Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 25, 2024 - The David Knight Show

03:01:58

The David Knight Show - 07/25/2024

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 Thursday, the 25th of July.
	Year of our Lord, 2024.
	Well, we have a lot of interesting things that are happening right now.
	CrowdStrike is still in the news.
	And finally, some mainstream media organizations are talking about the implications, for example, with cashless societies.
	And the larger picture, do we really want to build our entire society on these shifting sands?
	Well, people like Marc Andreessen.
	We are, this is our sorcery.
	This is our philosopher's stone.
	We're literally making intelligence out of sand.
	Well, maybe we are building a society that is the foundation of shifting sands.
	We're going to take a look at what is going on with CrowdStrike as well as with the technocracy, artificial intelligence, more updates on that.
	And we're going to begin by taking a look at Lala.
	Not because we're interested in the high school student council aspects of this, but because of the massive money laundering behind this big donation take that she had.
	We'll be right back. Well, we have been told that Lala Harris is...
	First of all, she's going to take the $91 million.
	There's going to be a lawsuit about that.
	And it should be, I think.
	But that's more of a technicality versus the $231 million that she claimed that she got within a 24-hour period.
	And as I said before, these astronomical sums of money are just a metric of how corrupted our elections are, how hopelessly corrupted Washington is.
	And that corruption is going to be flowing down to the state levels, as I pointed out a couple of days ago.
	And when we look at the...
	The patterns and how Elon Musk has openly talked about how smart it was for George Soros to focus his money on changing society at local election levels by putting in district attorneys that were going to essentially create chaos.
	That's what Soros wants. He wants chaos and destruction.
	And so how do you do that? Well, you get some district attorneys that do what has happened in California, where you turn the criminals right back out on the street.
	Give them a free pass to steal as much as they want.
	Not even the Wall Street big box retailers can handle that.
	Because they're closing down stores left and right.
	And they're able to raise money almost as easily as the federal government is.
	Their ability to create money out of thin air using Wall Street is almost as good as the Federal Reserve.
	Nevertheless, that kind of chaos, if you want to do it, it's very easy to do that with the district attorneys.
	Now they're moving to state legislators, and we're seeing this happening in many different ways.
	And one way to stop this, it can be stopped at the state level.
	And we have people like Frank Nicely who said, a lot of foreign money, a lot of out-of-state money, Coming from these foundations, and quite frankly, many of them are globalists, many of them are foreign, and so we can stop this by putting a limit on it.
	Well, that didn't pass in the Tennessee legislature, but they're coming after a guy who put that in.
	And so you need to do that in your states.
	Stand by these people who put that kind of stuff in.
	And, you know, the candidate that they've got is just flush with cash, running ads all over the place.
	And he says absolutely nothing about what he wants to do.
	He says absolutely nothing about his background.
	The guy is, you know, just a faceless person.
	You go to his website, he's got no issues whatsoever.
	Except that he wants to spend more money on teachers' salaries.
	Who's going to pay that? And then complains that we're spending...
	that our taxes are too high.
	That's the only two things he says.
	General stuff like that. And so that's the kind...
	and that's being funded by big, out-of-state billionaires and their foundations.
	So that's how this is rolling out.
	Now, when we look at...
	Lala Harris. $231 million.
	Where'd that come from? That come from a couple of foundations?
	Well, actually, it's even more insidious than that.
	And we're going to take a look at where this massive money laundering operation is coming from.
	But before we do that, I just want to show you one of the most cringy endorsements I've ever seen.
	This is Chuck Schumer, of course, Senate Democrat leader.
	And then you have Hakeem Jeffries, who is the minority leader in the House.
	If the Democrats had the majority in the House, he'd be Speaker of the House.
	And so the two of them had this meeting, this press conference, to praise Lala Harris as the next nominee.
	Listen to this. Vice President Harris will soon be our nominee and will be elected president in November.
	We are brimming with excitement, enthusiasm, unity.
	On Sunday, President Biden showed the world what a great man he is.
	His true patriotism, his profound sense of decency came shining through.
	We all know it was not an easy decision for him.
	But just as he has done in his entire life, President Biden's selfless decision not to seek the nomination put our country, our party, and our future first.
	At his core, he's just an honorable man.
	A family man.
	A man of deep faith.
	We love him. We truly do.
	We love him. We truly do, yeah.
	I'll have more to say on President Biden later.
	He's one of the ones holding gun to his head.
	In my floor speech.
	But... President Biden's selfless decision has given the Democratic Party the opportunity to unite behind a new nominee, and boy oh boy, are we enthusiastic.
	Since President Biden's announcement, we've seen the Democratic Party swiftly coalesce behind Vice President Kamala Harris.
	When I spoke with her Sunday, she said she wanted the opportunity to win the nomination on her own, and to do so from the grassroots up, not top down.
	We deeply respected that.
	Hakeem and I did. She said she would work to earn the support of our party, and boy, has she done so in quick order.
	Vice President Harris has done a truly impressive job securing the majority of delegates needed to win the Democratic Party's nomination to be our next president to the United States.
	The vast majority of my senators quickly and enthusiastically endorsed her.
	So now that the process has played out from the grassroots bottom up, we are here today to throw our support behind Vice President Kamala Harris.
	I'm clapping. You don't have to.
	laughter That's even worse than Jeb Bush.
	Please clap. And then the little chuckling that he's got there.
	I've never seen anything more fake than that.
	And of course, they say that she's going to do it from the bottom up.
	And she got tons of small contributions, they said.
	$231 million.
	I'm told that Harris' campaign is already using ActBlue money laundering scheme.
	$20 million from Johan Jorg Weiss, known as Hansjorg Weiss, born 19 September 1935.
	A Swiss billionaire.
	And it was broken down into over 1.6 million donations across 400,000 donors.
	Dirty, dirty, dirty, dirty hairy, right?
	The accusation comes as the platform says that it had its best day of 2024, possibly of all time.
	In the wake of President Biden abandoning the re-election campaign on Sunday, ActBlue has been previously fined for facilitating nearly $44,000 in illegal contributions.
	Oh, but this is much bigger.
	As a matter of fact, Zero Hedge included a great clip.
	From Breaking Bad, where Saul Goodman figures out exactly how to do this.
	When the main protagonist, Walter White, is a chemistry teacher with cancer and he starts making meth.
	And so he's making money hand over fist because evidently he's got some really pure stuff.
	And he doesn't know what to do with the money, but they figure it out.
	This is insane.
	I have so much cash on hand that I actually counted by weighing it on my bathroom scale, and yet I can't spend it.
	I can't tell my family about it.
	All of whom think that I am right on the edge of bankruptcy.
	And now my son created his own website, SaveWalterWhite.com, soliciting anonymous donations.
	Do you have any idea how that makes me feel?
	Walt, I'm looking at the answer right here.
	It's staring me in the face. Do I have to spell it out for you?
	I know. You're thinking that I should be funneling my money into my son's website, but absolutely not.
	No. I am not going to have my family think that some mystery benefactor saved us.
	Not mystery benefactor.
	Singular. That would raise too many questions.
	However, stay with me here.
	Zombies. I got a guy who knows this guy who knows this rain man type, right?
	He lives with his mother in her basement in Belarus, right?
	So good luck extraditing his fat Russian ass.
	He's a hacker cracker, extraordinaire.
	This guy can hijack random desktops all around the world, turn them into zombies that do his bidding.
	For instance, he can make it so 20 or 30,000 little donations come in from all over the U.S. and Canada.
	10, 20, 50 bucks a pop.
	All paid in full.
	Nice and neat. Untraceable.
	From the good-hearted people of the world to Mr.
	Walter H. White. Cancer Saint.
	I'm getting a warm and fuzzy feeling just thinking about it.
	Yeah. Well, maybe Act Blue saw that as well.
	James O'Keefe.
	Working off of another organization that was putting together some of this research.
	Got the list of these people who've been donating, and he thought it was kind of interesting how many donations these people had.
	And so he thought, well, let me go buy and see if they really know that they're donating to this.
	FEC data shows that some senior citizens across the U.S. have been donating thousands of times per year.
	Some of these individuals' names and addresses are attached to over $200,000 in contributions.
	We went and knocked on a few of their doors to corroborate the data that we received from a group of citizen journalists called Election Watch in Maryland.
	Cindy Noe of Annapolis, Maryland, who in the year 2022 allegedly contributed over 1,000 times to ActBlue, totaling $8,000.
	Thank you.
	Thank you. Hello?
	Hey there, Cindy.
	My name's James O'Keefe, and we're doing a story on the number of people that have donated with your address.
	Did you donate to Act Blue, a political cause?
	How many times a month do you donate to Act Blue?
	I don't know. I don't know how many times.
	I don't understand why I'm getting this.
	Well, the question is...
	You did donate to ActBlue, right?
	Yes. Once in a while, yes.
	Did you donate a thousand and nine times?
	I don't know. I mean, once in a while I donate five or so dollars or something like that during election year.
	What about $18,850?
	I doubt that. Not that many donations.
	No, I don't think so.
	The Federal Election Commission indicates that that much money was donated to Act Blue and Biden for president.
	I wish I could have donated $18,000 to Biden's presidency.
	How much did you donate?
	I don't know. Order of magnitude.
	Like I said, I donate $5 once in a while because I have various charities I like to give to.
	Do you know people are using your address?
	I don't think so.
	So, interestingly enough, she said she donates something like $5 a month.
	But, um...
	We're getting kind of a pattern of reactions here as we do this.
	The woman was a very nice lady.
	She talked to us.
	So, interestingly enough, even in a two-party consent state like Maryland, with the camera out in the open, people are still being honest.
	This is sort of new to me.
	Usually we use the covert cameras, but maybe the camera's a truth serum.
	But does it sound about right that there's been 18,000 contributions?
	Absolutely not. For the...
	Absolutely not. In the amount of like $170,000?
	Absolutely not.
	Really? Yes. Okay.
	So that's not you doing that?
	No, it's not. But does the frequency ring a bell that you're donating that much every, like, ten times a day sometimes?
	No. No? No.
	Do you think someone is maybe fraudulently debiting your accounts or something?
	We must be. That glue is the one I use for political donations.
	And I do not make that kind of political donations.
	Right. So right here...
	Isn't that interesting, you know?
	So maybe Act Blue should be renamed Act Belarus.
	Maybe they got some rain man in Belarus who is doing this stuff.
	These are people who maybe made a couple of donations of $5.
	Maybe they've done it a few times.
	Oh, look, this person has made a few, several of these donations.
	All right, so we'll just keep doing it for them.
	Maybe we'll do it three times a day.
	Maybe we'll take an 80-year-old, which I don't know if they know that this is an 80-year-old retired person, and pretend that she's donating $170,000.
	Split over 18,000 donations.
	How many times a day would she have to do that?
	They didn't say what period of time that was.
	That full report, by the way, is nine minutes in full from James O'Keefe.
	I guess maybe Kamala Harris has Saul Goodman as her campaign manager.
	She started to, when they selected her to take Biden's place as they were holding the gun to his head, I guess I told her you better call Saul.
	This is unbelievable when you look at it.
	No, I mean, it is believable, but the fraud is...
	The magnitude of it, the brazenness of it is truly amazing.
	Now, the Trump campaign has focused on something else.
	Now, again, $231 million over a 24-hour period?
	How much of it is stuff like that?
	Well, we talked about the fact that there was $91 million.
	And... Well, see, that's the other part about this that's really brilliant.
	These are people who support Democrats.
	This is Act Blue.
	And, you know, so when you engage them and say, oh, yeah, yeah, we did that.
	But, yeah, that would be a good thing for that lady who is 80 years old.
	She probably doesn't have $170,000 in the bank.
	She probably could use that money back.
	But you also heard the one lady said, I wish I had that kind of money to give.
	So maybe they wouldn't ask for it back.
	They love the Democrats so much.
	If I'm not mistaken, I think that Act Blue was the organization that this Thomas Crooks guy donated to.
	I'm just going from memory here.
	I didn't think to look that up.
	I just thought about that.
	But I think that this Thomas Crooks guy, who's the shooter or the patsy, depending on your perspective of what happened, He donated before he was able to vote.
	He was not 18 years old on January the 21st, 2021, when Biden took office.
	So he gave like $5 or $10 or something like that to Act Blue.
	I wonder how many times he's donated and perhaps continued to donate after he died to Lala Harris.
	He loves the Democrats so much that even after he's shot in the head, he'll continue to donate to her, I guess.
	It'd be interesting to see how many of these people made donations after they died.
	Yeah, it's not enough for them to have zombie voters.
	They've now got zombie donors.
	These people are just so brazenly corrupt.
	It's amazing. So, the other $91 million.
	So, $231 million, you know, overnight from this kind of stuff.
	And the question is, you know, when we have, why is it that we allow foreigners in other countries, like a, you know, 90-year-old Swiss billionaire, why do we allow them to donate in the United States?
	And we set up these structures like foundations and political action committees and things like that.
	You know, again, as I mentioned, if you go over $2,500, like Dinesh D'Souza did, to a friend of his from school who was running for office, and, you know, he went to jail for that, typically that's a fine.
	But, hey, if you do something Democrats don't like politically, if you're their political enemy, they'll get in jail for something that they don't even get fined for.
	So, you know, more than $2,500, jail.
	And yet these other people can give unlimited amounts of money going through a PAC. Even Elon Musk saying, well, I'm going to give $45 million a month.
	By the way, he has now recanted that.
	That was something that was reported by the Wall Street Journal.
	They said that was a source that was close to Elon Musk.
	And that was out there for a couple of days.
	He didn't correct that right away.
	And so he's now come out and said, I'm not doing that.
	I'm not putting $45 million a month for the next four months into this thing.
	So a lot of people, because he was silent about it for a couple of days...
	Before he contradicted that, a lot of people believe that he's changed his position for some reason with Trump.
	Who knows what is going on?
	Nevertheless, the potential for something like that is there.
	And people are giving tremendous amounts of money that are unrestricted.
	It's not limited to $2,500.
	It's not limited even to American citizens giving money.
	Same type of thing I was talking about at the beginning of the program.
	People from out of state can manipulate your local elections.
	You know, Soros was giving these people who were running for district attorney, they had millions of dollars to run for office.
	And initially, in San Antonio, when I was living in Texas, initially the district attorney in San Antonio went public with that.
	He said, do you see what's happening here?
	This is, Soros wants me out.
	He's giving this guy millions of dollars.
	And that worked for him.
	He ran against Soros, and rightfully so.
	And yet, they eventually got him.
	They eventually pushed him out with that money.
	So, when you look at, again, looking at Trump's campaign coming after the $91 million that's being transferred again, this is a technicality.
	Some people say it can be done because her name was on the Biden-Harris ticket.
	And so they say, yeah, sure, she can take that.
	But it's a question that's going to be litigated by the Trump campaign.
	But the bigger issue are these zombie donors.
	That is fraud and money laundering.
	And it is false reporting to the FEC. So the Trump campaign has also filed a complaint with the FEC on Tuesday accusing Biden and Harris of violating campaign finance laws with a transfer of $91 million in fundraising cash to her new campaign.
	Trump campaign general counsel David Warrington called the act a brazen money grab that would constitute the single largest excessive contribution and biggest violation in the history of the FEC as amended.
	He said Lala Harris is in the process of committing the largest campaign finance violation in American history using the commissioner's own forms to do it.
	The Commission must not and cannot sit idly by while one candidate takes nearly $100 million from the authorized committee of another in violation of the act and of the will of the donors who gave the money in the first place.
	Well, the problem, the elephant in the room, is the magnitude of the money.
	He can't take nearly $100 million.
	You know, your campaign took $100 million from Sheldon Adelson's widow.
	What's that about?
	Come on. We all know what that's about.
	I'm just disgusted by the amount of money in politics.
	And that's where the corruption comes from.
	You know, these people will donate $100 million and they'll get back billions.
	They'll get back $100 billion worth of foreign aid for their country, the Israel that she's supporting, or whatever other cause that they're doing.
	It's how Elon Musk became the richest man in the world.
	You buy a politician. So now the press is covering for her, saying that she was not the border czar.
	Because the border is an unmitigated disaster.
	I remember when this happened and a lot of people said, oh yeah, that's probably Jill Biden.
	Jill Biden is getting Joe to do this because she really hates Lala Harris.
	You know, give her the catastrophe at the border and make her in charge of it.
	And now all of these mainstream news media outlets are trying to say, well, she was never, the borders are.
	And so, in this article, which you can find on Zero Hedge, they've actually got side-by-side screenshots of the current headline saying she wasn't the border czar, and their headline from back when they said she was the border czar.
	And why would they call her the border czar?
	Well, it might be because Biden said that she was.
	I've asked her, the VP today, because she's the most qualified person to do it, to lead our efforts with Mexico and the Northern Triangle and the country's We're going to need help in the movement of so many folks stemming the migration to our southern border.
	Yeah, that's sort of where the borders are.
	You know, so we look at the lies that are being told by the mainstream media, how they don't even try to be objective.
	You've got AP, you've got Time, you've got Axios.
	All these people feel like they can just lie to your face and that we won't notice the difference.
	And yet, Google is getting better and better at memory-holing things, but these things still survive.
	Back at that time, the Associated Press, Biden taps VP Harris to lead the response to the border challenges.
	Time. Kamala Harris was never Biden's border czar.
	Here's what she really did.
	That's today. Axios said, right now, the Trump campaign, Republicans have tagged Harris repeatedly with a border czar title, which she never had.
	You just heard that she did.
	But back in April of 2021, this is what Axios said.
	They said, White matters.
	The number of unaccompanied minors crossing the border has reached crisis levels.
	Harris appointed by Biden as border czar.
	That's their own words. And now they say she was never border czar.
	So, when we look at what is happening, this competition...
	Between two puppets for who gets to sit on the throne is absurd and the extreme.
	In case you haven't noticed, it's never been more obvious that this is a selection.
	We all know that. But what is important to notice is the levels of corruption in terms of money laundering, the levels of corruption in terms of deception and outright lies and memory-holing done by the mainstream media, Associated Press, Axios, Time Magazine.
	And now, GovTrack erased Kamala's ranking as the most liberal U.S. senator.
	Can't have that there, can we?
	As a matter of fact, I don't know how they're going to cover up for her word salad speeches here, but Karen saw this.
	A campaign. I said, we should probably put this up here behind me.
	It's so funny. But I said, people might think that I'm actually supporting her because they might not read the fine print.
	Here's a fine print. It says, Kamala Harris, it's like a yard sign.
	For President of the United States of America, In which the country of America, which has states that are united and which needs a president to preside over those states united in America.
	That's exactly the way she would put it, too.
	When she was asked, have you been to the border?
	She said, well, I haven't been to Europe either.
	You see, this is why I refer to her as Lala.
	Well, la-dee-da, la-dee-da, la-dee-da.
	Yeah, la-dee-da, la-la.
	La-de-da-la-la.
	I don't know. She was on with Ellen Degenerate, and they were talking about Trump and other things, and now the conservatives are outraged.
	They want to play the cancel game.
	And as I said before, you don't want to play this cancel culture censorship game, hate speech game, but they're doing it big time.
	And so you can look all over conservative media and you see.
	Remember that time that Lala Harris said with the Ellen Degenerate show that she wanted to kill Trump?
	If you had to be stuck in an elevator with either President Trump, Mike Pence, or Jeff Sessions, who would it be?
	Does one of us have to come out alive?
	Laughter Oh yeah, that laugh.
	That laugh. That laugh should get her convicted, but...
	There's also the fact she misspoke.
	She should have said, do both of us have to come out alive?
	What she implies is both of them will be perishing in the elevator.
	Yeah, that's right. Speaking of the elevator and getting Mike Pence alone in the elevator with her, I had that conversation with Alex when Pence was running.
	He really hated Pence.
	This guy's such a do-gooder.
	You know, he won't even get in an elevator alone with a woman because he's afraid somebody.
	I said, well, actually, I think that's a wise decision.
	You know, he's staked his personality, his reputation, regardless of what he is in reality.
	I mean, his political reputation is really at stake.
	Who was it? Was it Gary Bauer, I think, the Christian Coalition or something like that?
	He ran for president, and he was frequently meeting behind closed doors in his office with a female staff member, and a whispering campaign began.
	And so I said, you know, if you're going to do something like that, and if you're going to say, you know, this is who I am, you better make sure that in politics, where everybody's always slandering other people with ad hominem attacks, you better make sure you don't leave them an opening to do that.
	Anyway, the POTUS debate was set up to force Biden out of the race.
	Who knew? Did you know that?
	I literally fell out of my chair when I was like, breaking news here.
	New American thought that it was really news when the New York Post said this.
	The New York Post has revealed.
	Has revealed. We knew this the day after it all happened, didn't we?
	I mean, I talked about it.
	I said, you notice the dates?
	We've never seen anything. You've heard me say this multiple times.
	We've never had a debate this early.
	We've never had a debate a month and a half before the person's even nominated.
	Neither one of them had been officially nominated at that point in time.
	Like I said, usually the first debate is the end of September.
	And then there's another one in the middle of October.
	And then there's another one at the end of October.
	And they usually have the nominating conventions in late July or early August.
	And so I said, we've never had, first of all, the Democrats' convention has never been later.
	And the debate has never been earlier.
	Large gap there.
	They knew exactly what was going on.
	So, yeah, it was obvious.
	I just thought it was funny that...
	You think I don't know that?
	I know that. To General Martin Short.
	Funny that you'd think I don't know that.
	Lala Harris has had 92% staff turnover during her first three years.
	Again, when we start looking at conservatives who start taunting people for saying, they've got to put Trump in the crosshairs or got to target what he's doing or something.
	You can't say that now. There was a shooting around Trump, so you can't use any of those metaphors.
	And if they want to start talking about how popular somebody is with their staff, they may not want to throw stones in that glass house.
	She had 92% staff turnover during her first three years.
	In other words, nearly everybody left and was replaced.
	Trump hasn't been much better.
	And as a matter of fact, when you look at the people, cabinet-level people that he picked, very few of them support him.
	Never had a situation like that.
	So, yeah, you want to play that game, it might come back around.
	Rosie O'Donnell is ranting that democracy may be over by Thanksgiving.
	What democracy? Your so-called Democrat Party has just thrown out all of the people's votes who voted, pressuring this.
	This is all calculated as a 20.
	We know the dates are there.
	That's the smoking gun.
	To show that they knew exactly what they were doing.
	That Clooney and Obama knew exactly what they were doing at that fundraiser, $30 million, and then had to show and escort Biden off the stage, denied that that was what they were doing, and then comes back three weeks later.
	Yeah, no, he's just checked out.
	Sorry. Well, what is Lala going to do if she gets elected president?
	These people who are complaining about Democracy dying in darkness who want to censor everybody.
	That's the Washington Post. These Hollywood celebrities who say democracy is going to be over, Trump is going to be a dictator.
	Well, she certainly does embrace the idea of a dictator.
	More than anyone else that I have seen.
	Again, as soon as Trump did executive order gun control with a bump stock, setting that precedent, she immediately jumped on that and wanted to do it with steroids.
	She says, I've got a long list of things I want to do in terms of banning guns.
	Everything that the left has always wanted, and as a matter of fact, The Drudge Report was pushing former astronaut Kelly, who is now a senator, and his wife is Gabby Giffords, who was shot.
	And they've got a gun control organization, her name, Drudge, and a lot of people are pushing him for vice president to do gun control.
	But she said, I'm going to give Congress 100 days, and if they don't do it, I'll do it myself.
	And she wants to do everything by executive order.
	It's amazing to me to see these people who are freaking out about democracy ending people who are freaking out about a dictatorship I don't care at all that she's selected without an election and that she wants to rule as a dictator.
	It fits both of them. It fits Lala and it also fits Trump.
	She wants a ban on fracking.
	She wants to suppress the availability of red meat, of course.
	A ban on offshore explorations.
	She wants to legalize illegal aliens, abolish ICE, and let convicted murderers and terrorists have the vote because that's what Soros wants.
	And she is going to be even worse than the Biden administration has been so far on the climate MacGuffin.
	So, yeah, when we look at this, the people behind them and the policies that they're putting out, we see where this is all headed.
	But the key thing is that they're going to focus on these personalities.
	And just an amazing amount of lies from these people who want to shut us down.
	This one is so dangerous.
	For the conservatives to play this game of gotcha and cancel culture.
	For people who say things, you know, individuals who say, well, too bad he didn't have better aim or something like that.
	Or even the people who are speaking in metaphors critical of Trump.
	You want to have that speech criminalized for you as well?
	We don't want to live in a society like that, trust me.
	And these people...
	We're going to wind up both left and right.
	You know, it's just like this ratchet taking us down into this dystopian society.
	We're going to take a quick break, and we'll be right back.
	Unlike most revolutions where the people rise against a real economic oppression, in our case here in Boston, we are fighting for purely an abstract principle.
	It is, however, not nearly so abstract as a young gentleman supposes.
	The issue involved here is one of monopoly.
	Hey!
	Today the British government will monopolize the sale of tea in our country.
	Tomorrow it will be something else.
	I'm going to be a hero!
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Well, I have on Rumble, SoloCat1980 says, Democracy is two Bidens and a little girl voting on what's for sniffing.
	Or it could be two Bidens and a la-la voting on what you're going to be able to eat.
	Are we going to let them have red meat?
	No, I don't think so. Yeah, me neither.
	You know, just like they did. The person that Biden has put in charge of the CDC was the North Carolina public health director, state level.
	And that's what she said. Yeah, I would call up my friends who were public health directors in other states.
	I mean, it's like we're back in high school again.
	It's crazy. Are you going to let them do that?
	Oh, yeah, neither am I. That type of thing.
	Well, I wanted to thank some of the people who have sent us contributions by mail.
	Read their names in the initial, the last name.
	First names and last initial.
	Tom and Nancy K, Richard R, Jackie and Fred U, Ray and Carolyn C, Mary P, Kelly M, Matthew H, Robert B, James F, and Ryan F. Thank you so much.
	We really do need it this month.
	Gage is running really low.
	Karen is about to update that.
	But it's really low.
	We're just past... One tick mark past half.
	And we're getting pretty close to the end of the month.
	Let's talk a little bit about what's going on with CrowdStrike.
	I did a special report with Goat Tree on Saturday because I think it's very significant.
	I think it tells us a great deal about the kind of vulnerabilities that are being built into our society, as well as concerns about the cashless society.
	And after we did that report, like I said, I did it on a Saturday because I thought it was very important.
	I got a goat tree talking to me about it and said, let's do this on Saturday.
	He was willing to do it, so I appreciate him doing that on Saturday.
	But this came from a listener who said, I work for a large Fortune 50 health insurance company in IT. Can't give you the name, so I won't say anything other than his first name, Kyle.
	He said, after knowing what to do, he said, it would take me five-ish minutes per user to get it removed.
	That would also depend on the knowledge and the level of the users.
	Believe me, my patience was tested.
	Thankfully, I don't use video.
	I'd be fired with all the eye rolls.
	Most of the users I helped were off-site, so it could be done remotely if your business had the correct securities or passwords to be able to help the user manipulate their system in Windows safe mode.
	Like the first thing they always tell you.
	Have you tried restarting the system?
	Let's try restarting the system and bringing it up in safe mode.
	Here's how you do it. However, you had to walk the user through the steps.
	The user had to do the work with guidance.
	I know I spent all day Friday and Monday working with users.
	We had, at our peak, 500-plus IT folks that were asked to do the work.
	I don't know the exact issue count that we had, but we were able to clear ours up in two business days.
	But there was not any scripting No automation that we could do because of the nature of how to get into the safe mode.
	It was not 100% of our systems affected, and I believe this depended on when a user logged on after the issue was originally discovered.
	Maybe a third of our machines and servers were affected, but that was still well over 10,000 to 15,000 machines.
	Huge. That took them a couple of business days.
	Well, we've got a lot of businesses like Delta Airlines.
	That is still having issues with it.
	Even though we're told it only affected 1% of the Windows, Microsoft Windows computers worldwide, it was still incredibly massive.
	And the effects of that are still being felt everywhere.
	And, you know, you can only imagine what would happen if it was more than 1%.
	If it was something that was intentional rather than incompetence that was there.
	So the Biden administration has launched an investigation into Delta Airlines.
	Because if Microsoft makes a mistake, you're going to come after somebody else as their customer, right?
	Or CrowdStrike. Because both of them are so politically connected.
	CrowdStrike so connected to the Democrats, especially Hillary Clinton and Russiagate stuff and the rest of that.
	They were key in terms of selling Russiagate.
	And so they are politically connected.
	So you're going to go to somebody.
	Evidently, Delta Airlines hasn't bought enough politicians to protect themselves.
	The U.S. Department of Transportation.
	Who runs that?
	Boudiguet runs that.
	So Boudiguet, he doesn't have anything to offer to help people.
	You know, that old thing. Hi, I'm from the government.
	I'm here to help you. He doesn't even do that line.
	You seriously had that line that was put out by Biden's department.
	I think it was the guy that runs the Department of Education.
	He used that Without any sarcasm or irony in a congressional hearing.
	I remember I played that. It's like, can you believe this?
	This guy actually doesn't realize that he is a satirical meme.
	You are exactly the kind of person that Reagan was warning us about, that we all know exists.
	I'm from the government. I'm here to help you.
	And so, Booty Gay is from the government, and he's here to help you.
	And the way he's going to do that...
	For Delta, he's not going to help them reboot their systems in safe mode.
	No, he's going to take his boot and he's going to smash them in the face forever.
	He's got this Orwellian fix.
	This Orwellian fixation.
	So while the IT companies are trying to reboot, he's going to be kicking him in the face with his boot.
	U.S. Department of Transportation has received hundreds of complaints about Delta since Friday when the cybersecurity company launched a faulty software update that brought down Microsoft systems globally, impacting retailers and top airlines.
	While most airlines have since recovered, Delta is still working to get back on track.
	According to FlightAware, a commercial flight tracker, the company was leading the number of delays and cancellations at 779 and 460 on Tuesday.
	We've got everyone around the company working around the clock to get this operation where it needs to be, said the Delta CEO. The airline explained that more than half of their IT systems worldwide are Windows-based.
	The error required the company's IT teams to manually repair and reboot each of the affected systems, as we've mentioned.
	Which makes sure that all flights have a full crew, requires the most time and manual support to synchronize.
	You wouldn't want to, for example, take off without a pilot.
	So you're going to have a computer to figure that out, don't you?
	And so the obvious solution is for Buttigieg to send his government thugs to them, not to Microsoft, to them, not to CrowdStrike.
	Department of Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said, we have made it clear to Delta they must take care of their passengers and honor their customer service commitments.
	This is not just the right thing to do.
	It's the law. We'll tell that to Microsoft.
	Tell that to crowdsource.
	No one should be stranded at an airport overnight or stuck on hold for hours waiting to talk to a customer service agent.
	It's too bad that, um...
	If Buttigieg didn't go into cybersecurity, he could have avoided all this stuff for us.
	He would have fixed everything, right?
	So, the disruption is far from over, unless there's been an update today.
	The crowd strike outage may not be the top headline, but that does not mean that the impact is a thing of the past.
	One person said, these incidents can take three times as long to resolve at the length of time that they last, but that's very much dependent on the scale of the IT failure and of the market conditions at the time it occurs.
	And as I said before, Microsoft said this only affected 1% of all Windows machines.
	They said there's 8.5 million Windows devices that were affected.
	So I guess they've got 850 million Windows machines worldwide.
	That's amazing.
	Though this is a significant percentage, the economic and logistical fallout for corporations and individuals respectively was immense.
	But let's take a look at the fallout of this from a perspective of money.
	I think it's very significant when we look at the impact on cashless society and what it tells us about our dependence on this.
	But before we leave CrowdStrike, they are not completely insensitive to their users, as Boutier is trying to paint Delta insensitive to this.
	No, as a matter of fact, CrowdStrike has told their vendors, we're sorry for the tech outage.
	Here is a $10 Uber Eats voucher.
	My son said, I thought that was a joke.
	I said, no, actually.
	CNN said they called up CrowdStrike and the person there said, no, we actually did that.
	A single CrowdStrike bug sent the entire tech world into chaos last week.
	Some companies like Delta, of course, are still recovering from it.
	But as a token of appreciation for those who have been inconvenienced, a $10 Uber Eats voucher.
	CNN said, we're not kidding.
	We contacted the people there and they said, yeah.
	When reports of the voucher gifts first surfaced on Wednesday afternoon, there were three main reactions.
	One of them, which was mine, was, can you get anything for $10 on Uber Eats?
	Travis is shaking his head, no.
	You cannot. No, I can't imagine that you could.
	They've got to deliver it to you, of course, and that's not even including the tip.
	You know, they've got a bit of a premium there.
	That doesn't even include the tip for the driver.
	He says, this person who wrote the article said, at least where I'm located, I can't even get a pizza for $10 on Uber Eats after taxes and fees.
	A can of Coke, a package of two small Twinkies with a Hershey's chocolate bar.
	We're among the very, very limited number of items I was able to identify that if purchased individually, not together, I mean, you're not going to get a can of Coke and a Hershey bar for $10 from them.
	We're talking, I guess, I've never used Uber Eats.
	I guess this is like, you know, buying food at the movie theater.
	And unfortunately for the movie theater people, that's the only way they can make money.
	The tickets are pretty much, almost all that is snarfed up by Hollywood.
	They give them enough to cover their overhead.
	But, you know, they have the basic cost of their building there.
	But if they want to make a profit, they've got to make it off of the...
	The sales at the concessions.
	But as you point out, that doesn't even include a tip.
	Then the second reaction people had, they said, oh yeah, that kind of checks out.
	Partners are working under immense pressure.
	As the point of contact for their customers who in some cases still can't operate their businesses as smoothly compared as before the outage.
	Yeah, if you're trying to fix thousands of these things in a couple of business days, even if you've got 500 plus IT people, still a lot of pressure.
	Now partners could risk losing their customers as a result of this mess, even though it was out of their control.
	CNN needs to send this article to Boutique.
	Do you realize this is not under Delta's control?
	Maybe they should have known better than to buy something from Bill Gates.
	But hey, other than that, Guard Goldsmith says, can I order some truth from CrowdStrike with that Uber Eats coupon?
	Seems like truth is not on the menu.
	That's right, it isn't.
	A lot of users across social media platforms compared this to an office pizza party.
	And you know, a $10 Uber Eats voucher should make it all better, even if you...
	Lose your business, right?
	This is, you know, kind of their version of Trump's stimulus check.
	Those tend to happen, these pizza parties tend to happen when bosses want to show they really appreciate their employees' hard work.
	You know, hey, here's a pizza.
	Great. Yeah, that always helps, doesn't it?
	Another one is, this has got to be a scam.
	They said, no, a CrowdStrike spokesperson confirmed that the emails with the $10 vouchers were legitimate.
	But then added that Uber has now flagged it as fraud because of the high usage rate.
	Oh, they've got an algorithm too, I guess.
	Meaning too many people were trying to cash them in.
	It didn't help that the voucher code in the email was sent to many partners, and then it stopped working, just like their software.
	CrowdStrike outage is Christmas in July for cybercriminals who've been setting up phony websites meant to appeal to people who are seeking information on or solutions to the worldwide IT meltdown.
	So they're trying to find out what to do to fix it themselves.
	Well, there's a lot of cybercriminals who, yeah, come here and we'll show you what to do.
	And take over their computer.
	reality they're designed to harvest visitors information or to breach their devices and so he says as all this is unraveling some details got lost in translation about who was getting the $10 vouchers that would be a pittance anyway for what these customers have lost it may have cost a fortune 500 companies as much as 5.4 billion dollars in revenue and
	gross profit it's not clear if CrowdStrike will pay them back You think they're going to pay back these people without a lawsuit, but I imagine there isn't going to be a lot of lawsuits.
	It says CrowdStrike has, however, apologized to them.
	Look, let's give them some credit.
	CrowdStrike apologized for this.
	That's more than the Republicans and Democrats have done, or will do, about what they did in terms of the lockdown and the damage and the destruction of people's businesses on Main Street especially.
	They never have even apologized for any of that.
	So, you know, we don't want to be too hard on CrowdStrike.
	As bad as they are, they're not as bad as Republicans and Democrats.
	Give them a nickel for their trouble.
	It truly is amazing.
	On Rumble, 12 June 1776.
	Thank you for the tip. I appreciate that.
	A little gift to help with a monthly meter.
	Thank you very much. Appreciate that.
	Well, let's talk about what this really tells us.
	And, of course, that was a big part of why I wanted to have this discussion on Saturday with Goat Tree.
	Because I think it's a good example, and it was so widespread globally that That it was an opportunity for people to take a look at this and see what kind of a society are we setting up here.
	This is from Free Thought Project, actually the article is by Common Dreams.
	They said, if we cannot control the effects of our own technological invention, then in what sense can those creations be said to serve human interests and needs?
	Maybe we have an overly complex global environment that has become increasingly fragile.
	They said, July 18th, 2024, we'll go down in history books as an event that shook up the world in a unique way.
	It gave the mass of humanity a pointed wake-up call about the inherent fragility of the technological systems we've created and the societal complexities that they have engendered.
	Critical services in hospitals, airports, banks, government facilities around the world were all suddenly unavailable.
	And you would think this would give people's attention.
	But no, they've got...
	Donald Trump and Lala Harris and, you know, senile Joe, these people are like fidget spinners, you know, or the joke we always have in our family from Up.
	You know, Pixar's Up, when the dogs can talk and you can hear what they're thinking, right?
	And so he's having this conversation with a human, and then all of a sudden he just stops and goes, squirrel, you know, takes off.
	That's the attention span of the public.
	All we have to do is wag the Biden or wag the Lala or wag the Trump, and nobody pays any attention to this.
	Such an event was entirely predictable because of three factors.
	The inherent fragility of computer code, the always-present possibility of human error, and the fact that when you build interconnected systems, a vulnerability in one part of the system can easily spread like a contagion to other parts.
	And because, you know, there's this interaction that happens.
	That adds a whole new level of complexity to these things.
	And this particular situation, I think what is interesting is that you could have this much damage without any malice, just carelessness and lack of testing.
	On Rockfan, Gard Goldsmith says, I just saw this in the communications from MRC. A Virginia city just voted to sell $1.2 million of land to Planned Parenthood for $10.
	Not tradable for Uber, evidently.
	There you go. Maybe $10 and a pizza.
	Wow, that is amazing.
	Guard Goldsmith, Liberty Conspiracy.
	You can find him in the evenings on Twitter and on Rockfin.
	Dustin Helm, thank you very much for the tip.
	I appreciate that on Rockfin.
	So the fragility that we're talking about, the vulnerability, we see this daily in terms of constant outpouring of news stories about hacking, about identity theft, about security breaches and on.
	All sorts of companies, all sorts of institutions, you know, the CIA has been hacked, the NSA has been hacked, the Department of Defense has been hacked.
	We had all of the records of AT&T, call records, and the companies that are piggybacked on that.
	We don't deal directly with AT&T. We have our cell phone coverage through another company.
	So we got notification about it as well.
	I said, well, the actual contents of the calls, the actual contents of the text messages are not leaked, but just who you are calling and that type of thing.
	Well... What are they going to do with that and can I trust them with that?
	Do they really know what was stolen if they aren't able to protect the data themselves?
	But it's happening to all the institutions.
	These are now massively deployed systems.
	They're so fragile in the larger scheme of things.
	They concentrate huge amounts of informational power and control by wielding it like an Archimedean lever to manage the physical world.
	A Senate could probably argue that we're now building our civilizational infrastructure on a foundation of sand.
	I would argue that exactly.
	As a matter of fact, as I said at the top of the program, we look at some of these technocrats, people like Mark Andreessen, actually saying, yeah, yeah, we're actually making sand think.
	Well, you know, that may be your foundation of sand.
	And this Tower of Babel...
	And I think that's a pretty good way to describe chat GPT, babble.
	That kind of babble is really a giant tower that's built on a foundation of sand.
	It's even worse than just the basic reliability issues.
	Because human resources...
	That they want to replace people with machines.
	They want to put us on universal basic income, universal welfare.
	No jobs, just stay at home, lock down, you know, and people are going to atrophy.
	People are not going to be happy.
	They're going to atrophy, though.
	And then when these systems go down, there's not going to be that many people around that can pull this thing back up, perhaps.
	We'll have to see what can happen.
	How are they going to recover from a collapse when all the humans have been, you know, we've now created an idiocracy with everybody that is just kind of sitting around and being served, where the Morlocks have created a world of Eloys so they could prey upon us.
	What happens when the Morlock system goes down?
	Given AI's now critical role in shaping key aspects of our lives, given its very real and fully acknowledged downsides and risks, why was it not even being discussed in the presidential debate?
	No questions about that.
	No questions about CBDC. And quite frankly...
	You know, Biden issued the CBDC order to every bureaucracy of the deep state.
	All of them, by the way, underneath the president.
	Just in case you think Trump's going to do anything about it.
	But he sent out something to all of them.
	Does he even know? I mean, does he even know what he's signing?
	You know, somebody was putting that out there.
	They did that in the spring of 2022.
	Six months later, I want these reports about what we're going to do.
	But then at the same time, they tell us, oh, but we're not going to actually...
	Do a CBDC. I guess that was just a thought exercise for everybody.
	You know, what if? Let's just do it.
	It'd be fun just to think about how we would implement this if we wanted to implement it, which we're not going to do.
	Don't worry, we're not going to implement it.
	We're just planning and practicing and putting all the pieces together.
	So... Why wasn't that talked about in the presidential debate?
	Well, because the president doesn't really have to decide about that.
	That's going to be decided for the president by the people who run the government and by the bureaucracy that is the government.
	So the president's just there as a fidget spinner to keep you mesmerized and watching so that you don't pay attention to what's really going on behind the curtain.
	Is there a limit to the natural order of things, to the amount of technological complexity that is sustainable?
	If so, it seems reasonable to assume that this limit is determined by the ability of human intelligence to encompass and manage that complexity.
	Oh, but we're supposed to believe that AI is not only equivalent to humans and intelligence, but it's superior to us.
	That is the big lie that they're telling you right now.
	So AI is an existential threat, but not in the way that Hollywood has sold it.
	I mean, they can do a tremendous amount of damage with autonomous killing machines.
	Do you want CrowdStrike writing the code for autonomous killing machines?
	Wait a minute, didn't you test that before you downloaded that to all the drones?
	No, I didn't test that.
	That at least will be their ability to have plausible deniability.
	We didn't mean to wipe out that city.
	It's just a careless worker there at CrowdStrike who didn't really check this stuff before they rolled out the update.
	Yeah, but maybe society is going to end not with a bang but with a whimper.
	Maybe it will be just everything stops working.
	And nobody knows really how to reboot it, because everybody's just been kicking back and playing games on virtual reality for so long that we don't know anything, can't do anything.
	Runaway technological advance is now being fueled by corporate imperatives and a growth-at-any-cost mentality that offers little time for reflection.
	As a matter of fact, they despise that.
	The slogan for people like Mark Andreessen is, Go Fast, Break Things.
	Well, yeah, you go fast, you are going to break things.
	Maybe you go at warp speed.
	And who cares? Who cares when things break?
	Who cares when people die?
	Who cares when people are disabled for the rest of their life?
	Hey, nobody could have done it faster than I did it.
	I'm the father of the vaccine.
	It's worth asking if we can even control what we've created.
	And whether the harmful side effects of this seemingly constant chaos, see?
	It's its own kind of chaos, is now militating against the quality of life.
	When everything is constantly changing, is that, you know, I do my best on the devices that I have to use to block any and all updates, but these things are being done automatically.
	When they do them, they break things.
	I sometimes believe they're doing it on purpose to make sure that I update my hardware.
	The bottom line is, if we can't control the effects of our own technological invention, then in what sense do they serve human interests?
	Under the radar, hyper-technologies such as nanotechnology and genetic engineering...
	This is why I talked about the virus stuff yesterday.
	These are things nanotech...
	Genetic engineering? You don't even see this stuff.
	These are technologies that can only be understood in the conceptual realm.
	Not in any concrete way.
	And this is one of the reasons why Fauci seized on the PCR. Because he was able to use these concepts that he was selling.
	You know, as I said yesterday, I now have serious...
	And many people now have serious questions as to whether or not we've had questions for quite some time about COVID. And we've known for quite some time that there was no pandemic.
	And we've known that there was no science.
	It was just behavioral science that was being used against people.
	And so now, I think it is reasonable when you have known liars who have been damaging society to be skeptical about everything they say.
	You know, when you had Michael Cohen, the criminal lawyer for Trump, again, going back to Breaking Bad, when Walter White sees Saul Goodman, he says, you need a criminal lawyer.
	And he says, or somebody told him that, you know, you need to go see Saul Goodman.
	And he goes, yeah. No, I mean, you need a criminal lawyer.
	Well, you know, Cohen was that criminal lawyer for Trump.
	And he lied about everything.
	And that's what people were saying.
	It's like, how can the prosecution use him?
	Because he's discredited himself with so many lies about so many different things.
	And we look at Fauci, who's lied about the mask, he lied about the six-foot social distancing, he's just making all this stuff up.
	At what point do we say, oh, okay, I can trust him on this issue.
	I'm at the point now where I quite frankly don't believe anything the medical community tells me, and certainly been at the point where I don't believe anything the government tells me for a very long time.
	It served me well during 2020.
	It kept me away from the masks and the vaccines and things like that, that kind of skepticism.
	But, you know, when you have, as I said yesterday, you have Michael Yadin, who has been in that world and who burned his career down to say none of this is true.
	And when you have people like him who start to question not only the narrative around this so-called pandemic, But also virology itself and even viruses itself as a construct.
	Do we have that right? I had a listener who sent me an email and he said...
	Well, if you don't think viruses exist, he said, and the vaccines can't fix it, he says, just ask yourself what you would do if you're bit by a rabid animal.
	You know, you're going to take the shots, the big long needles in the stomach and that type of thing.
	You know, quite frankly, I'd have to think about that a long time.
	I'd have to do some research at this point.
	That's how little I trust anything from the medical community, any other so-called science.
	They have basically burned their credibility down.
	And when they want me to believe their model, he said, he said, virology is a mess, but he said, viruses are real, is what he said.
	So, you know, there's still a debate about it, but we should have that debate.
	People should welcome that debate, because that's what science is always about.
	Science is never settled.
	That's the first thing we should know about science.
	And if anybody tells you that science is settled, well, then you put them in the same category as you do, a lying lawyer, a criminal lawyer.
	So, again, to make these things that are only understood in the conceptual realm, like genetic engineering, like nanotechnology, to make these things appear to be concrete, Fauci used the PCR. And,
	you know, these things, both of these things, nanotechnology, genetic engineering, both of these things can be unleashed on us, and they can be blamed on a virus, because that's already been done, right?
	The shot, probably a combination of genetic engineering and nanotechnology.
	Oh, but any adverse reactions that we see in society, oh, that was based on this COVID virus that they never isolated.
	Runaway technological advancement is now being fueled by corporate imperatives and a growth at any cost mentality that offers little time for reflection.
	None of this is new. This is just, we've always had people, you know, hey, we're coming through with a railroad.
	I'm going to steal your property.
	I'm going to kill the buffalo.
	I'm going to kill the Indians.
	Whatever. You know, I've got to get that railroad through.
	And I like railroads.
	Railroads are good. But, you know, when you have this mentality, but I don't really care the consequences or the cost that it does to other people.
	I've just got to rush this thing through.
	When you do that, growth at any cost.
	That's when you break things, and that's not a good thing.
	Advanced hypertechnology may dazzle us, but in the process, it may also blind us.
	How can we guide the progress of technology with wisdom?
	Well, that's a good question.
	Because when we start to look at this sometimes People don't see the problems before they happen, but as we're looking at this global IT outage Thanks to CrowdStrike Some of the places that had embraced cashless society Got a little bit of a lesson Australia for example and in the UK you got a lot of British newspapers
	They're talking about, you know, this is a good, look at what happened.
	If we go to a cashless society, everything's going to get shut down if we have some kind of an error.
	Or if we have an attack.
	The mainstream media has until now played a key role in advancing the global war on cash.
	A war that began with no official declaration, but in which propaganda, as with all wars, is the vital weapon.
	When a content update by CrowdStrike caused millions of Microsoft systems around the world to crash on Friday, bringing banks, payment firms, airlines, hospitals, retailers, all to a standstill, businesses were faced with a stark choice.
	They could go cash only, or they could close until the systems came back online.
	You know, we had, as I said, Karen and I had several video stores at one point in time.
	And we never closed the video stores except one time when the power outage was so extensive that nobody had any power.
	They couldn't watch a movie if they had it.
	But if we would lose power, we would still keep the stores open.
	We had situations where, you know, it's all computerized with inventory and everything.
	So how do we keep track of it? We're just writing hand receipts.
	And we actually would have situations where the power would go out, but the customers might have power at home, or they thought they were going to get it back shortly.
	And so they'd come into the stores, and we'd hand them a flashlight, and they'd go looking around the shelves trying to find a movie to rent, you know?
	And then when they'd find one, we would do the same thing and write up the receipt by hand.
	And it was a real pain in the neck when we had to enter all those things in after the fact.
	But that's what we do.
	But some of the businesses, most of the businesses, would just close when they didn't have any power.
	And, you know, it wasn't a computer error that took it out.
	So, in Australia, there was chaos.
	The Australian government has explicitly encouraged businesses to go cashless.
	Pictures posted on social media showed card-only self-checkout registers at the grocery chain Kohl's displaying blue screens of death.
	Yeah, you know, blue screens are like Gates himself, you know, on the runway.
	Remember that? We had that the other day.
	I've got that here somewhere still, I think.
	But I can't find it.
	There it is. Thank you. Thank you.
	Yeah, there he is on the runway.
	He's got his blue screen of death.
	Queues for human-run registers at Australian Groceries stretched to the back of the store.
	Some Australian marts simply locked their doors.
	Starbucks, whose CEO in 2020 said he was shifting toward more cashless experience, appeared to have been particularly hard-hit.
	One Kansas-based Starbucks worker posted a TikTok showing the mobile order system was completely down.
	The machine that the store uses to print labels for cups is also not working.
	It just comes out blank every time, she said.
	And she told Wired, this is a quote from Wired magazine, that some customers were upset and very rude when she tried to explain.
	A different Starbucks worker said on TikTok that she had to write down every order on sticky notes.
	Software supply chains have long been a serious cybersecurity concern and a potential single point failure.
	Yeah, when we talk about this foundation, one of the things Gautry was stressing is, DOS is like 50 years old.
	It's older, actually, than Windows, because, as I pointed out many times, Bill Gates essentially stole this from digital research.
	They had a program called CPM. They didn't even change the labels and terminology that they used for stuff.
	They called it, you know, BIOS, and that was, they just, they called it BIOS. They used the same syntax.
	They probably looked at all the same code.
	And he beat him in court.
	So it was his.
	Just like he stole a lot of stuff from Apple and beat Apple in court.
	They said in this article, they pointed out that cash does not crash.
	Yeah, you want to have physical, financial transaction privacy and security.
	The problem is that as important as it is to have something that is physical, something that is outside of this vulnerable, complex, fragile infrastructure of cashless computers and that type of thing, the cash that we have as well can crash in value.
	We've seen that happen with fiat currency as well.
	This is one of the most important arguments in favor of cash, and what they're talking about with cash is something that is physical.
	It provides to a country's overarching payment systems a system that does not crash.
	But still, the fiat currencies do crash.
	This is a lesson central bankers in Sweden.
	One of the world's most cashless economies are apparently relearning.
	The world's oldest central bank keeps sounding the alarm on the fragility of cashless economies.
	Are other central banks listening?
	And in that article...
	It says, after playing a part in the wholesale removal of cash from Sweden's economy, Riksbank is now trying to reverse some of the damage that's caused.
	And it's not the only Scandinavian central bank to have flagged up the fragility risks of exclusively digital payment systems.
	In 2022, the Bank of Finland recommended that the use of cash payments be guaranteed by law.
	Like all Nordic countries, Finland is largely cash-free.
	But like Sweden, it has begun to see the risks of going too far too soon.
	Certain legacy media outlets have also begun to learn this lesson.
	In the UK alone, four of the country's largest newspapers, The Guardian, The Daily Telegraph, The Daily Mail, The Times, have all run articles about how this global IT outage has underscored the fragility of a cashless society.
	The Daily Mail, as a matter of fact, had the entire front page covered with it.
	Giant letters.
	Global IT Meltdown shows peril of going cashless.
	And yet, in the United States, what do we have at the same time?
	It was everybody arguing over who shot J.R. and whether he was shot.
	This soap opera.
	This fidget spinner of election.
	You know, I guess, you know, we've got more people to watch this report that I did with Goatree if I'd done it on how many shooters there were instead of how widespread was the chaos that was caused by 15 characters.
	If people can't pay because they can't use their phones, then when systems go down, as they always will, people won't be able to access vital services like food and things like that.
	You know we can talk all day about the DEI craziness in the Secret Service, but we never talk about this So Many supermarkets prefer to have self-service card only tills which makes cash users feel like second-class citizens And they said that in the UK Unlike the United States where they have to accept it They don't have to accept payments legally not obliged to accept payments
	Now the interesting thing is and I talked to Pierce Corbin about that He wanted to buy some strawberries and all these was not going to allow that to happen with cash Not going to take any cash. Nope, this is legal currency.
	I'm going to leave my cash here.
	You can't do that. You can't do that.
	It's a small purchase. And they call, he said, call the police.
	They called the police. Police said, yeah, he can do that.
	But according to this article, they're not legally required to do it.
	But they've been telling us for a long time about the advantages of a cashless world.
	And we saw the propaganda films coming out of Ukraine.
	Again, the globalists are running that show.
	The war and that society.
	I said, in just a few years, when we won this war, this is what it's going to look like.
	Everything is going to be so convenient.
	Government is going to be interjected into every aspect of our life.
	But the good news is that everything will be so streamlined because of digital ID. Well, one thing that I thought was interesting...
	Right.
	Right.
	Right. And it really picked up.
	He put that back in there at the very beginning of all this talk, even before the pandemic emergencies were declared.
	He says, we're going to go from dirty cash to digital trash.
	And MasterCard had been pushing for this back in 2013.
	They sponsored Oxford University to run a quote-unquote trial.
	We want you to look at the germ loads on a banknote.
	And of course, they've played this type of game in the war on drugs.
	Oh, let's see if there's any cocaine on the money.
	And yeah, you pretty much find traces of drugs on any of the money.
	And that's not even doing a PCR test.
	Certainly, you could find anything that you wanted to with a PCR test.
	And I imagine you could find everything in the world and some level.
	If you magnify it by over a trillion times, I'm sure you could find everything with a PCR test on cash.
	But they took Oxford University, they funded this thing, and said, we've got an exclusive right to present the findings of this trial.
	So they paid Oxford University, got the research, and then put it out in every single country.
	In the United States, CNN picked it up.
	In Switzerland, they've got multiple news outlets there.
	Disgusting money. Many find Swiss cash unhygienic.
	Or a study by researchers at Oxford University concludes that legal tender in Switzerland is among the dirtiest in Europe.
	CNN said, if you thought dirty money was only found in offshore bank accounts, check your wallet instead.
	But you may want to wash your hands afterwards.
	That type of thing. By the way, you know, Gerald is great at picking the trends.
	If you want to see Trends Journal, go to TrendsJournal.com and you can save 10% off of the subscription price if you use the code KNIGHT at TrendsJournal.com.
	But he's absolutely right about this.
	This has been... You know, for over a decade, they've been pushing the propaganda and trying to demonize cash as filthy, as criminal.
	And, you know, so they've got in this article from Zero Hedge, United States, Switzerland, France, the UK, all these different headlines.
	and that's just a sampling of them as how they were telling everybody that it was filthy and they said this is just a dress rehearsal for 2020 where they got everybody OCD. It worked like a dream. Four years on cash is being used for transactions far less frequently. A large part due to the exaggerated safety fears that have been propagated by the media telling everybody
	that it was dirty money.
	On Rumble, thank you for the tip, YJ72. I appreciate that.
	Writes both food and medicine.
	Are in the people with dark agendas.
	Please check out the book by Nina Teicholz called The Big Fat Surprise.
	Reveals the lies of what they push to us with detailed data.
	Alright, I'll see if I can find it.
	On Rockfin. General McGuffin, thank you very much.
	Good to see you there. I haven't seen you for a while.
	Appreciate the tip. Says, I can recall at least ten times in last year...
	Where an establishment, like a gas station or grocery store, had signs up saying cash only because their system had crashed.
	That's absolutely right.
	It is the backup system that we all need to have.
	Resilient and more secure.
	I mean, nothing is secure. Thief can break in and steal anything.
	But it is more secure.
	The most secure thing than cash, because cash can be destroyed by the Federal Reserve.
	That's they're working very hard to do.
	The most secure thing is going to be gold.
	That really is the ultimate backup.
	I guess you could say it's the gold standard for wealth insurance is gold itself.
	If you go to davidknight.gold, that'll take you to Tony Ardman's Wise Wolf Gold, and you can be part of a large buying group and get the discounts.
	You can get in at a lot of different levels from $50 up.
	And just set aside a certain amount, like an insurance policy, each month into gold or to silver.
	And you can also get the group buy discount there.
	You can also buy direct from Tony, small or large, if you go to Wise Wolf Gold.
	And again, go through davidknight.gold.
	That'll take you to Wise Wolf. He can also help you with an IRA if you want to roll some stuff over into metals IRA. Tony's not going to be joining us today.
	He's in Nashville.
	There's a Bitcoin meeting there, and actually Trump is going to be speaking.
	That's not why Tony's going to speak.
	He's not a Trump groupie, but he's going to be in Nashville, and so he will not be on with us today.
	But, you know, when I look at this, you know, Tony likes Bitcoin.
	He's been involved with it.
	He's going to be doing more with it, I think.
	And I don't give people investment advice.
	I just say, when I look at this stuff, I just don't trust Bitcoin.
	I don't trust the stock markets.
	I don't trust our electric power grid anymore.
	I don't trust computers.
	I'm getting really cynical about all this stuff.
	I'm becoming functionally Amish.
	I mean, I'm not going to start dressing that way.
	But, you know, I think there's a lot of wisdom in what they do.
	They made a determination a long time ago.
	I always wondered, why did they stop it at a certain point?
	You know, they got... They've got horses and they've got buggies.
	But, you know, I mean, you could go further back than that.
	They did that because they wanted something that they could do within their community and not be reliant on people outside of their community.
	And they built a strong community around their religion and their families and things like that.
	There's a great deal of wisdom in that, I think.
	We're gonna take a quick break and we will be right back Excellencies ladies and gentlemen yet laws Your annual global risk report makes for And so I think we're going to come back in.
	Something happened with that. I don't know what is going on with that.
	Are we starting to hang up?
	It's still playing. You've stopped it.
	Okay, I think we finally stopped that.
	I don't know what happened with it, but see?
	See what I said about relying on computers?
	You can't live with them, and you can't live without them.
	I was just trying to illustrate a point.
	We didn't really have a technical failure here.
	No, we did have a technical failure.
	The amount of cash and circulation has actually surged in some jurisdictions, even though Other people have shut it down.
	The world recorded a sharp increase in cash withdrawn from ATMs, while at the same time registering a sharp fall in transactional usage of cash.
	Put simply, people still wanted cash, but they wanted it as a means of storing their money outside of the banking system at a time of crisis.
	So that's what we're looking at in terms of the gold stuff.
	But, you know, there's another level of crisis that is involved with the cash.
	And that is the Federal Reserve and the central banks themselves.
	And so if you want something as a means of storing your money outside of the banking system at the time of crisis, instead of putting cash in your mattress, I guess you put some gold bars or something.
	Maybe a little bit lumpier and firmer.
	A recent op-ed piece in the Sydney Morning Herald declared, cash is dead.
	Only then to ask, so why are we still pretending to use it?
	As if 13% of Australians still using cash on a regular basis are just pretending to use it.
	Doubts appear to be setting in as the IT outages affect payment systems, becoming frequent and larger.
	In China and in the U.S., businesses have been fined for not accepting cash.
	As I said before, in the U.K., they don't technically have to do it, You must accept cash if it's in payment for a court lawsuit or something like that.
	They require that. But there's nothing on the books that says that they have to accept it.
	But here in the United States, it says legal tender for all debts, public and private.
	So you could always force them to do that.
	The problem of a model collapse.
	How a lack of human data limits AI progress.
	This is something I've talked about a long time ago.
	This is now being talked about by Financial Times, perhaps in the wake of the CrowdStrike thing.
	It's the mad cow issue with artificial intelligence.
	When it starts consuming its own synthetic information, it starts going downhill very rapidly.
	And it's kind of analogous to people who cannibalize humans and how they get Yakov-Kreutzfeldt disease or cows when they would feed cows to other cows and they started getting mad cow disease.
	AI mass surveillance, though, is being put in for the 2024 Olympics.
	And the people in France are getting kind of freaked out about it.
	The French government, hand in hand with the private tech sector, has harnessed the legitimate need for increased security as the grounds to deploy technologically advanced surveillance and data gathering tools.
	Well, how did we manage that in the past?
	This isn't the first Olympics that they've had.
	Is it maybe because they brought in a lot of people that are violent?
	It's a more violent society than they had before because of immigration?
	Is that it? Is it problem-solution?
	We're going to create chaos.
	We're going to open up the borders so that there's chaos and danger inside, so people are clamoring to be protected, and they will submit to this kind of dystopian surveillance state.
	The controversial use of experimental AI video surveillance is so extensive that the country, France, had to change its laws to make the planned surveillance legal.
	Why didn't they just do what we do here in America?
	We just ignore the law, right?
	Why bother changing the law?
	We just pretend that there is no law, even when there is.
	You know, just like we pretend Lala Harris was...
	Never given the title by Biden of borders are.
	We don't care what the law is about the border.
	We don't care what the Constitution says, even though they swore to it as a condition of office.
	We just do whatever we want.
	I mean, that's the American solution.
	But see, this is what the big problem for AI really is.
	The big problem for AI is that it is going to be amazingly effective for For biometric surveillance.
	It's going to be amazingly effective for the government to surveil us.
	Instead of having to have a lot of human intelligence, instead of having everybody spying on everybody else as they did in East Germany with Astazi, you know, they had more than half of the people were spying on other fellow citizens.
	Well, they don't have to do that now.
	Put it on killer drones.
	They can use it to suppress information and censor.
	Very easy to find certain things that you don't want out there and purge them.
	And then also put out their own propaganda.
	But in France one person said it kind of feels like jail.
	Paris spent 1.5 billion euros to clean up the Seine River, effectively an open-air sewer, promising Parisians a long-term legacy of open-water swimming using preparation for Olympic distance and triathlon swimming as a pretext.
	But it was still too bacterially infested with a month to go.
	Then, with just days to go before the games, the French sports minister donned a full wetsuit and slipped into the river.
	Now, that's kind of an admission that it's dirty.
	You've got to put on a wetsuit.
	Screaming her head off, perhaps because she knows exactly what's in there, before declaring, It's mild!
	She quickly hopped out, patted herself on the back for the government keeping its promises, and within days the mayor of Paris did the same, raving about the water, which was brown.
	Brown. Of course, the mayor of Paris is a hardcore Marxist.
	She has pioneered the idea of 15-minute cities.
	That came out of Paris, came out of that Marxist mayor.
	Pretty weak return.
	On a billion-plus investment, it kind of makes you wonder where all the cash went, doesn't it?
	To allow these games, some people want these games to be used for the ruling elites, to run around behaving like a caricature movie, villains in a dystopian hellscape.
	Some people have a problem with that, but that's the way it's operating.
	And you've got the world's richest 1% have gained $40 trillion in the last 10 years.
	It's working out pretty well for them.
	This is according to a British government report.
	They said the world's richest 1% increased their fortunes by a total of $42 trillion over the past decade.
	And they said, well, despite this windfall, taxes on the rich have plummeted to historic lows.
	This is being put out by the labor government, which wants to increase taxes, of course.
	And I just read to you yesterday the fact that the labor secretary is already saying that it's the middle class.
	Who has had a windfall profit from housing prices, and that needs to be taxed.
	That needs to be taxed.
	So we need to tax them on the paper value of their house.
	They haven't sold it, but this is the kind of thing that we see governments everywhere now talking about doing.
	You wonder how they're going to make sure that we own nothing.
	Well, most people don't have any equity except what is in their house, in the middle class.
	They don't have bank accounts or stock portfolios or any of that stuff.
	And so they're going to turn a blind eye to the elite that have had $42 trillion.
	The 1% have gained $42 trillion in wealth.
	They're going to gin up envy with people and say, we're going to get those people.
	That's a tremendous amount of money, and they don't deserve it.
	And so we're going to take that money from them.
	Well, they're not going to take any money from them.
	Even in this article where they're talking about, they point out that the super rich don't pay taxes.
	Billionaires have been paying a tax rate equivalent to less than one half of a percent for their wealth across the globe.
	So we've got to do better.
	We've got to do better. And it's worse in the developed countries.
	So they're going to use this as an opportunity to come after the middle class.
	They are going to turn a blind eye to these people.
	The middle class doesn't have any lawyers or politicians who represent them, typically.
	And so they're going to come after that wealth.
	Oxfam dubbed it a real litmus test for governments.
	Urging them to implement an annual net wealth tax of at least 8% on the extreme wealth of the super rich.
	And yet it was just yesterday that you had a new Labour Party functionary in the UK. Talking about the extreme windfall profits that people have had because of inflation and housing prices.
	That's the other thing about it. I mean, you know, just as people, these death taxes, when someone dies, has a farm or a business, or even a home.
	You've got a 30-year-old home, and maybe when somebody bought that home, it was one-tenth of what it is today.
	Is that 30-year-old home worth 10 times the amount that it was before, after it's used and everything else?
	No, of course not. That's just a reflection of how they've destroyed the value of money.
	And so they tax you. First they destroy the value of your money, and then they tax you on that as well.
	Alright, we're going to try doing another break here.
	Let's see if this works this time around.
	This is a test.
	It's working.
	Let's see if this works this time around.
	Let's see if this works this time around.
	It's working.
	Let's see if this works this time around.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Travis tells me, when we had that failure before trying to play the clip, So an update notification just popped up.
	It might be doing things in the background that we don't want it to do.
	So we'll see what happens.
	I just love those updates, don't you?
	And I just love the fact that they don't give you a choice.
	Actually, Apple does, but they just constantly nag you.
	And we've had a situation that happened once.
	Karen said, oh no, I hit the button.
	I hit the wrong button. It's doing an update.
	Turn it off quick. And sometimes that can cause big problems too.
	Maybe you don't want to do that. I'm not saying to do that.
	But on Rockfin, Chem K, thank you very much.
	That's very kind and generous.
	I appreciate the tip. Let's talk a little bit about Lala Harris.
	In response to the fact that she was the official border czar, and let me just say, I really hate hearing that any Americans got the title of czar.
	First person to do that was Bill Bennett as drug czar, and I thought it was absolutely reprehensible.
	Here's a conservative supposed to be all about virtue, writes the book of virtue, writes All about America and the Constitution, and yet we have this grossly unconstitutional war on drugs.
	A program which came from the UN. They got the conservatives' temple in it.
	See, that's the way it always works.
	Conservatives let their guard down.
	It's like, oh, okay, we got a Republican president in there now.
	We don't have to worry about gun control.
	Oh, yeah, he'll do it by executive order.
	The drug war was a UN agenda.
	As a matter of fact, they created the schedule.
	You know, we got a schedule, one, two, three, four.
	Schedule one drug. It's something that is highly addictive, has no medical use, that type of thing, so they punish that severely.
	They put marijuana in that category.
	And so most of the people are getting locked up for marijuana.
	So it's a U.N. agenda.
	They never had the respect for the Constitution to pass an amendment like they did when they did alcohol prohibition.
	And then they put a person in charge of it and call him a czar, a dictator, if you will.
	And so Harris is the border czar, but she doesn't want that because it was such a mess.
	So the way she's going to push back on Trump, she says this.
	Trump wants to, quote, rip children from mothers.
	Wow. Wow.
	I thought she was the one who was supporting abortion under any and all circumstances, right?
	I mean, she's literally talking about ripping children apart and ripping them from their mothers.
	But she says, oh, at the border, you're going to rip children from their mothers.
	This is also the same party that wants to take kids away from parents if they've been able to gaslight the kid into thinking that they're in the wrong body and they've got different pronouns and all the rest of the stuff.
	And you don't go along with that.
	And they're not going to tell you in California.
	Heiress and nuisance and all the rest of them.
	They're not going to tell you what is happening with your kid, and they're going to secretly groom these kids, and if they can get them to go in that direction and you oppose it, oh, they're going to take those kids away from you.
	As a matter of fact, they just did it in another country.
	I think it was coming up, I think it was Switzerland, where they took a kid away from the parents because the parents didn't support the kid transitioning.
	They want to do that in California as well.
	Harris would like to do something like that.
	So you're talking about ripping the kids from their parents over your pedophile gender grooming?
	Yeah, they do that as well.
	So they'll literally rip the kids apart.
	Maybe what you should do is call anything that is done at the border, maybe we should call it an immigration abortion.
	Instead of Border Patrol, let's call it the immigration abortion.
	Or we could call it planned immigration.
	How about that? Like Planned Parenthood.
	If we called it immigration abortion, would Harris support it?
	She said, the only plan that Trump has to secure our border is ripping mothers from their children and a few xenophobic placards at the Republican National Convention, said a Harris campaign spokesperson.
	Well, you better be careful with that language.
	It just may come back on you.
	But we had an interesting couple of things that came out.
	Elon Musk in an interview with Jordan Peterson.
	And part of it was this transgender thing.
	But then there was another part of the interview that I thought was even more interesting.
	And that's where Jordan Peterson, who appears to be trying to work out, you know, what he thinks about Christianity, about Jesus, he seems to be kind of publicly ruminating through these different things.
	And so he brought Elon Musk into that conversation that he's having with himself.
	And Elon Musk identified himself as a cultural Christian.
	Same thing that Richard Dawkins has said, you know, culturally I like the things that we get out of that.
	Well, there is no such thing as a cultural Christian. It really is an oxymoron.
	You know, the very term Christian was not a term that Christians gave themselves.
	It was a term that was given to them since interrogation from the people there.
	And when we look at words, when we look at the etymology of Christian, at its root, what it really means is Christ's men.
	Or Christ's people.
	We look at anthropology, for example.
	That's a study of people. We talk about something being anthropic.
	It looks like it was man-made global warming or something like that.
	And It comes from the Greek anthropos, if I'm pronouncing that correctly, or anthropos, I don't know.
	Maybe the emphasis on the wrong syllable, but what the word is, that whenever you see that A-N-T-H type of thing, or just the A-N, that means man, or mankind, if you will, or people.
	And so what it really means is Christ's people.
	And it's not just about a culture.
	It's about whether or not they're going to follow him.
	And that's what people say, oh, those are Christ people, you know, out there.
	Well, here's the conversation that they had in terms of the back and forth that Jordan Peterson had as he kind of challenged Elon Musk.
	And I thought it was interesting because I had, when he went in and he talked to the people at Babylon Bee, they said, well, you know, we're a Christian organization, so we've got to ask you this.
	What do you think about Jesus? Oh, good, we're done.
	Okay. It was really cringy, what they did.
	They were very much afraid of him.
	They should be as afraid.
	If they're Christ's men, they need to be as afraid of the Lord Jesus Christ as they are of Elon Musk.
	But it seemed to be the other way around.
	Well, here is Jordan Peterson, and actually, he did a better job of challenging them.
	It happened to one of my...
	Oh wait a second, that's the wrong one. That's the other one about his son here.
	Well, I'm having a hard time finding things today.
	Here it is. You know, while I'm not a particularly religious person, I do believe that the teachings of Jesus are good and wise.
	And that there's tremendous wisdom in turn the other cheek.
	And for a while there, when I was saying, I thought, well, that's really a weak thing.
	Yeah, it can be. And with respect to bullies at school, I think you shouldn't turn the other cheek, you should punch them on the nose.
	And then thereafter make peace with them.
	But they need to stop bullying you, and a punch in the nose will stop that.
	And then thereafter, you know, make peace.
	Sometimes that punch on the nose is the first step in making peace with bullies.
	Yes, it may, you know, change their career from being a bully to perhaps they shouldn't be doing such things.
	So why not bitterness?
	This notion of forgiveness is important.
	I think it's essential because if you don't forgive, then, I forget who said it, but an eye for an eye makes everyone blind.
	If you're going to seek vengeance and you have this never-ending cycle of vengeance, There are anthropological speculations that we were caught in a 350,000 year cycle of not getting anywhere after modern human beings emerged precisely because of that.
	Because we couldn't get out of accelerating tit-for-tat revenge cycles, right?
	Yeah, so I'm actually a big believer in the principles of Christianity.
	I think they're very good.
	So in what sense then are you not religious?
	Well, so Dawkins just came out three weeks ago or thereabouts and announced that he was a cultural Christian, right?
	And so the question... Right, I would say I'm probably a cultural Christian.
	I was brought up as an Anglican and I was baptized.
	Although oddly enough, my parents also simultaneously sent me to a Jewish nursery school, preschool.
	So it was Jesus our Lord...
	Well, the Jews have a reputation for being religious too, you know?
	Yeah, yeah, no, I might have been the only non-Jewish kid at the school.
	I didn't even realize that was the thing.
	But I was just singing Havana Gila one day and Jesus is outlawed the next, you know.
	So that is my upbringing.
	Well, it's kind of interesting.
	And when you look at it, you know, it's...
	So how is it...
	How are you not religious? And of course...
	The religion is going to be things that you're told that you need to do, but it's not necessarily meaning that you are following Christ.
	You know, that's the difference.
	It's that connection that is there.
	Musk said his beliefs could be best described as a religion of curiosity.
	And I think Peterson is kind of the same way.
	I think Peterson is very curious about it.
	You know, I really didn't understand Peterson's approach to it.
	Until RFK Jr.
	talked about his religious beliefs.
	And he talked about his religious beliefs, RFK Jr.
	did, in terms of Carl Jung and that school of psychology.
	You have the Freudian school, you have the Jungian school.
	I don't know anything about those.
	And so I didn't know, even though I knew that Jordan Peterson considered himself to be a Jungian.
	I didn't really know what that was about until I heard RFK Jr.
	talking about his experiences and talking about Carl Jung.
	And so Carl Jung was always on look for some kind of quote-unquote spirituality or something that was unusual or the universe talking to him.
	That's where a lot of this stuff comes from.
	I don't know. There's some force out there, some indeterminate force.
	I don't want to Identify it as such, these people would say.
	Clearly, there is a general revelation showing that there's an intelligent designer and things like that.
	But then there is also a specific revelation in the Bible.
	Which is what they reject.
	And so what RFK Jr.
	said was he talked about how Carl Jung had had some very strange situation.
	I think it was a butterfly or something that appeared at his window.
	It's been a while since I watched it.
	I forgot some of the details.
	But it's basically just something that you wouldn't expect to see this.
	And it tied in somehow with what he was thinking.
	It was a strange coincidence.
	And so RFK Jr.
	said, and yeah, something like that happened to help me get off of my addictions and things like that.
	Well, that's the world in which Jordan Peterson is in.
	That's his worldview. So his worldview does not reject some kind of indeterminate spirituality that's out there or something that is supernatural.
	As a matter of fact, it invites that in.
	But it doesn't have any simple childlike faith that would result in following God, which is a key thing.
	And it kind of came up.
	I thought it was very interesting, the fact that to try to Let's psychoanalyze Elon Musk.
	He's talking about how, yeah, you're an adventure person and all this kind of stuff.
	Well, yeah, you're not climbing mountains, I understand.
	But, you know, you are trying intellectually to push into these different areas and so forth.
	And so Jordan Peterson says, yes, I'm trying to make sense out of the Old Testament.
	And he starts talking about the situation with the Promised Land and the spies that were sent in.
	They came back, and Joshua and Caleb say, we can't do it.
	So they say, we can do it.
	The other ten say, we can't do it.
	And here's his take on it, which I thought was really interesting and strange.
	Well, so one of the things I derived from this analysis I've been doing of the Old Testament is that I'll give you an example.
	So, when Moses is on the verge of the Promised Land, he sends scouts out to check out Canaan, because that's the Promised Land.
	Now, Canaan is the home of the descendants of Cain.
	It's the place of people who aren't aiming up, put it that way.
	Okay, so the scouts go out to look at the future, and they come back in two teams.
	And one team says, there's nothing but giants there.
	It's a complete bloody catastrophe.
	You led us out into the desert stupidly.
	We were better off in the tyranny.
	There's no way we're going to survive, right?
	And the next scouts, or the other set of scouts, Caleb and Joshua, come back and say, well, there's trouble there, but...
	If we aim up and we get our act together, we can turn this into the promised land.
	And the earth opens up and swallows up the faithless scouts.
	And it's the people who are led by Caleb and Joshua, who has the same name as Christ, by the way, and that's relevant.
	They're the ones that are led into the promised land.
	Okay, so what's the meaning of the story?
	Well, the future is always a challenge.
	The moral thing to do is to evince faith and courage in the future regardless.
	In some ways, it's a weird thing because it's kind of regardless of the data because you can say, well, look at all the suffering that constitutes life and look at all the potential horrors of the future.
	And certainly people do hesitate about bringing a child into a world like this.
	I hear that often, yeah.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, there's an ethical requirement that's associated with living in the manner that would justify your life even to yourself to have faith and courage in the future, no matter what.
	Sure. Right? So it's not a foolishness or what?
	Defense against death anxiety or foolish superstition, that faith.
	It's not that at all.
	It's a kind of courage. It's like, we're going to make this work.
	Yeah. We're going to make this work.
	Isn't that interesting? These are the people who are not aiming up.
	I've never heard that expression before, but I'm assuming that, yeah, we're going to pull ourselves up by our bootstraps.
	We have to understand that the future is a challenge, but we have to have faith in the future.
	Frankly, that's a bunch of psycho babble.
	Look, that's not what that was about at all.
	Not at all. You don't have to justify your life to yourself, and you don't have to have faith in the future.
	We're going to gin up the strength to do this in our own strength.
	It was exactly the opposite.
	The very fact that Moses would even send scouts into that area meant that these people were not really trusting that God was going to fulfill his promise to them.
	The very fact that they sent these scouts in showed that they were trying to do this in their own strength.
	And so, you don't have faith in the future.
	You have faith in the God that delivered them.
	One miracle after the other to that point.
	He had promised them a land.
	And they wanted the land, but they didn't believe the promise.
	They didn't believe the promise that God was going to do it for them.
	And so that was why the punishment was there.
	And it's kind of interesting, I think.
	You know, we have these simple promises.
	It's like, do you believe it?
	Right? That's really what following Christ is about.
	Do you believe those promises that are there?
	You know, it astounds me when I see somebody like Ben Shapiro questioned about what he believes.
	Joe Rogan, do you believe that God parted the Red Sea for them?
	Well, no, I don't believe that. I don't believe that.
	But I believe that that land belongs to me.
	Well, if you don't believe the promise, you don't get the land, quite frankly.
	People who pick and choose us, the land is not even important.
	It's the Lord that is important.
	They don't believe the Lord, but they want the land.
	They don't believe the miracles, but I like what happens when we have a society that's based on Christian values.
	Well, you're not going to have a society that's based on Christian values if Christ is not your Lord.
	It just isn't going to work that way.
	It's not going to work that way for you individually.
	It's not going to work that way for society.
	You can't say, as I've pointed out before, this usual thing, and actually I think it was Doug Wilson's analogy, when he was talking about Richard Dawkins.
	He said, Richard Dawkins likes the fruit, but he wants to cut down the orchard.
	You know, he likes the Christian architecture.
	He likes the Christian culture and the approach to the legal system.
	He likes the even songs at Christmas time and all that kind of stuff.
	But he just doesn't like the tree that that all came from.
	He's going to cut down the root of all of that stuff.
	And that's why, you know, you can't fake it until you make it with that stuff.
	It's just really simple.
	It's really simple. It's just a childlike faith.
	It doesn't have to be psychoanalyzed.
	And it's not about us achieving our destiny or going to the stars or this or that, or even going to the promised land.
	The promised land was something that was there, but it was the promise.
	It was a promise. And again, not the land, but people who want the land and they want the gift but not the giver, as they say.
	We've seen progressivism hollow out our civilizational decency and wear its skin as a suit that some people are finally waking up to the fact they don't like this.
	But what this means for the possibility of a Christian awakening or a renaissance remains to be seen.
	Yeah, it's not going to be something, and I think a good example of this is Jordan Peterson.
	This is not something that's going to be intellectually attained.
	It's going to be something that, just like the Promised Land, you're going to have to rely on the power of God to make those changes in you, and the power of God to make those changes in society.
	It's not something that, oh yeah, I've got a new insight here about human nature from reading the Bible.
	No, it should be giving you an insight about the power of God.
	The power of God to change you, and then to change a lot of other people like you, and thereby to change society.
	That's the way it's going to happen, if it's going to happen.
	This is from WNG.org.
	They say, while it is possible to argue perhaps that the eclipse of Christian culture allows for a more vibrant and self-conscientious Christianity to flower, it also means material harm to human dignity, to the natural family, and to the common good.
	And so, on Rumble, DG8 says, David, don't forget, when we talked about, you know, Lala Harris saying that, well, Trump is just ripping babies from their mamas.
	And the fact that she wants to rip babies from mamas, he says, don't forget that the new Republican platform doesn't defend life in the womb either.
	Any government that is willing to kill babies in the womb has no problem killing you.
	That's right. And they've now embraced that as well.
	The difference between the Republican Party and the Democrat Party on this issue and on many others is not in practice, but in pretense.
	The Republicans are going to pretend to be on one side of an issue, whereas the Democrats, interestingly enough, will frankly tell you what they're going to do.
	The Republicans will lie to you about it and do what the Democrats are going to do anyway.
	So Elon Musk says he's a cultural Christian, and talking about that, he got very angry as he said he was tricked into transitioning his kid, his son.
	It happened to one of my older boys, where I was...
	I was essentially tricked into signing documents for one of my older boys, Xavier, This was before I had really any understanding of what was going on.
	We had COVID going on, so there was a lot of confusion.
	And, you know, I was told, oh, you know, Xavier might commit suicide.
	That was a lie right from the outset?
	Incredibly evil. And I agree with you that people that have been promoting this should go to prison.
	So I was straight into doing this.
	And... It wasn't explained to me that puberty blockers are actually just sterilization drugs.
	I lost my son, essentially.
	They call it deadnaming for a reason.
	The reason it's called deadnaming is because your son is dead.
	My son Xavier is dead.
	Killed by the woke mind virus.
	I'm sorry to hear that.
	Yeah. I can't imagine what that would be like.
	Yeah. So...
	Yeah, and there's lots of people in that situation now.
	Right. It's not pretty.
	And lots of demolished kids.
	Yes. Yeah, well, that's a good reason to be the final straw.
	All right, so let's... So I'm about to destroy the woke mind virus after that.
	That's kind of interesting. When I saw that, at first, I don't keep up with Elon Musk's personal life and his girlfriends and sons and daughters and that type of thing.
	And I thought, well, he died?
	You know, I didn't realize he was talking about it metaphorically.
	But yeah, the dead naming. In other words, it's broken that relationship, and that child changed all their name.
	You know, I completely disown Elon Musk.
	So it goes both ways with all of that.
	But that is what the pagan world has put out there.
	Now, if Elon Musk has...
	And again, I would say, certainly, pray for him.
	Pray for Trump.
	Pray for Jordan Peterson, because he's still trying to find his way.
	And I think Jordan Peterson is sincere in terms of what he's looking for.
	It's just it's really hard, I think, for him to get out of this worldview that he spent his entire life in.
	But you'll know that...
	Elon Musk has changed when he gets rid of that Baphomet icon that he put on his, dressed up in his Baphomet costume with upside down crosses and all the rest of the stuff on it, as well as a picture of Baphomet on it.
	He's got this pagan stuff he thinks that's really cool.
	Doesn't really understand what is happening with it.
	As I said before, when we talk about the transitioning and the role of government in terms of taking kids away from parents, it was in Switzerland where a 15-year-old girl was taken away from the parents by the government because they refused to consent to puberty blockers, which is exactly what he's saying.
	If he was in California, what would have happened if he had not consented to that for the 15-year-old?
	Again, this program goes back a couple of decades to the UN. When they started talking about the rights of the child, when you had the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, that was about pretending that children were mature minors.
	You know, I was talking about some of the things that Senator Nicely has voted for or passed or whatever.
	The bill in Tennessee to stop this idea that children can be mature minors, that was put in during the lockdown pandemic scare.
	And as part of that, they were trying to pretend that the kids had the maturity to make decisions about taking an experimental vaccine.
	And so you had the public health official here in Tennessee was saying, yeah, we got the mature minor law.
	And so minors can make that kind of determination if we decide that the minor is mature enough.
	Not all minors, of course, but we'll do this on an individual basis.
	If they're mature enough, they can decide to take this untested mRNA shot.
	And so they fired her and then they passed a law.
	Saying that no, minors are minors, and minors don't get to make these kinds of decisions.
	But when you look at the puberty blockers, That's like saying that a young child who has been under a lot of psychological pressure, peer pressure, and pressure from people in authority, you know, using both the pressure of the Milgram experiment, somebody in authority telling you something, as well as the peer pressure like we would see with the ASH experiment.
	Some kid who's had both of those things applied to them.
	As well as a lot of disinformation, propaganda, lies about what the effects of this stuff was going to have on them.
	You pretend that some child can consent to this stuff And it's just horrific what is happening.
	But this is pervasive throughout our society.
	Kids that they would never let have, let's say, a gun or never let drive a car.
	Even to the extent that they're now in a lot of jurisdictions requiring you to have a license to have a boat.
	I remember we...
	Did a trip at one point. We needed to rent a boat.
	I was doing it with Joe Biggs, and we wanted to get this shot, so we were going to rent a boat.
	And, well, you have to have a license here to drive a boat.
	I said, what are you talking about?
	I was driving powerboats when I was eight years old.
	And they said, well, you're over 55, you don't have to have a license.
	It's like, yeah, because we know better, you know?
	We're not going to put up with this.
	But everybody else thinks that everything in life is a privilege, and the government lets us do that.
	But then when it comes to this type of thing, they want to say, well, in this area, we can't let a miner drive a boat.
	Not anymore. But a miner can sterilize themselves.
	A minor can be given the kinds of drugs that we give to sex offenders to chemically castrate them.
	Yeah, that's perfectly fine.
	Well, in terms of looking at some legal issues that are here, you know, I've said for the longest time it scared the Dobbs decision, scared the liberals to death.
	Because they said, well, the Supreme Court has said that the federal government doesn't have any authority to determine when life begins, and it doesn't.
	See, this is another thing that I think many conservatives, pro-life conservatives, don't understand the legal issue here.
	If you want to give the government the ability to determine when life begins, be careful, because they're going to set that at the level that you agree with, and eventually they're going to take that over in Washington.
	Even if you get that pushed through.
	So from a pragmatic standpoint, that doesn't work.
	But from a constitutional standpoint, we have the Tenth Amendment, which says if the federal government doesn't have something expressly given to them, they don't have the power to do that.
	And if we start to apply that, that Dobbs decision, Could, if applied to everything, saying we're going to actually go by the Tenth Amendment, that would pretty much shut down almost all of the federal government.
	Stop and think about it. Health and Human Services.
	It wasn't called that initially, but they created that department in 1953.
	And so it'd rip out all of that stuff where Fauci and Francis Collins and all those people hung out.
	It would get rid of pretty much every one of the alphabet agencies because there is no authority for most of the things that the federal government has insinuated itself into to exist.
	And so immediately, though, we look at the most obvious things like determining when life begins or defining marriage.
	And immediately the liberals said, ooh, ooh, this could affect not only Roe v.
	Wade, but it could also affect the Obergefell decision, where the Supreme Court overruled the states and the people.
	You know what does the Tenth Amendment say?
	It says powers that have not been delegated to the federal government.
	Well, the states and the people had already defined marriage.
	They didn't all define it at exactly the same time.
	Sometimes it couldn't be married legally if it was a minor, that type of thing.
	But they had had referendums.
	And even in California, the referendum to change the definition of marriage had failed.
	And the states had constitutions that defined marriage.
	And the Supreme Court overruled all of that stuff.
	So a lot of people said, well, this Dobbs decision could, and it should, change all this stuff.
	Now we have Kim Davis, who was the Kentucky County Clerk...
	This definition of marriage is against my religion and I'm not going to sign it.
	And so she was sued by two guys who wanted to get married.
	And earlier this year, she was ordered to pay $100,000 We're good to go.
	They sued her after she refused to give them a marriage license a decade ago.
	The wholehearted adoption of gay marriage became the law of the land, as they like to say, with Obergefell.
	And quite frankly, I hate to see that phrase used for any Supreme Court decision.
	The Supreme Court is not the legislative branch.
	And if they're creating the law of the land, then they're legislating from the bench.
	They're doing things that they don't have any authority to do, which is precisely what this is.
	So many things that the Supreme Court has done, they don't have the authority to do.
	Roe v. Wade was never the law of the land.
	No Supreme Court decision is the law of the land.
	That's done by the legislature.
	It's signed by the executive.
	But now she is appealing that ruling and arguing that, like Roe v.
	Wade, Obergefell should be overturned.
	Liberty Counsel is representing her.
	They said this case has the potential to overturn the Supreme Court's wrongly decided 2015 Obergefell marriage decision, they said.
	Pro-LGBT activist news site Jezebel was aghast, they said.
	In a brief to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, Davis' lawyers argue that Obergefell should be overturned for the same reasons articulated by the court in Dobbs.
	Mainly, that it was wrong when it was decided, and it is wrong today because it was based entirely on the legal fiction of substantive due process, which lacks any basis in the Constitution.
	While no other justice joined Clarence Thomas's Concurrence in the Dobbs case, he argued that, he was the one who argued that the court should overturn not only abortion, Roe v.
	Wade, but also marriage equality.
	He said, while no other justice joined with Clarence Thomas, you had Thomas, Alito, and Roberts all dissented in Obergefell.
	And it was simply a 5-4 ruling.
	It is now within the realm of possibility that this could be a 6-3 decision to overturn Obergefell.
	I find that to be very interesting.
	You know, this is somebody, and I think it's important whether she wins or loses, or whether this is overturned or not, there's a couple of things that are transcendent in this.
	Number one, we need to respect the Constitution.
	And that goes for the pro-life Republicans, because from a pragmatic standpoint, as I said, it's not going to save more lives.
	It's going to wind up completely erasing.
	If you federalize this again with the legislature, there'll be no time at all before they'll legalize all abortion, full term and everything.
	That's just the way it's going to work.
	And even when you say that you cannot do abortions, how are you going to stop it when New York and California are aiding and abetting it?
	There's no way that you can do that.
	When California and other jurisdictions decided they were going to ignore the war on drugs, there was nothing that Jeff Sessions or anybody else could do about it.
	Because they didn't have the legal authority to force that under the Constitution.
	So if you are going to allow or to prohibit abortion, you don't have the authority to do that at the federal level.
	So if you want to do something about it, you would have to change the Constitution, first of all.
	And if you don't change the Constitution, you have opened up a can of worms that's going to bite us in a lot of other areas.
	But it's not even going to work for your main issue of trying to protect life.
	The other thing I think we can get from this is the fact that this county clerk, county clerk, from the grassroots up, she has done more to oppose an activist court that is writing law, and she disagrees with that law, but she's right to oppose it, whether you agree with it or not.
	It's wrong. The decision is wrong.
	They don't have the legal authority to make that decision.
	And she is the only one who has opposed it.
	It's not been opposed by her congressman in Kentucky.
	It's not been opposed by her senators, Rand Paul or Mitch McConnell.
	Not opposed by a Democrat president or a Republican president.
	Trump never did anything to stop it.
	You see, we put all of our energy on these people in Washington, and yet it is a county clerk who said, no, I will not do that.
	And now she's going to take this all the way to the Supreme Court.
	We'll see what happens with it.
	Again, you know, it is something that the state officials, if you had state officials that had the respect for the law, respect for the Constitution, and the character of this one county clerk, The governor or the state officials should have stood up and said, no, we're not going to go along with that.
	You don't have the authority to make that determination.
	We have had, in every one of the states, as I said, we've had referendum or we've had something in the Constitution to define marriage, and the Supreme Court cannot overturn that.
	If you allow the Supreme Court to overturn that, then they can overturn anything that you do, whether you're talking about firearms or whatever else, right?
	Pick your issue.
	Do you really want everything to be ruled from a central location?
	I certainly don't. And finally, this person notes that at the time, her refusal to sign garnered her no report, no support I should say, no support from people who were supposedly part of conservative Christian denominations, especially the Southern Baptists, where they had Russell Moore, a liberal, who had marched through that institution and taken over the ethics and
	religious liberty council, and the Southern Baptist Russell Moore was fully on board with what the Supreme Court was doing in terms of redefining marriage.
	We're going to take a quick break and we'll be right back.
	♪♪
	THE END.
	the
	defending the American dream Dream.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Alright, welcome back.
	And on RockFan, George McDonough.
	Thank you very much for this tip. Says, morning David and family.
	Thank you for your continued hard work in keeping us all informed.
	Well, thank you very much. I appreciate that.
	Thank you for supporting us.
	If you didn't do that, we would not be here.
	So I really do appreciate that.
	Let's talk a little bit about...
	George Orwell. You know, George Orwell is being canceled.
	Yeah, that's Daily Skeptic shows it.
	And I saw this cartoon.
	It was, let's see if I can still find it.
	Here it is right here. Look at this.
	I love this. This is some AI artwork.
	But it's George Orwell.
	And he's got a book that is labeled 2024.
	And he is astonished and scared to death.
	Well, this is coming out of the Daily Skeptic in the UK, and this is an author who works in academia.
	He says, Orwell, I think, would be less happy about the weasel word problematic.
	Problematic. And he said, you know, we have to see when people start to talk about particular writers nowadays, they have to protect themselves from their peers.
	And they have to say things like problematic.
	Well, you know, T.S. Eliot or Rudyard Kipling or Ezra Pound, they've got different things to say.
	And I know that they did some things that we don't like and somewhat problematic, but I just wanted to offer this to you to think about it.
	They have to apologetically put that in.
	You know, Rod Dreher was talking about that in his book, Live Not by Lies.
	And he said he had...
	Had a lot of people, he wrote this several years ago, and he said the reason he wrote it was because he had a lot of people who came to him and said that their parents, who are older now, had come to this country from living in a communist country, and they said, you know, we're seeing all this stuff happening again, the same way that Xi Van Fleet talked about Mao's America, a survivor's warning.
	She said, all this woke stuff, there's nothing new about that.
	She said, I went through all that when I was under communism, and Mao was in control, the kind of indoctrination, the tremendous peer pressure and things like that that put on you the pressure from your teachers.
	None of that is new.
	But Roger Ayer was saying...
	He was noticing the people that he was talking to, if they would say things that would disagree with what was being taught in the universities or what was being said in mainstream media, they would do it in quiet tones and kind of look around in the public space that they're in to see if there's anybody that might know them when they're saying this kind of stuff.
	He said, that's really dangerous.
	when people have that kind of feeling, they know that there is, you know, something in the society that is going to punish them for what they have to say, and we have to resist that.
	And so he said it's people that he knew in academia, people whose parents had come here from authoritarian, totalitarian countries that were doing that.
	And so this writer, Paul Sutton, says that there's certain writers like Eliot, Pound, Kipling, Selene, all clearly beyond the pale.
	Any discussion of them has to be prefaced by an impassioned and often inaccurate lecture on their moral and political failings.
	The denunciations are highly performative.
	They follow a script.
	And, you know, even to the extent, as Xi Van Fleet was pointing out, the whole self-denunciation, right?
	And it's important that you have to be not only not racist, but you've got to be anti-racist or anti-whatever they're against.
	And you have to denounce that.
	And you have to denounce yourself.
	And that was always a key thing that they did in the struggle sessions in China.
	You're struggling with yourself.
	So the denunciations are performative, they follow a script, an observation that could easily be made of much discussion with progressives.
	They seem to speak nervously and miserably, as if it's under some kind of constant observation.
	It's like I was saying, Roger, I'm being watched, you know.
	Isn't that a shame they have to live that way?
	Do you really want to live that way?
	Shake that off.
	Shake off that fear of man.
	That fear of politics.
	These people don't have any power over you unless you give it to them.
	And if this is the kind of World in which you live.
	You don't have to live in that world.
	There's a better world to live in.
	I mean, if you're working for an employer, for example, as I said for the longest time, you got an employer who wants to force inject you with an experimental vaccine as a condition of your job?
	Why would you think twice about resigning?
	I mean, I would leave that job in a heartbeat.
	Good use of the term.
	It's taking of people's hearts.
	I don't know who took that.
	But seriously, what a degrading tyrant.
	Who wouldn't want to work for somebody like that?
	Some impersonal, gigantic corporation that has absolutely no regard for you as a human being?
	Anyway, self-censorship is at work.
	They feel the need to monitor everything and everyone, and so they assume that this applies to them also.
	And you know, it is kind of interesting.
	You look at the etymology of the word censor.
	And we know that the Romans had censors, and it was an official position.
	And within their realm, they had total control.
	You know, if it was in their realm of authority, they could destroy whatever it was.
	But it comes from a Latin word that means to appraise.
	To value this or to judge it, right?
	And so these people became judges of what was going to be allowed.
	And of course, it's by their arbitrary standard.
	Is this something that I don't like ethically or morally or politically or whatever, religiously?
	I've got my own standard.
	I'm going to appraise this.
	I'm going to judge it.
	And then I'm going to be able to have absolute power to get rid of the things that I don't like.
	That's what censorship is really about.
	That's why all this content moderation is so reprehensible.
	Yeah. Moderation of content is no virtue.
	Unfortunately, Orwell's stint in the Burmese Imperial Police made him a despicable figure to students.
	Little better than a Waffen SS or a Gestapo officer.
	True, he had belatedly retrieved himself by his eventually writing in the 1940s, but he had spent many years performing the dirty work of the British Empire.
	His famous essay, A Hanging, showed him enthusiastically hands-on at it.
	This was the conversation of some academics that he was listening to.
	He said, I heard this lecture where they were saying that by some graduate students that he was eating with.
	They were at lunch, and the two of them were discussing, and he's kind of like a fly on the wall listening to all this stuff.
	And that's how they saw it.
	The fact that he had worked for the British Imperial Police, and the fact that he had written an essay called A Hanging, Oh, it shows that he was enthusiastic for the tyranny of the British Empire.
	He said, I'd never, honestly, never heard such a narrow and limited view, and I was intrigued by it.
	As preposterous a misrepresentation as it was, he says it needs little rebuttal.
	He said, a hanging is indeed a brilliantly disturbing account of an Indian murderer being hanged.
	A man who would have been executed at that time in any country.
	The essay explores the deep unease that are well felt about his role.
	So it's a lie to claim that it shows him uncritically doing his job, let alone reveling in his exertion of British authority.
	Such an interpretation shows a shocking lack of understanding, as does the idea that Orwell only recanted of any pro-imperial views in the 1940s.
	And he goes on to talk about his work, which is not as important as it is to see how these people are operating.
	And this is exactly what the survivors of totalitarianism and the people who work in academia see.
	And this cancer...
	Has spread out of the universities because we have a situation where these people took over the universities.
	We want to make it so that everybody goes to college and everybody gets their heads filled with mush like this.
	He said, needless to say, discussion then moved on to the Rhodes statue at a nearby Oriel College.
	That would be Cecil Rhodes, who did Rhodesia, which both of these philosophy graduate students were adamant had to be removed.
	It was easily as disturbing to the victims of British imperialism as any supposed hurt caused by a Gaza protest chants of from the river to the sea.
	Palestine will be free.
	It would be to Oxford's Jewish students, he said.
	He said, as I listened to this, he said, I should have quoted them Nishi.
	But presumably he is also problematic and a fascist.
	Benishi said, he who fights with monsters best take care lest he himself become a monster.
	And that's exactly what happens in all this.
	Now I would say, you know, we can look at that and we can go, yeah, those liberals, oh, they're really awful, aren't they?
	But you're starting to see these same types of cancel culture because it really is a kind of tribalism.
	And when you break people into different tribes, it's easy to get them to fight with each other.
	And so when we look at MAGA 2.0, this is Joe Allen saying, the conservative case for a transhuman future.
	Is there a MAGA 2.0 that is different from MAGA 1.0?
	Joe Allen talks about how the technological gray tribe that stands apart from the progressive blue tribe and the tradition-oriented red tribe And he suggests that MAGA 2.0 promises to hurdle you blindly into the future.
	If you don't see this not-so-subtle distinction, you'll find yourself living in a transhuman and a technocratic future.
	That's the foreword from Patrick Wood, and this is from Technocracy News.
	And so this is the op-ed piece by Joe Allen.
	He said, you know, Trump...
	It's all in on these gray gods of artificial intelligence.
	In retrospect, I suppose this was inevitable.
	What Trump said was, he said, it is a superpower, and you want to be right there at the beginning of it.
	But it's also very disconcerting, he said.
	Yeah, he wants that superpower, doesn't he?
	For decades, Silicon Valley and the Pentagon have appealed to competition and to survival in order to justify total digitization.
	The digital IDs and everything else, the surveillance state, the police state, all that digital.
	During the contactless COVID panic, which, again, Trump, digitized survival was a core principle of the global Great Reset agenda.
	You unplugged at your own peril.
	It was your only connection to the outside world.
	You had to go home, stay there.
	Everything was going to be filtered through your computer monitor.
	As we saw then, during the debacle, the real-world manifestation of tech fantasies looked more like sorry people crippled by algorithmic parasites looked more like that than some kind of futuristic blend of starships and classical architecture.
	But optimists insist that technology is neutral, and it can ultimately be steered towards nobler ends.
	He says, Steve Bannon was the lone Luddite in MAGA circles, warning about this stuff.
	And, you know, I think that he was the only one, I think, that really understood back in the beginning of the first Trump administration, he was the only one that really understood what was going on with the fourth turning, and he mentioned that.
	And I thought, well, you know, that might be a positive thing.
	But he's become so entranced with the ring, I think Bannon has become the Boromir of the Trump administration.
	His thrust for power has led him into fraud and many other things.
	But look, I would never identify myself as a Luddite.
	The Luddites wanted to destroy the machines of the Industrial Revolution.
	As I've said before, I think the Amish are better at this.
	They're not out there trying to destroy our cars.
	They simply refuse to use something that they can't fix and make themselves.
	So they're not out there bashing.
	They're not like the Just Stop Oil people.
	You can imagine the Amish were gluing themselves to the roads.
	They'll leave people alone.
	That's kind of the Christian way.
	But they're not going to be a part of it.
	Even their clothes.
	They keep the clothes simple because they're going to be clothes that they make themselves.
	Following the botched assassination attempt on Trump and seeing his heroic self-possession, the cyborg car dealer Elon Musk endorsed him and pledged $45 million a month to his campaign.
	That's now been recanted, as I said earlier, to Wall Street Journal.
	He reported that, said it was somebody who was close to Musk, said he was going to do that.
	Musk waited several days and then said, no, I'm not going to do it.
	Now that Musk's XAI supercluster has been fired up in Memphis, Tennessee, and that his X headquarters has moved to Austin, along with Neuralink and SpaceX, it makes sense that he'd commit himself to the MAGA wing of the Red Tribe.
	And I think it also makes sense because...
	The people that are part of the, as he calls it, the Red Tribe, the typical conservatives, they worship achievement in business.
	And they don't want to look too closely to see that he got his money largely from doing exactly what the government wanted, feeding the climate change panic, feeding the military industrial complex.
	He provided everything that these people wanted.
	And it was a lot of crony capitalism that made him the wealthiest man in the world.
	Tech acceleration has become a mind virus floating in the air, along with cow farts.
	It infects liberals and conservatives alike.
	You have to fight adversarial algorithms with even better algorithms, and you've got to combat killer drone swarms with even larger swarms of swarms.
	And you have to fight the cancel culture and the hate speech with even more cancel culture and even more hate speech, you see?
	It works with everything.
	Well, we've got to do a better job of censorship.
	As a matter of fact, Trump was saying, yeah, you know, they stole the election with ballot harvesting and stuff, and we're going to do a better job of that this time around than they did.
	There's not any sense that they want to undo these things.
	They just want to do these horrible, tyrannical things better than the other people did.
	It's just about winning.
	Competitiveness, national security.
	The central arguments put forth by another gray alien, the ex-Google executive Eric Schmidt, who advised both Obama and Biden's administration.
	As a matter of fact, he is so embedded now, quietly, in the military-industrial complex.
	He's probably the most influential person there.
	Again, you can get a good insight into what is happening with the book, Four Battlegrounds, and talking about artificial intelligence, but the bigger Potemkin village that is all set there is the war, the competition between the U.S. and China.
	And that may be the thing that we get with a Trump presidency.
	I said before the 2020 election, I said, you want to know the big difference that I see between Trump and Biden?
	It's going to be war with China or war with Russia.
	Well, Biden was war with, I said Biden will be war with Russia.
	I think if Trump gets in, these people, and it's the military industrial complex and the military intelligence people that have been pushing Trump from day one.
	And this whole vaccine lockdown stuff, deeply tied to the military.
	And so is all the rest of the stuff.
	And they want to go to war with China.
	As chair for the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence, Eric Schmidt proposed a new American technocracy, and he urged the U.S. military to embrace fully the autonomous lethal weapons, killer robots, that will make the kill decision themselves without human oversight.
	Unsurprisingly, this year, he founded the startup White Stork, To produce kamikaze death drones for Ukraine.
	Instead of delivering babies, these storks will deliver bombs to kill the babies.
	Artificial intelligence, says Klaus Schwab.
	To the metaverse, near space technologies, I could go on and on.
	Synthetic biology, he talks about.
	Those who master these technologies in some ways, they'll be masters as a world, right?
	And he's said that over and over again.
	Palantir and Peter Thiel and Alex Karp, I did not know this, however, about Palantir.
	They have provided militarized artificial intelligence to Ukraine at no cost.
	Because you see that's what so many of these unending wars really are It is a beta test site with live fire. We're under real conditions forget about Testing this stuff and simulating shouldn't we want to have the actual see how it does an actual combat So we've got to constantly have a war somewhere And so Palantir wants to use its militarized AI its autonomous killing machines and things like that without charge
	Alex Karp openly admitted at last year's World Economic Forum that one benefit is to hone their digital projects using real human blood.
	He also funds Andruil, which builds AI-powered surveillance towers and VR-controlled combat drones for Ukraine and other allies.
	You see, when Peter Thiel talks about Davos in dismissive terms and how he doesn't like those people, his partners go to Davos.
	His partners sit on the panels and everything.
	And of course, his partners and Thiel go to Bilderberg.
	He's lying to your face.
	No different from Anthony Fauci, except in what he creates to kill people.
	The anti-communist Conehead, Mark Andreessen.
	I love that description. Have you ever seen Mark Andreessen?
	He does look like the Coneheads, if you remember that from Saturday Night Live 40 years ago.
	Yeah. And I don't know if he's from France or not, but he definitely does look like the Coneheads.
	He is also backing Trump.
	He and his partner, Ben Horowitz, believe that Trump is the right candidate to facilitate their little tech agenda.
	This libertarian mission pits freewheeling startups against big tech megacorporations who threaten to lock down the entire market via regulatory capture.
	Andreessen proclaimed, We believe in accelerationism.
	We believe artificial intelligence is our alchemy, our philosopher's stone.
	We are literally making sand think.
	Do you want to have people like that in control of the economy and control of government policy?
	I mean, that is...
	You're talking about delusional power.
	To think that you're literally making sand think.
	Oh yeah, because we make the silicon chips, we make it from sand.
	And we are making thinking machines.
	Now, you've got a foundation of sand, as I said before.
	It is going to collapse.
	On Rumble, 12 June, 1776, what is your favorite Bible passage?
	Well, I guess it depends on what I'm going through at the time, but I mentioned it yesterday when I talked about that dry land farm.
	You know, I've actually got that engraved on the front of my Bible instead of my name, but as the rain and the snow.
	I think that God described how He works in our life, and sometimes when we listen to Him, it has an immediate effect, and sometimes it kind of sits there.
	And that it has an effect at the appropriate time.
	George Madano, thank you very much for that.
	I appreciate that. Occult Priestess, thank you also for the tip.
	And Martin Halverson, thank you all of you for the tip.
	I appreciate that. On Rumble, Max writes, Trump, with an executive order, shoved the Federal Reserve inside the Treasury early on in the coronavirus and then handed them $7 trillion to dish out as relief.
	And that relief was really the initial training and really kind of an experiment as well.
	For universal basic income, which these guys absolutely love.
	On Rumble, Marky Mark, New Jersey.
	Thank you for the tip. He says, if Obama were really in favor of the military-industrial complex, then why did he cancel the F-22 Raptor, one of its biggest programs?
	I don't know what his motivation was on that, but I do know that he had...
	He expanded the wars that we had.
	We wound up with, I think it was seven wars by the end of his administration.
	And Trump kept all those wars.
	He didn't get rid of any of them.
	Look, it's just a ratcheting effect with all of these guys.
	And they've got their favored corporations and the other ones that they don't favor.
	But I think that the proof of the pudding is in their wars and how they operate.
	You can also ask the same question, you know, why has he got Eric Schmidt in there?
	Talking about setting up autonomous killing machines.
	If he doesn't like war, why is he doing that?
	Oh, well, he's got to do it because the Chinese are going to do it.
	It's that mentality. It's that mentality that we're working against here.
	Trump allies have drafted a proposal to make America first in AI. The Washington Post says a key focus of this is to develop military technology without unnecessary and burdensome regulations.
	In effect, this would shift the future away from DC regulators and towards more dynamic elements in the military-industrial complex.
	So MAGA began by looking back to America's past for inspiration.
	Apparently, MAGA 2.0 is going to hurdle us blindly into the future.
	Somebody, I think, this wasn't sent to us.
	Karen found this. And I like, you know, we've seen the Trump-Pence sign from before.
	And what they did was they just took out the P.E. and they stuck in a V.A., you know, and they show you as they're making that change.
	But then there's also this.
	If you remove the U.M.P., And you remove the V for Vance, you wind up with trance.
	Maybe that's what we're in. Maybe that's, you know, we're hurtling blindly into the future with the trance ticket.
	At the highest levels, a politician is surrounded by so many pathological liars, so many glad-handed backstabbers and money-grubbing shapeshifters, bloodthirsty warmongers and whore-hopping hypocrites.
	The idea that humans would be better off as brain-chipped cyborgs or replaced by machines altogether has to seem sensible at times.
	He says, bearing in mind that according to the New York Post, Trump has been consulting with BlackRock CEO Larry Fink.
	That tracks in light of Fink's bold statements about the greater replacement at this year's World Economic Forum.
	He says he's had conversations with leadership of large developed countries that he said are xenophobic in their immigration policies.
	They're afraid of foreigners.
	And they also have shrinking demographics.
	Well, that would be the U.S., and that would be all of Europe that he's talking about, or the parties that maybe aren't in power, but the people that...
	Are running for office as populists, saying, you know, we don't want to have our country overrun with uncontrolled immigration.
	But he says, hey, your demographics are shrinking.
	I wonder why. Does it have anything to do with the poison that we were injected with?
	Fink arrives at the conclusion that social problems that one will have in substituting humans for machines are going to be far easier for those countries that have declining populations.
	And I played that clip for you.
	He said, yeah, you know, so you don't want us to overrun your country with foreigners, with young males who don't have any jobs, don't have any money, but they're just coming into your country?
	You don't want that? Oh, okay, well, you're not having any kids, so what's your alternative?
	This author says, so you and yours will be replaced by robots, but at least these automated patriots will patrol your border.
	How about that? We've got to be careful what we ask for, because if we get so focused on on using force to control the border.
	As I've said for the longest time, the real problem is not that we don't have enough, it's not that we don't have a wall, and it's not that we don't have some kind of a virtual wall where we've got drones constantly patrolling it and robots that are going to taser people that come across the border or something like that, because that can be used to keep you in.
	And the real problem is that we are pulling people in.
	We have a gigantic welfare magnet.
	We say, come here and we'll give you everything.
	We'll give you benefits that are superior to the benefits that even Americans have in the welfare state.
	And they are. That's what they do.
	And they bring those people in and they financially incentivize it.
	And if you put those kind of incentives there, people will find some way to get in.
	They may stop coming across the border if Trump buys into this Andrewil system, which is what they're selling.
	They've got an electronic border with drones and ways to apply force.
	That's probably what they'll wind up doing if we demand it that way.
	And so, the problem is, instead of fixing the original problem, which is the welfare state, what they do is they create a second problem.
	I've said it before, when you look at this problem, I remember back in the late 1980s, The Libertarian Party, they call it the Nolan Chart, and they called it Operation Politically Homeless, and they would go to college campuses, and they had a graph that they had rotated 45 degrees, so it was like diamond-shaped.
	It was still a square, but it was diamond-shaped, and it was down on the corner, and they would ask you 10 questions about economic freedom, And ten questions about civil liberties.
	And then they would plot it.
	And so if you're leaning more towards civil liberties or whatever than you were, and you didn't like economic freedom, you'd be kind of on the left or you could be on the right or the center.
	Then they had the authoritarian quadrant down at the bottom.
	Trying to get people to think about this instead of just a left-right paradigm.
	To think about it in a more three-dimensional way.
	And if you supported freedom in all 20 questions, they would put you up at the top of the libertarian quadrant.
	Well, there was one question on there about open borders, and I didn't support open borders, never did.
	I said, you've got to stop the welfare state before you open up the borders.
	And the Democrats understand that as well.
	That's what Cloward and Piven was about.
	Cloward and Piven was about using the welfare state to deliberately destroy the country with immigration, with open borders.
	And those two together will destroy the country.
	Imagine an AI tutor, he says, that teaches your kid the Constitution and also gives your kid selective excerpts from the Bible.
	More blasphemous than Christian heavy metal, yet given the trends, it's just as likely.
	So this is why, not just an AI tutor, but it's why I'm opposed to schools in general.
	I don't know any more than I know the AI tutor.
	I don't know who this person is that would be teaching my kids.
	And it's not a solution to do what they said they were going to do in, I think, is Oklahoma.
	Where they said we're going to teach the Bible in classes.
	Well, what are you going to teach about the Bible?
	That could be an even bigger problem.
	If we legacy humans are to coexist with nascent cyborgs, Our side is going to need to erect high cultural barriers to wall off their digital demons.
	That's a good way to put it.
	Perhaps, as various tech brothers and transhumanists and soft genocidal post-humanists have argued, the reckless digital mutation of the entire human race, first culturally, then biologically, is as inevitable as openly gay Republicans and mass migration.
	But that doesn't make it desirable.
	Boy, that is really true.
	The reckless digital mutation of the entire human race, first culturally, and then biologically.
	Transhumanism is neither left nor right.
	We have to, you know, that's why when we talk about left and right, you've got to get past that.
	You know, so is Hitler extreme right and is Stalin extreme left?
	And why are they exactly like each other?
	Because they're not left or right.
	They're authoritarian.
	And so there needs to be a spot.
	We need to have a revised Nolan chart.
	We don't just have left, right, center, authoritarian, and libertarian.
	We need to identify where these transhumanists are.
	And the problem is, is that they're taking a little bit from each of these things.
	I guess there needs to be like another dimension where you have demons.
	That's the dimension. It's like the third dimension.
	So you've got a two-dimensional square chart that you put on a 45-degree angle.
	I think we need to have a third dimension, which is the demonic dimension.
	That's where the transhumanism belongs.
	It's neither left nor right.
	The desire to use technology to surpass human nature transcends globalism and nationalism.
	Many in this camp are willing to gamble our entire history on the promise of synthetic biology.
	In their materialist trance, there we go, there's the bumper sticker, some honestly believe that it is good to obscure our eternal spiritual connection with animate digital icons.
	That's what we're really fighting here.
	And so when we look at the billionaire technocrats that are piling on the Trump train, we look at their connections with J.D. Vance and how J.D. Vance was created by Peter Thiel, both as his career as a venture capitalist, as well as his career as a politician.
	He is a product of Peter Thiel.
	And when you stop and think about it, you know, what would you think about somebody who was a product and funded by the Rockefellers or by the Rothschilds or whatever?
	And what we're seeing here is that JD Vance is a product that has been funded by the transhumanists And these people in Silicon Valley who seek to put in the singularity. I mean Peter Thiel funded the singularity Conference that is done all the time with Ray Kurzweil, but it's Peter Thiel is the money behind all of that JD Vance the new VP is Thiel's creature
	He is a man that Teal molded in his own image through lavish investments in both his business and his political careers.
	JD's business and political careers.
	Before we get into UBI, on Rumble, the progress retort.
	Thank you very much for the tip.
	I appreciate that. Writes, as a major champion of local control, I encourage everyone to check...
	To check from the form of the National Circus.
	So many local things happening now.
	Go to commonsenseadvocate at substack.com.
	Commonsenseadvocate for a glimpse into my locale.
	Well, that's good. We need to check that out.
	I'll take a look at that. On Rumble, Shelly A., thank you very much for the tip.
	She says, thank you, David.
	God is working through you. Well, that's very kind.
	I thank you. The truth will set us free, she says.
	Yes. On Rumble, Marky Mark, New Jersey, thank you for the tip.
	BHO's reasons for canceling the F-22, Barack Obama's, were that it was too expensive and not needed as there were no peer adversaries.
	However, all the wars are wearing down U.S. fighters that the F-22 could replace.
	As a matter of fact, the F-22...
	Let me just say this before I finish the comment.
	The F-22...
	A lot of those have been stationed not in Taiwan, but in Japan and some other places like that, to defend Taiwan.
	And they had a big technological advantage.
	You're talking about, made me think about it when it said there were no peer adversaries.
	They were able to operate by stealth.
	So that, you know, with those systems, if you're invisible to the enemy, and you can see them before they can see you, and you've got weapons that you can fire, then you're dead before you even know that the enemy is there.
	So that was a key thing, the stealth aspect of the F-22.
	Now, China is claiming, we don't know, but they are now claiming that they have been able to penetrate that stealth technology, which would neutralize that.
	And again, that's where these people are all focused on It is on the competition with China.
	That's where the entire military-industrial complex is really focusing, even beyond Russia.
	And I'll tell you that.
	So anyway, it says the U.S. Air Force isn't even requesting enough F-15EXs to replace the F-15Cs and the F-15Es that have been worn out from all the wars the U.S. is involved in.
	Yeah, that's the thing that is so insane.
	You know, it's like watching the Federal Reserve, for example, and the monetary policy.
	When you look at the military-industrial complex, and you look at the aggressive war policy, And the fact that these complex systems, they're not really doing what they need to even back up their aggressive policy.
	And their aggressive policy is hurting the economic aspect as well, the reserve status of the dollar, as well as the military.
	It's just that the military-industrial complex is thinking, I think, that they're going to be able to get the money to build this stuff.
	That's all they really care about.
	If you go back and look at Daniel Suarez's novel, Kill Decision, where he was talking about autonomous killer drones, in that book, it's all about the military-industrial complex, and it's all about the military-industrial complex completely changing everything.
	No more aircraft carriers and no more carrier groups and airplanes.
	This all goes immediately to drone swarms and things like that.
	It's just a complete revolution so that everything has to be bought all over again.
	From the military industrial complex.
	And of course, that's what they want to do in one industry after the other.
	We don't want you to have any, you know, fill in the blank.
	We don't want you to have regular food.
	We want to ban all that food and have you buy our lab food.
	We don't want you to have the kinds of cars that you've had before or the kind of energy sources that you've had before.
	We're going to shut those things down with a fear campaign and you're going to buy the new stuff that we're going to mandate from us.
	And so that was kind of the overarching insight, I think, that Daniel Suarez had.
	He did a pretty good job.
	It's about 10 years old, I think, that book, but it's still very apropos, and you can see it coming closer to fruition.
	Let's see. Okay, we got all those comments.
	I want to talk about universal basic income before we run out of time here.
	There was a study that showed that they gave Americans $1,000 per month, and they said, guess what?
	It had negative consequences.
	Well, didn't we know that already?
	And we'd already had the Great Society experiment with LBJ back in the 60s, and it wasn't so great.
	Now they want the Great Reset and so forth.
	And when we look at the lockdown, the Trump programs for stimulus checks, when you look at Steve Mnuchin, Yeah, we'll give you a $1,000 check, but that's only for like six months.
	Then we'll do another one and another six months or something like that.
	We don't want to spoil the people.
	It's just like the Pentagon.
	Oh, we'll give you a $20 bonus for six months, not even for a full year.
	They're putting that out there as a little help for the soldiers.
	That's how much... They want to thank you for your service.
	It's kind of like that $10 Uber Eats coupon from CrowdStrike.
	The Pentagon's going to give the enlisted men $20 a month bonus for six months only.
	Because, you know, again, you don't want to get these guys too soft and lazy from all the money that you're showering them with.
	And so they put together this program, $1,000 a month.
	They had 3,000 people participate.
	It was a three-year study from the National Bureau of Economic Research.
	They said that people increased their leisure time as recipients.
	They spent less time sleeping and on child care and on community engagement, on caring for others, and on self-improvement.
	Oh, sounds like it was kind of negative.
	Even from the standpoint of the money that they earned, it actually went down.
	For every $1 received, total household income, excluding the transfers, fell by at least $0.21.
	So you give them a dollar, and every dollar that you give them, their income drops by $0.21.
	And total individual income fell by at least $0.12.
	This is something that we've known for a long time.
	We've known that welfare destroys families.
	And we could see this as part of their introduction.
	Look at what happened as they locked people down over the so-called pandemic and gave people just a little bit of money.
	And really, when you look at it, the stimulus checks were really pretty negligible.
	How is somebody going to live on a $1,200 check for six months?
	And then, oh, yeah, we'll give you another $1,200 check.
	That's absurd. The bigger things that were happening...
	There were extended unemployment benefits, things like saying you can't be evicted from your home.
	But it was an experiment to see what would happen, and we know what would happen.
	You know, people came out of that saying, well, I don't think I want to work as much anymore.
	This is a way to pacify us.
	They said participants' individual incomes declined $1,500 per year relative to the control group.
	This is a way to make us all Eloys, and they know it.
	Combination of artificial intelligence and universal basic income.
	Thanks for joining us.
	Have a good day. 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.

▲