Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Aug. 15, 2024 - The David Knight Show

03:03:06

The David Knight Show - 08/15/2024

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	you
	using free speech to free minds
	You're listening to The David Night Show.
	As the clock strikes 13, it's Thursday the 15th of August, year of our Lord 2024.
	Well, today we're going to take a look at the monkeypox push.
	No, no, they call it mpox.
	But we're going to take a look at that lie as they are ramping up everything again.
	All of these organizations, there's actually more of them.
	They've got more money, more grants, and they perceive they have more permission to do this since there's been no penalty for either Trump nor the Biden administration.
	And of course they're teeing this stuff up to hit us with this regardless of which one of these puppets is selected.
	So we're going to begin with that.
	And we're going to take a look at some updates into the vaccines as well.
	There's been a horrible court decision in Vermont.
	We're going to talk about that. Stay with us.
	with us we'll be right back.
	So vaccination all across the nation, keep you from catching pockypox, pockypox, because when you get the vaccine you'll be all right.
	So vaccination all across the nation, keep you from catching pockypox, pockypox, because when you get the vaccine you'll be all right.
	So vaccination all across the nation, keep you from catching pockypox, pockypox, because when you get the vaccine you'll be all right.
	So vaccination all across the nation, keep you from catching pockypox, pockypox, because when you get the vaccine you'll be all right.
	Yeah, honky pox, not monkey pox.
	So vaccination all across the nation, keep you from catching pockypox, pockypox, because when you get the vaccine you'll be all right.
	The appropriate response to all this stuff, of course, is to laugh at it.
	We can't laugh it off.
	They're pushing it pretty hard.
	Yeah, everybody get in line.
	Get in line again. Put the mask on.
	I see people putting this stuff out.
	This time it's real. Look, there's sores on people.
	And it's like, yeah, okay. We had people who had real respiratory illness, and what'd they do?
	They put them on ventilators.
	Holmonologists said, we've never done that before.
	Of course it's going to kill them, and it did.
	The WHO has declared MPOX to be a public health emergency as newer strain appears in Africa.
	Yeah, they're straining the truth here, aren't they?
	But this was sent to me by Handy.
	They're already pushing this stuff out in the hospitals.
	Here's what you need to do.
	You've got to isolate these people. Immediately initiate contact isolation, droplet isolation, eye protection.
	Personal protective equipment used by healthcare personnel who enter the patient's room should include gown, gloves, eye protection, goggles, all the same stuff.
	All the same drill.
	And long setup here of procedures.
	If you look at tips for adequate collection of lesion specimen from a suspect monkeypox virus case, it is so important to do this.
	Not from a science standpoint, but from a deception standpoint.
	You've got to pretend that you're actually doing science.
	You're actually doing measurements. And everybody's part of that.
	The PCR is such a genius move.
	Everybody gets to participate.
	Everybody gets to measure. It's like, oh, look.
	See, it says they've got it.
	After I multiply it by 1.1 million times or even more now.
	And then if they test positive, step number one is you mask all patients.
	Now, the hospitals again.
	All patients masked.
	Come in with a respiratory issue or they come in with a heart attack or something.
	Smother them. Smother them.
	Yes, of course. What?
	How useless has the medical profession and hospitals become?
	Absolutely. Then step two.
	Identify a patient with signs and symptoms for monkeypox.
	But you've got to mask everybody now.
	Then if they pass the...
	You spin the roulette wheel with a PCR, and if it comes up positive, then you use orange isolation signs, and you tag them with it.
	So the World Health Organization declared MPOX, monkeypox, honkypox, whatever.
	It is a tower of power for these people, isn't it?
	I love that.
	But we used to play with a group that was in for our own entertainment.
	We would sometimes work in some of the songs, but people didn't want to have stuff that they would listen to.
	They want to have stuff they dance to.
	So they wanted a Casey and the Sunshine Band.
	We'd play Tower of Power for them.
	But anyway, Public Health Emergency of International Concern.
	And they have an acronym for that.
	H-E-I-C, Public Health Emergency of International Concern.
	Today the Emergency Committee.
	Do you remember voting for these people?
	I didn't vote for them.
	Met and advised me that in its view, the situation constitutes a public health emergency of international concern, and I have accepted that advice, says the non-physician Dr.
	Tedros, during a briefing yesterday.
	In the U.S., there have been 1,634 cases of MPOX reported so far this year.
	According to data from the CDC, who we all trust, right?
	It is, by the way, significantly lower than what they saw at the peak of the MPOX outbreak in 2022.
	Do you remember that one, how we all died?
	I don't remember that. I remember them freaking out about it.
	I don't remember it being any big deal.
	Most recently...
	The Public Health Emergency of International Concern declared that the COVID-19 pandemic and the previous Simpox outbreak of 2022.
	So, you know, these are the same usual suspects that we see everywhere.
	And now they're trying to tell us that they've got this down to the genetics.
	And of course, I hope you saw the interview that we had yesterday, and I hope you do your own research.
	Because you need to understand that their genetic analysis and the so-called...
	You know, they don't isolate anything.
	And their genetic analysis is just as much hand-waving as, you know, the PCR test.
	We used to talk about it.
	I don't know if that's a common phrase or not.
	It used to be a common phrase when I went to school in engineering.
	You know, put the big equations up on the board.
	Just wave your hands, you know.
	That's all it is.
	Pure fiction. In terms of determining this, the genetic sequence is as much, if not more.
	Well, fiction, the PCR. PCR, you can find anything anywhere, as you pointed out, especially if you multiply it by a trillion times.
	People just don't realize how big a trillion is.
	That's why when you look at the deficit, it's absolutely amazing.
	Well, this is something, actually, by the way, we didn't talk about it.
	But actually, they did talk about it in their book, Mark and Samantha Bailey, that we talked about yesterday.
	And I want to read to you what they wrote in this book that came out, I think, last year.
	Blame the pox on gay men and animals again.
	By 2022, the corporate media was taking stories of disease contagion to hitherto unseen levels.
	In mid-August, the Daily Mail reported that a gay couple in Paris had given monkeypox to a dog that shared a bed with them.
	This time, the concept of zoonotic disease had flipped on its head, and it was proposed that humans were now transmitting germs to animals, the so-called science.
	Concerning how this had happened was reported to be based on the following social media post.
	I'd suggest that the dog probably licked the ill human and then licked its own butt, said an MD at the University of Alberta on Twitter.
	So, there you go.
	Pure science. Pure conjecture.
	You didn't know anything of the sort about that.
	The article claimed that a PCR test had been used to confirm the dog had monkeypox.
	However... A review of the scientific literature revealed that the monkeypox PCR kits had no established capabilities for diagnosing an illness, and thus relevance of each of the positive results to the subject was unknown.
	But the Daily Mail story went viral.
	This is what the real viral stuff is.
	The media is really viral.
	The propaganda is really viral.
	Genetic sequencing showed the strain of the disease was an identical match with the disease that had infected its owners.
	This was conflating the detection of certain genetic sequences in closely confined shared environment with an imagined contagion virus.
	The virologists have claimed that these genetic sequences are specific to monkeypox virus.
	However, there is a major problem with this claim.
	There are no scientific publications that show the sequence came from inside of a virus.
	Unlike the New York Post, which used a computer-generated image for the story about the recent mysterious pneumonia in Argentina, the Daily Mail included a real electron microscope image purporting to show...
	Monkey pox virus.
	And here it is. They have it in their book.
	You can see this over here, the black and white picture.
	However, as described in the caption, it was simply a sample of human skin showing tiny vesicles.
	The findings could, of course, be associated with a disease condition.
	For example, vesicles can result from the body's attempts to get rid of unwanted substances.
	If the claim was being made that these particles are viruses, then further experiments would need to be carried out to show that they are infectious.
	But hey, you saw it right there.
	There's a picture of the virus.
	And we've got all the computer-generated images.
	As a matter of fact, they have fun with that on the cover of their book.
	You've got a guy in a... In a hazmat suit, and he's got a big ball there with spikes on it.
	The coronavirus ball.
	The detection, now back to current fiction.
	And this is, now that was what the Daily Mail said.
	This is now what is being pushed out by ABC News.
	The detection and the rapid spread of a new clade of impacts in the Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo.
	On Monday, the Africa CDC. That's what I call it, the Africa CDC. You know, this is what I say.
	When we talk about globalism, when we talk about the climate MacGuffin, when we talk about the pandemic MacGuffin, you realize that it's not some globalist somewhere that we're fighting.
	We're fighting our own government, our own government of people in it, like Al Gore.
	They're the ones who created the inconvenient lie, or truth.
	The convenient lie, the inconvenient truth.
	They created this, I mean, you look at this whole climate movement, Paul Ehrlich and these other people, it's all coming from the U.S., really.
	The funding for these organizations is coming from the U.S. The vaccines, right?
	Larger coming from funding from the U.S. and so forth and on.
	You know, it is all of these things, including the wars, including the surveillance, is coming from that cesspool Washington, D.C. The satanic center of the universe.
	And we pretend that we're going to fight this by getting the right man, a single person, elected to Washington, D.C. He's going to turn this around.
	Well, I wouldn't believe that, even if I believed that Trump was a man of character and intelligence, and he's far from either of those things.
	Anyway, the Africa CDC declared MPOCs a public health emergency of continental security, and they have another acronym for that.
	They're going to be declaring these, so they create these acronyms because they're going to be doing them all the time.
	A public health emergency of international consequences, another one of continental security.
	The first such declaration since the Africa CDC was created in 2017.
	They didn't even do this for the COVID scam.
	Certainly not in Africa, because in Africa, most of the people have just said, I forget about it.
	And I've had people contact me who are listeners in Africa and said, well, you know, the Europeans who are here, they freaked out and went home.
	But everybody else is just going about their business.
	They don't care. I'm not affected by it.
	Again, it's like a joke.
	We've seen that meme. I don't have to worry about catching COVID because I don't watch the media.
	That's what happened in Africa.
	And so ABC News says, on the same day, the WHO published a report that found that there were a total of 934 people.
	New lab confirmed cases of impacts and four deaths from 26 countries in the month of June.
	They put this in. Okay.
	934 cases confirmed.
	And only four deaths.
	That's a pretty low case fatality rate, isn't it?
	And I can, if I wanted to, I could give you two dozen things that have a higher case fatality rate than that.
	But this is an emergency.
	And then when we talk about, they found 934 cases and only four deaths, and they looked in 26 different countries.
	Now, they don't mention the 26 countries that they looked at.
	It'd be interesting to know what the combined population of those 26 countries was.
	How many hundreds of millions of people?
	Maybe billions of people.
	And they had four deaths.
	Is this an emergency? A two-dose vaccine, however, has been approved by the FDA. You see, here we are.
	America. The satanic cult in Washington.
	At the center of it all again.
	The FDA has approved a two-dose vaccine.
	And this two-dose vaccine now will prevent both smallpox and mpox.
	Now, if you believed all their stuff about how they had isolated this...
	And this is a new clade.
	Remember, that's how they begin. Oh, we have new clades.
	New genetics. Well, how does this work then?
	You know, I mean, this is a multi-purpose thing.
	It not only does smallpox, but it does mpox, and it does variants from mpox.
	I mean, weren't we told that we had to get boosters because we have these variants?
	Yeah, you got variants.
	Yeah. I think their variance with logic is what they are at variance with.
	So MPOX has declared a global public health emergency by the WHO. Don't get fooled again.
	And as new, deadlier strain.
	There's a new, deadlier strain.
	But they've already got a vaccine that they're going to use for it.
	It's a new strain, and it's deadlier.
	But don't worry, because the vaccine's going to take care of it.
	Thank you, Unrumble.
	Thank you, Michelle Obama.
	Thank you very much for the tip.
	I appreciate that. So, we have four organizations, four organizations of the pandemic vaccine industry, and they're looking to raise $125 billion.
	Now, the headline says $123 billion, but they forgot to add that last one in.
	Over the past few months, the WHO... Gavi, the International Development Association, that's one I had not heard of before, and I had not heard of the Pandemic Fund either.
	They've all revealed how much money they will need in the next few years, because, you know, they're going to kick this stuff off.
	I mean, just imagine the trillions of dollars in wealth transfer that will happen if you give them only $125 billion, you see.
	People are going to get a return on their investment from these...
	Bureaucratic organizations, just like they do from government elected officials.
	You know, thousands of percent return on your investment.
	The WHO wants to raise $11 billion.
	Gavi wants doctors to cough up another $11.9.
	IDA, the International Development Association, wants to raise $100 billion.
	And the Pandemic Fund wants $2 billion.
	$125 billion. Where's the money going to come from?
	You. You and your children.
	The U.S. is the largest single donor to global health.
	You see what I said? We fund it.
	We create this stuff.
	We create the vaccines, the PCR tests, all the rest of this stuff.
	It's all coming from the U.S. It's coming from DARPA. The U.S. was the top donor to IDA. The U.S. was also the top contributor to the WHO. And so far, the U.S. is leading the charge for the replenishments of both the pandemic fund and of Gavi, the Gates thing, pledging $667 million.
	It's not 666.
	It should be $666 million.
	Anyway, when you look at who's paying for these various things, usually you can trace this back to Soros and Gates.
	One or the other or both in these types of things.
	But in this particular case, you know, we has met the enemy and they is us.
	As in United States.
	We are the Soros and the Gates.
	And it's actually people like Trump and Biden and their administration.
	They are the ones who are administering this, managing it, funding it, and so forth.
	It's just amazing to me that people can't get their head around it because of this partisan cliquishness, tribalism.
	They don't want to believe that their candidate would do this kind of evil stuff, and yet it comes out of their administrations.
	Massive wealth transfer.
	As we've seen during the COVID era, error, E-R-R-O-R, The same names crop up among private funders such as the Rockefeller Foundation, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Wellcome Trust.
	The Rockefeller and Gates Foundations are linked.
	Wiki Spooks noted in 2020, people with close connections to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Microsoft, people like Patty Stonestuffer and Rajiv Shah, have senior positions in the Rockefeller Foundation also, making the two giant foundations noticeably interwoven or strategically infiltrated.
	By Gates. And, of course, when you go back and look at the social media companies, you can see this same type of stuff, as I've said many times, on the venture capital boards.
	You've got the intelligence community, representatives, higher officials, just like they have these higher officials of Microsoft sitting on the Rockefeller Foundation board.
	You had on the venture capital firms, you had these people who are high up in the intelligence community, the military-industrial complex, sitting on these venture capital firms, boards, handing out money to all these people who are going to compete against each other.
	May the best man win and control the people.
	The CIA had its own venture capital firm, In-Q-Tel.
	So, you could say that in the same way that we're looking at the Rockefeller and Gates Foundation, the UN, the WHO are all interwoven with the U.S. government.
	And not only that, but with the part of the U.S. government that's all about conducting wars and killing people.
	The money that Gates is moving from one scheme to another is not his own, but it originates from contributions made by national governments and the taxes that we pay.
	Primarily, the U.S. government and the U.S. taxpayer.
	And that's how we get things like $35 trillion in debt.
	And it's why these people don't care, and they'll never balance the budget with an income tax, but they'll continue to do it because they are at war with Americans.
	Our American government is at war with us.
	And every government on Earth, if you paid attention for the last four years...
	You can see that every government on earth is at war with its own people.
	And if you even say as a politician that you want to do things to the benefit of your people, you are labeled a nationalist, a populist, and you are attacked as a threat to their order.
	Because you are a threat to their order if you do that.
	And this is true of both Trump and Biden.
	It's true of Republicans and Democrats, regardless of who they are.
	The pandemic fund, which I had not heard of before, was established in September 2022.
	It is a partnership with the World Bank.
	It finances investments to strengthen pandemic prevention.
	Works to make money and wealth transfer for these pandemics.
	Of course, the World Bank would get in on it because it's a massive transfer of wealth.
	And then, of course, Gates' Gavi and the Vaccine Alliance, founded in 2000.
	It is allied with UNICEF and the World Bank.
	The three permanent members of this are the World Bank, UNICEF, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
	They're the three permanent members of the Vaccine Alliance that they call Gavi.
	They are the core partners.
	Gavi is now vaccinating more than half of the world's children.
	Giving it tremendous power to negotiate vaccines at prices that are affordable for the poorest countries and to remove the commercial risks that previously kept manufacturers from serving them.
	That's how they describe themselves.
	Now, and this article is from Exposé News.
	They said, in other words, Gavi is creating a global vaccine monopoly.
	Gavi is not a charity.
	Gavi is not giving vaccines away.
	It is selling them. And to pay for its expenses, it'll be selling vaccines at above cost.
	And so, what is their financial...
	They say they're a not-for-profit organization.
	But look at what they spent in 2023.
	$33 million on fundraising activities.
	$44 million on its management expenses.
	So that's $77 million.
	But then they had something they call program expenses.
	That would be the cost of goods sold and, you know, the profits that they make from it as well.
	That was $3.6 billion.
	In other words, of its expenditures, 98% of that was program expenses.
	That's all about selling vaccines.
	And so what drives the public's mass fear?
	With things like this impact stuff.
	And again, I've seen conservative influencers putting out pictures of people with pox on them and everything and saying, this time it's real.
	This time it's real. Same people who've been scaring you for four years, four plus years, about the Wuhan gain-of-function stuff.
	They told you it was real.
	Yeah, it's real. They got a gain-of-function lab there.
	And yeah, they did. I noticed that in 2019, and I reported on it.
	But then when I saw people falling down the street, and when I saw the measures that they were doing, you know, China, locking people down.
	You've got to lock down until we get the vaccine.
	That was straight out of the playbook from DARPA. DARPA. The Chinese Communist Party implemented the DARPA plan, going back to dark winter.
	Think about that.
	Like I said, we are the epicenter.
	Of the dark, satanic plots here.
	Well, how did they get all this stuff through?
	Well, there's an interesting story on Zero Hedge, Paul Thacker, Disinformation Chronicle.
	Neither scholar nor journalist, how a New York Times influencer undermined groundbreaking study debunking mask mandates.
	She's a social media influencer from Turkey, originally.
	Zeynep Tufekci.
	She's from Istanbul, not Constantinople.
	That song. Once you get it in your head, you can't get it out.
	Social media influencer Zeynep Tufekci pressured the prestigious medical non-profit Cochrane to put out a statement attacking his own review that found that there was little evidence that masks stop respiratory viruses.
	Folks, there's no evidence.
	No evidence whatsoever.
	It has been debunked for decades.
	One of the people that Tufekci interviewed in the piece also told me that she twisted his words and gave me the emails to show it.
	This is Paul Thacker, Disinformation Chronicle.
	How the New York Times undermined mask evidence.
	In March 2023, the New York Times columnist, Zeynep Tufekci, Wrote an essay arguing that masks work while attacking a review on masks by Cochran.
	Now, the people who did this at Cochran, they're scientists.
	They did clinical trials.
	They do medical research.
	What is her expertise in?
	She got a degree in social sciences.
	She works for the New York Times.
	And because she took the lead at the New York Times in terms of pushing all of these superstitious measures, you know, if you don't knock on wood, you're going to get COVID. If you step on a crack, you're going to get COVID, and all in on, right?
	All this stuff. This person said, I'd noticed videos and news stories circulating on social media pointing out that several public health officials had done a 180 from the early months of the pandemic, first stating that masks don't work, Because they knew it before the code.
	But then, after they were told they had to do it, keep their job and their position, they pivoted to advocate for masks.
	He said, so I went down the list.
	I looked at the Cochran Mask Review, he says, that was published in February of 2023.
	And this was not the first time that the scientists there had examined scientific literature, To see if there was any evidence that masks worked to stop viruses.
	They had published prior updates finding the same thing in 2020, in 2011, in 2010, in 2009, in 2007.
	He says, so the whole thing started 17 years ago.
	Every time Cochran put out a review that looked at masks, nobody said anything because masking was It wasn't controversial.
	It wasn't political. Like I said, this was all about behavioral science.
	It was about political science, which is where she comes in.
	So the people who are doing this says, well, you know, people are getting sick with this, whatever the tests were that they did with it.
	But look, it's even older than 2007.
	As I've said many, many, many, many times, there was research done in 2002 that And the scientists there said masks don't make any difference.
	Some people are wearing them in operating theaters, shoes from Australia.
	Some people are wearing them in operating theaters, and some people aren't.
	And there's no difference in the results.
	And in 2002, when they first pushed out the SARS suspicion and the pandemic claims and everything, you had people all over Asia wearing masks.
	And it's a matter of public record that the New South Wales government threatened a $100,000 fine to anyone who sold a mask and made a claim that it was going to protect people from SARS or from any virus.
	And it was based on, a lot of it was based on her work.
	And it's one of the reasons why when you look at the boxes that have the masks, the boxes say, this doesn't do anything to stop anything.
	But, you know, this whole thing is for people who don't think, people who don't read.
	He says, so why was I reading a Mask Works essay in the New York Times?
	The only explanation is this woman, Zeynep Tufekci.
	Once the pandemic started, she made a name for herself, writing essays in places like Wired, Total garbage.
	And Scientific American, total garbage.
	Scientific American is going to publish somebody like this to tell you that masks work?
	Scientific American can't determine what a man and a woman are.
	I mean, that's how pathetic it is.
	It's been called out even by people like Dawkins.
	To effect, he has no training in medicine, no training in public health.
	But you know what? She got a Pulitzer Prize for pushing lies on the New York Times.
	Wikipedia says she was, oh, she didn't get the prize.
	She was a finalist. Pulitzer Prize finalist for her, quote, insightful, often prescient columns on the pandemic in American culture.
	She could predict this stuff before it happened.
	Imagine that. She was selling it to people before it happened.
	She was selling it to people, and it never happened.
	Which the committee said, quote, brought clarity to the shifting official guidance and compelled us towards greater compassion and informed response.
	Again, she is a sociologist.
	And she was able, they considered giving her a Pulitzer Prize because she was able to explain away People who did 180s, you know, shifting guidance.
	Well, here's why they're telling you now something completely different than what they've always known and what they've always said.
	She was a visiting assistant professor at the Department of Sociology and Anthropology at the University of Maryland.
	Somehow now a global expert, just like Bill Gates, who doesn't have any background at all in any of his stuff.
	He doesn't even write decent operating systems.
	He doesn't even write operating systems.
	He steals them from people.
	Like digital research.
	Doesn't even change the names of stuff.
	Becomes one of the richest men on earth.
	He doesn't write code.
	He steals stuff from other people.
	And he doesn't even maintain it well.
	So, in 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, Tufekki was critical of the mainstream media for failing to explain the importance of mask wearing.
	And is often cited as one of the first to take up the importance of mask-wearing and mainstream media.
	A sociologist.
	An anthropologist.
	Because that's what this is about.
	This is about groupthink.
	It's about behavioral psychology.
	It's about manipulating people through politics and all the rest of the stuff.
	It has nothing to do with medicine.
	All of this stuff is a bunch of nonsense.
	This led to becoming one of the academics...
	Who advised the WHO. We've got Tedros, who's the head of the WHO. What's his background in medicine?
	Zero. None. None whatsoever.
	All these people are demanding zero COVID. Guess what?
	We've got zero doctors.
	We've got zero science.
	We've got zero medical people there.
	It's all being run by Marxists and socialists and sociologists and all the rest from these places.
	She became an advisor to the WHO. On masking.
	Well, we'll leave it at that, and then I want to get into what is going on with the vaccines.
	There is an update on that.
	We're gonna take a quick break and we'll be right back
	Music playing
	you Making sense.
	comment again you're listening to the David night show well as I said yesterday we again Holly suggests that you look at the interview and that you get the books Mark Bailey, Samantha Bailey, The Final Pandemic, An Antidote to Medical Tyranny.
	Another book that appears to be interesting, I've not read yet.
	Dissolving Illusions.
	Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History by Dr.
	Suzanne Humphreys and Roman Bistrionic would be my best guess in terms of pronouncing his name.
	But it talks about 60 years of working on flu vaccines, unable to develop vaccines that reduce mortality rates.
	This is also from Exposé News.
	The book was published in 2013.
	Ten years later, after more experience in research, the authors released a 10th anniversary edition, to which the authors added more than 200 pages, more than 350 references.
	And again, these people are really documenting stuff well.
	The original book that was done by Mark Bailey, it's 400 pages, 1,400 references.
	This is shorter, but it still has over 400 references in it.
	Dissolving Illusions details facts and figures from long-overlooked medical journals, books, newspapers, and other sources.
	Using myth-shattering graphs, the book shows that vaccines, antibiotics, and other medical interventions are not responsible for the increases in lifespan and the decline in mortality from infectious diseases.
	If the medical profession could systematically misinterpret and ignore key historical information, the question must be asked...
	What else have they ignored?
	What else have they misinterpreted today?
	This is one of the reasons why the Baileys went upstream and started questioning, all right, so what is your evidence?
	You know, show us the isolated COVID thing.
	Well, we don't have it. Christine Massey and others, we don't have it.
	But this is the way we do it.
	Wait a minute, do you do that with all the viruses?
	Oh, then you don't follow the scientific method with any of the viruses, do you?
	Or any of the diagnoses here?
	But there's a lot, there's information that is extracted from this dissolving illusions in terms of various diseases attributed to viruses that is also in here.
	You see, when they tell you, well, our vaccines cured polio, our vaccines cured smallpox and so forth, did they?
	Did they get rid of measles?
	You know, even RFK Jr.
	even will push that out.
	He goes, okay, so they got rid of chickenpox and measles and so forth, but at what cost?
	Because now look at how certain things like autism have soared in our society and many other conditions because of injecting things directly into your bloodstream.
	As I think it was Samantha Bailey who said, In that interview, you know, when you inject something into somebody's body, this has been a long-term criticism of vaccines.
	It's very different.
	I think both of them were talking about if you ingest snake poison, it's not going to harm you.
	Your body will take care of it if you swallow it.
	But if you put it into your bloodstream, you're going to die.
	You know, that type of thing.
	You inject something directly into the bloodstream, your body doesn't have defenses against it.
	Other things that are in the atmosphere, as you breathe in, especially if you're not a mouth breather, you're going to have a lot of different things in your body that are going to filter out things, your skin and other stuff like that.
	Anyway, it wasn't long ago, this is from the book, it wasn't long ago when infections plagued the Western world.
	Smallpox, scarlet fever, measles, typhoid, diphtheria, whooping cough, other diseases, once considered to be a tragic part of life.
	Starting in the mid 1800s, there was a steady drop in the death from all these infectious diseases, decreasing by the mid 1900s to very low levels.
	The elimination of these diseases is one of the most amazing yet unsung public health revolutions in history.
	That journey from disease cesspool to our modern world is a tale of plagues and famine, crushing poverty and filth, lost cures, individual freedoms versus the might of the state, protests and arrests.
	and much more. Dissolving Illusions paints a historic portrait with quotes from the pages of long-overlooked medical journals, books, newspapers, and other sources to reveal a startling history that's been disregarded.
	And so, when you look at what they show, you see that these things have disappeared.
	These things have disappeared, and they came and say, we cured it, right?
	This is exactly the same playbook that Trump and Fauci and Biden and all the rest of them said.
	Oh, wow, yeah, see, we cured COVID with our vaccines.
	It's like, no, it wasn't a COVID to start with.
	But then they take credit for having cured it.
	Roman Bistrionic briefly discussed the U.S. data on measles.
	The collection of data on measles began in 1900.
	By the time a vaccine was rolled out for measles in 1963, the measles mortality rate had already decreased by 98.6%.
	The vaccine came in way after their mortality rate had already dropped.
	So I was a child when that stuff came out.
	I didn't get it.
	My mom was skeptical of this stuff.
	She wasn't going to rush out and get the latest vaccine that had come off the, you know, just rolled out.
	And as I said so many times when I played that clip from Trump, well, they got to get it.
	Got to get the shot. It's going around.
	They really got to get the shot.
	It's like, no, you didn't get the shot.
	You didn't die.
	And you're denying people their medical and religious exemption over this, saying they've got to get it?
	No. As a matter of fact, England began gathering data on measles in 1838.
	The mortality rate decreases gradually from an initial high and then significantly drops from the 1920s.
	From the mid-1900s, the mid-1900s, The measles mortality rate in England was virtually zero.
	As I've said so many times, all these people are talking about, oh, wow, this happened.
	Yeah, anything can happen.
	You know, you can die from freak accidents or anything.
	But I had never, ever heard of anybody getting measles and dying.
	And so they started vaccinating in 1968 in England, and by that point they had almost a 100% decline.
	It was 99.8%.
	Nearly 100%.
	Decline in mortality rate from measles.
	I had covered this many times before.
	Before they started all this COVID nonsense and everything, there had been several different supposedly outbreaks of measles.
	Nobody died. And when they looked at the people, there was one in New York that involved four people, and they had all been vaccinated.
	All of them had determined, except for one, had determined that they had been vaccinated twice, and that person wasn't sure.
	And yet, they all got it.
	You know, patient zero and the other three had all been vaccinated, and they still get what they identified as measles, whether it was or not.
	And they said, so, by their own standards, their vaccine is not effective.
	So, but everybody said, but we don't have measles.
	Yeah, measles disappeared mid-20th century.
	Mid-20th century.
	We haven't had it, and it disappeared before the vaccines, but they take the credit for it.
	They did the same thing with whooping cough as well.
	Displaying the graph for a whooping cough, Bistrionic demonstrated that it was the same.
	The mortality rate was already very low before any vaccine campaigns.
	In the U.S., a vaccine for a whooping cough was introduced in the late 1940s.
	By that point, there was already a 92% decrease in mortality.
	In England, they began vaccinating in 1957, when they already had almost 100% decline in mortality rate.
	It was 99.7.
	Not only did the vaccines not contribute to reduced mortality, But data from Sweden conclusively shows that the whooping cough vaccines are ineffective.
	In 1978, examinations showed that 84% of children who were verified to have the pertussis bacteria had previously received three doses of vaccine.
	But again, in the book, The Final Pandemic, they point out that the pertussis bacteria, this is a bacteria, it's not a virus, That when they try to, when they expose people to that particular bacteria, guess what? There's no difference in people who get whooping cough and people who don't get it.
	So that would tell you that's not the cause, right?
	There's no evidence, as a matter of fact, there's evidence that shows that it's not the cause of it.
	And yet, that's what they call it, whooping cough.
	They call it pertussis. Flu.
	Flu shows a similar pattern.
	The U.S. began vaccinating for flu in the late 1970s.
	By this time, there had already been a 90% decrease in the flu mortality rate.
	There's no real decrease in the death rate from the flu after 40 years of vaccination.
	There was something else that was happening.
	And many of these things in the book, they talk about beriberi.
	A very difficult disease.
	One doctor believed that it was due to malnutrition, but he was immediately dismissed.
	No, we know that it's a virus, and we know that it's going to be cured by a vaccine.
	Fortunately, they found that they could cure it with nutrition.
	It was a malnutrition disease, just like scurvy and vitamin C, something like that.
	So, perhaps that is why these things were disappearing.
	And yet, the virologists in the pharmaceutical industries took the credit for what had happened with all of that.
	Well, there's also the downside.
	We have a popular YouTuber who had a channel known as Pretty Pastel Please.
	Died suddenly of myocarditis at the age of 30.
	An influencer.
	Somebody who had pushed the vaccine.
	Somebody who had pushed the booster as well.
	The Australian travel and fashion content creator had 691,000 subscribers on YouTube, was only 30 years old when she died.
	And so the family, who is in Scotland, posted some details on Facebook about it.
	They said it was determined by the Tasmanian coroner that Alexandra's sudden death was due to a very rare debilitating and fatal infection of the heart.
	It used to be rare.
	It's not anymore. Myocarditis.
	Now, household word.
	A condition that affects approximately one in every 15 million people.
	Myocarditis, they said.
	She had been feeling faint, short of breath, shortly before she died.
	This was unbeknown to her due to her failing heart.
	The Post adds that she had suffered extreme reactions to the COVID mRNA vaccine boosters.
	The Trump shots. Well, I think in her particular case, we can pretty much say that she was killed by the Trump shot.
	Myocarditis. Often symptomless, can go undiagnosed, acting like a ticking time bomb in sufferers who are unaware they have it until it's too late.
	Especially the younger people who are used to being able to go out and do extremely stressful things and have extremely high heart rates.
	They don't know that they've got a heart problem.
	I mean, we used to not have to...
	Give electrocardiograms to school children to see if they can play sports.
	But thanks to Trump, that Benedict Donald and Biden and the rest, Fauci, and the rest of these globalists who have taken over our government, now that is a common practice.
	Many different jurisdictions began telling kids if they wanted to participate in sports, they were going to have to do an electrocardiogram.
	But hey, you know, it's just like autism.
	Just forget about it. It's just the thing now, right?
	Nobody wants to ask why it is so common when it was so rare.
	So, our carditis has skyrocketed around the Trump mRNA shots.
	And so, you have, as a matter of fact, before I get into this clip here, This is someone who was injured by the vaccine, and she also has a story about it.
	One time, I got COVID back in 2020, and I was like, oh, MG, this is the worst, but also I'm 21 years old, it should be relatively okay.
	I've never had any prior health issues, but then I started getting numbness in my hands and my forearms, along with really persistent headaches, which I never really had before.
	I attributed this to just being really stressed out because I just started the serving job.
	I was crying in the walk-ins.
	You guys know how it is.
	You know how it is. But then my tongue goes numb in my mouth, and I'm like, oh, oh, that's not supposed to happen.
	So I go to the ER. I pass out in the ER. Drama queen.
	I know, I know.
	They tell me, don't even worry about it.
	You're just anxious. Like, they were agreeing with me.
	I was like, I knew it.
	Like, so sorry to waste your time.
	I go back home. Three months later, I'm hanging out with someone.
	My entire left side of my face starts to droop.
	They're like, okay, time to go back to the hospital.
	I'm like, no, no, it's just anxiety.
	Don't you worry. But sadly, not anxiety.
	It was a stroke. And I had been having strokes, apparently, because my internal carotid arteries were closing up to be this teeny tiny small.
	So they had to open them back up with stents.
	And I was like, great. Okay, that's totally great.
	We're done. Haha, that was traumatic.
	Putting that in the past. I fly to New York City because what else am I supposed to do?
	And then whilst in New York City, I get numbness again, this time in my head, and they find a big old marshmallow of inflammation behind my eyeball.
	So I go back home because no way I'm I'm dealing with that by myself.
	Absolutely no way in New York City.
	Are you kidding? And when I wake up from the flight, no vision.
	No vision at all. So that's kind of unfortunate.
	And now it's 2023 and no one really knows why all of this happened exactly or how to get rid of it.
	I think we know how it happened, but we don't know how to get rid of it.
	And as upbeat as she is, For the people who are listening, the whole left side of her face is paralyzed.
	At first I thought she had Bell's palsy, but it's worse than that.
	It's a stroke. And she lost her vision in that eye as well.
	Just horrific. Beautiful young woman who has been disfigured and blinded by this stuff.
	And so, the Vermont Supreme Court Is going to sacrifice children to Big Pharma.
	That's the brownstone headline, and that's exactly what they're doing.
	I tell you, we talk about child sacrifice in ancient cultures.
	You know, it was very common to sacrifice their children to Moloch.
	And Canaan and the Israelites began doing the same thing.
	They'd heat it up and they'd put the baby on this heated up metal idol and burn it to death.
	They called it passing it through the fire.
	And as Israelites picked up the culture there, picked up the religion there, even some of the kings did that.
	Many of the kings did that.
	And so this is something that's been there for quite a while, but aren't we doing the same thing?
	You know, we're kind of sacrificing our children to Big Pharma.
	We're sacrificing them to Planned Parenthood.
	We're sacrificing them to our ambitions.
	We're sacrificing them if they survive being a baby.
	We sacrifice them to the LGBT political correctness.
	The tranny stuff.
	A controversial Vermont Supreme Court decision.
	Reached the rather astonishing conclusion that the government can vaccinate very young children with experimental products without parental consent or legal recourse.
	Where did they come up with this?
	You know, we've completely gotten rid of parental rights.
	And again, going back 15 years ago when I was working on stuff, 2009, I did some videos for the parentalrights.org.
	It was an offshoot of the Homeschool Legal Defense Association.
	And they pointed out that even though the UN had the UN Commission on the Rights of the Child, and the purpose of it was to destroy the family, the purpose of it was to remove the parents so the government could control the children.
	And we see what that looks like now.
	We see all the gaslighting, grooming, mutilation, vaccination, all the rest of the stuff.
	There was a mature minor situation.
	Law here in Tennessee.
	They had a big fight over it.
	And the head honcho of public health in Tennessee was fired.
	And Nicely and others got rid of this idea that there's a mature minor.
	They don't have a mature minor in most of the things.
	You can't drink.
	You can't drive. You can't smoke.
	You can't own a gun. You're not mature.
	Minors are not mature.
	That is an oxymoron.
	It is a lie. But this is what they're saying.
	The kids can do this, and they don't need to have parental consent.
	And we said when we were doing this 15 years ago, pushing and saying, look, we just need to have a very short amendment to the Constitution, parental rights amendment.
	It was only a couple lines long.
	Just establishing the parents as the authority and a family.
	And without that, even though the United States did not sign on to that UN abomination, you've got judges and courts everywhere making it de facto.
	And that's what's happening here with the Vermont State Supreme Court.
	The Vermont Supreme Court ruled that the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act The PREP Act, the PREP Act that the George W. Bush administration shepherded through in 2005,
	as I've said so many times, all of this stuff that's happening with the pandemics, all this stuff that is happening with the public health tyranny, all of it politically is 100% tied to 9-11.
	It's the other shoe to drop.
	They used 9-11, and it was two months before 9-11 that they started their first germ game and so forth.
	They put out the Public Health Emergency Powers Act to the states and had them pass them.
	And then, that was all in 2001.
	They had the first germ games.
	You had 9-11 attack. You had the legislation went out to the states.
	And then, in 2005, George W. Bush is still in, and he pushes the PREP Act, which...
	Like the Childhood Vaccine Act of 1986 that Reagan signed, the first thing that Fauci got through, the PrEP Act did it for any pandemic that would be declared, any kind of public health emergency.
	And of course, it essentially shut down all compensation.
	There's been about $4 billion worth of compensation for people that were injured by the childhood vaccine thing.
	There's been essentially nothing.
	And so the Vermont Supreme Court went to this abomination put in by George W. Bush, this 9-11 Patriot Act, PrEP Act stuff, and referred to that and said that this PrEP Act immunizes school officials.
	It doesn't immunize kids.
	You know, this is a vaccine. They don't work.
	Nobody gets any kind of immunity from any of this stuff.
	But they're going to immunize legally school officials from all state law claims as a matter of law, said the Vermont Supreme Court.
	So here in Vermont, the Supreme Court is legislating from the bench.
	The court did not address state or federal constitutional privacy protections or bodily autonomy.
	Merely swallowing these paramount individual rights in a perverse, all-entrusting servitude to federal preemption by an omnipotent administrative state.
	An administrative state government.
	So forget about all this, my body, my choice.
	Forget about all this stuff that minors are incapable of decision in pretty much every other area of their life.
	And forget about the fact that we have parents.
	All that stuff, wiped out by the Vermont Supreme Court.
	As we see people being injured and killed by this.
	Now, one last thing I want to say about vaccines.
	We had, and I didn't cover it, I don't cover every accident that's everywhere, but there was a horrific plane crash in Brazil.
	And there was...
	And I'll just show you the picture of it here.
	It was captured on video by a lot of different people from a lot of different angles.
	And you see it falling very, very rapidly.
	It goes down behind the trees and then there's a big explosion that happens there.
	This is in Brazil. Everybody on board died.
	There were eight doctors.
	There's the smoke from the fire.
	eight doctors That were on board on their way to an oncology conference a cancer conference and The It's very interesting because there were going to be 15 of them on board and it was just a small plane including crew 62 people on board
	The plane was at an altitude of 16,000 feet, and then went into, I don't know why, went into a death spiral, And fell to the ground from 16,000 feet, fell to the ground in 50 seconds.
	There were 15 doctors on their way to the...
	They were going to be about a quarter of the plane scheduled to take that flight, but seven of them had taken an earlier flight, or they would have gotten 15 of them.
	Of the people who were on board, they were whistleblowers.
	And... As they were eulogized by regional medical counsel, a person, Eduardo Baptistella, he said these were people who dedicated their lives to saving others.
	They were on their way to an oncology conference.
	And the according to a colleague, the whistleblowing doctors were set to present evidence to the world that the public was being misled about the nature of the mRNA COVID-19 injections.
	The doctors on the doomed flight had concluded that governments and regulators should urgently recall the mRNA vaccines before any more harm was done.
	Here's what one of the doctors had to say before he was killed in that plane crash.
	There is, however, one subset of T-cells that tumors are very happy to have.
	And that's the regulatory T-cells.
	So unlike the conventional T-cells, they're usually not designed to kill.
	They inhibit specific immune responses.
	And solid tumors are really enriching these cells.
	So what I found is that if I take a page from the CAR T-cell book and put a CAR targeting a tumor antigen on the T-reg, This CAR Treg actually kills the tumor cell.
	And compared with the naturally activated Treg, it makes a lot more inflammatory cytokines, including interferon gamma and TNF-alpha and others.
	And so what we're finding then is that something about the way the CAR signals in a Treg makes it become less suppressive, less inhibitory, and more pro-inflammatory and cytotoxic.
	So our hope is that because Tregs are this ability to infiltrate solid tumors, If you can put a CAR in them that targets solid tumors, they actually infiltrate and destroy the solid tumor.
	And in addition, it can be shown as inflammatory cytokines further reprogram, destabilize the suppressive immunomicroenvironment of the solid tumor.
	So the idea is to have this Trojan horse, this CAR-T reg, that will traffic the solid tumors and kill the cells when it's there and help recruit more inflammatory immune cells over there.
	And so right now we have a lot of data in vitro on what these CAR T-rays look like after activation, what their chemokine expression level is like, chemokine receptors as well.
	We're currently doing immunocompetent mouse models to test how powerful these CAR T-rays are in solid tumors.
	Come by my poster on Sunday.
	And so he put that out just before he went to the conference.
	He was saying that they had 90% remission in the labs.
	But, of course, that's been shut down.
	And so, as they were going to blow the whistle about the mRNA vaccines, and as Pfizer has just announced that they have a cancer vaccine.
	Yeah, this is supposed to cure cancer instead of causing it.
	It's like that joke from Better Call Saul.
	Actually, it's Breaking Bad. Saul Goodman says...
	You need a criminal lawyer.
	He goes, yeah, I got a criminal.
	No, no, I mean a criminal lawyer.
	You know, like me, I commit crimes, you know, that type of thing.
	Well, you know, you need a cancer vaccine.
	Well, we've already got one, and they were going to talk about it.
	And they were also going to talk about what they had that they said they had gotten 90% remission.
	So, I guess, you know, the question is, conspiracy theorists will look at this, and it's like, well...
	I don't have any problem believing that we've got to prove it, but certainly if these people, these mass murderers, have killed millions, tens of millions around the world, what's another eight doctors?
	You see, this might be another reason why members of Congress and the GOP, even though their constituents don't like these shots, certainly it is career suicide to oppose Trump.
	Who boasts about what he accomplished.
	But it also might be suicide to do it otherwise.
	That doctor's name was Leo Ferreira, I think is the way that that's pronounced.
	We'll take a quick break. We'll be right back and talk about Lala and Tim Waltz.
	I didn't get to this yesterday.
	The paintball thing.
	Just amazing what he had the National Guard doing.
	During these lockdowns.
	What an incredible tyrant he was.
	We'll be right back.
	♪♪
	The David Nutt Show you Well, there's been a lot of discussion.
	I talked about the Musk and Trump conversation, the two-hour conversation, preceded by a cyber attack, preceded by threats from the EU. And we talked a little bit about some of the things that they said.
	One of the things that they said that we didn't talk about yesterday, they both agreed that we don't have a president right now.
	Well, it depends.
	Who is the president?
	Who runs this country?
	See, I believe it's the same group of people, regardless of which puppet they put up front.
	So the reason that the country is continuing on, even though we've had Biden, who is clearly not there, and still, you know, he's still supposedly the president.
	What's he doing? They've essentially done the 25th Amendment on him in the Democrat Party, for all practical purposes.
	But he's still there.
	So who's running the country? If he's not capable of running for re-election, then who's running the country?
	Well, The good news is that they've busted the illusion that there is something, someone has anything to do with it.
	Now, the president, which is the same group of people that run both the Democrats and the Republicans, but Trump and Musk, speaking, said, well, we don't have a president right now.
	Trump said he can't lift a chair.
	The chair weighs about three ounces.
	No. It's meant for children and old people to lift, and he can't lift it.
	The whole thing is crazy. Talking about a beach chair.
	Musk chimed in, adding, it's clearly like we just don't have a president right now.
	To which Trump replied, you don't have a president.
	You know, the problem is America hasn't had a president for quite some time after we had the JFK coup and all the rest of these things.
	We've got handlers. We've got CIA handlers who are running the country.
	Babylon Bee said, She goes along with that theme.
	Meet Brindley, the White House intern who's running the country today.
	And they give Brindley's schedule.
	8.30 a.m., Brindley wakes up to a tall mocha frappuccino and a briefing with the Joint Chiefs of Staff regarding the conflict in Gaza.
	Oh, wow, look at all these big men in their uniforms, all those shiny medals on their coats.
	Then a half hour later, she enjoys some meditation and some Instagram time.
	An hour later, she has a meeting with Janet Yellen on the economy, and she's ready to go in her snazzy new chartreuse pantsuit and matching handbag.
	The girl has it going.
	Then 10.30, brunch and mimosas.
	1 p.m. Time for a gay meeting.
	Brindley meets with the Gay Straight Youth Drag Trans Alliance of South Carolina.
	We talked about boys, and we did each other's nails.
	There was this one nice bald man wearing red lipstick who kept trying to steal my stuff.
	But I guess that's normal. Didn't know Sam Britton was in the White House still.
	2 p.m. Brinley pretends to be Biden on social media.
	At 4 p.m.
	it's nap time. She settles in for the daily scheduled Biden night time.
	If you're in charge of America, you need to rest, she said.
	I've got a yummy glass of warm milk in bed and Jill tucked me in with a story and a funny little request to log her into the nuclear system.
	Then they say, Brindley rounds out her day with a cute little state dinner with the president of Japan and reports having a lot of fun signing half a dozen executive orders. I love sitting at the Resolute desk and signing all those documents with all those big words. I grant absolute immunity from all prosecution for my son Hunter Cute, right? Well, look, just put a different name in there.
	Instead of Brindley the intern, put in Donald Trump, or put in Joe Biden, or put in Lala Harris.
	It's the same thing.
	It's the same thing.
	That's what their date looks like.
	They're moved from place to place.
	They're told what their schedule is.
	They get handed a card that says, now you say this, and you sit here, and you do this.
	It's all prearranged for them.
	So who is running the country?
	Well, you know, we do have a president right now.
	It's a collective president.
	That's why I talk about the Biden collective.
	You know, it's like the Biden administration.
	There was a Trump collective as well.
	And, you know, these people, this is why you shouldn't put your hopes in Washington, because nothing's going to change.
	And these people don't have the strength of character or the intelligence to do anything about it.
	They are just going to go along with it, let people hand them the instructions, set up their schedule, and part of the schedule is going to be which executive orders they put out.
	This is why you have somebody like Trump, who is supposedly the anti-globalist and he just does everything that they want.
	But again, when you look at Biden or you look at Lala Harris, it makes it very easy for people to understand, because they can't even communicate or talk.
	Biden is joking. He says, well, I'm looking for a job.
	After being forced out of the race.
	But he says, the good news is, I've got contacts.
	Well, and this is not the Babylon Bee.
	I mean, he said this, I'm looking for a job, but I've got contacts.
	He's got contacts all over the world.
	You know, he can go get a job as a CEO of a company in Ukraine like Hunter did when he's got no experience in oil or anything.
	Got a Burisma, I'm sure they'd hire him, right?
	Maybe not. Maybe they would be hiring him for his contacts and he doesn't have those contacts or influence anymore.
	So he says, what do you think?
	When I retire, what do you think?
	I've got contacts, man, said the 81-year-old.
	This is not the Babylon Bee.
	This is Washington, D.C. And so there was a, you know, we now know that it was Pelosi who was really behind the putsch to get him out.
	And she even talked about it in a radio interview.
	I love him so much. I think he's been really a fantastic president of the United States.
	So I really wanted him to make a decision of a better campaign.
	Because they were not facing the fact of what was happening.
	Just a little background. I've never been that impressed with his political operation.
	Biden's operation. Yeah, I'm not.
	I mean, I just hadn't. They won the White House.
	Bravo! So my concern was this ain't happening, and we have to make a decision for this to happen, and the president has to make the decision for that to happen.
	Let me just say, I won't say necessarily I knew what I was doing at that time.
	I knew what I was doing in the whole thing, not just that show.
	No, it wasn't planned.
	Donald Trump would never set foot in the White House again.
	Oh, okay. Well, you know, of course it wasn't planned or anything like that.
	Yeah, she starts out, you know, I just love him.
	I love him so much. Like Mark Anthony's speech.
	And Brutus is an honorable man, you know, as he's lighting up all the reasons that he needs to be taken up.
	It just happened.
	I didn't plan it.
	Yeah, they all planned it.
	They all planned it.
	They planned it. That's why they had the dates they did for the For conventions and for the debates and all the rest of the stuff.
	It was a very meticulously planned thing.
	There's somebody who's running the country.
	Running the Democrat Party.
	We don't know who they are, but they sure are clever, aren't they?
	Democrats are caught hiring actors to pretend they support Lala Harris and other candidates at rallies.
	You see, the Republicans have lost the plot.
	Trump buys into this tweet.
	They're saying, look, it's an AI, you know, faked crowd and everything.
	Well, it's a fake crowd, all right, but it's real people, not AI. They're always off, aren't they?
	This is a story from Wine Press News.
	And they've got clips or screenshots of...
	An acting network where you can get jobs.
	It's called Casting Networks, a platform that allows producers, writers, media members to cast actors for certain roles.
	It also allows them to do astroturf crowds if you're a politician.
	Real People for Democrat Events is the title of this.
	It's non-union and it is paid.
	And so they're talking about...
	You know, the age range, anybody from 13 to 90.
	So, you know, Joe Biden could get a job there.
	He's got another nine years he could do.
	Hiring himself out as a Democrat crowd member.
	You're being cast as a real person who supports the Democrat Party.
	I'd have to get my head around that.
	I don't know. The shoot date was the August 12th, August 13th.
	You know, again, you know, Biden needs to check his calendar.
	I'm sure he's not doing anything in the White House.
	Maybe he could show up for one of those things.
	And it's not just the fake crowds.
	Lala Harris has got fake headlines.
	They're setting things up, editing news articles and setting up fake headlines with banners as if these are articles from press outlets.
	And a lot of mainstream media.
	And so they have a headline that they've modified.
	They have a little text excerpt that's right under the headline that they also wrote.
	But then they use the publication's name in all of this.
	Harris' campaign team has been silently editing news headlines and Google search results to make it seem like major news outlets are on her side.
	The altered headlines, all paired with a Paid For by Harris for President banner, were changed without the news outlets whose name they're using knowing about it, Axios reported on Tuesday.
	Nearly a dozen publishers were swept up in the fake headline campaign, including companies like The Guardian, Reuters, CBS News, Associated Prostitutes, and PBS. And you would say, well, why are they concerned about that?
	Well, the Guardian told Axios, while we understand why an organization might wish to align itself with the Guardian's brand, I can't understand it.
	What a piece of absolute trash the Guardian is.
	We need to ensure that it's being used appropriately and with our permission.
	We'll be reaching out to Google for more information about this practice.
	And so what they do is they concoct these fake articles, headlines, and And then they put them out there with Google to be served as ads.
	And it's got a little disclaimer there that they paid for by that campaign.
	But people just glance at it and they see that information and they think that it's real.
	They think that it is a friendly article to the Harris campaign.
	Which really kind of makes you wonder.
	I mean, aren't these publications I just listed, aren't they friendly enough?
	To the La La people, why do they have to fake it?
	I mean, they really fall over backwards trying to flatter them.
	The ads include links to real articles from the outlets.
	However, the headlines and the supporting text were altered.
	You know, maybe one of these organizations that I just listed there, maybe one of them would want to do an interview with her and ask her about that practice if they don't like it.
	You think? Nah, they don't need to do interviews with her, said the Associated Press.
	We love her. We don't need to do an interview with her.
	That would only hurt. And Peter Doocy says that Lala ditched the press pool on one of her recent trips to avoid having any questions asked of her.
	She's not only running scared from many one-on-one interviews, she's not only running scared from press conferences, but now she's running scared from the White House press pool as well.
	Fox News White House correspondent Peter Doocy.
	Said that Vice President Lala Harris ditched her press pool on a trip to avoid media coverage weeks after receiving the being selected by the Democrats to be the nominee.
	She has not talked to anybody, given any interviews or press conferences.
	He said, and something new tonight, he said, as the presumptive nominee, this is on Tuesday night, VP Harris is supposed to travel everywhere she goes with a protective press pool.
	A protective press pool.
	I... Maybe they're better than the Secret Service.
	I mean, it couldn't be worse, right?
	They're at least in the way of anybody trying to shoot her.
	Maybe they could hire some tall reporters so that they couldn't shoot her.
	She goes everywhere with a large group of meat shields.
	Yeah, exactly. Meat shields, yeah.
	A protected press pool.
	Well, in the case of the Democrats, the press pool does protect them.
	The only person that would be a threat to her would be Peter Doocy or somebody like that.
	They keep most people away that would criticize these people, keep them away from that.
	Anyway, he said, we just learned that she left her press pool behind to attend an event at Howard University yesterday, he said.
	And so this is happening at the same time that Trump is doing a two-hour long live stream conversation with Musk.
	But here's the thing. His long-form conversations and rallies aren't working.
	He's riffing and repeating and rambling on this stuff, and everybody is really kind of tired of it.
	They've seen it all before, and that's the big problem.
	Just overexposure.
	Been around for a long time, and I certainly don't support Nikki Haley.
	I think she's loathsome.
	But she is an astute political observer, just like Nancy Pelosi is.
	You know, very Machiavellian.
	They know how to do this stuff.
	She said, now, whoever gets rid of...
	People hate Biden.
	They're tired of Biden. They're tired of Trump.
	They can't stand either one of them.
	Whoever gets rid of... Whichever party gets rid of one of those two guys is going to win.
	It could be me or it could be Lala, she said.
	She said that back in February.
	Well, they're also going to cover for them in terms of the economy.
	And this is one of the things that astounds me.
	I look at both mainstream and alternative mainstream media.
	You know, they say that's the name that David Icke came up with.
	That'd be like Breitbart, WND, you know, Daily Caller's not as bad as them, but they'll do it as well.
	But typically the conservative media.
	And then, of course, you know, there's...
	Like the Blaze or Infowars or whatever.
	But when you look at the Trump media, the polarization and the absolute contradiction, it's amazing.
	The mainstream media and Drudge will put out all these articles about how, well, the economy is doing so good and they've conquered inflation and Trump doesn't even talk about the economy anymore.
	It's like, is that true? I don't need to have push polls.
	I don't need to have mainstream media.
	And I don't need to have Matt Drudge tell me that inflation is raging.
	We all know that.
	And it's amazing to me that anybody would buy that.
	But of course, if they want to buy into the Democrat cult, they will.
	Just like the MAGA people have bought into the idea that Trump is not a globalist, in spite of what he did in 2020 and even in 2019 with the The vaccine mandates for measles and the gun control by executive order and on and on.
	I could go on and on. David Stockman said he had set up the economy to fail long before any of the pandemic stuff.
	So people buy into whatever they want.
	But the reason I bring this up is because when you look at the mainstream media and drudge and you look at these so-called conservative media, Trump media, They're selling such radically different views, whether it's about the economy and inflation, or whether it's about who is ahead in the polls, who's ahead in the battleground states and everything.
	They are completely opposite stories that they have.
	It's just astounding. You have a situation where here's another one, not just the economy.
	Okay, so Drudge...
	And those people are saying, that issue's been lost now to the Republicans.
	The vast majority of people think the Democrats are doing great with the economy.
	The economy is wonderful.
	Inflation has been licked, and on and on.
	And yet, on Breitbart, you see Kamalanomics, the worst food inflation in nearly half a century.
	Now, I think that is the correct one.
	We know what grocery store prices are.
	A recent YouGov poll found that a staggering 77% of Americans consider inflation to be a very important issue.
	But they don't say who they're blaming it on.
	See, that's where these things contradict each other.
	And so you'll have a situation.
	Here's another example.
	Frank Luntz did an interview.
	And he talked about Trump.
	And he talked about the unions.
	And so because of comments that Trump and Musk were making about unions, the UAW leadership is suing, they said.
	We'll see what happens with it.
	But they got very upset about it.
	And Trump made some kind of offhand remark about, you know, you don't like it, you're fired, or something like that.
	And so Frank Luntz said...
	It truly is surprising.
	He said, we've never seen a Republican who is this strong with the unions.
	And so that statement is what the Trump media picked up and ran with.
	But then he continued on with the statement.
	And he said, so why is he destroying his relationship with him by the comments that he made?
	It's got a lot of them now hopping mad.
	He said, this is Trump's election to lose.
	And he's losing it. We're the comments that he's making.
	And so the left-stream media picks that up and runs with it.
	Now, in that particular case, they're the ones telling you the truth.
	And the Republican media is lying to you.
	In the case of inflation, the left-stream media is lying to you, and the right-stream media is telling you the truth.
	But there are two different worlds, two alternate universes.
	How are these things when we have...
	Such radically different stories being put out.
	And both of them are lying to us.
	Sometimes they'll tell you the truth, but not the whole truth, that type of thing.
	When both of them are lying to us, and both of them are presenting to us radically different universes, how are we going to reconcile this with an election?
	Well, you're not. You're going to have people who want to fight each other over it.
	That's the essence of what they're building up here is a civil war.
	And when we look at the civil war, let's take a look at what I think is one of the most egregious things I wanted to talk about this yesterday, but I ran out of time.
	And I'm almost out of time today.
	Tim Walls, because Tony is going to be joining us in just about five minutes.
	Tim Walls, when he was governor, told the National Guard to get all suited up in body armor and walk down the streets, yelling at people to get into their homes.
	And if they didn't, if they were even on their porch, their front porch, these guys are out in the street, light them up and shoot them with paint balls.
	Absolutely insane.
	Here's the video. Look at this.
	They just keep coming.
	Go on! Go inside!
	Go inside! Go inside!
	Get inside! Get in your house now!
	Let's go! Light him up!
	Go inside now!
	Get in the house! Get in, get in, get in, get in, get in, get in!
	Get in! Fascist tyrants.
	Are you okay?
	You got hit? I'm good. Wow.
	What? Okay.
	Yeah, how about that?
	Isn't that great? Yeah, vote for that guy.
	He's such a friendly uncle type of figure.
	Isn't that nice? He's such a nice guy.
	You want to talk about stolen valor?
	How about a National Guard that behaves like that?
	Have they stolen the valor?
	Have they stolen the title?
	And you've got Tim Walz out there saying, well, only the National Guard and the Army and the military should have these kinds of weapons.
	Really? Really? When you've got a character like that, when you've got people like him running the show, when you've got people like them, goons, going to follow the order, I was just following orders, right?
	The old excuse.
	I was just following orders.
	I don't have any moral responsibility for what I do.
	When somebody orders me to do it, I do it.
	I'm a robot. You want people like that, having a monopoly on arms?
	Power comes out of the barrel of a gun.
	That can sometimes even be a paintball game.
	But yeah, what are you going to do? Are you going to shoot back at those people?
	Even? You know, their helmets and they've got body armor and all the rest of this stuff.
	Thugs, bullies, criminals, terrorists.
	That's what they are. They're terrorists.
	This guy's stealing people's businesses, threatening them, shooting them in their home.
	For what? What law does he have?
	Well, there is no law. It's medical martial law.
	It's martial law.
	That's what it looks like, folks.
	That's martial law.
	That's Minnesota. You order people to do this and that, and if they don't do it, you shoot them.
	Labeling him a tyrant, a description that echoed other people's opinions about walls.
	And so this guy has not only stolen valor, he's a complete nutcase.
	In the video, you can see police officers, actually National Guard, I think, walking the streets, maybe it's police officers, in Minneapolis on May 30, 2020, screaming at residents and shooting paintballs at anybody who's sitting on their porch.
	But what did they do when they were Lighting up the town, right?
	You hear these guys saying, light them up, light them up.
	Well, it's very interesting to see that happening.
	And again, this is why you don't give a monopoly of firearms to these people.
	That's the thing that really bothers me too about the GOP, is they won't push back against that.
	They'll respond to it and say, well, he didn't take his gun to war.
	Did those people take their guns to war?
	Or did they show that a standing army, whether they are police officers, National Guard, or regular army, I don't care.
	If they're capable of acting like that, they should be dismissed.
	And he is certainly not somebody who is capable of handling the power and not becoming a tyrant.
	I talked about someone who had a...
	A woman who had a business and how he destroyed it.
	Shut down two bars. I've got another story here.
	I don't have time to do it because Tony's ready to join us.
	But another person, a grandmother, jailed by Tim Walz.
	Jailed with a fine because she violated his orders to lock down, which didn't do anything to help anybody.
	There was no pandemic, and even if there had been a pandemic, even if there was some kind of contagion going around, it would not have helped anybody.
	It's absolutely amazing to see these types of people.
	This is why he was selected, of course, because they have absolutely no interest in following the Constitution.
	We're going to take a quick break, and we'll have Tony Aardman of Wise Wolf Gold joining We'll be right back.
	So, uh, I'm going to go ahead and start the video.
	Okay.
	¶.
	you
	It's your move.
	And now, The David Knight Show.
	Joining us now is Tony Arterbin.
	He has Wise Wolf Gold.
	And Tony and I go back a long way, and Tony has set up DavidKnight.gold that will take you to Wise Wolf.
	A great place to get yourself some wealth protection.
	As I was talking about yesterday, people always talk about the price of gold.
	But there was an article, and Tony has talked about this in the past as well, Where this one individual went back and looked at the price of a whole bunch of different things.
	From how much does a ski lift ticket cost to how much a beer cost at the Oktoberfest in Munich.
	Price these things in gold.
	Then he says, this is the key.
	You look at the price in gold of something instead of the price of gold compared to a currency because it's all over the place with various currencies.
	But again, if you want to protect your wealth, And if you want to protect your privacy, you can get gold and silver at WiseWolfGold.
	You can go to davidknight.gold.
	I'll take you there. And also, Tony has the Wolfpack, which allows you to gradually accumulate.
	You pick the amount that you want to set aside each month, and you can get a group discount by being part of Wolfpack.
	Thank you for joining us, Tony.
	It's always good to have you on.
	It's good to see you, David.
	Thanks for having me. I'm broadcasting from Los Angeles today.
	I'm actually on the road. Really?
	I was out recording. Yeah, I was supposed to be recording a podcast, so I'm out here on business.
	And I didn't want to miss the show, though.
	And you're absolutely right. Gold, over time, just keeps its value.
	And a lot of people mistake that.
	And there is times when it's a great investment, if you want to call it that.
	But really what it is is a store of value.
	Gold is actually money. And if you look at, there's a meme that's really popular right now that says it has 10-ounce gold bars.
	It's like, 10 of these would buy a standard family home in 1920.
	And it's like, fast forward 100 years, 10 of these will buy a standard home in 2024.
	And I think that just makes people think, like, well, what's What's the deal here?
	And we, the people, are left holding the bag, and that's why it's something that I talk about all the time, understanding the difference between currency and money, and that money has intrinsic value and stores of value.
	Yeah, and yesterday I talked about how there was an excellent article from, I think it was Mises Institute, Talking about the fact that the Federal Reserve doesn't own any gold.
	They've got some gold certificates, right?
	But they don't get it. And they said, why would they?
	Because, you know, as you've said so many times, they're essentially at war with gold.
	They're trying to increase the value of the thing that they control.
	And so they're unique amongst all of the central banks because they're at war with gold, but the other central banks don't want the risk of exposure to the dollar as a fiat currency.
	So that's why they're accumulating it, even to the extent that the People's Bank of China, their central bank, had lied and said they stopped buying gold in May.
	And then they said, but we've got the export...
	Tickets that they have to, when they export it from London, they've got to file these reports.
	And so we've got the receipts here for how they were buying significant amounts.
	Bought 53 tons just from that one source in May.
	So it goes on, and there's a lot of deception and lies and concealment with all this stuff.
	But it's pretty clear the central banks understand what's going on.
	They're worried about their exposure to fiat currency.
	I think we ought to be worried about our exposure to the dollar as well.
	Yeah, you always look to see what the elites are doing.
	I don't like that term. I need to stop using the term elites.
	Look to see what the parasite bankster class is doing, and then you can see where the trend is going with their own experience.
	They don't believe in their own money. They don't hoard their own cash or own systems.
	That article from the Mises Institute did mention something Completely ironic, though, you know, the Federal Reserve and, of course, the United States itself was not buying gold.
	It's not a net buyer anymore.
	It hasn't been for decades, since the 1950s.
	It's really before the end of World War II. And the reason that they can't is because they are at war with gold, especially since Richard Nixon took us off the gold standard in 1971.
	The Federal Reserve is at war with Or with gold, because if it buys gold, it increases the value of gold by eating up the supply.
	So when the gold price goes up, you see that the dollar is weakened.
	So they're in quite a predicament.
	Imagine the irony. And the article also mentioned that the Federal Reserve buys debt.
	It buys the U.S. Treasuries.
	And so if you look at the other central banks around the world, they are buying gold.
	And the reason they are is they don't believe in their own systems.
	And they certainly see that they...
	Well, to quote Jamie Demon, an economic superstorm is coming, and I think that has to do with the amount of debt worldwide and the loss of purchasing power and currencies and the increase in the currency supply and the money supply.
	There was an article out today that global debt has surpassed $350 trillion.
	Which is basically, almost all, if you look at some estimates, say that there's like 400, 450 trillion in actual assets and value across the world.
	Some estimates are like a total of a quadrillion.
	I don't know. But I think a lot of that is fake.
	And so if you look at, I think we're just awash in debt.
	There's just no way that if you look at all these, and this is something that Michael Saylor put up on the board when he's doing his presentation at the Bitcoin Conference in Nashville, showing all of the different categories of where wealth is held and around the world, whether it's stocks or bonds or sovereign wealth funds or treasuries.
	And it's hundreds of trillions.
	I'm really wondering, and of course, gold and Bitcoin were this tiny little corner up in the top left-hand side of the chart, and so I'm starting to think that so much of it, even the markets are fake, and we really are headed for a chaotic revaluation, David. Oh, yeah. Yeah, and 10% of that is just the U.S. government alone, and then, of course, you've got the U.S. businesses and consumers and so forth.
	It is... I guess maybe, you know, they can talk to Larry Fink and maybe he can save us all with some derivatives and we can keep kicking the can down the road indefinitely, but I don't think that's going to happen.
	As people, you mentioned Bitcoin, and of course you're talking about setting up Bitcoin ATM. I thought this was interesting, the fact that we talk about power usage, and this came from Cointelegraph.
	They said AI may already be using more power than Bitcoin.
	And it is actually a threat to Bitcoin money because they are going to be bidding for power and because they can make more money per kilowatt that they use, AI can, with the services that it charges for.
	They can make more money than the Bitcoin people can make using electricity for mining.
	It's a bigger issue for all of us, really, because when you look at how incredibly massive Artificial intelligence is, in terms of its being power-hungry, is going to make electricity unaffordable for us.
	I'm just talking about how they got a record auction in the area around Maryland because, again, they want to put AI close to the people who are going to be using it.
	That's our government for the most part.
	And so a big auction there.
	And even though they had incredible, had a 700% increase in price, they still didn't have enough electricity to go around.
	And so what does that say?
	Not just for Bitcoin mining, but what does it say for us?
	But it truly is amazing to see this considering the fact...
	That it was just March of 2022 that the Biden administration was attacking Bitcoin and all crypto, saying that the mining process was using too much electricity.
	They just look the other way, don't they, when it comes to something that's going to be used for propaganda, surveillance, and biometric identification.
	They don't care what it costs.
	Well, that's what I've always said.
	I always thought that was a ruse.
	They attack Bitcoin for energy usage or cryptocurrency in general for energy usage, but they wouldn't attack something else like AI. And let's be rational about the whole argument.
	You look at the amount of energy usage that just regular banks use.
	Just add up all the branch locations, the offices, and it dwarfs Bitcoin by leaps and bounds.
	So it really is just a false metric to use, like how much energy is used on Bitcoin or cryptocurrency.
	And you're right.
	I mean, something like AI, which is going to be approved by the establishment or the ruling class, will never, ever be talked about.
	So this is all fake.
	I mean, it's a...
	The power usage, I think, if you add up, isn't it like, and I've read this before and I could be wrong, I think all of the Bitcoin mining all over the world equals somewhere around the usage of the country of Poland, I think, like everything, if you add all of it up, and maybe not even that, but if you add up all the actual banks and businesses associated with the banking industry, it's like, Ten times that.
	So I don't think that's an actual valid argument on the energy usage.
	Yeah, especially when you look at artificial intelligence.
	They were saying that it reached a rough parity last year, they believe.
	They said it's a little bit hard to measure the AI stuff because it's also used for other things.
	But they said if you calculate out, as MIT did, How much energy it uses for AI to generate an image is as much as fully charging your smartphone.
	So that's pretty... Each one of the images that it generates is like charging a smartphone.
	It's very energy intensive.
	And they said in terms of terawatt hours that they expect in...
	2024, it's going to use 169 terawatt hours, whereas Bitcoin mining is using 125.
	So it's already significantly more.
	They think by 2027, it'll be 50% more.
	It'll be 240 terawatt hours versus 160 terawatt hours for mining.
	So it is amazing.
	And, you know, when I look at it, it's not just about Bitcoin.
	And it's viability because they said there's this competition between them.
	They're going to be able to pay more for it.
	But I thought, well, what about us?
	What's it going to take to turn on the lights and have air conditioning if the Bitcoin miners can't make a profit off of this stuff that is equivalent to the AI? If the AI has got so much power requirement...
	And it's making so much money that it really doesn't care, and these people have deep pockets.
	They're going to do it, whatever.
	They're tied with the government.
	They're going to do it with whatever. What does that say for the power rates for the rest of us and what that's going to do to inflation?
	I mean, it's just incredible to look at the near-term effects of all this stuff, isn't it?
	Well, absolutely. And they're doing nothing to support the grid.
	As Thomas Massey pointed out, interviewing Pete Buttigieg, he says adding an electric car to a house is like 25 refrigerators, as you covered before.
	And so every house is going to add 20.
	Where's the grid that you're building to support that?
	The answer is they're not.
	They're not building a grid to support any of this.
	I'm in California right now.
	That's right. The AI people are going to build their own grid.
	And you're talking about being 25 refrigerators and that type of thing to charge your car.
	They're saying that the AI uses 17 to 25 times more electricity than the Bitcoin miners do.
	And they were trying to make that a selling point to ban crypto less than, well, two years ago.
	It's amazing. It's about the time that Elon Musk came out and said he was dumping his Bitcoin holdings and not going to use Bitcoin because of the energy usage.
	That was swirling around Bitcoin around that time.
	Now that narrative is, well it's reshifted and I think they'll bring it back up and try to hide the fact that AI is now draining the grid more than crypto.
	Yeah, yeah. But the reason that Cointelegraph was using it was because they said, well, it's a real threat.
	Nobody talks about how are we going to live.
	You'll own nothing, and by the way, you'll have no electricity either.
	That's gonna be the future there because they're gonna be pouring it all into AI and these other things you're not gonna be able to afford it they may go in and set up their own personal private nuclear power plants, but you're not gonna be able to tap into that most likely they said they don't even have
	They're always 100% uptime, whereas with Bitcoin, they said the one advantage that Bitcoin has on the grid is that they can essentially slow it down or turn it off depending on the grid, and so they can take advantage of lower power rates and discounts if they're using it at off-peak hours.
	But with AI, it's always on peak.
	It's always doing this stuff.
	So that's one of the reasons why they're looking at these other things.
	But yeah, when we look at the future...
	That is the key thing.
	The reason I bring this up is because it is both inflation that is going to be happening to us, and it is also the move towards central bank digital currencies and surveillance and all the rest of the stuff, because I think that really is the killer app of AI. I think that's why it was designed by the government.
	Let me ask you this, because a lot of people, and I got a very lengthy article that I haven't gone through all of it yet from a listener, talking about, yet again, we've heard this in the past, that the government is behind,
	you know, we have this Satoshi guy, supposedly we don't know who he is, but they said, well, we think it's the government that did that, and we think that they're using this And so, you know, a lot of people have brought this up for a very long time.
	I think Catherine Austin Fitz talked about it six years ago.
	But what's your take on that?
	There was an article out recently, someone's done a FOIA request to both the FBI and the CIA to find out what they know about Satoshi Nakamoto.
	Who was it? Was it a group of people?
	Was it an individual? Look, I've been studying this for years, going back to 2016 when I wanted to get into the Bitcoin space, and I've read books on it, I've looked at it, I've read articles, I've researched over time.
	I do not know.
	However, those who believe that it's some kind of ruse created by the Central Intelligence Agency to get people sucked into a new CBDC grid, I think that if that was the case, then they failed miserably.
	Because what it has done is it's taken a younger generation of people and turned them on to arguments against fiat currency and central planning and central banking.
	It's created an entire subculture of younger people that no longer are going to look at the world the way that the educational system would like them to look at the world, like the Rockefeller educational system of obedient workers.
	I think there's a lot of this shift in consciousness from this last generation of looking at bitcoins.
	One of the reasons that, and I've talked about this before, the Pentagon ran a war simulation three years ago or four years ago in the scenario of a Gen Z Bitcoin revolt, where Gen Z stops using the dollar on purpose as a protest because of inflation or loss of purchasing power or not being, having the perception of not being able to afford the same things as their parents and grandparents did.
	And again, that was a war game.
	So they know that there's something with that.
	If you look at the consequences of introducing it, then it certainly blew up in their face.
	I don't know. Nobody knows the answer.
	I'm certainly not an evangelist for Bitcoin per se, but what I do think that is the idea of it is what's the most powerful thing.
	It's like Victor Hugo said, the one thing more powerful than all the armies on the earth is an idea whose time has come.
	Well, perhaps Bitcoin is just an idea whose time has come.
	And the reason that, first and foremost, you know, I'm a precious metals guy.
	I like gold. I want to hold it in my hand.
	Gold and silver do something that Bitcoin can never do.
	And that's existing in the third dimension.
	They exist in the material world.
	Now, you can argue Robert Kiyosaki calls gold and silver God's money because it's put here by God.
	It's going to be here long after we're gone.
	It's going to survive that, and it's an element in the Earth, and it's finite.
	You can only get so much gold or silver, but we don't know how much gold and silver there actually is geologically.
	In outer space, supposedly, there's asteroids with gold.
	So we don't know. It's more than what we've already mined.
	Yeah. But Bitcoin's finite.
	So it's a really interesting system, and I think it teaches people, okay, well, this is what money should look like.
	It should be scarce, right?
	It should be divisible. It should be easily transferable.
	And again, it should hold a store of value.
	You shouldn't be able to take, like we do now with modern governments, and they just inflate their way out of an issue, which...
	It destroys the middle class.
	It destroys people on fixed income.
	It destroys those who can't get upward mobility fast enough to outpace inflation.
	We've seen that on our own. That's where our society is coming apart, you know, with policies such as that and then, of course, free trade and other things.
	But I really do believe that Bitcoin is a force...
	For good at this point.
	And the jury's still out.
	Again, we don't know who the founder is.
	And I always add on my show whenever I talk about this, we're an alternative media.
	We look at the world a little bit differently, a lot differently than the normal person or somebody who consumes mass media.
	But I do think we can get caught up in the fact that We don't have any wins.
	Sometimes we have a win. Sometimes this could be an anonymous cryptographer.
	It could have been somebody whose passion this was.
	That would be the only way that Bitcoin could exist the way it is, is the way it was adopted, the way it was put into motion.
	That's my opinion, David. You look at...
	The decentralization of it, that it's not owned by a company, it's not owned by a country.
	Every other crypto tracks back to someone.
	That's just the way it is.
	It tracks back to a group of investors.
	It tracks back to a person.
	Bitcoin does not. And I think that's the only way you could truly have something that's revolutionary.
	And whoever, whatever Satoshi Nakamoto was, understood that.
	I kind of look at it like I look at the internet.
	The internet was an idea from a DARPA psychologist in the 1960s.
	As I said many times as it started to get practical, they started all these venture capital firms, went public with it, social media firms and things like that.
	That was a way that they started to get ownership of this thing that But there's this constant back and forth that is happening.
	So we went through a period of extreme free speech and all the rest of the stuff, and it looked like their plans had backfired on them.
	But then they start to pull it in using these same companies that they had backed and put into operation to compete against each other.
	But now there's a pushback against that.
	I talked yesterday, there was an extensive article on Reason talking about a new platform called Noster.
	And Noster, if people want to use that for free speech, they've got complete control over it.
	Anonymity at the moment, apparently.
	But also, you can exchange and pay people using Bitcoin.
	So it kind of ties into that Bitcoin thing.
	And who knows? Maybe Noster was something.
	It had some of the same developers from Bitcoin.
	But... We're good to go.
	It's going to be a struggle from the people versus the government and DARPA as to who's going to be able to use this to their advantage.
	And that's going to constantly ebb and flow in different directions.
	I think the same thing may be the case with Bitcoin.
	If they try to use it, there's been a lot of talk about Ethereum being the backbone of a CBDC and how they could rapidly bring that in, I think, more easily than they could Bitcoin.
	So I kind of think that they would do it with Ethereum.
	But there's going to be this constant back and forth with Bitcoin and I think also certainly with the Internet.
	Maybe Noster is going to be something people can use.
	But if it's not, there'll be something else that'll be out there that people will try to use their system.
	Well, that's exactly right.
	And the whole point of all of this is that The system set up by governments, especially this government and our central bank, is going to be ultimately a failed experiment.
	We can see it happening in real time, especially accelerated over the last five years.
	You have a currency system that is dying.
	You have a worldwide reserve currency system that's dying.
	The petrodollar is going away.
	So we're losing purchasing power in our dollar while we're expanding the liabilities of the United States, putting us on a war footing, continuing to massive foreign aid.
	We're importing people from all over the world, crushing the safety net and the welfare system and all that.
	So the welfare warfare state continues to explode.
	Spending and liabilities go up.
	So we print and print and print more money or more currency, and that devalues it.
	So that, ultimately, I think people are starting to catch on.
	This isn't, you know... This isn't, you know, generations past, and we had the inflation in the 1970s, the inflation shock and all that, but we're not going to be able to bail ourselves out of this one.
	It's, you know, again, the United States was a trillion dollars in debt in 1980.
	It's $35 trillion today.
	As you pointed out earlier, it's about 10% of the global debt is here in the U.S., and that debt is only accelerating.
	It takes a trillion dollars a year just to serve as the interest on the We go a trillion dollars in debt every 90 to 100 days.
	These are facts and figures.
	So there's cropped up because of things like, and really, Bitcoin was a response to the 2008-2009 bank bailout, too big to fail, too big to jail era, you know, where they had the mortgage crisis and the subprime meltdown and all that, the Great Recession, if you want to call it that.
	That was a response to that.
	And you had Occupy Wall Street and all those other things.
	That was another response.
	But this is just throughout the years since then, you've just seen an outcropping of more and more people getting into the space, whether it's crypto or whether it's even precious metals.
	I think there's a lot of entrepreneurs that are understanding this.
	And I've watched my business change, David.
	It's changed rapidly over the last five years.
	It is really a complete transformation.
	I've seen more and more people starting to understand what this is all about.
	I think it's positive that there's a change in thinking going on.
	I really do. I think there's a lot of positive out of that because if you're paying attention now and you're starting to see how this all works, you're catching some things early and you can do something about it.
	You don't want to be left holding the bag.
	When the dollar really slips into, you know, I don't want to use the term hyperinflation.
	I'm not sure that we'll see that like that, but we'll definitely see a devaluation.
	It'll be more rapid than what we've experienced over the last 10 or 20 years.
	Oh, I agree. I agree.
	There was an interesting report from Credit News about an August 8th press conference that Trump had at Mar-a-Lago Where he said he thought that the president ought to be able to have a say in the interest rates that are done by the Federal Reserve.
	He ought to be in on all of that.
	And I thought, that is just, I laughed out loud when I saw it.
	because I thought how typical that we would say, look at a system that is as corrupt as the Federal Reserve, as unconstitutional and illegal as the Federal Reserve really is.
	And it's not illegal, I mean, they pass the Federal Reserve Act, but it is unconstitutional.
	But to look at that and to say, I want a seat at the table, rather than saying, I want to reform this.
	I mean, do we really?
	He makes the case. He says, well, I'm a very successful businessman, and I probably know more than these people in the Federal Reserve, so I should be having a say-so as to the interest rates and how we manipulate things like that after he's manipulated us with trillion dollars.
	Trillions of dollars worth of debt and the lockdowns and all the rest of the stuff.
	He wants to take control of the Federal Reserve.
	And this is the way that it is and why I want to get completely out of the system.
	You know, I just want to...
	That's why I like the gold and silver.
	It's outside of the system and they...
	Of course, they can break in and steal stuff or steal from wherever you got it.
	If you got it at another institution or something, they can steal it there.
	They can steal it anywhere. But it's less of a profile than it is if it's a crypto thing.
	And certainly when you've got your money in a dollar, they're constantly stealing it all the time by their devaluation, aren't they?
	It's amazing. Absolutely.
	And, you know, the Federal Reserve is to economics what the Warren Commission was to justice, okay?
	Their charter was to ensure that the money supply was stable, that prices were stable.
	That's the ruse.
	That's what they came in at. You know, they engineered the crash in 1907.
	By 1910, November 22nd, they were in Jekyll Island planning the Federal Reserve.
	And as you pointed out, many times going into Christmas, Christmas Eve 1913, they just passed that Federal Reserve back.
	It is unconstitutional.
	Unfortunately, no one's ever successfully challenged that.
	I mean, they never overwrote the Constitution to put in the Federal Reserve.
	They just put it through. Because if you look at the Constitution, the United States Congress is...
	It can only coin money, right?
	Only Congress can coin money, and it has to be gold and silver species.
	So that's something that isn't done anymore.
	Going back to that article you mentioned from the Mises Institute, there is some interesting back and forth between the U.S. Treasury and the Federal Reserve in the 1934 Gold Act, where the Fed had to hand over their gold, and then the Treasury issued certificates.
	I don't know if that will be something that comes to fruition in the future, because I think if you looked at, you know, Janet Yellen was head of the Fed, now she's head of the Treasury.
	I think we'll see more and more of this.
	I don't know that they're two separate entities, really, because I think that if you read the creature from Jekyll Island, you see this is an international banking consortium and cartel that really runs its company.
	It's not that the U.S. government wags the Federal Reserve dog, right?
	It's the other way around.
	But I'm interested to see, because a lot of my research showed that the, and you can read this in the book The Killing of Uncle Sam, which is some Rodney Brown put out.
	It's really some great research on what happened to the gold after 1933 when Franklin Roosevelt did that executive order for you to turn it in.
	A lot of it went to Basel, Switzerland, at the Bank of International Settlements, if not a great majority of it.
	That's an interesting article that came out And, you know, I think moving forward, I think there'll be, just like you mentioned, David, I think there'll be less and less of a separation of Fed and State.
	Yeah. That's right. That's what we should have is a separation of Fed and State.
	Cut them off.
	And we've done it in the past.
	You know, last week I talked about an article that said we've ended the federal bank several times.
	It's an American tradition. Let's do it again.
	But, you know, people, it used to be people look at you funny if you talked about ending the Fed, ending the income tax and things like that, but, you know, now that is there.
	So it's at least a possibility in people's minds, if not in the politicians' minds.
	Tell us what's coming up.
	Now, you're in L.A. Are you going to have your broadcast immediately following this one today, or what's up with that?
	Unfortunately, no. I think I have just enough bandwidth here to get through.
	I want to make sure I didn't miss your show, but I probably will run a best of today just for scheduling and bandwidth.
	I'm running off my cell phone right now because the hotel Wi-Fi wasn't that great.
	Definitely a show next week, and we'll be on a regular schedule after that.
	But I never want to miss our interviews.
	Well, I appreciate that, and it's always great to have you on.
	Again, Tony Arterman, Wise Wolf Gold.
	You can get to Tony with davidknight.gold to help you get there, get gold small or large quantities, and you can also start to accumulate it on a regular basis.
	That is something that people...
	In America, just don't think about saving anymore.
	But that is a great thing to do.
	And if you're going to save, don't save in dollars.
	Save in something that's going to retain its value, like gold and silver.
	Thank you so much, Tony. It's always great talking to you.
	Before I leave, David, if it's okay, there was something I forgot to mention.
	The mainstream put out an article I thought was very useful.
	There's a scam happening right now where people are getting, especially seniors, getting calls from someone posing as a treasury agent saying, you need to put your savings into gold.
	It's for safekeeping. And they have that same people go and buy the gold, and then they have a treasury agent come pick it up.
	That's not a treasury agent.
	These are gold scammers.
	I'm going to talk to my staff.
	I talked to one of my friends in Rockwall, Texas, who's a gold dealer friend of mine.
	He had the same thing. He actually was able to stop one of them.
	It reminded me again today, I was doing some research for a talk, and that came out on Fox News.
	That's happening all over the country.
	The U.S. government's never going to tell you to buy gold, number one.
	That's a red flag.
	They never want you to own gold.
	They don't want you buying it.
	They would want you to put your savings in fiat currency.
	So that's a red flag right there.
	But yeah, if you have any questions or something happened like that, just give me a call at Wise Wolf and I'm happy to put you in the room.
	They're not a treasury agent.
	They're a treasure agent.
	They're a treasure hunter trying to pick on people.
	It really is amazing.
	But it also does tell us...
	That there's so much more public awareness of gold right now, and that's for a reason.
	So thank you so much, Tony.
	Always great talking to you again.
	DavidKnight.Gold will take you to Tony at Wise Wolf.
	Thank you for joining us, Tony.
	Have a good day, and hope things go well for you there in L.A. We're going to take a quick break, and we'll be right back with Eric Peterson.
	Stay with us. We'll be right back.
	♪♪
	So, I'm going to go ahead and get started. So, I'm going to go ahead and get started.
	So, I'm going to go ahead and get started.
	Defending the American Dream.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	And welcome back. And joining us now is Eric Peters.
	I always love talking to Eric.
	We share a love of cars and a love of liberty.
	And that covers a wide range of topics.
	EricPeters.com is where you'll find a lot of very interesting articles about cars.
	And I'm very interested in a couple of things that you've got here.
	The anodyne, exotic, I want to get into that.
	But before I do, what is breaking on your mind?
	Because I picked up some of the articles.
	It's been, I guess, three or four weeks since we've talked.
	And so there's a wealth of things that have happened in the automotive industry.
	But... What is at the forefront of your mind right now?
	Thanks for joining us. I've been ruminating lately a lot about making do with, again, the things that we used to make do with.
	If you're a Gen X person or older, you'll remember a time when it was feasible for even a high school kid to buy a car using their own money rather than having their parents buy a car for them.
	Because there was a time when you could still buy basic new cars, which made them affordable.
	You could buy a car with or without things like air conditioning, power windows, locks, automatic transmissions, and I'm by no means disparaging any of that.
	Those things are all very nice, particularly once you get a little older and you like the idea of having an air conditioning system that you can turn on to keep you cool.
	But hey, when you're 17 or 18, it's kind of nice to be able to go out and buy a $700 Loppy that lets you get from A to B.
	And it's one of the reasons why, you know, when we were that age, we became functional adults a lot sooner than the kids today because cars, they've been priced out of cars largely.
	And part of the reason for that...
	It's what I like to call this riptide effect of being comfortable with extravagant debt.
	You know, people now think nothing of signing up for a $50,000 or $60,000 indenture for a car for the next six years.
	You're going to be paying $500, $600 a month for it because they all have these things that are now standard that used to be considered luxurious.
	There used to be a thing we'll remember, you and I can remember, called an economy car.
	Remember economy cars?
	Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. It was a car.
	It was a Pinto. You want to talk about an economy car.
	It had rubber mats. It didn't have air conditioning.
	It didn't have power windows.
	It was pretty barebone.
	I tell you what, we were living in Florida.
	If you don't have air conditioning in Florida, you're thinking about it all the time.
	Sure. Sure. Now, to be clear, I am in no way disparaging the comforts and amenities that new cars have.
	My point is that now that they all have that, they become extravagantly expensive, and there's no downward price pressure.
	Back in the day when you had the option to pick, say, a luxury car or luxury features, which was what they were considered once, like air conditioning and power windows and automatic transmission, it kept prices in check because you always had that option.
	If you wanted to buy the higher-end, more expensive car, you could.
	But, you know, on the other side of the lot, there was the more inexpensive car.
	I remember just after we got out of college, one of my best friends, he just lives down the road from me, he wanted to start a roofing business.
	And so he bought a brand new 89 Ford F-150 pickup.
	Now, it just had the straight six engine, manual transmission, manual four-wheel drive, and that was it.
	No air conditioning, no power windows, nothing.
	And he could afford to do that, you know, as a kid, just out of college to start his business.
	Today, the least expensive Aft Sun truck that you can buy is pushing $40,000.
	I mean, how many cases out of college can afford something like that?
	Yeah, yeah, that's right.
	Yeah, it used to be, you know, again, it was a real unusual thing to have power windows.
	My dad would get Cadillacs.
	He would usually wait until they were like two or three years old, so all the depreciation was gone.
	But he would have power windows, and it's like, wow, look, this has got electric windows.
	All the rest of the cars, I guess I had for about ten years' worth of cars before I ever had one that had power windows on it.
	They were all crank, and it was not really a problem with the Spitfire like we got behind me right here.
	The Spitfire, while I was sitting there in the driver's seat, I could reach across and I could roll the passenger window up and down while I was driving.
	Manually, I could roll it up and down.
	Well, I think we're reaching a kind of event horizon now.
	You know, this was sustainable as long as...
	Debt was viable.
	But I think we're getting to the point now where people can't continue to assume the levels of debt necessary to maintain this Potemkin village facade of affluence and prosperity.
	It's just ridiculous, self-evidently.
	What's the average family income in this country?
	Something like $60,000?
	Something like that. And the average price paid for a new vehicle, as of last year, approached $50,000.
	It's ludicrous. You can't keep doing that.
	So I don't know that it's necessarily such a bad thing in a way that perhaps Americans who've gotten used to living beyond their means are kind of nudged in a way to go back to living within their means.
	It's not necessarily a bad life lesson.
	The more you live within your means, the less you're at the mercy of these You know, back during the pandemic, one of the great things that I had going for me was that I'm not only self-employed, but I don't have debt.
	So I didn't have a corporate overlord telling me that I had to mask up, you know, and threatening me with loss of employment if I didn't roll up my sleeve to get jabbed.
	You know, I had the financial wherewithal, if I had to, to ride it out.
	You know, and that's a really, really comforting thing, you know, to know that you don't have to put up with Really abusive kinds of situations at work because in the back of your mind, you're thinking, well, if I don't bow my knee, bend my knee to this, I'm going to not be able to take care of my family.
	I'm not going to be able to pay my mortgage.
	I'm not going to be able to put food on the table.
	It's an enormous pressure that's been applied.
	It's very subtle. People have fallen into this now.
	For at least the last generation or two, it's been normalized to live paycheck to paycheck.
	To have no savings and thus to be completely at the mercy of these fake corporations and the government too.
	Yeah. Yeah, yesterday I interviewed a couple of doctors, a married couple.
	And they were both MDs, physicians in New Zealand.
	They did clinical trials and stuff like that.
	But he had gotten out even before the COVID stuff.
	And I said, you know, when the interview was over, I talked to him.
	I said, so what are you doing now?
	You know both of you were doctors and and you've had to get out of your position because of Your principles and because you were fighting this stuff on the basis of real science and things like that And they said well, you know we've got some farmland, and we're homeschooling our kids, and we're raising food, and we're self-sufficient It's just like you know what you're talking about they said we've never been happier because we don't have to work for a corporation and And we're not and they're not working in New Zealand. They
	would be working for the government as part as being a doctor and that Type of thing but now they're now independent and a self-sufficient, and they've got neighbors I mean, they're living the life that we all aspire to, I think.
	And it's worked out for them.
	That really needs, you know, we need to have our goals and our aspirations, I think, adjusted in this country.
	They've been telling us for the longest time that both husband and wife need to be working for the man, and we've got to have these careers, and that's the only way that we're going to have any real self-respect or respect from other people.
	And that simply isn't true, but they put that onus on us that, oh, you need to have a job, or you need to have a title, or you're nothing.
	And that really isn't true.
	You know, we need to completely rethink these lies that they're telling us about how we evaluate ourselves, how we evaluate our life, what our goal in life is.
	That is what really needs to be rethought.
	We need to start with the Reformation with ourselves.
	And that's a big part of it, I think.
	I think so, too. And I think it's politically poisonous, particularly with regard to the younger crowd.
	You know, the generation that's coming up now that's in their 20s that feels despair, hopelessness, and anger.
	When they look at the stats that, you know, an average house now costs, the average price for a house is $400,000 now.
	Mm-hmm. And they can't afford a car.
	They can't afford a house. And they feel like they're going to be living in their parents' house until they're 40, you know, if they ever get out of their parents' house.
	And that is fertile ground for this Marxism that's been percolating upward everywhere where they promise people, oh, just like Lenin did.
	Land, food, you know, we'll take care of you.
	Don't worry, the oppressors.
	When in fact, the whole reason for the problem has to do with exactly the machinations of these machinators.
	The people who are responsible for it, you know, are the ones who are offering the solution.
	It's just, it's absolutely tragic because these kids, they don't know.
	You and I grew up in a different world.
	You know, people who are under 40 don't really know the world that existed before then.
	I don't know. It's our job to somehow try to convey the reality of what was to them so that they can see what could be in the future.
	That's right. I think a lot of them are seeing that the university situation is a Potemkin village for the most part.
	It can help you to get a job, but you're still going to be in that corporate world of control.
	I think a lot of them saw how that control worked out four years ago and Don't necessarily want to put themselves in that trap into a debt Trap in order to get that degree and a lot of other things like that. So yeah, I think it you really do need to adjust what you aspire to what you think is You know how whether or not you care about what other people think or whether you're gonna pursue your own goals I think that's really the key thing. Yeah, absolutely You know, you've got an interesting article.
	I said this is the first one I wanted to talk to you about.
	The Anodyne Exotic.
	And I'll tell you, as somebody who owns a little tiny car that doesn't have a whole lot of horsepower, but I love to drive it, that really hit home.
	The Anodyne Exotic, you know, years ago, Ron Atkinson, who's Mr.
	Bean, and he's very successful, of course, and got a lot of money as a movie star.
	And he talked about how he's got...
	Hypercars and everything, you know, million-dollar cars.
	They say, you don't really so much drive them as you manage them.
	And I thought, that's a pretty good description of these things.
	And I think that's really what you're talking about with the anodyne exotic.
	I mean, what good is it to continue?
	And this is one of the other public cases.
	This is what I appreciate about what you do at your website, ericpetersautos.com.
	Is that all the other sites, what they do is they compare all these meaningless statistics about 0 to 60 and all of the other metrics that they've come up with in the past few years.
	Skid pad numbers or whatever.
	And it really is meaningless to the experience.
	And you focus more on the real experience of it as well as the things that they're putting in the cars that are going to make them unaffordable and are going to basically spy on us.
	And so I think when we talk about the anodyne exotic, that really does fall into that category that there's a lot of stuff that they've loaded us up with that is really unnecessary and you take it back to the real experience.
	Yeah, well, cars have become quite one-dimensional.
	A good way to understand this is if you're a fan of stock car racing, all of the cars have to fit within a template, a literal template.
	They have a template that they affix over the body of the vehicle so that it conforms to whatever the standards are.
	And a similar thing is applied to new vehicle design with regard to the government regulations.
	So you get these vehicles all look pretty much the same. So there isn't a lot of personality There's not a lot of difference in terms of anything meaningful Emotionally the intangible stuff, you know It makes a car interesting like you can think about the the fins of a late 50s Cadillac or Chrysler You know, it's just a look of that that was just wow. Look at that. Somebody came up with that. That's just incredible So focus on the one thing that they're still allowed some latitude with and that's horsepower And how quickly the thing can get to 60 and the problem with that is that you know, once you get beyond that
	It's very ephemeral, you know This this car that I focused on in the article is the 1000 something horsepower version of the Corvette That's going to be coming out next year And okay, great. So for a few months, it's going to be I guess a short of a Bugatti the most powerful new High-performance car that you can get well, you know, somebody else is going to make one with 1200 horsepower And then there'll be 1,500.
	And once that happens, it's kind of like owning a six-month-old iPod or iPad.
	You know, it's like, oh, wow, when you get it, it's the latest, coolest thing.
	But after a couple of months, it's just not anymore.
	It's old. And then because it doesn't have anything else about it that's particularly appealing, that connects with you on an emotional level, it's just a throwaway.
	And it's sad. You know, all you have to do is go look, and I put some pictures with the article and look at earlier four of us, and there's just, you don't even have to drive the thing.
	You don't even have to be physically in its presence.
	Just look at the picture of the thing.
	Oh, I know. Yeah, when I was a kid looking at those things, I didn't really care about the zero to 60 and from 60 to zero numbers, you know, the...
	I just looked at it and was like, wow, that is just amazing.
	And the Stingray Corvette was my favorite one.
	And it was a small car, but both as a convertible and also as a fastback.
	They were just amazing to look at.
	Yeah, absolutely gorgeous. There's an analogy here that occurs to me, too.
	I'm an aviation fan, and if you look at older airplanes, there was a lot of difference between one airplane and another, military aviation in particular, fighter jets.
	Now they all look the same. They all have that same insect look, and the reason they have that insect look is because it is dictated by the function.
	They're trying to maximize the performance of the aircraft within a certain envelope.
	And the same is true with regard to these exotics.
	That's why the new Corvette looks like the new Lamborghini, which looks like the new Ferrari, which looks like the new whatever it's like.
	They all have that same sort of angular insectoid look.
	And motorcycles is another one.
	I have motorcycles.
	I love motorcycles. Now you know how you tell the difference between a Honda and a Kawasaki and a Suzuki?
	By the color of the plastic.
	You know, Hondas are red, Kawasaki's are green, Suzuki's are blue, Yamaha's are yellow.
	But, you know, I'm talking about hyperbikes here, sport bikes, which is the analysis of supercars.
	Because, you know, the sole objective is to see how quickly this thing can go through the quarter mile and how fast it can go on the top end.
	That sort of winnows down in dictation.
	Well, at least they're doing them in different colors because most of the cars are either, you know, black, white, a shade of gray, or red, you know, and it's very rare that you see a car that's a different color.
	I was driving with Karen the other day.
	She said, look at that car's color.
	It's not a black or white car.
	I don't like it, but it's interesting that they have a different color.
	This was inadvertent because, you know, I've kind of thought about that off and on peripherally for Actually, a number of years.
	Why are these cars all pretty much all the same color?
	You see lots of silver, white, you know, these sort of generic milk box kind of colors.
	And I got to looking at some of the stats of one of the vehicles that I was reviewing, and I noticed, my God, they charge you extra for most of the other colors, and not just a little bit either.
	I think it was a Mini.
	I was driving a Mini Clubman a few weeks back, and if you wanted anything but one or two colors, you had to pay $800 extra for it.
	Well, when you look at what they're doing with it, I saw an article.
	I forget which one. There's probably several of them that are doing it now.
	You know, different functions on the cars.
	I think it was Audi or Mercedes, maybe BMW. It's a German car.
	And, you know, if you want this function that I would take for granted, you've got to pay an annual subscription rate to it.
	And they're doing that.
	Now they're taking these different functions of the car and making them a subscription.
	It's crazy. Sure. It's the Netflix model.
	At least when you pay at least $100 for the different colored paint, you actually own the paint, I guess.
	But you're right. It's BMW that you're thinking about.
	And it was Tesla that started this.
	Of course. Tesla was the one that came up with this idea of requiring you to subscribe to the features.
	The features are all built into the car, but they're only activated if you pay the fee.
	Now, people discovered this because they would sell the car.
	So the second owner of the Tesla, and he looks at the window sticker and it says that it comes with whatever the feature is.
	I think it was in particular their self-driving feature.
	So it looks like, okay, the guy ordered this with the self-driving feature.
	Great, that's what I want.
	I'll be happy to buy this car.
	They buy the car and they find out that it doesn't work.
	And it's not because of a mechanical problem or an electrical problem.
	It's because they haven't paid their subscription.
	So they have to get in touch with Tesla to pay.
	And BMW is doing the same thing now.
	They build the seat heaters into all the cars.
	You know, all the cars have the physical stuff that makes the seat heater work.
	But if you want it to actually work when you push the button, you have to pay a monthly fee.
	That is the chintziest thing I've ever seen.
	I couldn't remember what feature it was, but that's why.
	It's a seat heater. Of all things, you've got to pay them to get the seat heater to work.
	When Karen and I got married, we didn't have much money, but we had some time.
	And so we went to England for about two and a half months, and we had no time.
	And so we were starving.
	We couldn't afford to even eat.
	But we stayed in this one little beat-up place.
	This mini flatlet that was on the outskirts of London.
	It took almost an hour to get in.
	And they had, for the lights, you had to put in coins.
	They were like a quarter, you know?
	And so the heater was like a 1,000-watt little squirrel cage motor, like something you'd use for a hairdryer.
	I mean, it was cold. It was January.
	And then you would...
	For the lights and for the TV and for the heater, you would have to put coins in this thing and it would give you a certain amount of time.
	And I thought that was the strangest thing, but I think the seat heater that you've got to get with a subscription is even chintzier and stranger when you consider the price of a BMW. I mean, it's crazy.
	Do you remember if you went to a shady roadside motel back in the day, they would have magic fingers?
	Oh, yeah. Same thing in the coin box on the side of the building.
	That's right.
	Yeah, but we were watching a movie and, you know, all of a sudden, boom, everything goes down.
	And we're like scrambling around trying to find the coins and trying to find the thing to put in because the lights were gone, the TV was gone, everything just gets turned off in that little flat.
	You know, it's funny, but at the same time, it's also infuriating because what we're doing step by step It's taking away the ownership of a vehicle, you know, when you asked, bought it, and it is yours.
	If the word has any meaning, you paid for it, and now it's your property, into a thing that you are allowed to use, you know, within certain parameters, and as long as you continue to pay for it.
	And it's a really vicious business model, and I think it actually was pioneered by our friend Bill Gates, Back in the 90s when he came up with the idea of instead of you buying the CD that had the editing program or whatever you were using, that you possessed. You owned it once you bought it.
	And maybe it was out of date, but it still worked.
	And if you put it on another computer, it would work.
	And if you wanted to give it to your kid for school, they could have it and it could work.
	To licensing software.
	So now you buy the license for the software and you have to renew it.
	And if you don't renew it every so often, then it just stops working.
	So the auto industry saw that and decided, ah, that's a great idea.
	We're going to start doing that too.
	Yeah, in the mid-2000s, I remember they started doing it with graphics programs and with 3D modelers and everything like that.
	And all of a sudden, they're all doing it as an annual subscription.
	Of course, it still is that way with Adobe.
	And it was infuriating.
	It really was. Talk about this 1978 Mustang II for $32,000.
	I saw that and I thought, well, I wonder how much my 1968 Fastback would be if I saw that.
	Because I bought the Mustang IIs and I didn't really care much for them.
	But yeah, it's amazing.
	$32,000 for that.
	Well, some background.
	Not far from me is a really interesting dealer that specializes in classic cars and weird cars, including right-hand drive stuff.
	They call it JVM, Japanese domestic market stuff.
	And a lot of these cars are just driver cars.
	You know, if you want to get a neat old driver, you can get a car like that.
	And I go there every once in a while to sort of refresh my spirits because sometimes it's so debilitating to deal with everything that's going on in the new car world.
	And I consider it a barometer of what's going on in the new car business that they would actually seriously put a $32,000 price on a 78 Mustang.
	You know, and for those who don't know what that is, you know, this is the Mustang that was, in the day, just laughed at by practically everybody.
	Now, I hope to save the Mustang, to be fair, because things were bad in the mid-70s.
	So Ford radically downsized it.
	They took a lot of Pinto components to make this Mustang II, which was the first Mustang to come with a four-cylinder engine.
	And which eventually offered a V8 that, wait for it, made all of 122 horsepower.
	And so everybody laughed at it, you know, because at that time it was silly because, you know, the memory of things that were better was still fresher, you know, and you could always buy an older Mustang that was superior.
	And even the new stuff got to be progressively better.
	So the cars got forgotten and they were essentially worthless for many years.
	Well, their value is creeping up because, my God, they're starting to look better and better all the time in the rearview mirror.
	You know, you look at this car and it's like, you know, which would I rather have?
	This This extremely low miles, pristine 78 Mustang II for $32,000 or a new four-cylinder turbo Mustang with all kinds of multiplex touchscreens and just disconnected drive-by-wire data mining spyware, big brother apparatus that I can't work on, and I'm a competent mechanic.
	You can't do anything with these vehicles.
	I could take that little Mustang over, too, even though its engine only makes about 130 horsepower, and in a weekend, I could put a four-barrel carburetor on it, a set of headers, and a cam, and I could do that for less than $1,000 and double the horsepower.
	That's pretty appealing. Yeah.
	Oh, yeah. Absolutely. Absolutely. Yeah, you mentioned the Pinto.
	It's amazing. I didn't know that the Mustang II had Pinto parts in it, but yeah.
	The floor pans, I think, are Pintos.
	It was the only Mustang to ever have, I think it was the only Mustang to ever have four lug hubs, just like an economy car.
	Wow, wow. Did it blow up if it got hit from the back?
	No, I mean, you know, it actually was a, you know, again, in retrospect, it was more akin to the original 64 Mustang.
	You know, the Mustang had gotten big and huge and heavy by 1973, and it was kind of an overwhelming car.
	The original 64 Mustang was a slight, small, nimble, agile car that appealed to anybody.
	It wasn't just hot rod types and young guys who liked the original Mustang.
	You know, it was a car that a housewife could drive or an older person could drive.
	And the Mustang II that was made from 1974 to 1978 was very similar.
	It was, you know, smart design.
	It had a hatchback. It was, you know, it was roomy for its size.
	It was economical. It was not a bad car, you know, even though at the time we all ridiculed it.
	Oh, yeah. Yeah, I remember, you know, I got my car...
	I guess it was 72, 73, and I had a 68 Mustang, and I was looking at the new Mustangs.
	I was like, those are horrible.
	If I had the money, I wouldn't want that.
	It was so huge.
	I remember from the Bond movie, Diamonds Are Forever, there was a scene where they're chasing, where he's driving the Mustang, and he goes down an alley, and then there's a ramp, and he gets it up on two wheels, and he goes down through the alley on two wheels.
	The guys who did that We're out of Tampa, where I lived.
	They call themselves the Hurricane Hell Drivers, and they would always perform at the State Fair.
	And they could go all the way around this dirt track on two wheels, and they did that stunt.
	I'd seen that stunt so many times.
	It was a lot of fun to see that stunt done in the film.
	But they did it with one of those gigantic Mustangs, the 73 Mustangs that were huge.
	Very impressive stuff. Very impressive stuff.
	Yeah, the Pinto, like I said, Karen had the Pinto.
	And it was not a hatchback.
	It had a trunk. And that trunk was the thinnest piece of sheet metal I've ever seen on any car I've ever been around.
	And when you'd slam the trunk, it would just vibrate.
	Yeah, but you know what? In Pinto's defense, and in Lee Iacocco's defense, who at the time was the Ford Vice President of North American Operations, that car was brought to market for just under $2,000 when it first came out.
	And like most of the economy cars at that time from American car makers, it was rear-wheel drive.
	Today, rear-wheel drive is exclusively for affluent people because you can't find anything that's rear-wheel drive anymore that isn't basically a luxury-branded vehicle.
	So this is a measure, again, of what we've lost.
	You could get a Pinto with a rear-wheel drive layout.
	And you remember when we were in high school, people would put V8s in Pintos and Vegas and things like that.
	And it was all kinds of fun.
	Yeah, that's right. With a little front-wheel drive car.
	That's right. That's too complicated.
	Yeah, when you go back and you look at, there's a company called Flying Miata.
	They put, they cram in really big engines, you know, up to V8, like a Corvette V8 engine, LS1.
	And they started doing that with the older ones, but it got successively more difficult for them to do it. By the time they got to the third generation of Miata, it had a lot of electronics in it. And then this fourth generation, which just came out, well, I don't know, maybe it's been about five or six years now. They, it took forever for them to do it.
	They had to hire specialists to do the electronics and everything, to change out the motor and then put in a more robust transmission in it.
	It took them forever to do that because of all the electronics and how complicated it was.
	Very expensive. Everything now is an integrated system.
	If you bought, for example, a.22 Charger with the V6 engine that's standard in it, and you wanted to put the Hemi that you could have gotten in it, the V8 engine, that's almost impossible to do from an economical and technical point of view because it wouldn't be worth doing.
	You have to literally gut the entire car, all of the electronics, because it won't mesh.
	It won't accept A different engine than the one that came with it from the factory.
	The computer, all the related equipment won't work with it.
	So, you know, I have a 76 Trans Am, as you know, and I can put any engine I want to in there easily if I felt like it.
	And as long as it physically bolted up, It will work, and everything else in the car will continue to work because they're separate systems.
	They're not interconnected systems.
	Oh, yeah, yeah. Everything was interconnected on it.
	But getting back to the Pinto thing, you know, again, what you began by saying in terms of people being able to pick something that they can afford, Karen was just starting out as a teacher.
	She didn't have any money. She could get a used Pinto, and I think it was under $1,000.
	And, you know, she didn't have to go into massive debt with it.
	It was stripped down.
	It was bare bones. And, again, it was an older car.
	Somebody stole that car.
	And they came and gave it back to you?
	Well, what happened was, she got a water leak, and it was a slow leak, and it was the middle of the week, and I said, let's wait a couple of days and I'll fix it on the weekend.
	And so she would carry out this jug of water for the next two days to fill it up before she would take it to work.
	And she could make it there and back by just topping it up because it was a slow leak.
	And so she goes out in the morning with her jug of water, And her car's gone.
	You know, it was parked in front of the apartment she was renting.
	And she called me up and she says, Mel, you brought me home yesterday, right?
	She just couldn't believe that somebody would steal this car, and they did steal the car, and they had it for about 30 days, but the insurance company paid her for it, because I imagine they ruined the engine, probably ran it without any water in it, but they paid her the full amount, and actually she made a little bit of money on the deal, because she had gotten a really good price on it, but yeah, it was very bare bones, and everybody was joking about, did you leave the engine running in a bad neighborhood?
	Who would steal that car, you know, but they took it for fun.
	I'm talking about it now, but, you know, and again, here's another related thing, you know, housing, to get back to that issue.
	Because of zoning laws, you know, people who are just coming up and wanting to buy their first house, used to be that you could find affordable little houses, you know, the starter home, they called it.
	Now you can't, because everything in the development is the same.
	And, you know, it's only for people who can afford a $400,000 or $500,000 mortgage.
	What happens to the people who maybe want to spend $100,000 because that's all they've got?
	Yeah, that's right. They're pushed out of the market effectively, and that's exactly the same thing that's happened with cars.
	And cars, I think, set the predicate for that.
	You know, in Austin, they've got a neighborhood that they're doing 3D printed houses with concrete.
	And it's kind of interesting to watch them come together.
	And I thought, well, are they going to make them affordable?
	No, they didn't make them affordable.
	They're extremely expensive houses.
	And it's like, you know, when is somebody going to address that lower end of the market?
	I mean, here you've got a situation where there's not a lot of labor, and yet, you know, you're supposed to be able to save some money by having this 3D printed thing.
	It's like, what is the advantage of this thing if it's going to be expensive?
	And they've got an entire neighborhood of 3D printed houses, but they're extremely expensive.
	And I think they're more than the medium price of the house.
	I don't know. It's difficult.
	Austin's kind of a strange market.
	It's been going up and going down, so I don't know really how it compares.
	Isn't it ironic when you think about it that we hear this endless prattle about democracy?
	Democracy is the deified word, and yet there's extremely little democracy in the economy.
	We don't have choice anymore in the economy.
	Everything is dictated to us from the top down.
	And the effrontery of it, because the people who are dictating it are extremely affluent people who can afford to buy anything, and they're telling the people who don't have that much money, and particularly young people who are trying to get a leg up and start out in life, that no, you can't have that.
	You can only have this, and if you can't afford it, well, too bad.
	Yeah. Oh, no, they want to dictate everything to us.
	They want to dictate what we eat, even.
	I mean, all this bird flu stuff, you know, focusing on...
	Monkey pox. Yeah, monkey pox now, but the bird flu, the way they focused on it, you know, they were killing, unnecessarily killing, massive numbers of chickens in New Zealand.
	They did kind of the same thing with bees that produced manuka honey, which is extremely expensive.
	But then, this time around, this year...
	Bird flu, they start testing all of the milk and the meat and stuff.
	It's like, why aren't you testing the eggs if it's bird flu, right?
	It's because they want to end meat and dairy.
	They talk about that. They want to dictate everything to us.
	Where we can go, what we can wear, where we live.
	You will own nothing. We're not even going to be able to afford electricity at the rate that they are ramping everything up.
	They're ramping the grid down.
	You and I have talked about it. For a long time about how they're forcing everything onto the electric grid while they shut down power plants.
	And now with AI coming in, it's making it really impossible.
	But, yeah, everything is about them dictating terms to us.
	It's a neo-feudalism. It really is.
	And it's very cleverly done, too.
	You know, they've learned a lesson, I think.
	They refrain from outright outlawing things.
	What they do is they outprice things.
	That's right. That's right.
	So, you know, it's getting to the point where average people cannot afford to eat meat anymore. And it's not banned. You can, you can have a steak if you want to say, if you can afford a steak and you know, as they continue to jack the prices up, it's going to get to the point where almost nobody except the very affluent can afford a steak. You know, they're open about it when they talk about this carbon credit thing, you know, that Elon Musk has taken advantage of, but now they want to make it so that each of us has a carbon footprint, which we're not allowed to step out of.
	And if we step outside of our carbon footprint, then we get hit with carbon taxes. So, you know, if you, if you use too much gas, if you drive too far, if you eat too much meat, whatever it may be, you know, they have a mathematical formula that they can use to say, well, that results in the emission of so much carbon dioxide. And accordingly, you have to pay for it.
	You know, they frame this as the polluter pays.
	They're really working overtime to frame and characterize this harmless inert gas that's necessary for life as a pollutant.
	Yeah. And who do you pay?
	You pay them, right?
	You buy an indulgence from them because they're the king of the world, you know?
	They're the pope that you're buying indulgence from to pollute.
	It's absurd. I just can't believe how people are being taken in by this climate scam.
	But then when you look at what happened the pandemic stuff and the fact that you know You're still running your diaper report people are still scared to death of this stuff and they're still you know They're still pushing the mask earlier in the program. I talked about this influencer who Was a sociologist and worked for some universities and worked Went to work for New York Times and wrote some articles defending the flip-flopping of the mask recommendations and they nominated her for a Pulitzer Prize and
	And she's shutting down scientists who are doing control studies and have done control studies.
	This one institution did them as early as 2007, but I had one that went back to 2002 where they were talking about the fact that masks don't work for any of this stuff.
	They become very astute in using psychology to use people's innate good nature against them because most people are decent people and they don't want to be the source of harm.
	They don't want to be a problem.
	So you get them to think that, well, if you don't wear a mask, you're going to kill grandma.
	Right. If you eat meat, well, you're causing the climate to change.
	So you're a bad person.
	It's really adroit, and it's really vicious.
	And I hope to God we can figure out a way to combat this, because if not, life on this earth is going to become literally hell on earth.
	Oh, yeah. Everything is about making sure that you don't offend somebody, that you don't harm somebody else.
	You know, your mask is there to protect me.
	You know, just like your vaccine is there to protect me because the vaccine, people know they don't protect me.
	So you've got to wear one.
	And it's like, what difference does that make?
	It's absolutely insane. But let me ask you about this because you mentioned there's a place that has some unusual cars down not too far away from you.
	Is that where you saw this right-hand drive?
	The 91 Land Cruiser 70.
	That's a very interesting article, and I'm interested to know if you've made a decision yet.
	Tell people the prepper's dilemma.
	Tell them what your dilemma was about this.
	I am contemplating violating my own prime directive, which I've lived by since I was in high school, which is to live below my means and to avoid debt.
	To the extent possible.
	I never, for the past 20 years, have bought a thing that I could not afford to pay for at the time that I purchased it, because I think that debt is cancer.
	It's bad. But, you know, we live in chaotic and crazy times, and maybe it makes sense to make an exception.
	And the exception that I'm contemplating making in this case is for one of these neat JDM right-hand drive export-only models that you couldn't have gotten in the United States, thanks to Uncle Sam.
	It is a 91 Toyota Land Cruiser, which is No turbo that has manual four-wheel drive, a manual transmission, analog everything.
	There's nothing electronic about it.
	You don't even need a battery to start the thing if you've got a hill.
	Just roll it down a hill and it'll start and run.
	It doesn't need anything.
	And I thought to myself, wow, that might be a really great thing to have in the months and years ahead, potentially.
	So I can't afford to cut a check for it, but I've been thinking about, well, maybe just this once I should take on a little debt to get something like that.
	Because it really could be the difference between being able to get around without walking or pedaling in the future.
	Because these old diesels will burn practically any kind of oil.
	They don't have EEFs.
	They don't have particulate traps.
	They don't have electric fuel injection.
	So as long as you can get some type of oil, whatever it happens to be, you can operate your vehicle.
	And that makes it a very viable vehicle to me, to my way of thinking.
	So I haven't come to a decision yet, but I'm definitely ruining it about in my head.
	So you haven't come to a decision yet.
	I saw the article, and I guess it's a couple of days old, and you are asking the readers to chime in on this and let you know.
	I mean, are you taking a poll?
	Is that what it is? Yeah, because one of the things that I've come to very much appreciate, and it was inadvertent about my site, is There are a lot of really thoughtful, bright, well-educated people who come in there.
	And I learn a lot from the people who do.
	And I take their advice on a lot of things.
	And it was interesting because people fell on either side of that dividing line.
	Some said, yeah, this is something that's justifiable.
	This is something that makes sense.
	And others said, don't do it.
	And there's good reasons on both sides.
	And I still haven't come to my own decision about what to do.
	Yeah, that's interesting.
	You've got another article, I See You, You See Me, talking about the Ford patent, which you and I have talked about this for the longest time, that it's inevitable that, you know, they've got all the tools and they've had them for a while if anybody uses a map.
	On your phone, the MAP app, you know that it knows what the speed limit is, wherever you are.
	And so all you have to do is add a little bit of something to it so that it can snitch on you.
	And that seems to be what they've got in the patent.
	You know, you and I should have patented that.
	People have filed ideas for, you know, there was a patent for showing pictures on an electronic device or something, and they're collecting money from all these smartphone manufacturers.
	I mean, literally, you and I should have...
	I hired a lawyer and filed a patent for that because we could see it coming years ago.
	You know, we saw that happening. The problem is we both have a conscience for all of our defects.
	Yeah, this is really Orwellian, though entirely predictable.
	Ford had filed a patent for basically an elaboration of technology that already exists.
	And of course, they claim it's only for law enforcement purposes.
	But essentially, the one used the tech that's already embedded in practically every vehicle that's been made since roughly about 2015 to use one vehicle, Vehicle A, to note the speed of another vehicle, Vehicle B, and to transmit data about the fact that that Vehicle B is exceeding the speed limit to the authorities or to the insurance mafia.
	So essentially, to turn every car on the road into kind of a narc.
	And it means that it's a panopticon.
	Every time you go outside, somebody is literally watching you.
	And as you said, we've been talking about this for many years.
	And they talk about this as a hypothetical, a theoretical, something that might come to pass.
	No, it's already come to pass.
	Almost all new cars have cameras built into them.
	And the cameras watch the car ahead of them, to the side of them, and behind them.
	They have speed limit recognition technology.
	So the vehicle knows not only what the speed limit is on the road that you happen to be driving on in real time, you know, that's updated constantly as you drive, but then it can juxtapose that with the speed that you're driving.
	And therefore it can tell that you're speeding, you're driving faster than the speed limit.
	And because the car has the ability to transmit the data that it collects, well, look, it can tell the insurance company, It can tell the government you're speeding.
	It can say where you've been, where you're going, all of these things.
	So, you know, it's just a matter of all of this now sort of coalescing.
	Bits and pieces of it have been added to cars for roughly the last 20 years or so.
	And now you can see the picture.
	It's almost there. It's almost become completely coalesced, and it's soon to be activated.
	And I think that's, by the way, part of the reason why a lot of people are deciding to opt out of a new vehicle.
	They're saying, you know, I think I'll pass.
	I think I'll see what I've got.
	And a lot of people are saying, you know, I think I'm actually going to go back in time, and I'm going to go get myself something older that doesn't have any of Yeah, but the problem is, you know, you make that decision, but the problem with this is that it's these other new cars that are spying on you, even if you've got an old analog thing, you know?
	It's now like an invasion of the body-by-fissure snatchers, you know?
	There are always ways to get around that.
	You probably agree with me.
	You tell me. Normally, I'm the kind of person who would refrain from doing anything quote-unquote illegal because we're trying to do the right thing, right?
	But there comes a point when the system itself becomes an outlaw that your only option is to become an outlaw, too, and to stop playing along with these games that they play.
	So, you can do things like, I don't know, put a farm use plate on your vehicle that isn't specific to your vehicle.
	It just says farm use on it.
	They can't identify you that way.
	Or maybe slap some mud on your license plate.
	Oops, I went off-road a little bit, Oscar, and they can't see what your number is.
	Do all of these things. There's nothing immoral about it.
	When the system is immoral, you have a right to defend yourself against it.
	Oh yeah, we thought about that and came to our own conclusions about that four years ago when they're talking about vaccine passports and all the rest of this stuff.
	And it's like, I'm not playing that game.
	I'll play a different game. And I didn't see any moral qualms with that at all.
	I think, as a matter of fact, they like to put this guilt trip on you.
	You need to do this to save grandma.
	You need to do this to save your neighbor.
	And it's like, no, I'm resisting what you're doing in order to save grandma, in order to save my neighbor, in order to save my grandkids, right?
	I'm going to resist you because you're the problem.
	And I'm going to do whatever I need to do to resist you with all this stuff.
	And so some of it is passive.
	Some of it is active nullification of what they're doing.
	I absolutely agree with you.
	I think what they're doing is really turning every new car into some kind of a Stasi snitch to try to surveil us.
	And it's this obsession that they have.
	And I think in a sense, it's kind of a sign of weakness.
	They're so paranoid because they're worried that somewhere somebody's going to be doing something that is going to push back against their power.
	And they've got to follow and observe and track and predict everything that everybody's going to do everywhere.
	So they've got cameras everywhere.
	And now they think, well, where else could we put a camera?
	And it never ends.
	It never ends. And the other facet of it is that there's this underlying puritanical meanness to it.
	You know, this sense that if you don't do things the way they think they ought to be done, then you're effectively a criminal and you deserve whatever punishment they decide to levy against you.
	It's really a hideous kind of psychology behind it.
	No, no. Americans used to have an instinctive dislike of busybodyism.
	They used to not like the nosy neighbor who peered through the blinds to see what you were doing in the backyard.
	Now America has become defined by busybodyism.
	Of course, people have been conditioned to that for 20 years now.
	Back during the reign of George W. Bush, I always refer to him as the chimp because he's a simian imbecile.
	Forgive my language for it.
	But remember, if you see something, say something.
	I mean, it was right out of East Germany.
	It was so profoundly un-American to have that kind of attitude toward people, you know?
	And unfortunately, now that has become, frankly, I think, a very common kind of attitude that people have.
	What are they doing?
	It looks suspicious. I better call the cops.
	Yeah. Just mind your own business and leave other people alone.
	Oh, yeah. Look at Tim Walsh during the lockdown stuff.
	He had a snitch line, you know?
	A hotline to snitch on other people that had 10,000 calls that were made to it.
	So they had people in Minnesota that were taking him up on it.
	Take a look at the threats from this bureaucrat in the EU. Even the other bureaucrats are, like, pulling back.
	Ooh, wait a minute. We don't want to tell people where we're going yet.
	Yeah. You know, I call him, his name is Theory Breton.
	I call him Conspiracy Theory Breton.
	The guy was actually, his dad was a bureaucrat, so I call him an SOB, son of a bureaucrat.
	But he thinks that he ought to get involved.
	And say that our political candidates in our election don't have the ability to speak and to debate things.
	To me, the most amazing thing about this Trump-Musk thing, people are on both sides of the political divide.
	They're taking a look at some of the things that they said.
	But to me, the most important thing about it...
	Why aren't all Americans outraged about the fact that some bureaucrat in Europe would think that he could shut down a discussion with a political candidate?
	If anything good has arisen out of what's been happening is that we're seeing a clarification.
	The focus is now clear.
	It used to be that you could ascribe what's going on to, well, they're just trying to do the right thing.
	They have good motives. They don't have good motives.
	They're evil people.
	And that's not too strong a word.
	They're evil people. And you can see they're evil.
	You can see their desire, their punitive desire to punish people.
	Anything that they don't like, including if you're simply somebody who has stated an objective fact about, you know, the best example I think I can pull up about that, if you point out that, well, you know, Leah Thomas is a man.
	You know, I'm sorry, you know, it's not a matter of his hurt feelings.
	He's a man and it's it's it's just you can't change biology by putting on different clothes You know and and to say something like that now they characterize that as hate speech And I know that is should isn't ought to be extremely alarming when the truth when facts become hateful You have a real problem. Yeah, that's right I always refer back to, remember the Goldwater slogan?
	Kind of a paraphrase of that.
	Yeah, I'd say extremism in defense of free speech is no vice, and moderation of content is no virtue.
	Because it's always done to show people's feelings, you know?
	It's ridiculous. When you look at this, and this is one of the justifications that SOB Breton had, and that was, we've got to look at anything that is hateful, and, you know, we're doing this just to protect people.
	That's kind of like the Ministry of Love from Orwell, you know?
	He's combining the ministry of truth along with the ministry of love.
	You can't say anything that is false or misinformation.
	You can't say anything that hurts somebody's feelings.
	And it's like, wow, you've just rolled together two of the overwhelming ministries under one thing.
	It's to me just such a self-evident thing that free speech, that the truth has nothing to fear from free speech.
	If something is false, it will be established that it's false pretty readily.
	You know, this suppression of free speech has one objective, and that is to stifle the truth and facts that are uncomfortable to certain people.
	Yeah, that's right. Yeah, it is so fundamental, and we see it as being more and more fundamental all the time.
	For years, we would say, well, you know, the Second Amendment is there to protect the First Amendment.
	I think it's the other way around.
	I think the First Amendment was there first because I think it is absolutely the most important one because, you know, they didn't use a gun on us.
	In 2020, what they did was they used lies, propaganda, censorship, all of those types of things.
	Those are the weapons that they used against us.
	And I really think that it showed that the pen is mightier than the sword.
	That kind of psychological gaslighting that they were able to pull on people, creating fear, distrust, snitching, and all the rest, that was done because of mass violations of the First Amendment.
	And so it really is the paramount one, I believe.
	I think, ultimately, implicitly, if you're not free to speak, you're not free to think.
	That's right. That's the bottom line.
	And once you're not free to think and to hold true to your own convictions and your own conscience and what you think is correct and right, you have no freedom.
	Everything else is meaningless. That's right.
	Yeah, yesterday I was talking a little bit about this new platform called Noster.
	That Tom, that Dorsey, what's his name?
	Jack Dorsey. That, you know, he's thrown his weight behind and it's supposed to be, you know, this independent system where you can have social media, you can have content like we produce and stuff, you know, and people can't even pay you for it.
	And so it's a way of...
	But what he said was, he said it's not really about free speech. It's really about being able to think freely, but that really comes from the free speech violations.
	You know, that was the targeting of the way that we think and that behavioral manipulation that is there, that used a violation of the First Amendment to do that.
	You know, so yeah, but hopefully something will come of that.
	I don't know. I'm just starting to look at that, but it might be something that we all need to get involved in.
	So anything?
	What else is on your mind? We've only got about a minute and a half here.
	Okay. So, you know, what else is happening?
	How about my interview with the parasite?
	Did you catch that one? Yes.
	Yes, that's right. I saw that.
	The property taxes.
	Because you talk about not owning anything.
	As long as you've got property taxes, as everybody's pointed out, you really don't own your home, right?
	Yeah, well, the thing that astounded me most, well, what happened was an assessor, you know, a government agent came to my house the other day to assess my property.
	And I just, I got to thinking about the Associate way that most Americans just accept the idea that some government guy can show up at what you think is your place to assess, to determine the value of what you putatively supposedly own so that they can decide how much money they're going to charge you for being allowed to continue to occupy what you think is your home.
	You know, I rant about the property tax a lot because I think the property tax is even more pernicious fundamentally than the income tax, because if you didn't have the property tax, at least you could at some point own your home or at least aspire to it and have a place that was truly yours.
	And in that case, you wouldn't need income, would you?
	You'd have to pay the property taxes.
	So, you know, it's just, it shocks me that people have accepted this, this idea.
	And no politicians will talk about that.
	It is really amazing that they won't even talk about that.
	It's such a powerful control.
	And we've seen them confiscate property and sell it for 1% of the value of the home.
	It absolutely is insidious.
	Eric Peters, ericpetersautos.com.
	Thank you so much for joining us, Eric.
	Always a great time. Thank you, David. Always have a great time.
	Thank you. Thank you. Have a good day.
	And thank you, folks, for listening.
	That's the end of the show. Thank you.
	Let me tell you.
	The David Knight Show, you can listen to with your ears.
	You can even watch it by using your eyes.
	In fact, if you can hear me, that means you're listening to The David Knight Show right now.
	Yeah, good job.
	And you want to know something else?

▲