of it.
	They might have trusted him.
	You know, they take their guard down, just like when you look at gun purchases.
	When you get a Republican who's friendly to gun ownership in, they think, they stop buying guns.
	When you get a Democrat to send, they start buying guns.
	It takes their guard down, and so perhaps they do want to put Trump in for what they've got planned coming up for the next four years.
	Well, I think they do for two reasons.
	Two reasons. And they're both really, really daunting.
	The one is that his base, the conservatives, and in particular, the nominal Christians are going to fall for this, I think.
	Who better to get us into a war?
	You know, onward Christian soldiers in the Middle East or Ukraine.
	You know, rally around the flag, support the troops.
	Trump could very much do that.
	And the other thing is that he could be positioned, you know, WWE style as the fall guy for what they've got planned.
	Let him... Let him get elected.
	Let all of the MAGA, you know, right-wing people dance in the streets, then crater the economy, and then blame everything on the free market.
	No, no, we've just got to get this under control.
	You know, we've got to have some sort of a centrally planned system where wise experts are in control of things so that this doesn't happen again.
	That's right. Yeah, January the 6th on a full national level was what that would be.
	And it's so frustrating when we talk about how effective their propaganda was.
	It's so frustrating to see so many.
	It's now become a mainstream media narrative to say that everybody was killed because of this engineered virus out of a lamp.
	It was never that.
	I was always worried about gain-of-function stuff.
	I always opposed it going back to 2014.
	And I pointed out in December 2019, hey, where they say that they got the bat soup and all the rest of the stuff in that marketplace, I said that's their only biosafety level 4 lab, and all of China is right there.
	So maybe that's what's happening.
	But... Early on in January, you could see that they were faking it.
	And it lined up with all of their germ games that they had.
	So I didn't believe that.
	I thought that was pushing fear on the conservative side.
	But now the mainstream media has adopted that, and they're using that gain-of-function, engineered virus thing to keep people believing that there really is a threat out there.
	There wasn't a threat. Everybody was killed.
	The people that were killed were killed by the ventilators and the medical protocols and the remdesivir and the do not resuscitate orders, and they were killed by the vaccines.
	And yet you've got now the mainstream media and the alternative conservative media are all pushing this lab leak thing, and they won't do anything to shut any of it down.
	That's another sign that it's a lie, I think.
	It's all orchestrated.
	And speaking of that, when I was watching the debate, to get back to that again, I was struck by how civil and temperate the usually rabid toward Trump or toward any Republican candidate moderators were.
	Very, very interesting.
	And in the wake of what happened with Biden, all of a sudden now these same people who are telling us how You know, how mentally acute Biden is and how in control Biden is have completely turned around on him.
	And it summons in my mind this vision of an aquarium with two piranhas sort of side by side looking at each other.
	You can see their eyes. And as soon as one of them notices that the other one's a little bit weak, you know, it immediately becomes a chum fest and they just chew them apart.
	You know, it's obvious they've decided that Biden's got to go.
	And now the question is, well, what's going to come next?
	Yeah, yeah. The other thing you could see in that debate, you know, was by cutting off the microphones, that kind of tamed Trump a little bit.
	The moderators, as you pointed out.
	But then the fact that they would leave the guys in a two-up picture, right?
	So that you see when the other guy's talking, you would see him.
	And Biden was just all over the place.
	Looking around like he didn't even know where he was.
	I said when we were watching, I said, I think he's going to wander off the stage like he did at the G7. And I think that was something that was deliberately done to make him look stupid.
	Jon Stewart even ran a clip of that for his audience.
	He said, you think it's bad when he talked?
	Look at what he was doing when he wasn't talking.
	And they pretend that they didn't know anything about it.
	Anderson Cooper is talking to Lala Harris and saying, well, didn't you know you were there?
	And it's like, doesn't Anderson Cooper know?
	I mean, where's his discernment?
	Everybody else knew. Why are they pretending that they didn't know all this stuff?
	They all know. You know, I'm conflicted.
	On the one hand, on a human level, I think I may have mentioned to you privately, my mom has dementia or Alzheimer's, whichever it is.
	So I've been dealing with that for the last three years.
	And so I've become quite acquainted with the signs of it and the expression on the face, for example.
	And I see that in Biden.
	And on a human level, I feel bad for the guy.
	Yeah. You know, my God, what sort of a person, his wife, would put her husband up for public ridicule like that to make him look like a fool in front of the entire country in the extra courses because she likes to be president as much as he does.
	But on the other hand, he's such a despicable human being that it's very difficult for me to feel bad for the guy.
	I'll never forget the confirmation hearings of Clarence Thomas.
	And I was listening to it.
	We were driving through the Blue Ridge Parkway going up to visit relatives up north.
	And I was listening to that, and I remember Biden going nuts about Clarence Thomas supporting the idea of natural rights.
	It's like, what? This guy doesn't even support natural rights?
	Biden has been one of the most authoritarian, totalitarian individuals ever out there.
	Incredibly corrupt, always hating the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, even the very concept of natural rights.
	So yeah, he is a despicable person.
	But again, he's not the one who's running the country, etc.
	Somebody behind the screen is, you know, you got a Wizard of Oz there that is pulling all the levers of the great and powerful Biden that is up there.
	On a human level, you know, he's dealing with his son and his son's issues with addiction.
	Well, when was it?
	back in the mid-90s, I think, when he was one of the principals behind the drug reform legislation, which threw people into federal prison for a minimum of five years, I think it was, for possessing an amount of a controlled substance that was about the same amount that his son has.
	And you would think that if he had any humanity in him, now that he's experienced this within his own family with his son, he would have some regrets about having condemned people who had substance abuse issues to federal prison for years, for the same thing that his son is dealing with.
	There's no recognition of that in that man at all.
	Of course, now he doesn't recognize anything at all anyway.
	Yeah, yeah, you're absolutely right.
	Yeah, I had the same situation with my mother.
	It was dementia that was...
	Induced from a medical procedure, gave her a stroke.
	But still, same type of thing.
	You couldn't tell the difference if she had Alzheimer.
	And same type of things that you see with Biden.
	So it is a sad situation.
	As I've said, if we live long enough, probably all of us are going to have that to some degree or the other.
	But they're using him.
	They're using him as a weekend at Bernie Totem so they can carry on their game behind the scenes, I think.
	They may not be able to carry it forward, though, for the duration of this year through the election.
	It seems to be that they are...
	Kind of a panic mode.
	They're talking about this openly, about figuring out some way to get him to step aside voluntarily or otherwise.
	But then the question becomes, who are they going to replace him with?
	They put themselves in a real quandary.
	Yeah. Yeah.
	Yeah. Some have said, and I don't disagree with this, that it's very possible that the two nominal, putative candidates for president will not be the ones that are on the ballot in November.
	We might end up with somebody like Nikki Haley versus somebody like Gavin Newsom or Michelle Obama, aka Big Mike.
	Well, you know, going back to the lockdown stuff, you know, back in October 2019, Fauci was asking one of these meetings, played a lot for my audience, they said, you know, how do you get everybody in the world to take an untested vaccine?
	He said, well, you do it from the inside, you do it with disruption, and you do it iteratively.
	And we're seeing that applied into the political sphere as well.
	You've got a civil war in the Republican Party over Trump.
	You've got a civil war in the Democrat Party now over Biden.
	How are they going to replace him?
	Who are they going to replace him with?
	Are they going to replace him?
	And so it's just chaos everywhere, I think, is really what they're after.
	It goes back to the old program, Get Smart.
	You know, you just got to...
	This is one of the foundational operative principles of the left in particular.
	That's right. That chaos is how you acquire power.
	Most people want calm.
	They want stability. They want predictability.
	They want to get up in the morning and not have to worry about the golden board descending on their house.
	They want to be able to go to work.
	They want their routines.
	This is just a normal human thing.
	And when that is denied them, well, their instinct is, please, let's end the chaos.
	What can we do to end the chaos?
	And, of course, the left has the answer for that.
	Yeah, that's right. Everything they do, whether it's the open borders or any of this stuff, is all designed for chaos.
	You know, one of the things I think about with Biden is he's always looking to ban something, he and his bureaucratic regime.
	You got an article, another in the Department of What We're Not Allowed to Have.
	What is that? Oh, I think that's what we were talking about earlier, which is that $13,000 Toyota truck.
	Yeah, you know and it's not just that $13,000 truck. There's a whole array of vehicles like that that we are not allowed to have Way something that we're not allowed to have which I think the people who are listening to this who buy into the climate change Narrative ought to take into account. We're not allowed to have affordable electric cars either There is a plethora of affordable electric cars available In other parts of the world. I'm talking about vehicles that cost less than $10,000 You know, they may not be vehicles that do 0 to 60 in 2.9
	seconds But they can get you from A to B particularly if you're in the city So why is it if there's this existential crisis and it's so important that people get into electric vehicles that they're not doing everything possible to see to it that these very affordable vehicles are available to Americans?
	I think the answer to that tells us a lot about the truth of the climate change shibboleth.
	Yeah, yeah. And of course, I know that as well.
	You know, these guys, they got into an argument.
	It's the point at which I stopped watching the debate, where they started arguing about their relative golf scores.
	Oh my gosh, I know. I was hitting myself in the head when that was happening.
	I was trying to coach Trump.
	I was seeing myself, why can't he say something like, you know, the question is whether a person has the mental sharpness and focus and the physical stamina to do this job, not whether he can hit a golf ball.
	That's right, yeah. He could have said, I'm able to answer your questions.
	Why don't you ask that to him?
	That's perfect. But, you know, Babylon Bee said maybe the rematch with them will be held at a golf course, you know, where they can...
	We can compete against each other.
	But one of the things that my brother-in-law pointed out, he said, you know, Biden is bragging about the fact that he had a six handicap.
	I don't play golf, so I didn't know.
	But he said, you know, if you get a six handicap, it means a guy's playing golf every day as vice president, right?
	That's probably true.
	He may not have gotten it down to a six handicap, but he probably did play golf every day.
	And he probably did putter around in a cheap electric golf cart.
	So why can't they give us at least something like that, right?
	But it's about taking away all of our transportation, isn't it?
	Sure. Why can't we go full WWE? Trump should have pulled out one of those folding chairs.
	Remember from back in the day when Paul put it in the battle of the Iron Sheet?
	And just hit Biden over the head with it.
	That's right. Yeah. That's exactly what it is.
	Let's talk a little bit about what you said in terms of intended acceleration.
	You referenced it.
	Oh, yeah. You said we had the Audis that supposedly had unintended acceleration.
	But now we've got the Tesla vehicles and Tesla vehicles.
	Drive-by wire, I mean, there's all kinds of issues.
	I don't know if you saw it or not.
	The lag in terms of the drive-by, the steering wheel on the side of the truck, and you turn it, and you can see in the frame, they've got the steering wheel being turned, and you can see the tire, and there's quite a bit of lag in that as well.
	But you're talking about the acceleration aspect of it.
	Well, yeah, you and I can remember.
	Boy, we're getting old, aren't we? Go back to the 80s.
	And there was this big brouhaha about something that they called unintended acceleration and had to do with Audi vehicles.
	And there was this assertion made that these Audis would just run amok.
	People claimed that no matter how hard they pushed on the brake, their car would just keep on going and go right through the wall.
	Well, what happened, it turned out, was that people weren't used to European car pedal placement back in those days.
	The pedal placement typically was higher up and the pedals were smaller, so inadvertently they didn't realize what they were doing.
	They were in fact pushing on the gas pedal and hence the car accelerated.
	But it may not have been intended, but it wasn't the car's fault, it was the driver's fault.
	They were dealing with something entirely different because these cars are all, as you say, drive by wire.
	So there was an incident last week with a guy who had been waiting for a long time to collect his Tesla Cybertruck and he was so happy when he finally got the thing that he decided to film himself driving it.
	So he put up his camera, he gets in his Cybertruck, and he drives down the road while the thing runs amok.
	And he is actually trying to break it.
	He is trying to slow the thing down.
	But it won't. He's leaving greasy tire marks down the road before you hear the sound of him running into a house, and that's how it stopped.
	The difference is that back in the day, Audis, like all cars, up until drive-by-wire, had a physical cable.
	the cable connected the gas pedal to the throttle, whether it was carburetor or the fuel injection system, so that when you push down on that accelerator pedal, you were operating a mechanical linkage back and forth.
	And sure, sometimes it might get stuck, but you could reach down if you were agile enough, pull that thing back up, or in a worst case scenario, you could put the transmission, if it's an automatic, in neutral.
	And again, back then there were still cable connections between the gear selector and the transmission, so you could disconnect it.
	And with the ignition, you could turn the ignition off.
	Again, there are multiple ways to prevent the vehicle from running amok.
	Now, everything is computer controlled.
	There is a simulation of control.
	You think that you're controlling the throttle.
	You're not a computerist.
	A computer registers a deflection when you push down on the gas pedal, and that gets translated into how much the engine, or in the case of an electric vehicle, how fast the motor should turn.
	When you move the selector from park to drive, you're not doing anything.
	The computer is. The computer is the thing that's putting the transmission into that particular range.
	And in the case of the Cybertruck with that electric steering, you're not steering it, the computer is.
	So what happens when that glitches, when it doesn't work?
	Well, all of a sudden you realize...
	I've got no control.
	You know, this has happened in aviation, too.
	You probably are well aware of this.
	You know, they put in these drive-by-wire controls on some airplanes, and there was this big incident with an Airbus.
	The pilot was pulling back on the yoke because, oh, my God, the ground's coming up.
	I'm going to hit the trees. The airplane decided to countermand and didn't want to let the pilot do what he wanted to do.
	The thing went into the trees and killed everybody.
	Well, that's what happened with the 737 MAX as well.
	Yes. Same type of thing.
	I remember Rowan Atkinson, the comedian, Mr.
	Bean. Of course, he's getting made a lot of money now, but he was, by training before he became a comedian, he was an electrical engineer.
	But he's very rich, so he's able to afford these hypercars and stuff.
	And he said, you don't so much drive these cars anymore as you manage them.
	Yeah. You give a general input to it, and it figures out how it's going to accomplish that.
	And that's really what's happening with a lot of the drive-by wire.
	Now I saw, with a Cybertruck, I saw a picture of one of them where the physical pedal got stuck, like over on the carpet side or something.
	Was that what happened with this, or was it a software issue, or did they know yet?
	I think it was a software issue.
	And in any case, it is inherently a software issue.
	And if this is happening with new vehicles, and this Cybertruck incident is by no means isolated.
	This stuff happens pretty regularly.
	If it happens with a brand new vehicle, it's just come off the line.
	And ostensibly, everything is working as it ought to.
	These are all new components, new connections.
	What happens after 5-10 years?
	You know, after being jostled out on the road, after being exposed to various duty cycles, hot and cold and all of that, connections fray.
	Things start to not work that well anymore.
	You know, these things are all ticking time bombs.
	I wouldn't get in one.
	You know, I wouldn't go down the road in one of these things because you don't have any control over it.
	I've had things happen to me.
	I was driving a few years ago.
	I was driving a car that had drive-by wire and had advanced emergency braking in it, and it just decided to stop itself in the middle of the road.
	It glitched. It was a brand new vehicle.
	It stopped in the middle of the road.
	Nothing I could do. It didn't matter how hard I pushed on the gas pedal.
	The thing had decided that there was an object in the road.
	Maybe it saw a ghost. Maybe it saw a shadow.
	I don't know what happened. Never did find out.
	But the point is, it stopped in the middle of the road.
	And if there had been a tractor trailer coming behind me, that would have been it, and we wouldn't be having this interview.
	Oh, yeah. Yeah. And, you know, especially if it did that on the interstate somewhere.
	Do an emergency stop and then just stay there.
	I had a situation.
	And that's going to happen. The Biden regime has now mandated that I think by 2029, all new vehicles have got to have this advanced emergency braking that will operate at speeds up to 90 miles an hour.
	And the manufacturers, the car companies, are finally saying, we can't do this. This is going to be a huge problem. If we're forced to do this, the technology is not going to work.
	We're going to have a lot of the kinds of problems that you and I are just talking about right now.
	Well, you remember that lady who was killed?
	She was jaywalking.
	She was homeless and pushing a cart and stuff.
	And there was a woman who was supposed to be in the driverless Uber.
	And she's playing with a phone, right?
	And in that particular situation, they said, oh, well, you know, she wasn't paying attention.
	She should have been paying attention.
	And then they said, well, she wouldn't have been able to do anything.
	Because if you look at the forward camera, you can see this lady came from out of the dark.
	And they said, yeah, but these cars have got LiDAR in them, so they would have seen this happen.
	They should have put on the emergency brake, and their response was, well, the emergency brake stuff is going off all the time, so we disconnected it.
	I'm going to have this strong emergency braking thing that's going to be another level of complexity.
	When I first got my Mustang, it was my first car, and I thought it was a great idea to put this decorative pedal on it, because I was just 16 years old.
	Oh, I remember this one that looks like a foot, maybe?
	Yeah, exactly, like a surfer foot, right?
	So I put it on there, and I'm on the interstate.
	And I wanted to pass this car on the right, and there was a flyover that was coming up on the right.
	It had a pretty sharp turn. And so I stepped on it to get past them, got into that lane, and then I take my foot off, and it got stuck on the carpet.
	And this thing is still accelerating, you know?
	It's like, what do I do now?
	And I fortunately thought, oh, I'll put it in neutral, because it was an automatic.
	I shoved it in a neutral, and so the thing was revving really high, but it was able to get the speed down.
	But you know, if it was a drive-by wire and something like that happens, I mean, there's not anything you can do.
	Right. And here's a point I wanted to make, too, with regard to these LIDAR and radar systems.
	And I've personally experienced this, so I can attest to it.
	You know, when it's foggy out, or when it's snowed, or we've had ice, and the camera's view is obscured, the systems don't work.
	So what's the implication? What do you think these control freaks are going to do?
	They're going to say, whenever it rains, whenever it snows, whenever it's foggy, whenever they want to, they'll say, it's not safe.
	We're having a lockdown.
	You know, we're not going to let people get out.
	You know, it sounds ridiculous, but I believe that they're going to do that.
	I can see it. I can see it coming.
	And I can say, just as we've talked about, as they shut down the grid and the power capacity and everything, and they push people to get the cars, they're going to tell them, there's not enough electricity for you to drive your car today.
	But we will, however, be needing to use that as a battery backup for the grid.
	We've talked about that for the longest time.
	So, you know, it's a very subversive agenda.
	They want to create chaos, take everything from us by creating the chaos.
	And it's just amazing to see how this is playing out.
	And I think we're going to see this really, really accelerating because they've only got a couple of years before their magic date of 2030 where they want to have all this stuff accomplished.
	There's synergies at work. It's all coming together.
	And for good or for bad, hopefully for better, this I do think is going to get resolved probably within the next year or two.
	Well, we've seen some real hopeful signs.
	I just think that as people wake up and start to push back, they're going to take us to war.
	That's what Gerald Slenty always says.
	Always great talking to you, Eric.
	Thank you so much again, everybody.
	That's ericpetersautos.com.
	Everything about mobility and liberty you'll find there, and really great insights from Eric Peters.
	Very entertaining to read as well.
	Thank you so much, Eric. Thank you, Dave.
	Have a great four. Thank you.
	You too. All right, that's it for today's program.
	Thanks for joining us. Have a good day.
	We'll see you tomorrow. The David Knight Show is a critical thinking super spreader.
	If you've been exposed to logic by listening to The David Knight Show, please do your part and try not to spread it.
	Financial support or simply telling others about the show causes this dangerous information to spread farther.
	People have to trust me.
	I mean, trust the science.
	Wear your mask.
	Take your vaccine.
	Don't ask questions.
	Using free speech to free minds.

▲