Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Oct. 31, 2024 - The David Knight Show

03:01:29

The David Knight Show -10/31/2024

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Thank you.
	it's Thursday the 31st of October, year of our Lord 2024.
	Well, it's also Halloween, and so we're going to talk about what the new rules are for trannies and the left.
	What can you dress as?
	What can you not dress as?
	And we're going to contrast...
	The darkness with the light as well.
	We've also had some new science actually done.
	They've discovered that they mis-underestimated, as George Bush would say, the CO2 absorption by plants.
	Well, that throws all their models off.
	Maybe that's why they've been wrong for nearly 60 years on all of these climate models.
	And we're told that a pig now has bird flu.
	Yes, that's right.
	A pig flew.
	Well, look at the assumptions of that.
	And also, they're back pushing the nudge.
	I've said from the very beginning, there wasn't any science to this except for behavioral science.
	Well, we're going to begin with an old story.
	Pentagon Waste and Endless Wars.
	We'll be right back.
	Well, as I've said, as I've said, it's just an old story, but it just keeps going on and on.
	There's no end to it.
	Pentagon paid nearly 8,000% markup on Boeing's bathroom soap dispenser.
	It's not the $600 toilet seat.
	This is much worse.
	They're taking things that you or I would pick up for $20, $30 and costing thousands of dollars.
	And folks, this is Boeing.
	And this is an example of just how corrupt and spoiled this monopolistic defense industry chain has become.
	Boeing can't do anything, right?
	Their planes are falling apart literally in the air.
	Their spacecraft is leaking like a sieve and had to be abandoned.
	Had to abandon the astronauts.
	They're still not back.
	And this is part of it.
	This is how government welfare destroys everything, including once efficient corporations.
	They used to be the standard, and now they are the example of what happens when we have government corruption welfare programs.
	The bathroom on the C-17 Globemaster 3 cargo plane.
	It's nothing special.
	The soap dispensers are exactly the same kind of pump that customers would find in a civilian airliner, in a restaurant bathroom, in your own kitchen.
	There's nothing different about it at all.
	And yet they put a 7,943% markup on it, costing taxpayers $149,000 more than it should have been.
	But that's just the beginning of it.
	There was a whistleblower that went to the U.S. government and told them how they were being overcharged.
	And so they had a two-year audit of the Boeing company, and surprisingly, nobody sent a missile through the Pentagon window that was doing the audit, like 9-11.
	Out of a selected sample of 46 spare parts, the Pentagon's internal watchdog found the Air Force overpaid for 12 of them, about a quarter, well, more than a quarter.
	I'm sorry, a little less than a quarter.
	Costing taxpayers an additional million dollars on top of the parts, 4.3 million value.
	So, in 2015, the Pentagon found that it was severely overpaying for Patriot missiles.
	They negotiated a new contract at that point in time that saved them.
	Half a billion dollars, $550 million.
	In 2019, the Inspector General found that the military was paying $4,300 for a half-inch metal drive pen that should have cost $46.
	How does a half-inch metal drive pen cost $46 in the first place?
	That's what I want to know.
	But they charge 100 times more than that.
	Soap dispensers.
	Again, this is the headline article, the one that they picked to put up at the top.
	They could pick any number of these things.
	The Air Force did not validate the accuracy of the data, they said, because they were just looking at the prices that subcontractors are charging and just, you know, well, if they're not really marking that up, we're okay with it.
	So, again, you know, oh, well, this metal dry pin should have cost $46.
	I don't know how it should cost $46.
	But if it's not marked up strictly by Boeing, I guess they don't find it.
	But see, part of the problem is that there's a revolving door, as we've seen.
	Lloyd Austin, who is now the Secretary of Defense for the Biden administration, they had to change the rules so he could come back.
	You know, usually that revolving door only goes in one direction, just like, you know, the buildings, you know, usually only goes in one direction.
	They had to go in and do an operation so the revolving door could go back the other direction again.
	Why is this type of thing happening?
	Why is it that you've got people in the Pentagon that are just approving this kind of absurd cost?
	Well, because they hope to go to work for these companies when they get out, and they do.
	It's a revolving door just like it is with FDA and pharma.
	And it is consolidation, corruption, monopolistic stuff, as they point out.
	These types of soap dispensers, you can buy them online for $30.
	But they marked it up 8,000%.
	Even tape.
	They said they went through.
	They found bearings, screws, gaskets, lights, even tape.
	Inspector General says Boeing overcharged $2,664 for some tape.
	And this is the way you can sneak stuff in.
	You notice these are all nondescript things, right?
	Screws, gaskets, lights, tapes.
	That was something that we had an employee who was a trusted manager who did that with us.
	I caught him.
	I had the ability back in the 90s to be able to log in and watch what was happening on the computers and check the sales and stuff.
	And he was very...
	He was very clever about it.
	He would do it on other people's shift, not on his own.
	And he left us and went to work for a pizza place next door.
	And he came in.
	He was stealing from us when he was working for the pizza place.
	He just came in and said, hey, you want to take a break?
	And I'll relieve you a little bit if you want to get something to eat.
	Oh, yeah, great.
	Thanks.
	And I didn't know he was on the clock.
	And he goes in, and what he did was he took bubble gum.
	And he knew that we didn't inventory the bubblegum stuff that we sold for like a penny.
	And, or whatever, some nominal amount, maybe a nickel or something like that.
	And so he put the price in as negative, and he sold a whole bunch of these things.
	And then he took the difference in cash.
	And I caught him on it.
	That's what they do.
	They'll go in and they'll take something that is, you know, nondescript like that.
	So in an interview with 60 Minutes last year, a former Raytheon contract negotiator, not Lloyd Austin.
	He's not honest enough to do this.
	It was somebody other than Lloyd Austin who worked for Raytheon.
	He was director of defense pricing.
	He blamed a lack of competition.
	He said in the 80s there was intense competition with a lot of different companies.
	And so the government had choices.
	They had leverage.
	But we have limited leverage now.
	Why?
	Because they allowed these companies to consolidate.
	And so you've only got a couple of them.
	You don't have competition between companies anymore.
	You don't really have oversight.
	Well, there's going to be a whole new wave of spending.
	As I've talked about this several times, I said, you know, Eric Schmidt, the ex-CEO of Google, It's now the big guy in the Pentagon, especially.
	He's all about AI. He's there all the time, but especially on military stuff.
	And if you remember, and I've forgotten the guy's name now, but the book was The Four Battlegrounds.
	Everything about it was oriented towards, we're going to war with China.
	And so here's the four battlegrounds we're going to go to war with China on.
	And I had the guy in because of what he had to say about AI. And the progress on it, how they were testing it, what the limitations were.
	Because I talk about AI many times, I'm very concerned about the fact, it helps me to remember the three things, SPC, right?
	And so we have surveillance, we have propaganda, we have censorship.
	And that's really the way they're using the generative AI that's on social media and that type of stuff.
	But then there's another part of it, and that is the killer.
	So I guess we could say SPCK. The killer robots, the killer autonomous drone swarms, and that type of thing.
	And so that's what Schmidt is pushing.
	He's there in the Pentagon trying to get them to change over.
	And I've also mentioned in the past before a book by Daniel Suarez.
	As a matter of fact, two things in the news today.
	That harken back to books by Daniel Suarez.
	This guy is kind of like Michael Crichton.
	They really should make his movies, his books into movies, but they're not.
	Maybe they're too close to what these guys are planning on doing to even be predictive.
	Maybe they're descriptive as to what they're doing.
	And we're going to talk about how there's a U.S. company now that is doing...
	Doing IVF and using it for eugenics has already started.
	Screening for IQ and that type of thing.
	That was in another book that he did.
	But I was in Change Agent and Kill Decision.
	He was talking about swarms of autonomous drones and how they would communicate with each other.
	They went out and they got somebody who was an expert in How insects do swarms.
	We talked a little bit about this the other day when Shiva was on.
	You know, they kind of move as a unit, and it isn't that they're just keying off of each other's movements when it comes to insects.
	And so that was kind of the basic theory.
	But the whole point is, and it's kind of a spoiler alert, this is being in the book.
	It is a complete paradigm shift.
	And it is something that allows the entire military industrial complex to just reset itself from the very beginning.
	And all new.
	All the old weapons are now obsolete.
	And we've got to buy all new stuff.
	Right?
	Well, the ex-Google CEO, Schmidt, is urging the army to replace tanks with drones.
	Remember a few weeks ago...
	Is it now four or five weeks since we've had the hurricane?
	And we were talking about the lithium mine.
	We were talking about the Pentagon being involved in that lithium mine.
	And I said, you know, they want to have lithium batteries.
	And they're manic about that at the Pentagon.
	And they want to get involved in this thing that's happening in North Carolina.
	They're not looking for lithium batteries to power tanks.
	I said, it's about the drones.
	And there we are.
	You know, it is about the drones.
	Google's former chief executive officer, Eric Schmidt, is urging the U.S. military to replace the fleets of useless tanks, he calls them, with drones powered by AI. He said, I read somewhere that the U.S. had thousands and thousands of tanks stored somewhere.
	He said, give them away.
	Buy a drone instead.
	Well, of course, they're not going to give them away.
	What they'll do is they'll start wars and sell them to both sides.
	That's the Pentagon model, right?
	We'll have a war over here, and now you can buy our tanks, which are obsolete.
	We do sell our obsolete weapons to people.
	Schmidt founded a startup building autonomous kamikaze drones for Ukraine.
	According to reports by Forbes, he told the gathering that the Ukraine-Russian war has demonstrated how a $5,000 drone can destroy a $5 million tank.
	Ukraine has been using cheap, off-the-shelf drones to counter Russia's military supremacy, but tanks have also been central to the fight.
	The Israel-Hamas war has also seen Israel, which possesses scores of sophisticated drones, rely on infantry forces and deploy thousands of tanks to Gaza Strip in parallel with the air raids.
	And so, they still have a use, I guess, especially in an asymmetric war where the civilians don't have much to fight back with.
	But when you look at the rapid change of all this, you see the pictures of the tanks with kind of a...
	It looks like they've got like a trashy lean-to house on top of the tank to try to have the drone explode a little distance away from the tank so it doesn't penetrate the tank.
	And they're also putting up now videos of...
	Russia dropping nets to catch the drone.
	So this is something that is in its infancy.
	Kind of like watching the beginning of the 20th century, the development of aerial warfare.
	And so that's where these drones are right now.
	Schmidt was the inaugural chair of the U.S. Defense Innovation Board, advising senior defense leaders On how they could come up with autonomous killer robots and drones.
	He also led the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence, which in 2023 made recommendation to Congress on how to best deploy AI for national security and defense.
	Ukraine and Russia drone tactics are changing every three to six weeks as a rush to innovate.
	The cost of autonomy is falling so quickly that the drone war, which is the future of conflict, will eventually get rid of tanks, artillery, and mortars, said Schmidt.
	Still, he indicates that he thinks the government and the armed forces in the West will be slow to adapt to the autonomous killer robots.
	Well, how does this affect us at home, right?
	Again, we're going to just, you know, change, scrap all this stuff, give them away.
	Maybe they'll sell them.
	Who knows?
	And they'll buy all new weapons.
	Well, there was an interesting article on American Conservative about war and the cost of groceries.
	You know, we always hear this guns and butter argument.
	You know, what do you do?
	Do you build infrastructure?
	Do you build defense and that type of thing?
	Well, we're literally talking about butter.
	The price of food.
	On CNN's town hall, when Lala was being interviewed, as I write here, she was asked a pretty straightforward question about progressives recoiling from the Biden administration's apparent inability or unwillingness to use U.S. leverage with Israel to bring an end to the civilian carnage in Gaza.
	And she said, well, okay, but staying on the couch and not voting at all because of this issue, she said, I'm not going to deny the strong feelings that people have.
	I don't know that anyone who has seen the images who would not have strong feelings about what has happened.
	But, but, forget about that, she said.
	I also do know that for many people who care about this issue, they also care about bringing down the price of groceries.
	And he says, although this was done as a rhetorical side of hand, let's talk about something else.
	He said these things are not unrelated.
	So you want to abruptly shift from the deaths of nearly 43,000 people, the displacement of nearly an entire population of over 2 million in the Gaza Strip, and start talking about milk and bread at the grocery store?
	So it's kind of cringy, but they're one and the same.
	If you don't think that sending billions of dollars of weapons to Israel After years of sending arms and cash to Ukraine, if that doesn't in some way affect Americans' consternation at the cash register, then we need to talk, he says.
	In 2021, the average American family, the middle 20% of income earners, paid $17,900 in taxes to federal, state, and local governments, Of that, $10,391 went to Washington and the federal bureaucracy.
	By the way, the middle 20% is a family that's earning between $46,000 and $78,000 a year.
	And they're having to send $10,000 to the government.
	And guess what?
	That is nowhere close to what's being spent.
	As they're sending a quarter of their income, their gross income to the government, to the federal government, and even more than that, with all the taxes that we pay, It doesn't come close to paying for what the government is spending.
	We are going further and further in debt, ourselves and our children and our grandchildren, even though they're taking a quarter to a half of what we make.
	As many people have said, God only asked for 10%, right, when Israel was a nation.
	In the Old Testament.
	So buying on credit, he says, a credit card?
	Well, the interest rates are in the stratosphere.
	Yeah, they're not going to do anything about that usury stuff.
	Banks are going to get whatever they want, and they're going to be left alone.
	It doesn't matter if they can get the money for free from the Federal Reserve.
	They'll charge you 20, 30, 40, 50% on the credit card.
	We used to lock people up for doing that.
	That used to be the game of organized crime.
	Well, it actually is still the game of organized crime.
	And they still do wear the nicest suits, you know.
	Not just the mafia.
	Since the Hamas attacks on October 7th, the U.S. has given Israel nearly $18 billion in aid.
	$17.9 billion.
	This includes the annual $3.8 billion Israel normally gets, plus the $14 billion supplemental package passed by Congress in April.
	Typically, Congress would have to approve each major weapons system, but they've got a way to get around that.
	The Biden administration has been very inventive in terms of getting around any rules, laws, or congressional approval.
	The Biden administration this year has greenlit hundreds under the $25 million threshold for reporting to Congress.
	So, tons of weapons have literally flown to Israel under the radar of the legislative branch, and the cost of war report suggests that much of this was never included in the $18 billion total.
	Now, think about this.
	This is Joe Biden, who has accepted bribes and laundered money and not paid his taxes on stuff from Ukraine.
	He's a criminal.
	He knows how this stuff works.
	This is somebody who, in his administration, Decided that he was going to start having banks report on us if we had a $600 transaction.
	Remember that?
	It used to be like $10,000 or something.
	And that was years and years ago when we were in business.
	They might have adjusted that for inflation.
	But he took it down to $600.
	And then what is he doing?
	He's structuring transfers to Israel by keeping them under the reporting limit of $25 million.
	What a criminal he is.
	So, yeah, we're not going to file that TPS report.
	Let's not do that.
	This is like structuring deposits.
	This is what they sent Dennis Hastert to jail for.
	Actually, he was structuring withdrawals, which they shouldn't even worry about that.
	But, you know, they didn't send him to jail for pedophilia, although the judge referenced that.
	That's really what he was being sent to jail for, for a short period of time.
	But, you know, it cuts both ways.
	That's why he was picked to be a Republican in Congress, and why he was made the Speaker of the House for the Republicans for the longest amount of time was because he was blackmailable and a pedophile.
	But then when somebody blackmailed him and he tried to take the money out, then they sent him to jail for structured withdrawal.
	Anyway, Israel is not trying to save money in an effort to destroy Hamas.
	By May of this year, Israel had dropped more weight in bombs than what was laid waste to Hamburg, Dresden, and London combined during World War II. As of December, Israel had fired 29,000 air-to-surface missiles at Gaza.
	Only half of them were precision-guided.
	The rest were American-made dumb bombs that indiscriminately destroy whatever they fall on.
	At that point, some 18,000 people have been killed and 51,000 wounded in a matter of two months.
	In addition to the tens of thousands of missiles and bombs, all the way up to the 2,000-pound variety, shells, tanks, rounds, small arms, defense systems, shoulder-fired rockets, F-35 fighter aircraft, army vehicles, even fuel provided by the U.S., gave Israel its most advanced missile system as well, the THAAD. Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, which costs anywhere from $1 to $2 billion per battery.
	Are they worried about climate change?
	No.
	All these explosions, fuel, jets, and all the rest of this stuff, with all these wars everywhere?
	No, they don't have to worry about that.
	And you don't have to worry about climate change when it comes to electricity being used for AI to do surveillance, propaganda, and censorship.
	You don't have to worry about it either.
	Isn't that great?
	Just like China doesn't have to worry about it.
	India doesn't have to worry about it.
	The surveillance state doesn't have to worry about it.
	The military-industrial complex doesn't have to worry about it.
	The Pentagon doesn't have to worry about it.
	But you should not be allowed to have meat.
	And you will not be able to afford meat.
	Because they're at war with us in that area, in that sphere as well.
	And the excuse is climate change, right?
	With all of these explosions, all this money that is being wasted, all these lives that are being wasted, It's been estimated that Washington spent an additional $4.9 billion, increasing its own military presence in the Middle East last year, including leading a coalition of countries against the Hootie attacks and commercial shipping in the Red Sea.
	I know that should be Hoothy, Hoothy.
	I just have to call it Hootie, like Hootie and the Blowfish.
	Because they're blowing the fish out of the water, too.
	Rather than use the leverage...
	Listen to this.
	Rather than use the leverage of all these billions of dollars that are being given to Israel, rather than trying to use that as a lever to try to get a ceasefire, the U.S. appears to be content to fire off $2 million missiles at cheap Houthi weapons that seem to be in endless supply over the last year.
	Does anybody ask how long can America take it?
	We're just talking about the economic aspects of it.
	The bankrupt aspect of it.
	What about when they are successful in terms of bringing violence to our shores and to our country?
	We're not isolated from this.
	And they're doing everything they can to expose us to it.
	Leave the borders wide open.
	Come on!
	Everybody come in.
	Especially young single men.
	Whatever.
	Well, they'll print more money.
	They'll raise the taxes.
	They'll give us an army of...
	IRS agents.
	They'll use AI to scrutinize every single aspect of our bank accounts.
	Higher prices at the grocery store are just one aspect.
	They said it might be easier to stomach if we knew that our hard-earned income was not being sent to fight other governments' battles with no effort or influence put into ending them.
	It also might be easier if we knew that it wasn't being used to kill children and continue on with the war.
	I had a listener who has been a listener for a very long time, said, I understand you oppose your country's involvement in foreign wars, and I completely agree with your reasoning.
	However, it's difficult not to share the joy of these Iranians who were seen dancing on the roof after the Israelis attacked.
	So what's going on with that?
	Well, If we go back and we look at the American involvement in Iran, we went back in the 1950s and started the coup, you know, it's interesting, the people, part of the propaganda is determining where the beginning point is going to be, right?
	If your beginning point for what is going on in Iran is when they took over the embassy, which is what they want everybody to think of.
	And nobody thought about Iran before that.
	It was just always, there was always a Shah in Iran, right?
	Well, no, never.
	Iran, Iraq, these are constructs after World War II. You know, these ancient people groups that were there, the Babylonians, the Persians, the Medes, Kurdistan, everything.
	But they split them up between these two, so they didn't really have a homeland.
	They're fighting everybody, trying to get a homeland.
	The Iranians came out of the Persians.
	Iraq came out of the Babylonians.
	But, you know, they make these arbitrary distinctions.
	And then when they get a leader, a left-leaning leader, who wants to do something with you all, the CIA takes him out and puts in the Shah of Iran and a brutal regime that was there.
	And then that brutal regime, and there were a lot of people, it was a very Western country there under the Shah for a couple of decades.
	But the brutality of the Shah and the CIA... Training and torture.
	That blew back, and they wound up with the Ayatollah, and they got even worse.
	And so there's a lot of people in Iran that a lot of them are Christians.
	A lot of them want to have a free and open society.
	They don't want to have this Islamic rules and religious police like they're in Saudi Arabia on everybody's back, beating and arresting in the case of Saudi Arabia, killing people.
	I don't know that the Iranians chop off heads like the Saudis do.
	But still, a lot of them really hate their own government.
	Which is a blowback because of what the CIA did.
	And again, it goes back to our involvement.
	These people are dancing on the roof.
	They're likely going to be collateral damage in a war.
	As Christians, we should be trying to stop these wars on a moral basis.
	As Americans, we should be fed up with the cost of this.
	Even if it's only the cost in dollars.
	If we don't even care about the lives that are there.
	He says, I agree with you on Netanyahu's lack of moral fiber.
	Well, so do many of the people in Israel as well.
	He says, though not at all with your belief about the origins of the Ashkenazis, and I don't really care about that.
	Ethnic groups don't matter to me.
	It's not a hell I care about at all.
	I know Gerald does.
	I don't care about it at all.
	But he says, I find it difficult to fault his decision to retaliate.
	And I don't fault his decision to retaliate.
	I fault his decision to continue this conflict for over a year.
	With a stated goal of killing every man, woman, and child.
	That's genocide.
	So they can have land.
	And saying, well, we're headed to Damascus next.
	Right?
	They're on a crusade of endless war for conquering, killing civilians for land.
	I don't support that.
	I won't support it.
	I will never support that.
	And I will not support that as a Christian.
	And I don't care what your eschatology is.
	You're not going to convince me that your eschatology, even if you got it right, overrules the clear moral principles for Christians.
	And so that's where I stand on all of this stuff.
	But thank you, guys, and thank you for your support over the years.
	And he finishes it with a nice comment, so I really do appreciate that.
	And I had an email from Texas Freedom Forever.
	I said during Shiva's interview, you said, Outsourcing Tyranny.
	You need to write an article with that title.
	I do.
	I need to write some articles, period.
	But I think that is the way that we should view this stuff.
	When we look at whether it's censorship, They outsource the tyranny.
	They use these private corporations as a beard.
	Oh, it's not us.
	It's private corporations, except they're giving the orders to the private corporations.
	They're giving money to the private corporations, and we see it happening again with the flock surveillance cameras.
	Oh, it's not us.
	It's just private corporations creating a massive national and international network of geospatial intelligence to track and to anticipate your every move.
	This is something that the U.S. government has been working on for decades.
	Just like they worked on the internet for decades.
	Just like they wanted to have total information awareness and they wanted to have your life log.
	But then people say, oh, you don't want the government keeping a life log.
	Okay, we'll create Facebook.
	How about that?
	That'll be a life log.
	So they are outsourcing the tyranny.
	And pretending it's not coming from them.
	And we know full well where it's coming from.
	We always knew.
	That the censorship was coming from the government even before we saw the documents.
	And now that we've seen the documents, you still have the same liars and crooks who are doing this stuff, ignoring it, pretending that they don't know anything about that.
	I'll just say one more thing, too.
	I got this from Texas Swift.
	So about a year ago, you had a show with a brilliant rant about, I hate Trump, I hate Tucker, I hate Wayne Allen Root.
	They did it for the money, they did it for politics.
	They're Judas goats and everything.
	And so I looked at that and I thought, wow, maybe I need to kind of tone it down.
	I don't know what this thing was, but I look at it, and of course, you know, we can always, we always have to look at what we do and we have to think of it, you know, whenever we get angry, we always think we're justified in it, right?
	But I do think that as this continues to go on, we have to warn people.
	I was just talking the other day about how artificial intelligence is being used to scam people.
	They nearly used it as a scam to take people's property.
	Should we talk about that type of thing?
	What if somebody is ripping people off, stealing their homes, stealing their bank accounts, Should we continue?
	Should we just say, well, okay, I don't want to sound hateful to warn people about that.
	I mean, I look at this, and I've made the analogy as well with the shots.
	I said, we've got some guys on the top of a building, and he's shooting people in the street.
	You don't give him a pass, even if it's Donald Trump, right?
	And you've got to warn people about that.
	And if you know who did it, you've got to warn people about that person.
	Don't give them another rifle.
	Don't give them another four years.
	And I'm not saying vote for Lala either.
	Look, there's no good choice.
	There's not anybody that I will vote for.
	But if you want to vote for one of them, fine.
	Just don't endorse either one of them because they're clearly immoral.
	I mean, if you want to do something in the privacy of the voting booth, uh, but don't flaunt it out in public.
	Okay, folks.
	That's all I'm saying.
	Uh, and yesterday, uh, while we had the, uh, G Edward Griffin interview, I hope you all enjoyed it.
	Uh, what an interesting life he's had and, um, uh, really remarkable man.
	We had some tips, and I wanted to thank people for that as well.
	Sprumford, thank you very much.
	And he or she writes, love G. Edward Griffin.
	This man, along with Eustace Mullins, was responsible for waking me up for our captured monetary system via the Federal Reserve Act of 1913.
	Mr.
	Griffin is a model American.
	Yes.
	Don't frag me, bro.
	Thank you very much.
	Please ask Mr.
	Griffin if he thinks that we're headed to an economic collapse on the scale of the Great Depression and his thoughts about the fourth turning Great Reset.
	And of course, it was a recorded interview, so he didn't get that comment.
	But...
	He does think that we are headed for a really awful situation.
	He made that pretty clear.
	So just be prepared.
	Make sure you've got skills.
	Make sure you've got some supplies.
	Make sure you've got relationships.
	Look at things that are happening locally.
	But more than anything, you need to have a foundation, your relationship with God.
	And that's going to get you through a lot of things.
	It's going to get you through eternity, regardless of what happens.
	DG8, thank you for the tip.
	David, keep up the good work.
	God bless you and your family.
	Thank you.
	Mark C., thank you as well.
	You like the interview.
	ACSAB, thank you.
	And they thank us.
	Star Barkley, now a monthly supporter.
	Thank you very much.
	And for all over the road, thank you for all that you do.
	I appreciate that.
	He does our...
	It puts stuff up on Telegram.
	He said, Karen, please have David give his opinion on ranked choice voting tomorrow.
	I emailed him about it last night.
	Thanks.
	He did it earlier today.
	Glad you got Jed Gord Griffin on.
	He's a goat.
	He is.
	He really is.
	And so, yeah, we did the ranked choice voting, and I put that in the description for the show.
	I put the time code for where that was.
	We didn't break it out as a separate report because it's kind of short.
	Big Daddy Kane from yesterday says, Farmers Insurance canceled my homeowner's policy, said I had a hazardous material seen from satellite photo, all blurred.
	I had to appeal by showing photos of the yard and the garage area.
	Well, hopefully that took care of it.
	It didn't take care of it for these people that I was talking about yesterday.
	Three solar panels, I think.
	And Liberty Mutual believed that it was mildew or something, or algae on their roof, and they canceled them.
	But it was clearly...
	They even had somebody come out and look at it and say, look, it's solar panels, and there's no structural damage at all to the roof.
	But they canceled it for that.
	They were just looking...
	They cancel people in California because they've had a lot of disasters there and because California, I guess, has put limitations on what they can do in terms of raising rates.
	So the other alternative is to just cancel you.
	We're going to take a quick break.
	break.
	We'll be right back.
	PIANO PLAYS
	PIANO PLAYS
	What we are allowed to do by the feminists.
	These people have lots of rules for us to live by.
	They've got pronouns for us to use as well.
	The War on Halloween 2024.
	You've got feminist costume ideas.
	This is coming from Armageddon Pros.
	What can you dress up as?
	Can you use blackface this year?
	Don't think so.
	And as he points out, he says, Dylan Mulvaney gets to prance around in front of cameras cosplaying femininity with impunity, but you better not wear blackface or even sunglasses at night to pay homage to Stevie Wonder.
	That would be racist and ableist.
	This is the ethos of the social justice banshees who don't want the deplorables to ever have any fun whatsoever.
	Obviously, being a protected class, trannies are free to dress as however they wish or to undress completely if necessary, right?
	Remember?
	It just amazes me.
	You know, this one calls up.
	I'd like to report there's a naked man walking down the street.
	What?
	Where is he?
	said the police.
	This is what happened, you know, and it's like, oh, it's such and such.
	Oh, that's just the pride parade.
	Don't worry about it.
	So, trannies, I have 100% immunity from reproach.
	But the shoe is on the other foot.
	It's a hate crime, if it is.
	The poll found that only a third of respondents approve of blackface.
	With Halloween nearing a new YouGov survey, asked Americans about the Halloween costumes and whether they find certain costumes.
	By the way, if we talk about blackface, you do know that there are exceptions for Democrats with all this stuff, right?
	Just like Ralph Northam or Justin Trudeau.
	You know, if you are...
	With them politically, they don't care.
	We should tell you that they really don't care.
	It's just a political tool of oppression is really what they're talking about.
	With Halloween coming close, they ask Americans about their Halloween costumes and whether or not they find certain costumes.
	For example, a costume with a realistic gun.
	Oh, that's not good.
	Can't have that.
	Or a cultural costume worn by somebody who is not of that culture.
	Is that acceptable or unacceptable?
	Majorities of Americans say the following are acceptable Halloween costumes.
	A woman dressing up as a man, yeah, 70% say that's okay.
	A man dressing up as a woman, slightly less, but still 65%.
	A child dressing up in a cultural costume, if they're not part of that culture, 62%.
	And think about this.
	This is, you know, we still have about a third of the people who think, that's not okay.
	Um...
	An adult dressing up in a cultural costume if they're not a part of the culture.
	That's falling down to 56%.
	Fewer say that it's acceptable for a non-Native American person to dress as a Native American person.
	Only 52%.
	And again, as I pointed out many times, that was a mascot at our high school.
	We even had our drum majors didn't wear like a drum major outfit.
	They dressed them up.
	There was a chief, so they dressed them up in this big headdress, and they had a spear.
	Actually, speared the bass drum once, though.
	One of these guys did.
	Because they'd go out and twirl.
	He lost his balance and stuck the spear through the bass drum.
	But for the most part, they were not clownish.
	I mean, they looked pretty good.
	But they were shirtless, and they would rub Texas dirt all over them so they looked red skin.
	And then they would paint them on top of that.
	And it was...
	Boy, I tell you, that would really freak people out today, wouldn't it?
	Try to find some of those pictures and put them up to freak people out.
	It's not okay for a person who is not transgender to dress as a transgender person.
	Only 39% of the people supported that.
	Or for a person to wear a costume with a realistic-looking gun or other weapon.
	That's even worse.
	Only 34%.
	Two-thirds of people don't want you wearing, you know, dressing up as a cowboy.
	I guess that's, you know, you can still dress up as Woody because Woody never had a gun, right?
	There's a big message with that.
	I talked to my sons about that.
	I didn't watch Toy Story as kids.
	Or for a white person to wear blackface makeup in order to appear as a black person.
	33% only would approve of that.
	Turlock Journal says, I confess, somewhere out there a photo may exist of me wearing a white sheet.
	And before someone finds it and posts it on Twitter, causing floodgates of indignation to open up, the person says, well, it was Halloween, I was 10 years old, I was short, I was heavy, my mom was a single mom, had four kids, she couldn't afford to do it, so she got a sheet and she cut some holes in it, and it went as a ghost.
	But she's not saying chill out about this.
	What she says is the biggest fear you should have as a parent should not be about razor blades and candy, the urban myth, or distracted drivers running over your kids, or your kid eating enough Halloween candy to ultimately pay for your family dentist next trip to Hawaii.
	No, what you should be concerned about, she says, is what your child wears as a costume could derail their chances of getting into college.
	Or destroy their career 30 years down the road.
	Well, they'll be okay as long as they're a Democrat.
	Isn't that amazing?
	Yeah, don't worry about them getting run over by a car.
	Worry about how that costume is, if not, it's going to be shown.
	Another person says, well, Halloween is the best time, the worst of times, especially if you're a socially conscious feminist.
	Yeah, on the one hand, you can get candy and you can dress up, but on the other hand, something about dressing up seems to bring out the worst impulses in people, and I noticed.
	Just look at the racially insensitive costumes that are popping up every year.
	So, what is a fun-loving, costume-appreciating feminist to do?
	Well, we did the vetting for you.
	These suggestions will save you some trouble figuring out which costume best shows off your passion for gender equality.
	And so, they say you can dress up as AOC or as that soccer lesbian with purple hair.
	This is a satire with this one.
	So this is where we are with our society.
	And it truly is crazy.
	But it's even crazier in real life sometimes, I guess.
	You know, when the Scottish National Party has now come out and said there are 24 different genders.
	It's Halloween every day, right?
	You can be whoever, whatever you want to be.
	You can pretend that you're a different sex and gender.
	You can pretend that you're a different ethnic group.
	You know, just don't have any fun with it, I guess.
	I don't know.
	Scotland's National Party has been branded, disconnected from the real world after they put up a list of genders with 24 options.
	So, you know, what you need to do is you've got to vote for Trump and he'll put an end to this, right?
	Oh, wait a minute.
	He wanted to bring the trannies into this beauty contest.
	Melania, okay, she loves all this stuff.
	And she likes porn, too.
	And the two of them used to hang out with Epstein.
	So, yeah, we need to have this revival.
	You know, Vivek is fine with all this stuff, as long as you don't interfere with women's sports.
	Listen to this.
	Our message to gay Americans tonight is this.
	You're free to marry who you want, if you want, without the government standing in your way.
	But that doesn't mean that boys get to compete with girls in girls sports, or you do genital mutilation and chemical castration on our children.
	Yeah, you know what he's doing, right?
	They've identified the demographic of women as being a problem for them, so let's throw them a bone.
	Let's talk about men and women's sports, but everything else, hey, that's okay, right?
	So...
	The Scottish National Party, with its 24 different genders, they put that list onto a document that was guidance for public bodies in Scotland who collect data on sex and gender.
	And it comes after the first minister, John Swinney, in July, confirmed that there were only two genders.
	But now they are moving away from that silly assertion.
	Who just thought of male and female, right?
	Scottish National Party needs to stop playing to the minority and start governing for the majority by showing some common sense and focusing on the real priorities of people, they said.
	And it is pretty amazing when you think about this.
	You know, 24 genders, and they've got fewer people than Tennessee.
	You know, they've got five and a half million people.
	Tennessee's got slightly over seven.
	Britney Spears, by the way.
	Here's where this leads.
	Britney Spears is so confused that she married herself.
	She dressed up, and it wasn't for Halloween.
	She dressed up in a wedding dress, took pictures of it.
	Now, this is what Hollywood and this depravity there does to people.
	She did a video.
	She said, I want to make a major announcement.
	I have married myself.
	You know, the person she loves.
	But the question is, with Britney Spears, will this marriage last?
	Or will the personalities split off in different directions?
	She said it was the most brilliant thing she's ever done.
	Well, compared to her music, perhaps yes.
	Pretty much everything looks brilliant compared to her music, so-called music.
	She appeared wearing a wedding dress on October the 20th in a video she put on Instagram to talk about how she'd married herself.
	The pair of posts came in the wake of her divorce.
	From her ex-husband after only a year of marriage.
	Again, so like I said, how long will this marriage do herself last?
	It was a blessing to be able to share my life with someone for such a long time, she said, after that one-year marriage.
	And, you know, people grow apart and people move on after a year.
	She's 30 years old.
	So, where are we now with all this stuff?
	Well, we have, it is a dark time.
	And we should take the darkness seriously.
	This is an ex-psychic.
	Who is warning about her life in all of this darkness.
	She says, I am a former psychic, and I am noticing that tools of divination, such as Ouija board, tarot cards, are being marketed more in the Halloween season.
	Parties are having tarot card readers.
	You're seeing this in home goods, CVS. Your kids are going to these stores like Five Below.
	They're glorifying tools of divination.
	They're making them seem like they're fun, like it's no big deal.
	She said, it's interesting to see that this goes along with the Halloween season, isn't it?
	She said, there's something demonic in there.
	She said, when I was 12, I actually had two psychic attacks.
	And she defines a psychic attack as receiving information psychically.
	She said, around that time, she had her first tarot card reading.
	She said, it seemed to be innocuous, though now she believes that it was a satanic practice.
	She said, what seemed to be innocuous ended up to being addictive.
	She said it was a horrible rabbit hole of destruction.
	I always say there's a gateway or an entryway into the demonic, whether it is tarot cards or Ouija boards or horoscopes or what have you.
	She found herself increasingly doing readings and exploring tools like divination, numerology, astrology, other practices like that.
	She said one of the facets of her experience that initially convinced her to continue for years in the occult was that the demons she was summoning would appear as clients' deceased loved ones.
	I could see the demon, because that's what it is.
	He said it was masquerading as a mom.
	I actually heard a Christian teacher once say, you know, he was a pastor of a big church, and he said, I had somebody ask me, he said, what would you say if I told you that my deceased mom appeared at the end of the bed and talked to me?
	He goes, I'd believe you.
	I just wouldn't believe it was your mom.
	Huh?
	My biggest warning, she said, would be when you do devilish things, you get devilish outcomes, and you will get devilish results.
	Satan masquerades as an angel of light, so what you think is fun, what you think is innocent, is actually a tool of the devil, a game of the devil.
	And it's not a game to mess with.
	Which then brings us Talloween, and it's now becoming a very big thing in Ireland, where it really goes back to a pagan festival.
	I always pronounce this as Samhain.
	They say it is pronounced as So-en.
	And, you know, maybe that is the correct pronunciation with it.
	But it's such a big deal that Irish Catholics have started an organization to oppose this growing pagan festival.
	And they said it's a public campaign organized by the Irish Society for Christian Civilization.
	Seeking to inform people about the true nature of the annual Puka Festival.
	And again, I have no idea if that's the way you pronounce that or not.
	It's got some kind of an accent on the U, so I don't know how you pronounce that.
	The festival has grown to significant prominence in Ireland in recent years.
	They have it from October the 31st to November the 3rd.
	And the official website describes the festival as marking, quote, the mystical traditions of so-in, yet brimming with contemporary energy.
	It invites visitors to dance with otherworldly creatures to experience Halloween in its most authentic form.
	The multi-day program posits two events as particular highlights.
	The gathering of the spirits and the lighting of the Samhain fire, the Soen fire, I guess.
	The street performance, music, and a wild celebration of lore.
	The looming darkness, they said.
	As light turns to darkness and the veil thins, so too will the visions of otherworldly, shape-shifting spirits on their journey through the original home of Halloween in Ireland.
	The lighting of the fire, the organizers write, is a way to connect festival-like attendees to the ancient pagan rituals.
	They said the ritual serves to bridge the gap between the physical and spiritual world.
	And of course, you know, maybe they can drop some hallucinogenics as well, because that's now being normalized, being normalized by therapy.
	It's also, we've got mainstream articles talking about, there was one that was put up on the Drudge Report.
	This is, you know, a housewife who is doing mushrooms, you know, like once a week or something like that.
	And, you know, kind of made me think of...
	The White Rabbit.
	Was that the name of it?
	From Jefferson Airplane?
	You know, the pills that mother gives you don't do anything at all.
	Well, this mom's got some pills.
	So the pagan festival was held to mark the turn of the season from summer to winter.
	They believed it to involve the passing of spirits between the world.
	It centered around evil spirits, particularly one known as puka.
	And the time was marked by the brief and temporary ascendancy of the powers of darkness.
	I wonder if that is the right way to pronounce that.
	I remember at a film, Jimmy Stewart, Harvey, they said Harvey was a puka.
	Yeah, never, never.
	I thought, what in the world are they talking about?
	I mean, that's what that is.
	The first commandment is, I am the Lord your God.
	You shall have no strange gods before me.
	That is broken.
	That is replaced by false gods like this puka, this divination.
	And at the same time, we've got George Barna who looks at surveys, people's attitudes, what they tell them about what they believe, their worldview, what their life is like.
	He says, you know, We've rejected God, and he said, I think it is fueling the crisis that underlines our country.
	Is part of America's massive mental health malaise actually rooted in a spiritual crisis, they ask?
	He said, we're in a situation where the best estimates are that we have about one out of every four adults with some kind of diagnosable mental illness.
	There's a wide range.
	But when we look at it more deeply, we find that those numbers are higher the younger a person is.
	So, as you try to dig into it, to try to figure out things like anxiety, depression, fears, suicidal thoughts, OCD tendencies.
	Yeah, when they locked everybody down and said, stay away, don't touch anything.
	Remember?
	2020.
	It's the OCD nation.
	It really was.
	Addictions.
	So when we look at all those things, what we find is that often what may be happening is that it's not that they have some kind of chemical imbalance or some kind of a physical issue that's causing what appears to be mental illness.
	What's causing it may be their belief structure.
	Their worldview.
	And so he says, the majority of people in Gen Z, that is 56% of Gen Z, which are individuals in their teens and early 20s, 56% of them struggle with mental health issues.
	He said only 1% of them have a biblical worldview.
	Then millennials, 49% of them, these are people in their mid-20s to late 30s and early 40s, they say they consistently wrestle with anxiety, depression, fear, etc.
	And only 2% of that generation has a biblical worldview.
	He said, but older generations like Gen X and baby boomers who have a higher proportion of members embracing a biblical worldview have a lesser percentage of people struggling with this mental illness.
	He says, people who have a biblical worldview are less likely to end up in prison, less likely to have abortions, less likely to engage in other risky behaviors like addiction.
	He said they're much more likely to have longer-lasting marriages, not to marry themselves even.
	They don't have a one-year marriage and then marry themselves.
	They rate their marriages higher in terms of fulfillment and joy.
	And they're much more likely to have a clear, compelling sense of the meaning of life.
	So, you know, when we look at what is behind all this, this is, I'll finish up here, this section before we go to break.
	This was from dissenter.com.
	And I don't know who the writer was.
	I didn't identify it, but it's an excellent article.
	Talking about contrast is the language of God's glory.
	And what we see here is a real contrast, you know?
	We see people who are increasingly embracing the darkness.
	And openly and publicly doing it at this time of year, in Halloween.
	And I think that there's a great deal in terms of, contrast is so important.
	Without it, we can't really see what is happening.
	And that's one of the reasons why when I cover the news and I do events that I think are important, and when I try to get my perspective on it, try to analyze it, it's always about comparing and contrasting.
	Because if you don't have contrast, you can't really see what's going on.
	And he begins with the example of photographs.
	He said, if you've got a photograph that's got really poor contrast, it's not interesting, you can't really see what is happening there, there's no detail, it's not very intense, there's no depth, there's no definition.
	But you crank up the contrast on it, And in the world of photography, for example, a dull image that doesn't have any contrast, doesn't have any life, it's indistinguishable, it's lost among other images, it holds no defined shape or purpose.
	But if you add contrast, if you intensify the shadows, if you brighten the highlights, suddenly it pops off the page.
	Every line, every curve, every intricate detail pops up with new life and there's clarity and depth that draws the viewer in and captivates and refuses to let go.
	So he says, In the hands of the Eternal King and Holy One, contrast is the force that magnifies his glory against the background of a world veiled in darkness.
	Of course, God's glory is never dull.
	It is absolute in its brilliance, but it's against the backdrop of our own shadows, our sin, our darkness, our self-imposed blindness.
	That's where we see His glory standing out, made even more brilliant by the contrast.
	He says, God, in His infinite wisdom, used our wickedness for His glory, for His radiance, His justice, His unyielding holiness.
	None of it would be fully perceived if not for the contrast provided by a world bound to sin.
	Like light splitting through dark clouds, the brilliance of God's nature shines even brighter when placed next to humanity's flawed and fallen nature.
	God's love, what a profound, incomparable thing, consummately revealed in John 3.16.
	And Dougalug didn't know I was going to talk about this.
	He put a tip and he said, well, today's verse is John 3.16.
	For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
	And that's where this author goes as well.
	He says, we know that verse.
	We see it on, you know, put everywhere, John 3, 16.
	It says just a few verses later, what we see there is, and this is the judgment.
	The light has come into the world, and people love the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil.
	What a revelation!
	God's love and our rejection of that love are set against each other in brutal, unavoidable contrast.
	We want the darkness because it hides our shame, and we avoid the light because it exposes what we truly are.
	Yet God's glory isn't tainted by this.
	God's glory is intensified by this.
	The pure holiness of God is brought into clear view not by being diminished, We live in a world where we see through a glass darkly.
	The full radiance of God's glory is yet to be revealed to us in this fallen world, but we watch and we catch glimpses, moments of piercing clarity.
	But here's the wonder.
	God doesn't use contrast to shame us, to leave us helpless in our sin.
	Instead, He uses it to eliminate a path toward redemption.
	His glory, His holiness, His justice, all of these attributes come to us as light piercing through the darkness, calling us out, not to condemn, but to save.
	How would we know the brilliance of forgiveness if we hadn't tasted the bitterness of guilt?
	How would we know the depth of grace if we hadn't first fallen?
	In God's economy, contrast isn't just a remainder of what we lack.
	It's an invitation to step in the glorious salvation that He offers.
	Some may say, well, that's harsh.
	Why couldn't God have created a world without the possibility of darkness?
	Why allow sin at all?
	Yet, in his wisdom, he has used the very contrast of light and dark, sin and holiness, To reveal His love in a way that defies comprehension.
	We cannot understand the brilliance of God's light if we pretend that the darkness doesn't exist.
	But when we acknowledge both, when we see the contrast, then we begin to grasp the magnificence of who He is.
	So think about that.
	This time of year when the darkness is on display.
	When the darkness is being worshipped.
	He says, we may still walk around this world of shadows, but in those moments when his light breaks through, we understand, even if just for a moment, his glory is brighter, his love is deeper, his truth more real.
	I didn't say this in here, but It reminds me of the very beginning of Genesis.
	What does it say?
	Let there be light.
	And he separated the light from darkness.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	Audimodernretroradio.com.
	Thank you very much.
	That is very kind and generous.
	I appreciate that.
	He says, I have to say once again, that it is stunning that MAGA voters are positively oblivious to Trump's blazingly unconstitutional record as president.
	And I agree.
	I never thought I would see in my lifetime what was done in 2020.
	The lockdowns and all the rest of this stuff.
	I never thought that people would put up with that.
	By the time we got to the summer, by the time we got to July, I thought, no, we're never getting out of this.
	If people are this dumb to go along with this, even one day of it, you want to talk about a masquerade?
	You want to talk about a silly thing like Halloween?
	You want to talk about darkness?
	And after four months of it, I don't think we're ever going to get out of this.
	And now they want it again.
	And, you know, as I thought about it, I thought, and, you know, of course it would come from a Republican who is actually a New York Democrat, New York City Democrat.
	It would come from somebody who was a lifelong friend, best friend of Jeffrey Epstein and the Clintons, who would pose as, you know, that people who hate everything that they stand for would embrace him as their savior.
	It's just the most delusional thing I've ever seen in my life.
	Can we talk about contrast?
	Can we talk about light and darkness?
	12 June, 1776.
	Thank you very much.
	I really do appreciate that.
	It says, for all those feeling the pinch at present that support the DK family day in and day out, this is from them all.
	Thank you so much.
	I appreciate that.
	Thank you, all my friends.
	I really do appreciate that.
	Well, let's talk a little bit about the vaccines, as they are now Lining things up to try to do this to us again.
	Well, everybody knows they're going to play this game again.
	How do we know they're going to play this game again?
	Because we've not stopped anybody from either...
	It's both parties that did this.
	It's a uni-party approach.
	So it doesn't matter whether it's Lala or Don.
	We know they're going to play this game again.
	The only question is, what lies are they going to tell us?
	Is it going to be bird flu?
	Is it going to be something else?
	Well...
	Here they are talking about bird flu and a pig.
	Yes, when pigs fly or when pigs flu.
	...sounding over bird flu after a pig tested positive for it for the first time ever in this country.
	The ad department says this pig is from a backyard farm in the Pacific Northwest.
	Shut down the backyard farms.
	It's not from a commercial farm.
	But it's a farm that's still under quarantine.
	They say there's not a risk right now to the pork supply and that the risk to humans is low.
	But keep in mind the pigs are kind of a special kind of virus petri dish.
	They can be infected with bird and human viruses at the same time, which makes it kind of dangerous.
	The news comes as this bird flu, the H5N1 virus, keeps spreading fast among dairy cows across the country.
	Berkeley Loveless is joining us now.
	Okay, how did they find it and what does it mean?
	Yeah, so it is concerning.
	So they did find it in a farm in Crook County, Oregon.
	And so this farm had positive cases of poultry on the farm.
	So out of abundance of caution, they decided to test this pig and five other pigs on the farm for H5N1 bird flu.
	So this one pig did test positive for it.
	They're currently testing two others.
	One out of five.
	So that's a good sign as well.
	But overall, as you mentioned, this is concerning because pigs are essentially mixing bulls for flu viruses that can become infected with bird and human viruses at the same time, which can allow them to mutate.
	He knows this isn't serious.
	So the concern right now is a virus that can spread to humans.
	And so there's been a lot of attention on bird flu right now.
	So far there's been 36 human cases of bird flu in the U.S., which has been a concern.
	Most of these cases, farm workers.
	Who didn't have the flu, even.
	Just a PCR test.
	Only contact he had.
	So what's the CDC doing about it at this point?
	I mean, are they kind of monitoring, keeping an eye on it?
	So they're continuing to test animals.
	So they're testing more of the pigs under quarantine as well.
	I think a big question right now is whether or not the pig truly tested positive for bird flu.
	So they're going to do additional testing.
	So is this pig really was infected with bird flu, either through sharing feed with the poultry animals or water, or did the pig somehow pick up fragments of the virus?
	And so that came up on the testing as well.
	So those are all tests.
	Those are all, you know, remaining questions right now for that.
	But there's, you know, it's a little bit concerning.
	Yeah.
	Berkley-Level Center.
	Keep an eye on it and keep us honest on that one.
	Appreciate it.
	Thanks.
	Keep us honest.
	Is that a Freudian slip?
	And at the very end of this, it's like, well, you know, they're not really sure how this pig got it.
	Did he really have it?
	Did he have fragments of it?
	So you know what they're doing is they're doing a PCR test.
	What are they even testing for?
	They haven't isolated this virus.
	They don't ever isolate viruses, remember?
	We talked about that.
	I forget the person who was doing the research.
	She sent over 250 different institutions globally.
	She said, do you have the COVID virus isolated?
	And they said no.
	A lot of them said, we don't ever do that.
	What are you talking about?
	We don't ever do that.
	We come up with a genetic model that we think approximates that.
	In the same way that when they would do the annual flu shot, Well, we don't know what flu strain is going to be around this year, they would say.
	So we're just going to pick one, and we'll vaccinate everybody for that one.
	Oh, well, that should do it, right?
	And so, you know, when you start talking about human cases, what absolute nonsense.
	Again, all of these people that we saw, now they're saying it's up to 36, but, you know, when it was about a half dozen, wasn't anybody that had any respiratory symptoms?
	They didn't have any fever.
	What'd they have?
	They had conjunctivitis, one of the most common things that you have, especially if you're working in a dirty environment around animal feces and things like that.
	If you don't clean your hands, you rub your eyes, you're going to get conjunctivitis.
	That's all they had, pinkeye.
	They were calling pinkeye bird flu and using the PCR test.
	And the other thing was, well, this is a backyard farm.
	Was it a backyard farm?
	I mean, they had chickens, they had pigs and things like that.
	Maybe it was a house.
	Maybe it was, they later on called it a farm.
	Maybe it's just a small farm.
	And when they say it's not a, you know, a real farm, maybe they mean it's not commercial agricultural endeavor with millions of pigs or something.
	And why would you let them test your livestock?
	I don't understand why anybody would allow that.
	So again, it's a PCR test.
	What are they even looking for?
	Do they know?
	The other pigs were not sick.
	It was not being transmitted to them, but you better be worried because, you know, they might somehow get transmitted to you.
	Even though these pigs that are known to not be the cleanest animals and living in close proximity with each other could not pass it on to each other.
	This is something, you know, that the pigs are a petri dish.
	A pig tree dish, I guess.
	What?
	Well, let's try to keep it honest.
	And I'm going to try to keep them honest.
	They don't like me for that.
	We're going to try to keep them real honest here.
	The godfather of vaccines.
	Yeah, you know, we got Trump, who is the...
	He's made it very clear that he's the father of the vaccine.
	But there is a godfather of the vaccine.
	Stanley Plotkin, going back to the early 1960s, this guy is pretty elderly now.
	He was doing pediatric residency as a young man in London at the Hospital for Sick Children.
	He admitted in a 2018 court case that orphans, mentally handicapped and babies of mothers who were in prison were being experimented on for the development of vaccines.
	He's an American physician who in his retirement has now worked as a consultant to the big four vaccine manufacturers as well as to biotech firms, non-profits, governments.
	His book Vaccines is the standard reference on the subject, according to Wikipedia.
	He has been nicknamed as the godfather of the vaccines.
	When he's asked about that, he said, well, I think it's ambiguous.
	Since the godfather was a criminal, I wouldn't call myself that, but obviously I can't stop other people from calling me that.
	There are quite a few people who do call him that.
	I call him a criminal.
	During the COVID pandemic, He was sought for advice on recommendations for the use of mRNA and other vaccines.
	But of course, you know, the father of the COVID vaccine is none other than Donald Trump.
	I don't know why the people who follow him would not give him that.
	And, you know, you've got to be careful.
	He's going to get really angry with you and do something to stab you in the back if you don't kiss his ring and other parts of his anatomy.
	You better give him what he wants or you're going to be disloyal.
	And you know what Trump does to disloyal people.
	In an article on Tuesday, Roman Bistrionic said the medical establishment sees you as part of an unending experiment.
	Boy, is this not true.
	Listen to this.
	This guy nails it.
	The medical establishment sees you as part of an unending experiment, a subject for trial, and an array of medications and vaccines without ever being fully informed about the potential dangers.
	You likely trust these products are meticulously tested.
	You believe that corporations and governments would never risk your well-being.
	But history tells a different story.
	And our personal history does as well, doesn't it?
	The national vaccination of DTP, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, began in the U.S. in the late 1940s in England by 1957.
	Very early on, there were indications of problems.
	A 1946 article discussed twin boys aged 10 months who both died on June 19, 1945, after receiving their second injection of DPT. DTP, rather.
	A 1948 article in Pediatrics discussed cases of brain damage following use of the vaccine.
	A 1980 report tied the use of the DTP vaccine to seizures.
	But hey, you know, it's rare.
	It's rare.
	We don't care about that, right?
	I mean, how many people are going to sacrifice?
	We don't really care.
	We did have, during some previous vaccine campaigns, When a couple of people died, you had nine states outlawed.
	We don't care about that anymore.
	Destrionic quoted Stanley Plotkin's testimony in 2018 in a Michigan court where he admitted to DTP vaccines being used in developing countries such as Latin America and Africa, despite there being a 10 times greater death rate among those who got the vaccine.
	He admitted that children of mothers in prison, the mentally challenged, populations in developing countries were experimented on by vaccine researchers and developers.
	Reading from the transcript of the court case where he was under oath, they asked him, Have you ever used orphans to study an experimental vaccine?
	Yes.
	Have you ever used mentally handicapped to study an experimental vaccine?
	Yes.
	And he says, well, I don't recall specifically having done that, but in the late 1960s it was not unusual to do that, and I wouldn't deny that I may have done so.
	Well, have you ever expressed that it's better to perform experiments on those less likely to be able to contribute to society, such as children with a handicap, than with children without or adults without handicaps?
	Well, I don't remember specifically, but it's possible I said that.
	He says, well, I'm going to hand you what has been marked as Exhibit 43.
	Do you recognize this letter that you wrote to the editor?
	He says, yes.
	Did you write this letter?
	Yes.
	As a matter of fact, this letter was Exhibit 43.
	It was something that he wrote to the New England Journal of Medicine, a 1973 article that he wrote called The Ethics of Human Experimentation.
	And so he asks him, he says, here's something that you wrote in that.
	The question is whether we are to have experiments performed on fully functioning adults and on children who are potentially contributors to society, or to perform initial studies in children and adults who are human in form, but not in social potential.
	You hear that?
	They are human in form, but not in social potential.
	And so, you know, we can do experiments on them.
	We can abort babies.
	We can do humanized mice.
	We can whatever, you know, that they're in human form and they're going to eventually become humans if we let them go.
	But they're not humans now.
	There's something else, I guess.
	And so we can do whatever we want to to them.
	And he said, yes, I did write that.
	And I said, well, it may be objected that this question implies a Nazi philosophy.
	But I don't think that it's difficult to distinguish non-functioning persons from members of ethnic, racial, economic, or other groups.
	He says, mm-hmm.
	Have you ever used babies of mothers in prison to study an experimental vaccine?
	Yes.
	Did you do so in the Belgian Congo?
	He says, yes.
	Did that experiment involve almost a million people?
	It wasn't prison people, but he's asking him, did you go to countries that were under colonial rule, right?
	Uh, did that experiment involve almost a million people?
	Well, well, all right.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	You see, it never ends.
	And so, you know, when he says, well, these are people that aren't really going to, you know, because how do you know that, right?
	Young children, you don't know they're going to contribute anything.
	So you, uh, give Beethoven the shot because his mom's, uh, you know, he's poor and, um, Yeah, he's diseased and all the rest of the stuff.
	You can identify all that stuff.
	But when you hear all of that, doesn't that kind of harken back to what Trump was saying in terms of essential businesses and essential people and things like that?
	Was that maybe what he was being told by the people that he followed?
	And, you know, he pretended at the beginning when he was running his campaign, and at the beginning he pretended that he was something of a skeptic about vaccines.
	But then in 2019, I played this over and over again, right?
	Well, it turns out that if we take a look at some of the people that he's also referenced, you know, he started, he didn't go to the 1918 flu when Joe Rogan pressed him on it.
	Because, you know, if he would have pressed him on what he did with the COVID shot, $11 billion to the Pharmaceutical companies to develop it, push it around, tell everybody it's the best thing that's ever been invented, how he saved millions of lives.
	He would have fallen back on this 1918 flu nonsense.
	But instead, you know, they mentioned vaccines and he pivots over to polio.
	Oh, vaccines are good.
	Look, saved everybody from polio.
	Well, that's not really true.
	But, you know, let's not talk about COVID stuff.
	And again, when Joe Rogan was questioned about it, he said, yeah, I had determined ahead of time that I was not going to talk about the COVID vaccines.
	And so, but he couldn't help but when Trump said something about polio in Gaza, he goes, well, that's from the oral vaccine, isn't it, that you're giving people?
	Now, here's a clip of the guy, Sabin, who created the oral polio vaccine.
	Listen to what he has to say.
	...to get rid of these viruses.
	Why would he call it an obfuscation if it was a virus that was contaminated?
	Well, no, because, well, there are 40 different viruses in these vaccines anyway that we were inactivating.
	But you weren't activating the pillow.
	That's correct.
	No, that's right.
	But yellow fever vaccine had leukemia virus in it.
	You know, this is in the days of very crude science.
	So anyway, I went down and talked to him.
	I was like, well, why are you concerned about it?
	I said, well, I'll tell you what.
	I said, I have a feeling in my bones that this virus is different.
	I don't know why to tell you this, but I've been around biology a long time.
	I just think this virus may have some long-term effects.
	And he said, what?
	I said, uh, cancer.
	I love it.
	I love it.
	Go ahead.
	Yeah.
	No.
	I said, Albert, you probably think I'm nuts, but I just had that feeling.
	Well, in the meantime, we had taken this virus and put it into monkeys and into hamsters.
	So, we had this meeting, and that was sort of the topic of the day, and the jokes that were going around was, gee, we would win the Olympics because the Russians would only loaded down with tumors.
	This is where the vaccine was being tested.
	This was, this was, I understand.
	Right.
	So, and it really destroyed, I mean, you know, it was a big image.
	Yeah, right.
	So, it was sort of the topic, you know.
	Anyway...
	Was this the Cancer Society meeting in New York?
	No, no, this was Sister Kenning.
	Oh, Sister Kenning, right.
	And Del Beckel got up and said that he foresaw problems with these kinds of agents.
	Why didn't this get out in the press?
	Well, I guess it did.
	I don't remember.
	Because we had no press reviews on it obviously.
	You don't go wrong.
	This is a scientific affair within the scientific community.
	This is a scientific affair within the scientific community.
	Yeah, that's what these guys do.
	The guy who was questioning him, by the way, was the chair of medical history at the University of Toronto.
	The laughter was not added.
	That was there in the original thing.
	It's a pretty raw video, but that's all there.
	Someone like Goy says the lockdowns, masks, and especially the social monitoring Americans did to each other gave me an entirely new perspective on my countrymen, on their cowardice, and their obedience.
	Yeah, it was not a pretty sight.
	And now we see these same people who are cowardly and obedient and compliant lining up to vote for one of these two people that was pushing all this stuff on us.
	That's a whole new level of compliance in my book.
	Guillain-Barre syndrome.
	Associated with 17 vaccines, including COVID and flu shots.
	A new long-term study accessing the association of vaccines with reported cases of Guillain-Barre syndrome.
	This is coming from Children's Health, and a lot of people are hoping that things will change because RFK is there with Trump, and I think he's using him as a beard.
	Just like he used him to get contributions from big pharmaceutical companies.
	I don't even trust RFK Jr., frankly.
	And I certainly don't trust Trump using RFK Jr.
	Don't people remember how quickly he throws people out in the street for whatever reason?
	And he doesn't, when he gets somebody that's good in a position like he had Scott Pruitt at the EPA, that was the bright spot of the Trump administration, was Scott Pruitt, who had been Attorney General in Oklahoma, and he had fought and challenged the EPA, and it was a big win to get him in as head of the EPA. And he resisted a lot of stuff, but Trump resisted him.
	On things like the Paris Climate Accord and other things like that.
	And then the Democrats manufactured these scandals, silly scandals.
	Oh, you're renting this apartment at below market value or something.
	Ridiculous stuff.
	And Trump just abandoned him.
	So he left.
	Look, there's a number of ways that he could get rid of RFK Jr., or RFK Jr.
	could leave, or RFK Jr.
	could betray us.
	I don't put any hope in any of this.
	We better not think that we're going to get these problems solved in Washington.
	They are our problems, and we need to solve our problems and not passively hope that they're going to be solved by somebody else.
	One of the ways that you stop this is just to stop complying.
	You know, when people stopped with all the masks and all the other nonsense, it just kind of gradually disappeared.
	It wasn't that any of these leaders, you know, they were following us, if you go back and remember this, right?
	It wasn't like one day they came up and they said, all right, we've thought about this a little bit more.
	We've done some actual science and we're not going to, you know, do these superstitious measures anymore.
	No.
	They tried to put a happy face, a brave face on it, when people just stopped complying.
	We have the power.
	There's more of us than there are of them.
	We never had to do any of that stuff.
	And so we need to, again...
	We recapture that understanding and not put so much concern on what's going on with this election.
	I understand that you can make a lot of money doing that.
	And I know a lot of people who do that.
	That's their business model.
	It's the business model of people on both the left and the right.
	Shame on them.
	The study published October the 19th in the Journal of Scientific Reports.
	Part of the Springer Nature family of journals examined global cases of Guillain-Barre syndrome between 1967 and 2023.
	And the authors found that of the 19 vaccines examined, 17 vaccines, including COVID-19 and the flu vaccines, were potentially associated with Guillain-Barre syndrome.
	If we go all the way back to the 1970s, that swine flu thing that was exposed by 60 Minutes and Mike Wallace And the key lady that was talking about it, she had been, you know, injured.
	She had Guillain-Barre syndrome.
	She couldn't walk for the longest time.
	She was paralyzed.
	And then she was, at the time he interviewed her, she had braces on so that she could walk.
	And we had a friend, Church, who had a flu shot and then wound up in the hospital with Guillain-Barre syndrome.
	Couldn't connect it.
	He didn't connect it.
	I mean, you got Franklin Graham pushing the vaccine.
	He winds up in the hospital with pericarditis.
	It doesn't connect it, you know?
	One to two Guillain-Barre syndrome cases per 100,000 people.
	That's rare.
	Don't worry about it.
	Forget about it, right?
	Because these people are not essential, you know?
	So, you know, you got a million people.
	You got 100 million people, right?
	Well, you're going to have a few hundred people who are non-essential, and they're just going to be taken out of society.
	We don't really care about that.
	It can be deadly.
	According to the Cleveland Clinic, less than 2% of people die from it in the acute phase of the disease when symptoms are at their peak.
	But, according to the study, the mortality rate can reach 17% in countries that have limited resources, according to the Lancet in 2021.
	AP Rumble Seat says those WW2 camp experiments just went underground.
	That's right.
	Brought these guys over here.
	Brought them over.
	Operation Paperclip.
	They became the basis of our biological and chemical research programs.
	They're at Fort...
	Dietrich, I think it was, in Maryland.
	And they would bring in these guys from Germany, and they would put American up at the top.
	But they would be like, you know, the number two, number three person, just like when the Trump administration put Gina Haspel in as number two under Pompeo, but she's really running the thing.
	And then eventually they put her in charge.
	They went underground.
	They were hidden behind bureaucratic constructs, like I just talked about, yeah?
	Like a vaccine delivery to create disease.
	They've been experimenting on the public for decades.
	That's absolutely right.
	One jaded view says, David, did you see they're pushing the regular flu again lately?
	Notice that in the news.
	Get your shots.
	Oh, I see the signs everywhere.
	Grocery stores, drug stores.
	Talked about it last week.
	You go in and get your shots and they'll give you like $20 off of groceries or something.
	And it's really come down from the potential to win a million dollars.
	Uh, but, uh, yeah, you gotta ask yourself, uh, where are they getting, uh, who, who is incentivizing all this stuff that are handing out all this money?
	We're going to take a quick break.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	We're still trying to get Tony on the line, and he should be joining us shortly.
	But it gives us a little bit of time to talk about this nudge thing that I didn't get to.
	The NIH... Is spending millions, 2.2 million, to nudge now elderly people to get more vaccines.
	And as I've talked about this, even going back to the Yale study that was released in July of 2020, they target people, demographic groups, by age, by race, ethnic group, whether they're Christians or non-Christians or all these different things.
	They have different tricks to trick us into this.
	They call it nudging.
	So, this is targeting people with propaganda based on their demographics and how they look.
	And I've said for the longest time that this is a psyop.
	I said the only science in all of this pandemic superstition of the mask and the social distancing and the six feet apart, I said the only science in any of this is behavioral psychology, behavioral science.
	And so, the...
	They're testing this.
	They're going to test it for five years.
	Maybe they should test the jab, you think?
	No, they don't care about it.
	They know what's in the jab, and they know the results that they're getting, and what they're going to test and fine-tune is the propaganda.
	And so the $2.2 million is for a clinical trial they call Be Immune, which began in 2020.
	Yeah, we noticed.
	And will run through 2025.
	Spend five years figuring out how they can trick and deceive people.
	Researchers at the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Washington are using electronic health records data to target African American, Hispanic, Asian people who have lower flu and pneumonia and herpes vaccine rates.
	The trial is testing strategies drawn from the behavioral economics, which uses insights from psychology to understand, in this case to nudge or to direct people's decision-making behavior.
	This is simply propaganda.
	Cass Sunstein did this with the Obama administration, wrote a book on it at that point in time.
	So the experts who were combining, they said, medical and business-based strategies to run studies like this.
	Go back to Edward Bernays, Madison Avenue.
	These are the people who were using psychological programming to manipulate us into wars.
	That's what he did for Woodrow Wilson.
	And then he goes to Madison Avenue to get us to buy their products.
	And now they're still doing the same thing.
	And these people are so good at pressuring you that they can get you to inject poison.
	The Penn Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, they have in-house what they call a nudge unit.
	They've worked really hard on the science of this, where behavioral design teams are dedicated to figuring out how to influence patient choices.
	Do you see how they target this, how they practice this?
	I mean, it is a fine art to these people, the fine art of deception.
	The grant is part of a massive initiative by the NIH to increase vaccine uptake by changing how people make decisions.
	Hundreds of millions of dollars in grants since 2020 to create quote, culturally tailored pro-vaccine propaganda to promote COVID-19 and flu shots.
	And of course, Trump is funding it very heavily.
	It also included more than 50 grants worth $40 million designed to increase HPV vaccine uptake.
	The range of tested interventions is scaled on a ladder.
	Nudges lower on the ladder.
	Try presenting people with information so they can make their own decisions about vaccines.
	And as you move up the ladder, it's this pyramid, as you move up, they become more and more coercive.
	Nudges that are higher on the ladder either prompt people to make decisions or simply plan their decisions for them at the very top.
	We have scheduled you for this and you must go, that type of thing.
	One nudge automatically sets up a vaccine appointment for people, compelling them to go to their appointment and to get vaccinated unless they intentionally opt out.
	There's so many different ways that they can gaslight people.
	You have to say, well, what leverage do they have over people?
	Well, I You know, if you are in the VA or something like that, they might make this, as we have seen, they might make these vaccines, your healthcare and other areas, contingent on your vaccine uptake.
	That's at the very top of the pyramid.
	At the very bottom, they say, do nothing.
	Simply monitor the vaccination rates.
	And the next one, provide information.
	Offer education on benefits of vaccination.
	The next one, frame the information.
	Deliver social comparison feedback on vaccination rate among peers and healthier individuals.
	And on and on and on.
	And then you make it more and more, we're going to help you to do this.
	Finally, you get to the point where they say, I've scheduled you for it.
	You've got to go get it.
	The opt-out framework has been effective in other areas of health care.
	For example, in colorectal cancer screening or persuading more people to take their flu shots.
	I had these people try to do that to us.
	You know?
	Oh, well, you've got to have this test.
	Because of your age, you're going to have this test.
	Sorry, if it ain't broke, don't probe it.
	Because you're not going to fix anything.
	You start probing around, you're probably going to break something.
	So stay away from me.
	Yeah.
	If something's hurting, I'll let you know, and I'll get your opinion about it, and then I'll find my own treatment.
	I just got to say, you know, doctors killed both of my parents.
	Doctors have injured both of my sons.
	I despise these people.
	They're absolutely evil.
	Penn's Nudge Unit, which bills itself as the world's first behavioral design team embedded within a health system.
	Again, Cass Sunstein's 2008 book, Nudge.
	I remember talking about that.
	I said, look at this.
	They're putting the plan out about how they're going to manipulate and propagandize people.
	Pennsylvania University of Pennsylvania launched their Nudge Unit in 2016.
	Inspired by David Cameron's nudge unit in the UK, which was put in in 2010.
	And so this is an established practice.
	It is these greedy, deceptive monsters who make money by harming people.
	Even the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Gavi, says, well, this theory has its critics.
	Detractors argue that nudges can be paternalistic, they can be invasive, they can be ideological and coercive in ways that erode public trust.
	Do not trust them.
	Absolutely do not trust them.
	Well, don't trust this guy either with his lemonade stand.
	We're going to take a quick break, and we've now got Tony on the line, and we'll be right back, folks.
	Stay with us.
	We're trying to.
	We're trying to.
	We're trying to.
	We're trying to.
	And now, The David Knight Show.
	All right, we're back.
	I don't know if we've got Tony or not.
	Not really sure what's happening here.
	We're going to have some problems with the board.
	So we're going to continue on.
	We've got Tony on the line.
	We're trying to get this set up, but we've got some technical issues here.
	Not really sure what's happening.
	So let's talk a little bit about climate.
	As I said before, we have now somebody's done some science, and they said, well, you know, the science that was settled, well, it actually isn't.
	We found, according to our experiments, that plants absorb 31% more CO2 than we ever thought.
	As I said at the beginning of the program, perhaps this is why every one of their computer models has been wrong for 60 years.
	Maybe if they start with that fundamental misconception, they can't get anything to work.
	A new study reveals the plants have been absorbing 31% more CO2 than previously believed.
	A glaring error that casts serious doubt on climate models, emissions scenarios, and policy prescriptions like net zero.
	None of this stuff makes any sense, folks.
	We know that it's all been science fiction.
	For years we were told that science was settled, that the urgent action was needed to avoid catastrophic warning, but this discovery suggests that our models have been dramatically underestimating nature's ability to manage CO2. This revelation not only upends the rationale behind aggressive policies, but it also raises broader questions about the supposed certainty of climate science.
	And they begin by talking about the myth of settled science, but I always said science is never settled.
	The only time we've had advances in science is when you've had somebody who's questioned the status quo, the conventional wisdom.
	Every time science advances is because one person stood up against the collective wisdom of history and the academy and said, yeah, but actually I did this and I didn't get the results that you're talking about.
	Well, we looked at this and we can't really isolate any viruses.
	And we haven't really been able to see any evidence of contagion, even though we put people, we did a 45-year experiment on trying to transmit colds to people.
	We haven't been able to do that.
	So, at some point, you've got to be able to question the science.
	And if you've got people, as we do now, who will, their response to all this is just to censor you and shut you down.
	We're not talking about science, we're talking about authority, and we're talking about authoritarian society.
	Here's the abstract, by the way.
	This was something that was sent and published on Nature.
	And the abstract says, terrestrial photosynthesis, or gross primary production, GPP, It's the largest carbon flux in the biosphere, but its global magnitude and spatiotemporal dynamics remain uncertain.
	The global annual mean of GPP is historically thought to be around, and they give the units of measurement, but it's about 31% lower, they said.
	This disparity is a source of uncertainty in predicting climate, carbon cycle feedbacks.
	Here we infer what this is from carbonyl sulfide, an innovative tracer for CO2 diffusion from ambient air to leaf chloroplasts.
	Thrustomata and mesophyll layers.
	We demonstrate that explicitly representing mesophyll diffusion is important for accuracy, quantifying the spatiotemporal dynamics of the sulfide taken up by the plant.
	So we're getting into the weeds here, literally.
	But the bottom line is, that's just the technical jargon of this study.
	The bottom line is...
	That the plants are absorbing a great deal more CO2. And so, okay, we do have it fixed.
	We've got Tony.
	Okay, so we're going to take a quick break, and we're going to get Tony on right away, and I'll give you the rest of this and the consequences of this when we come back.
	We'll be right back.
	Using free speech to free minds.
	Screams It's the David Knight Show.
	It takes so long to get you on, Tony.
	It's great to have you on.
	Always interesting to talk to.
	And right now, everything is really changing, besides the election and the effects on that.
	Somebody sent me this article.
	St.
	Louis Fed releases an article on why a gold standard won't work.
	They said it's because of gold's lack of a fixed supply is a significant problem.
	It's like, what?
	What are they talking about?
	You just need to be able to manufacture as much of this stuff as you want.
	And so they say the supply of gold is not fixed.
	Well, it's a lot more fixed than the supply of their paper money, isn't it?
	It's amazing to see that argument.
	That's an interesting observation.
	The fact that gold is not fixed makes it their problem.
	And I think our founding fathers would disagree with that.
	I think history is going to judge them and disagree with that.
	Did you see the press conference where Janet Yellen was asked about, is she worried about the dollar losing the world's reserve currency status?
	And when the question was asked, the monument for the Treasury Department fell off the podium.
	Did you see that?
	I didn't see that.
	I didn't see that.
	That's great.
	It was only a couple of days ago.
	Yeah, live.
	I mean, she asked about tariffs, and then she was asked about this.
	She says, do you have any anxiety about the dollar losing the world's reserve currency status?
	As soon as the question was asked, literally the treasury seal fell off the podium, and Janet Yellen just looked kind of dazed and around the place.
	I'll have to send it to you.
	Very apropos.
	Then Dagon falls over and the head breaks off.
	Yeah.
	That's crazy.
	That's crazy.
	Yeah, something, that's a sign for us, isn't it?
	Well, when we're looking at what is happening with this election, there's a lot of uncertainty about that.
	But, of course, I think everybody understands that nothing is really going to change afterwards.
	I mean, there's not, nobody's talking about any fixes for inflation.
	I don't, I'll be surprised if we got a fix for the wars.
	But certainly nothing to stop inflation.
	As a matter of fact, both of them are looking to increase spending as they hand out tax breaks to various other people.
	So all the fundamentals are still going to be there, I think, after the election, right?
	Oh, absolutely.
	And we're looking at an all-time high for gold.
	It hit $2,790.
	Really what that is, is that the currencies around the world are losing to gold.
	I mean, they're printing more.
	The governments, the central banks are printing more.
	It's devaluing their own currencies.
	And against gold, which is a fixed asset, is a commodity, is a precious metal, is finite.
	And they're losing against that.
	This is something that's happening.
	It's not just in the United States, but worldwide.
	And we're going to continue to see Gold prices rise.
	And they're not really rising, though.
	I mean, again, its currencies are falling against gold.
	And, you know, it's interesting.
	I was reading that since the invasion of Russia, by Russia into Ukraine, and the sanctions that were placed, central banks have bought five times more gold.
	They increased their central gold bank purchases by five times.
	And every time that 100 tons of gold gets bought by the central banks, the price of gold goes up between 1.5 and 2%.
	And this has been steady for the last two-plus years.
	I think we're only going to continue to see these trends because, again, uncertainty, geopolitical tensions, and really the failures of governments to have any sort of fiscal sanity in the face of reality.
	And we're going to have, I think, a reset of prices globally.
	Yeah.
	Oh, yeah.
	Absolutely.
	And, you know, when you look at what is happening with the BRICS, that is only accelerating.
	And it's going to be that competition between these two economic systems, I think, that's going to continue to drive the accumulation of that.
	In addition to what you always talk about, the fact the massive debt accumulation that we've got globally is not going to go away.
	So all of those things, you know, they're trying to set up different standards, trying to get themselves to be Trusted by more than the other system, that kind of competition, I think all that is going to drive, continue to drive gold accumulation by the central banks.
	Yeah, that's the trend that's going to continue.
	Nothing's really going to derail that.
	Regardless of what happens this coming Tuesday with the election, gold, and I think Bitcoin will continue to rise.
	There may be, you know, I mean, short-term differences depending on which candidate makes it across the finish line or what's selected.
	But I'm just looking at the The bigger picture here.
	And the trend is worldwide, countries like the BRICS nations moving away from the dollar.
	The dollar's in trouble.
	We're going to see a continued loss of purchasing power with the U.S. dollar.
	People are going to move into gold.
	And that's going to continue to what appears to be driving prices higher.
	But really what it is is that currencies are falling.
	Yeah, yeah.
	You've got CBDC and all of the climate stuff of the BRICS manifesto that they released.
	I mean, they're fully on board with everything from the UN and all the rest of them.
	So we've got two competing systems, except it's like the two competing parties that we've got here.
	We've got Democrats and Republicans.
	We've got the BRIC system.
	We've got the Western system with SWIFT and all the rest of this.
	And yet both of them are embracing this full-on digital ID, the CBDC, and all the rest of this stuff at the same time.
	I just look at it, and the only thing that I see is that they're both going to be trying to shore up their credentials by buying gold, and that we don't want to be a part of either one of these.
	We want to try to be outside of it, and we should be trying to shore up our independence as well with gold, I think.
	You're absolutely right, and it's like talking about politics here in this country.
	If you start criticizing one party, they assume you're for the other one.
	So if I start talking about what the BRICS nations are doing to get outside of the Western system, the U.S. system, the dollar, and de-dollarization, they assume that I'm I'm not.
	I sympathize with a lot of their ideology and where they're headed and their strategy getting out of the SWIFT system and utilizing their own cross-border payments.
	I think that's great.
	I like decentralization, but I think it's an opportunity for all of us.
	To look at less being outside of the system, being your own bank, learning how to do that, because that's the opportunity in the crisis that we're facing.
	I mean, it's never going to go back to the stability that we had relative after the Cold War.
	There was maybe 15, 20 years where it was decently smooth for the economy.
	The dollar stayed pretty much the same, and there was a slight inflation, but it was manageable.
	Those days are done.
	I mean, you just look at the damage.
	You were talking about it last week.
	It's not just going a trillion dollars in debt every hundred days.
	It's closer to 2.5.
	And how do you manage that?
	I mean, the interest on the debt, paying that is over a trillion dollars a year.
	It's just unsustainable, you know, debt to GDP ratios.
	They have to create a monetary reset and they're doing that and they're telling you they're going to do it.
	The last people to know will just be the regular folks and that are just walking around thinking that, you know, they have normalcy bias and we all do to some degree.
	But I think that's really what we need to take from this.
	Not necessarily join a team and I'm for bricks or I can't wait for them to do whatever.
	You know, and there's speculation.
	You know, you talk about gold being a fixed asset.
	That ideology has to die off.
	I mean, this is modern monetary theory, as you point out all the time, the magic money tree.
	This is like just establishment thought.
	It's pervasive in all of the economists that run academia and so much of the, you know, politics.
	And this experiment that we've been in since 1971, it will come to an end.
	And it's not that the dollar is going to go to zero, I think, or you'll have wheelbarrows full of cash to buy a loaf of bread or anything.
	I'm not an alarmist.
	But I think you'll just start to see that the fix is in.
	people will start moving away from things that are too much counterparty risk or they see that they've got to get their cash out of the bank or out of savings and there's no yield on it, there's no return, any CDs anymore because of interest rates.
	And you'll see them buying assets, whether it's land, whether it's precious metals or something like Bitcoin.
	That will be the trend moving forward.
	And it's nothing I can do about it.
	I I'm not even necessarily cheering it on unless people are learning.
	So if people are learning about what happened and they can make better decisions, and I applaud that, it shouldn't be out of fear, but it should be from education.
	Oh, absolutely.
	Yeah, if we get into inflation or something like that, you know, again, if you can get some money into gold, I think the end game of this, the great taking, all the rest of the stuff is to say, well, we've got the debt, it needs to be paid, so we're going to confiscate your mortgages or anything like that.
	So to the extent that as the inflation kicks in, Perhaps gold is going to be relatively worth more, and that might help you to buy off some of these things to keep them from getting confiscated.
	That's one aspect of it.
	I just want to have the privacy having some medium of exchange that is outside of their system.
	I've got a question here from Atomic Dog.
	It says, hey, Tony, is there an end in sight to this long run-up on gold and now silver?
	Seems like it runs up, then there's some profit-taking, then it runs up some more.
	It seems to be the cycle.
	I think that's a great question because you wonder how we hit an all-time high again yesterday.
	And I assume that if history is my guide, I mean, first, you know, it was from 2011 to 2020, there was no all-time high.
	So let's just talk about that.
	And then from 2020, it took to 2022 to hit another one.
	Now, again, we're hitting it every other week, and sometimes multiple times in the same week.
	So I think what you'll see is you'll continue to see this trend where gold will go up.
	There'll be some profit tanking.
	It'll pull back a little bit.
	Same thing with silver.
	But there's a level here, I think, when the paper gold and the ETFs separate from the physical gold, when the demand continues to go up, which we're going to see from central banks, like I said, it's gone up fivefold now.
	Since 2022, that's central bank demand.
	That's only going to increase.
	So I think that, you know, watching it go up and then the profit taking, that's going to continue.
	I don't think we'll see any cratering.
	I don't think that it'll, you know, you're definitely not going to see $2,000 gold again unless there's an absolute market crash, but that'll only be temporary.
	I think there'll be more consolidation in the gold price.
	We're heading to, and this is not just me saying this, but I think it's a conservative estimate to be at $3,000 gold in 2025.
	Again, not financial advice, not about investments.
	I'm just telling you where it's going to be against the dollar and against other currencies.
	The real story besides gold, and I think even eclipsing gold, I've shared this with you, I think, a couple weeks ago, but it was a game changer.
	The Russian government putting silver and platinum and palladium on their strategic reserve asset list and really putting silver out front.
	There's something to that, and this is a big move.
	Really, no government since the pre-communist Chinese were heavy on silver for strategic reserve assets.
	Russia moving into that I think just underscores that silver truly is the most undervalued asset in the world, given all of its industrial uses and medical uses and then monetary uses.
	And the fact that it's under $34 an ounce is extremely cheap, given its history.
	I have to remind people, $52.50 in 1980, I know it was a bit of an anomaly.
	But that had to do with the Hunt family buying physical silver.
	And nobody's done that since.
	They were punished by the deep state.
	I mean, they were run through the mill for that.
	And, you know, I think targeted financially because they exposed the weakness of the dollar.
	So I know the trend to me is up.
	It doesn't always go up and to the right, but the trend for both precious metals against the currencies worldwide, I think, is going to continue to go up.
	And of course, you're talking about the $50 silver.
	Gold was around $800 or something like that as well around that time.
	And about what would that be today if we did that for inflation?
	Wow.
	Well, at least, you know, four or five thousand.
	Yeah, yeah.
	So, you know, when we look at this, the fundamentals, and I think the reason that there is some profit taking, but it continues to trend up, is because the fundamentals are that they're not going to do anything about the spending, and they're not going to do anything about making, you know, printing more money and inflation and all the rest of this stuff.
	And it doesn't matter, you know, which one of these two teams gets in.
	That's the way they're going to run it.
	I mean, when you look at what the Lala team is talking about, the Green New Deal, endless amounts of money being spent on this fantasy, talking about reparations, and then on the Trump side, he has absolutely no aversion to debt whatsoever.
	And we saw that in 2020.
	Yeah, just do a bill, $3.5 trillion, and hey, if you oppose that, you say anything, we're going to primary you out.
	You know, he said to Massey at the time.
	So he has no aversion to debt.
	That is something that he has used all of his life as leverage, and he knows how to use it.
	He's very comfortable with it.
	He's the debt king.
	And so you're going to see that go up.
	And he's not even serious, Tony, about trying to limit the deficit.
	And when he starts talking about tariffs, he says, no, I'm just going to use it as leverage to get things to onshore manufacturing in the United States.
	So he's not really necessarily talking about increasing the tariffs.
	He just wants to use it as a leverage thing.
	And that's the way he always used debt.
	He uses debt as leverage for the bank.
	So both of them are big spenders.
	Both of them don't care about any kind of, you know, responsible, balanced government whatsoever.
	And it's going to continue.
	I think what Trump learned early on is that he had amassed so much debt going into the 1990s that he was more dangerous to the bank than the bank to him.
	And they needed him.
	And it really took him years.
	You know, he had people like Wilbur Ross come in, you know, who's Rothschild's agent, and helped him to, you know, steer through that, navigate that.
	There was huge losses of equity, you know, in the Taj Mahal casino, all that stuff that imploded.
	And, you know, he learned he called himself the king of debt.
	If there was a fallacy in it, though, you know, when you kind of use that, you can use debt to a certain extent.
	If you're in the private sector and you become that big, that's true.
	but you're talking on a global stage, David, with that much on the line and GDP and all of that, the strategic strength of the United States relies on its currency.
	You start messing with that, that's a very dangerous territory.
	So I would think that creating an environment where you could invite companies to come here and build things, you can use tariffs for that, but there has to be a combination of safety in the currency.
	You can't just bully people.
	You You can't just say, well, I'm going to place 100%.
	He said this.
	He's going to place 100% tariff on a country that's not utilizing the dollar.
	Well, that's still weaponization of the dollar.
	It's just a different strategy by other means.
	So I really think those type of strategies, I'm all for trying something new.
	And I agreed with what Trump said on the Rogan interview about William McKinley being the tariff king and how well we did in the 19th century.
	But there has to be This debt issue and the currency issue has to be addressed.
	You have to remember William McKinley had the gold standard.
	That was the whole point of William Jennings Bryan running against him and saying the cross of gold speech.
	We had such a strong currency.
	They wanted free silver injected into the And to the economy to lower the purchasing power of the dollar to get people out of debt.
	So that was a populist political uprising, if you will.
	You're not going to crucify the country on a cross of gold.
	You needed liquidity from silver.
	Yeah.
	Right.
	That's where it hit the Comstock load.
	That's where you get, you know, the first Morgan silver dollar, 1878.
	You know, it's coming out of that.
	There was a massive silver hit, you know, in Nevada.
	And then so that's the...
	A Bonanza.
	That's right.
	That's the TV show that Nixon would interrupt to take us off the gold standard, ironically.
	Yeah, we went out to Nevada, the Tahoe thing when the kids were little.
	We went around some of those silver mines and everything that were out there.
	I wanted to see where they'd filmed Bonanza, but we wound up doing the silver mines as well.
	Ponderosa.
	Yeah, that's right.
	The Ponderosa.
	They ran that thing for years.
	They had the cast, the three of them.
	They set up a tourist resort around there, but it's kind of deja vu to see that.
	But yeah, getting back to the silver standard, we're not getting off on the tangent here.
	When you look at Trump, he's willing to do these very risky things.
	And of course, he was able to use that as leverage, but the bad thing was that he bankrupted casinos.
	And so, the bottom line is that he eventually lost the casino.
	All he cared about with the Rothschild people was, you're going to keep my name on the buildings, right?
	Until they completely go away.
	And so, if he's got his name on the U.S., he doesn't really care what's happening fundamentally with his stuff, I think.
	It's going to be a very...
	A dangerous time, regardless of whoever is there.
	And it is because the same mentality is there with Uniparty on so many of these different issues, but especially on the fiscal stuff.
	There's not going to be any change to it.
	We're talking about it, you know, with the...
	Going back to his examples of the 19th century, the real issue was also spending, right?
	And they're not going to stop the spending.
	They're going to continue to double down on the spending and just rearrange the deck chairs.
	Let me give a tax break to this demographic voter group over here.
	I won't put taxes.
	I'll make the policeman all tax-free, no tax on tips for waitresses.
	And that's the kind of games that they're playing.
	History shows us that great empires of countries rise on sound money and economic nationalism.
	They decline on fiat currency and free trade.
	And that's where we're in that cycle right now.
	And until we hit some sort of A wall, if you will, something where the music stops and we have to have a sober look at our fiscal house.
	Everything's up in the air.
	There's no telling how bad it will get as far as what happens to the dollar or whatever.
	What kind of economic damage is done from just not getting our fiscal house in order again?
	This is something that's not in our politics.
	It's not in this election.
	It used to be.
	And it begs the question, what changed?
	Have they just decided to do a controlled demolition of this economy to replace it?
	Is Build Back Better?
	In order to do that, you have to first destroy something to build it back better.
	That's really where my mind goes, because it doesn't seem like anything's being done to To prop up the dollar or our economy.
	For a love of the road, as Tony has said before, he's referring to DG8 about the Tomahawk missile.
	So let me put that up there first.
	DG8 says, David, can you ask Tony, if we go to war, will silver skyrocket?
	How much silver is in a Tomahawk missile?
	The law of the road says he wants to say that there was about 100 ounces of silver in it.
	It was a monster.
	500 ounces.
	500.
	Wow.
	It's a monster box.
	It's a monster box, which is 500 ounces of silver in every Tomahawk missile.
	And I wonder how much CO2 there is.
	They don't care about anything.
	You know, they've got their goals and all the stuff that they're telling us is existential, life-threatening, and all that.
	They don't care.
	I mean, their missiles are life-threatening.
	Yeah.
	We ought to be alarmed about that, but they want us alarmed about CO2 and eating meat.
	It's just absolutely insane what we see coming from these people.
	How are things doing in terms of being able to get supply?
	That was always a thing.
	You saw this coming.
	We could see what the fundamentals were.
	We knew that there was going to be this type of thing, and everybody's going to be scrambling for supply, and you said it starts hitting all these consecutive all-time highs.
	I think that's going to be the issue.
	How are things looking on that side?
	It's getting harder to get supply on a consistent basis, and I'm really glad that I have the two physical gold and silver exchanges, because pretty much any one-ounce silver rounds that I'm buying, or coins, or bars, or even 10-ounce silver bars, they all go into Wolfpack, because we have over 1,300 members across the United States now, and we get orders out.
	If your card is charged, I'm getting that order out within 48 hours, and you've got a tracking number for that.
	We don't keep We try to get the packages out to satisfy every order as fast as possible.
	And it's been tricky.
	I had to front-end load a lot of Wolfpack for that, and just replacing the same items, it's getting trickier.
	And of course, the price fluctuation, David, has been It's been interesting to keep track of, to say the least.
	Gold especially, with the price of gold going to where it is, just having to cover that, buying an ounce of gold.
	I'm built for it.
	I love what I do, but it is going to get dicier, I think, as time goes on.
	You point out that question from For Love of the Road about, is the price of silver going to go up if we go into a hot war?
	I think the price of silver is going up regardless.
	I don't think there's anything that can stop it.
	And we're about, I think, we've reached really peak paper silver, the way that that trades.
	And I've said this before, but I think it's estimated that for every...
	250 or so ounces of silver that's traded in the paper market.
	One ounce of silver actually exists in the third dimension in the real world.
	So physical one ounce to 250 ounce.
	These things, this is going to come to a head eventually.
	And again, there's another metric to this too.
	It's 225 million ounce deficit coming up this year.
	It was over 200 million ounces last year.
	So every time you run these 200 plus million ounce deficits, you have to take from the existing above ground supply.
	It's not coming from mining.
	So it has to continually come out of the above ground supply.
	You don't have to be a math wizard to figure that out.
	That eventually just basic economics kicks in.
	And we just haven't reached that point yet, but it will happen.
	Yeah, that's the thing about the paper gold and paper silver.
	I had started accumulating that years ago, I guess maybe about 10 years ago, and, you know, putting our IRA in it, and it was like, then the price started changing.
	You know, it was going horizontal for a long time like that, and you didn't really notice anything.
	And it's like, oh, okay, this is easy, and get a tenth of an ounce at a time.
	And then gold started going up, and it didn't go up, you know, and they didn't start tracking it.
	And that's when I looked, I was like, what's going on with this?
	Why doesn't it track?
	And that's when I found out, oh, well, there's this thing called Shanghai Gold Exchange where they got it.
	And it's like, oh, okay, so this is in China, so nobody's actually checking this to see if they got anything at all.
	I don't know what it is on gold.
	You said it's 250 to 1, your estimate of where it is on silver.
	I imagine it is easily that way.
	They create these derivatives, and it just lets them completely escape any reality and manipulate the price of the real assets as well at the same time.
	It's crazy.
	Yeah, it's one of the reasons I think in the primary goal of BRICS is to reset commodity prices with their own exchanges.
	I mean, aside from the cross-border payments, I really don't think when I read into this, and they may have developed some sort of unified currency, but I don't think so.
	I don't think those countries can agree.
	I think it might be a unified payment system like Vladimir Putin was talking about the BRICS bridge system.
	But really, David, in my opinion, reading what I do and looking into it, it's about the reset of commodity prices.
	It's no longer about de-dollarization.
	It's about the West in general, the way the West has run its markets and had a stranglehold on commodities.
	Because in an era of fiat, You have to control commodities against it.
	If you really look at the historical trend of what happened in the 70s, and you know this.
	I mean, you were there.
	You're watching what happened with the rise in interest rates.
	There was an alarm bell that went off in the night.
	You had Paul Volcker from the Federal Reserve.
	They raised interest rates to the teens.
	And why did they do that?
	Well, because the money supply needed to be contracted, and the purchasing power was going down, and inflation was rampant.
	And then it reflected itself in the price of gold and silver.
	They put a stop to that.
	And it lasted for a while.
	You know, it lasted until I was about, what, in 2005, going into that era.
	It lasted until I was about 25 years old.
	And then this trend has been up and up and up and, you know, sometimes taking a dip.
	But now, look at where we are now.
	And it really reflects the fiscal insanity.
	You know, and the amount of currency creation, the amount of debt, and just an absolute irresponsibility when it comes to our budget.
	It reflects in the price of gold.
	And eventually you'll see it truly reflecting in the price of silver.
	But you have to remember that the largest holder of silver in the world is JPMorgan Chase.
	And JPMorgan Chase was convicted of suppressing the silver price.
	And this gets lost on a lot of people.
	Why would you suppress the price of something that you primarily hold?
	That's because you want to get more of it.
	Yeah.
	That's what we saw during the real estate.
	It's to make it look less attractive.
	That's right.
	That's what we saw during the real estate stuff.
	I remember when that all kicked off, we had our neighbors refinance their home.
	The interest rates were very low and dropping, and they got some equity out of it, and they thought, well, let's do that as well.
	But it was only just a couple of weeks, and all of a sudden, Everything had changed.
	It's like, how could it change that quickly?
	And I said, well, this is being imposed from California.
	So I'm looking at it, and it's like, so why would they manipulate the market like this to make the real estate less valuable?
	And as you pointed out, they're playing the long game.
	They want to accumulate more of it, so they make it less valuable.
	And they put a lot of people underwater, and a lot of people lost their homes, but they were able to accumulate them at an even cheaper price through all that stuff.
	And again, part of it was the derivatives market and all the rest of these things that they were playing with people, and that's what they're doing now with the commodities.
	And you're right.
	When you look at BRICS, it's all about the commodities, everything that they're talking about, and getting a lot of these, getting on board a lot of third-world countries that are rich in natural resources and commodities It is a big move toward the commodities.
	It truly is.
	I mean, we looked at the gold supplanting the euro as becoming the second most held reserve asset by central banks, and number one being the dollar.
	I think, really, if you're paying attention, though, and if you're in the know, you get that gold is already the world's reserve currency.
	I think it supplanted the dollar some time ago, and it's just now playing a game of de-dollarization, getting out of those holdings, and, you know, how else that plays.
	It's a very interconnected worldwide economy, as you know.
	But the trend, and it's accelerating, I think we're just going to see, this is going to continue to be, and eventually will bleed into, even though I know they don't want it, mainstream will start having to cover this.
	They'll have to actually admit that something is afoot, and that commodities, you know, this boring thing, you know, gold, this barbarous relic, and, you know, would it...
	What did Warren Buffett call it?
	A pet rock that doesn't do anything.
	You know, it just sits there.
	But I think this will be headlines.
	You know, again, mainstream will start covering the stuff that you and I talk about every week very soon because it will be too large of an issue not to.
	Yeah.
	Well, so next time we talk, it's going to be two days after the supposed election.
	And I imagine that there's going to be a lot of chaos from both sides.
	Nobody's willing to accept the other side winning, I think, on this time.
	So what do you think is going to happen?
	I mean, we look at the long-term trends of this stuff, and we were talking about regardless of which party is in power, they're going to continue the debt accumulation and the spending increase.
	I think it has the possibility to...
	There's several things that could happen in scenarios.
	If we know early, which I don't see how we could, but if we know it's a sane country anymore, like there's an election result and there's some sort of consensus, that hasn't been the trend.
	But let's say we do, I think gold would pull back a little bit.
	It'd Depending on if Trump wins or is selected, I think gold will pull back a little bit.
	I think silver might pull back a little bit.
	Bitcoin would probably go up.
	If you put that in reverse order where Kamala is selected, I think gold goes up.
	I think silver goes up.
	I think Bitcoin maybe goes sideways, maybe falls back a little bit.
	So that was really, I think, The two best case scenarios.
	And then if we're in some knockdown drag out legal battle and, you know, it's stop the steal part two, the reckoning or whatever, if we go into that, then all bets are off.
	I think the markets will start going their own way.
	I think they'll just start, you know, saying this is, you know, whether this fiscal house, this is insanity over here on the ruling class side, they'll start looking at alternatives.
	If we are in chaos, that is where, you know, fear, It goes right into the precious metals market because, again, it's a store of value.
	It is actual money and it's physical and it's outside of the system.
	It gives people the opportunity to at least house that wealth and energy and work.
	And not have counterparty risks.
	So there's a lot of scenarios here, I think.
	But long term, David, you and I both know the trend for things that are finite in a world of fiat is up and to the right.
	Gold really has no top and the dollar really has no bottom.
	And that goes for silver and Bitcoin, too.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Yeah, those are the things that get us outside of that fiat currency, the gold, silver, and Bitcoin.
	Let me ask you, I see why you'd say that Trump would be bullish for Bitcoin, because he's talked about it a lot and say he's going to protect it, maybe even use it, have the government buy it and keep it as a store of value and that type of thing.
	And the Democrats have been very active to try to purge crypto, Bitcoin, but all the crypto.
	What about gold and silver, though?
	Why do you say that that would perhaps go down a little bit with Trump and a little bit up with Lala?
	What's your thinking on that?
	And it may be short-lived, but I think when you see a healthy stock market or people, and a lot of times when you see gold go up, it's because they look around, there's a lot of uncertainty, and they just get out of those positions and get into gold.
	Think of the psychological impact of Trump, and we saw that in 2016, and it was short-lived.
	It's not because of policy.
	It'll just be like, oh, well, there's a businessman.
	He knows the markets.
	He knows about I think he's going to be friendlier, at least in rhetoric, to Wall Street and Main Street.
	In rhetoric.
	It doesn't even matter what he does.
	And the reason I say it's temporary, this is just my opinion, I think you'd see a slight pullback, and it may just go sideways, but I think there'd be some positions that would be cashed out because they're waiting to see what happens, and that'd be put back into the market.
	But you give it another quarter, and we're going to see, you might even see it within the 30 days, you would see another all-time high for gold, because those trends are going to continue.
	But in the short run, I think psychologically you may see a little bit of a pullback, but maybe just sideways.
	Well, that's interesting.
	Of course, many of us are not day traders in anything, including gold and silver.
	It's a buy and hold strategy, gradually accumulating it.
	That's what Wolfpack is so great at, that you can gradually start to take a, you know, have a savings plan where you can put stuff there and have kind of a wealth insurance with gold and silver.
	And so we know, you know, we feel good about it in the long term, just looking at, you How people are going to perhaps be reacting to it in psychology.
	And we can all guess what that's going to be.
	Nobody knows for sure exactly.
	You've got a program that's going to be immediately following this one.
	Tell everybody about that.
	And is there anything that is happening at Wise Wolf that you want to clue us on?
	Well, I would say, you know, again, we have the free silver giveaway.
	It's still promo code 1776.
	You can go to davidknight.gold.
	And we have the program starting as low as $50 a month for Wolfpack going all the way up to $5,000.
	And I have some announcements coming from Wolfpack soon.
	I'm working on some stuff.
	I'm actually meeting.
	I'm in Florida right now.
	I have meetings going on that we're I'm going to be bringing some new programs to Wolfpack that I'm really looking forward to.
	So yeah, please, if you're in the market and you like physical precious metals and you want to trade your fiat in for something real, go to davidknight.gold.
	And yes, I have my radio show, the Art of Burn Radio Transmission, every Thursday following your show on X, at Tony Art of Burn, on Rockfin, the America Unplugged channel.
	You can find me on Rumble as well, America Unplugged.
	And we do an hour.
	Come over there and join the chat.
	Love to see you.
	And that's what I like.
	I like the fact that you, like you said, you're in Florida looking at something to do with Wolfpack.
	Wolfpack is a very innovative thing.
	It's not anything that I've seen anybody else do.
	And I really do appreciate that.
	I appreciate working with you all these years.
	It's great to have somebody that can trust.
	You too.
	And that certainly is the case with Tony Arderman and Wise Wolf.
	And you can...
	Get there through davidknight.gold.
	Thank you so much, Tony.
	Thank you for supporting the program.
	Thank you for coming on.
	And it's going to be interesting times, as the Chinese say.
	You know, we're going to have some really interesting times in the next few years as we get closer and closer to this 2030 thing that is coming up.
	And it's just right around the corner.
	Thank you so much for joining us and for all you do.
	Thank you, Tony.
	Have a good day.
	Thank you, David.
	Appreciate it.
	And everybody, don't forget, this program's coming up right after this, and we'll be right back.
	Thank you.
	Common again.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	All right, welcome back, and And Eric, thank you very much for the tip.
	I appreciate that.
	AP Rumble Seat writes, Build back better for the elites.
	They're obviously deliberately dismantling finance and society according to their ambitions for control.
	That is absolutely true.
	But let's talk about They're moved to dismantle society in terms of the Orwellian things that they're doing to each and every one of us, the depopulation shots, but also the eugenics.
	And this is something that has been on the horizon, talked about with the IVF issues.
	And I understand, I mean, we've been there from the standpoint of not being able to have kids.
	We didn't try IVF, but I understand that desire.
	But this is a new U.S. company.
	A company that says that they can screen your embryos.
	So you create the embryos in a glass, right?
	In vitro fertilization.
	In a Petri dish.
	And then they're going to genetically test them and determine what their IQ is and their height and their eye color.
	I talked earlier about the drone swarms and I talked about Daniel Suarez in his book that was...
	Kill decision.
	And he had another book that was really about genetic modification of humans.
	And he called that, let's see, what was it called?
	Change Agent, I think was the name of that.
	It's been a while since I listened to it.
	But the very beginning of it, I'll have to read it someday on the air because it's such a brilliantly written exchange.
	You have a couple that is pregnant, and what they're saying is we can modify that baby and we can increase its IQ for X amount of dollars.
	And if you want to, we can do some other things.
	We can do some things to make the baby super strong or healthy or this or that.
	So they have all these different modifications that they can do, different aspects, physical aspects, make the baby taller or whatever.
	We can modify the genetics on that.
	And each of them came with a very big price tag.
	And it was all in the black market because as these things came online, people banned it.
	But of course, realistically, it's going to happen in the black market.
	And so as he's got this scene set up, you've got this person who's trying to upsell them on their baby.
	You know, these different attributes that they're going to have out there.
	And so you got the two parents.
	One of them is for it.
	The other one is against it.
	And so he's kind of this interplay back and forth so that you see the thoughts on either side.
	And final thing that he does is to say, well, if you don't do it, other people are going to do it.
	And your baby is going to wind up being the servant of these other kids.
	And on the other hand, if you do it for this baby, those traits are going to be passed on to future generations.
	So you're increasing the IQ or whatever of not just your child, but also of your grandchildren and that type of thing.
	A very interesting scene that was there.
	And Now we've got, in real life, a new U.S. company raising concerns with embryo screening for IQ, height, eye color, other things like that.
	An undercover journalist goes in and starts talking to these people about how they can screen for this stuff.
	They're not genetically modifying it yet.
	But what they would do is they would create 100 embryos and then rank them by these different characteristics and then you decide which one you want and you throw the rest of them away.
	An undercover journalist has found that a U.S. fertility startup company has pushed further into the world of eugenics with an alleged offer to allow wealthy clients to weed out their children based on their projected IQ, sparking more concern about the ethics of IVF and about genetic sparking more concern about the ethics of IVF and about genetic The IQ testing controversy was exposed by a group called Hope Not Hate.
	They sent an undercover reporter to Heliospect Genomics, posing as a potential customer, seeking IVF with his partner.
	He was quoted $50,000 to use the screening tool Polygen X, which is marketed as a way to analyze genetic data to find out which embryo will have the highest IQ.
	Let me just, as a parenthetical aside here, say that how do we measure IQ?
	do we really trust that, right?
	It's different.
	As I look at it, I have come across so many people in so many different walks of life that have different aptitudes and abilities.
	And so how do you test that?
	I don't think that you can sort people by these IQ tests, first of all.
	I mean, it's just so many different types of people, and there's different types of gifts.
	And, you know, like I've said many times, you might have somebody who's very gifted academically in terms of, you know, writing and reading and stuff like that, but maybe they can't figure out how to fix anything or build anything.
	And somebody else who's, I've typically seen this type of intelligence, somebody who can be an absolute mechanical genius, but they don't talk.
	They don't write.
	They can't do any of that kind of stuff.
	So how do you rank this?
	And do we want a society where everybody is going to be above average in school, but they can't do anything?
	Yeah.
	I mean, there's different types of intelligence that are out there.
	And then the issue is, how in the world could they possibly, as difficult as it is to measure aptitude and intelligence and things like that with us, how in the world are they going to do this with an embryo?
	How are they going to look at the genetics there?
	I don't think it's going to be very reliable.
	Maybe they'll use a PCR test for intelligence, right?
	Because it is something of an intelligence test, isn't it?
	Danish CEO of this company pushed this as a way to help every parent to have all the children they want and have children that are basically disease-free, smart, healthy.
	It's going to be great, he said.
	Yeah, we're going back to that scene from the Daniel Suarez book at the very beginning of it.
	The reporter also participated in several online meetings with Heliospec and was presented with the company's polygenic scoring service.
	It said that selecting the 10 smartest embryos would allegedly lead to an IQ gain of about 6 points.
	Well, that's not all that much, anyway.
	It would also screen the embryos for height, for obesity, and even for acne.
	You see, this is where I call BS. You've got to tell me down to that level of detail.
	I think this is a con game, but this is where the ethics are headed.
	The issue is not whether or not these people are actually able to do it, but the ethical decisions as they continue to try to go down this path, if they were able to do this.
	They score these embryos.
	So how do they determine this?
	Well, they score the embryos based on a database.
	They call it a biobank.
	In the UK, they've started creating a taxpayer-funded biobank of genetic information.
	These are people who have voluntarily agreed to share their genetic data for life.
	And so what they're trying to do is find a correlation between the real world and what they see in the genes.
	And these people are volunteers in that.
	They said, however, the information of those who volunteer, people are mostly white, wealthy individuals.
	And because of this, they said, well, that's going to skew the results.
	You can't necessarily extrapolate this into other ethnic groups necessarily.
	The company is staffed.
	By supporters of eugenics, like a guy who calls himself Jonathan Anomaly, although his last name was Beres, and he legally changed it.
	In 2020, this guy, Jonathan Anomaly, published a book, Creating Future People.
	In which he argued in favor of eugenics and said eugenics became a dirty word because the Nazis and the Holocaust, he's defended liberal eugenics as a way to allow parents to be free and maybe even encouraged to use technology to improve their children's prospects.
	Well, no, simply what it is is it's a thing that denigrates people.
	It's a system that allows people to play God based on what they think the values should be.
	In the same way that people who decide they're going to set in a position of censorship.
	Well, I will decide what is true.
	I will decide what information people should have out there.
	And it is, usually they're wrong about that.
	Polygenics is expected to go public in 2025.
	But they said to this guy, they said, well, there's already babies on the way.
	Despite the fact that that is prohibited in the UK. However, it is completely legal in the US. And so that is the way they kind of got around this.
	Now, as we move further into this, and we see people's attitudes, and we're just talking about embryos, but there was an interesting article on the Daily Mail talking about a wealthy couple having a baby using surrogates.
	And listen to what this couple did and look at their attitude toward human life.
	Their attitude toward the babies.
	Their attitude toward the surrogate mother as well.
	So the Daily Mail reported the story of Marty and Melinda Rangers.
	A couple whose quote-unquote busy careers prevented them from having a family, but not from getting wealthy and retiring to the Caribbean.
	From the beginning, they treated the process as one in which the surrogate's body belonged entirely to them.
	The surrogate they chose spoke to them twice a week.
	But they also noted, kept watch over the woman's social media, for any sign that she was violating their lengthy contract.
	Then one day, they spotted her online having what appeared to be an alcoholic drink.
	She said it was all going fine with our surrogate pregnancy until Melinda saw that Instagram, said Marty.
	It was a complete shock for us, and when we confronted her about it, she said it was water that she was drinking, but there was something about her reaction that left me unconvinced.
	After much deliberation, we decided the best thing to do would be to terminate our baby at 20 weeks.
	So I see a picture of They said, well, I'm not sure.
	She had alcohol.
	I don't know.
	But let's rip the baby apart and smash its skull.
	Yeah.
	That's what they did.
	It was a tough decision, they said.
	But the trust had been broken.
	And we were unsure of what else this woman was capable of.
	Now, this baby was completely theirs in terms of genetics.
	It was just kind of they're renting a womb, you know.
	There is no indication that they underwent testing of any kind to see if the baby had been affected by the one drink.
	Instead, they merely ordered the surrogate to kill their child in the second trimester, and she complied.
	And as Live Action says, according to their retelling, Of the story, the surrogate was 20 weeks pregnant.
	The baby was not far from being able to survive outside the womb.
	The most common abortion procedure at this point in pregnancy is dilation and evacuation, D&E. During this procedure, the abortionist literally rips the baby apart limb by limb, then crushes the baby's skull.
	As I said when I was talking about that abortionist, he said, you know, you got the baby's skull when you see this white gelatinous material ooze out.
	They kept watch over the woman's social media after they did it.
	They got another surrogate, and they kept watch over her social media to see what was happening with it as well.
	They didn't just do it once.
	They got a different surrogate and tried it again.
	So he says, but you don't need to worry about what happened with this first one.
	You know, unless she had an abortion, she was well compensated, he said, for agreeing to undergo the abortion.
	Paid her a bonus so she'd kill their baby.
	The couple then switched to another agency, which cost nearly twice as much, but they were still not satisfied.
	She refused to get a COVID vaccine.
	The baby was healthy.
	The Rangers decided to go on to have yet another baby using a third surrogate.
	For our second child, we got them to commit more explicitly that they would follow medical orders on pregnancy, whether it's vaccines or diet or whatever it may be.
	Yeah, you know, you should always give pregnant women every vaccine possible, right?
	Think about how that's changed in just the last decade.
	These always exempt pregnant women.
	Now they target them specifically with these vaccines.
	So Marty described that the third and final experience renting another woman's womb was, quote, like something out of a Disney movie, unquote.
	He said she was so happy for us and happy to meet that baby, but she also had the attachment of having raised the baby for nine months.
	That's their words.
	So they know that the baby that they had killed was a baby.
	They acknowledge it.
	They don't try to call it a fetus or anything.
	They acknowledge it was a baby and just killed the baby anyway.
	Well, this article is talking about, as I've mentioned before, and it just never ceases to appall me when I see all of these people, many of them part of something called the New Apostolic Reformation, all around Trump praying for his political power and everything, but not praying for the man.
	As one person said, there's something like vultures.
	He said these vultures are steeped in the brew of something they call the Seven Mountain Mandate.
	They feast on the souls that they have lured in with promises of defined authority and earthly power.
	Yeah, the prosperity gospel these people have been prospering off of materially is a natural fit for Trump with his love of Norman Vincent Peale and self-help stuff like that and seeing God essentially as a lucky charm.
	God's lucky charm is going to bring me prosperity.
	Go get a rabbit's foot or something, you know, if you want to do something.
	They preach a gospel of personal conquest and gain, not the good news of Christ.
	They offer a gospel that glorifies man, that flaunts wealth, that exalts earthly authority, as if the kingdom of God could be brokered like a business transaction.
	Their false prosperity gospel is an intoxicating blend of self-worship and national conquest, a recipe that ensnares followers under the guise of God-giving mandates, but ultimately leaves them drained, exploited, and spiritually bankrupt.
	But I've got to say, this isn't limited to just the immediate circle around Trump, these people who take selfies of themselves praying with Trump.
	So they can be seen of men.
	What did Jesus say about that?
	But the question is, are people who are saying, and again, vote for whoever you want in the privacy of the voting booth.
	But if you're going to go out there and jump on board a bandwagon, if you're going to go out there and yoke yourself to one of these corrupt politicians, are you practicing the prosperity gospel?
	Well, you know, I really—I don't—there's a lot of stuff about Trump I don't like, but, you know, I want—I think things are going to be better for me under him.
	So, yeah, let's jump on board that.
	This guy said evangelicals should be gravely concerned about this strange parade of spiritual deception.
	The true gospel that's rooted in repentance and faith— And the only living God who saves has been nearly drowned out beneath a self-serving narrative that urges believers to seize influence.
	That's what these people are doing, who are gathering around Trump.
	And a lot of people who are not a part of this club and never will be a part of this club want to be on the winning team.
	I watched this when they would have the fake elections going all the way back to when I was in junior high school.
	And they would ask all the kids, you know, and it's like, well, a lot of the kids said they want to be on the winning side.
	So it's whoever the media is telling them is ahead in the polls.
	They want to be on that side.
	Well, there's a lot of different rationale for supporting one of these other.
	But the reason I mention this is because this guy says, yeah, Trump has lost.
	He's spiritually dead.
	And Satan has seized on that with these false teachers.
	No denying it.
	But, he says, given the role of the president, look at the alternative and ask yourself if you can live with the blood of millions of babies on your hands.
	That's right, we should ask ourselves that.
	Now, is it just abortion?
	Or is it wars?
	And if it's wars, is there any difference between the two of them?
	I don't think so.
	What about the, can you live with the blood of not just millions of babies or tens of millions of babies, but what about the lives of tens of millions of people worldwide whose lives have been destroyed because of the treachery and the lies of Donald Trump?
	And putting this out.
	The father of the vaccine.
	The father of lies about the vaccine.
	The father of lies about the satanic vaccine.
	Can you live with that?
	Because I can't.
	I can no more support him than I can support this satanic sex worker who elevates abortion even when she goes into places they call churches.
	Yeah, she comes in with her white coats and she's got 10 abortion doctors who can't be bothered or don't know what to do when somebody has a medical emergency during their speech.
	Yeah, she wants to kill babies.
	She bought into all this vaccine stuff as well, but so did he.
	And I cannot support either one of them.
	But, you know, that's your choice to make.
	But it is just a desperate attempt to have some relevance and to think that you're going to get what you want.
	This person, for example, an apologist.
	A Christian apologist explains the role that Christians play in the crisis ahead of Election Day.
	And again, all this is predicated on the idea that I think is, because of my experience in politics, I think it's absolutely foolish to think that you're going to change anything.
	And that is especially true of presidential politics.
	Even if...
	You live in one of the seven states.
	Pretty much the other ones, it's so much in one direction that your vote isn't going to make any difference.
	But even in those seven states, I don't think it's going to make a difference.
	With new data suggesting that more than 100 million people of faith, including Christians, Mormons, Jews, Muslims, might sit out the 2024 election, one apologist is suggesting that believers are, in at least part, responsible for the problems plaguing this country.
	And I agree, but not in the way that he says.
	Dr.
	Jeff Myers of Summit Ministries.
	Because these people don't know where the battle is.
	The battle is not at the ballot box.
	And the battle is not one day.
	And it is not one action that you take on that one day.
	And that's the big issue that I have with all this election hand-wringing and fire alarms and flashing red lights and all the rest of this stuff.
	It's going to be the most important election of your life.
	No, every day is an important one.
	68% of people that they talk to, these are Christians, he said, say they don't have an interest in politics.
	Well, politics is still interested in you, and I'm not saying that we reject it.
	I'm saying you better watch these people.
	They're dangerous.
	You just don't have to join them.
	I mean, you think of them like some kind of a criminal gang, right?
	You watch that criminal gang, and you know what they're coming after.
	But you don't join the Bloods or the Crips.
	Fifty-seven percent say they dislike both major candidates.
	Well, again, there's other elections that are local.
	There might be something that you could do there.
	Fifty-five percent say they don't believe either candidate reflects their most important values.
	Fifty-two percent say they don't believe their vote will make a difference in the outcome.
	And I certainly think that is the case for President.
	But this person says, and I've heard this argument before, We're obligated as Christians to be good citizens of the place in which we find ourselves.
	So, and, you know, talked about this with friends.
	So, if you live in Rome, let's pretend for a moment that you had a vote in Rome.
	Who do you support?
	Nero or Caligula?
	And of course, you might make a choice between one of them for some reason that you think one of them is maybe going to single you out in a way that the other one isn't.
	But would you ever want to go around with a hat that says, vote for Nero or vote for Caligula?
	That's my point about endorsing this stuff.
	And then he gets this exactly upside down.
	He said, the founders of the U.S. focused on the core principles first.
	They didn't focus on personalities.
	Then they developed policies that could bring us to those principles.
	Well, yeah, I mean, ideally we would have something like that, but what principles have we seen debated by Lala and Trump?
	None.
	They don't want to have debates.
	And when they did get together once, what did they talk about?
	Each other.
	They talked about each other's personalities.
	So they're the ones, not us, who are focusing everybody's attention on personality.
	And there is absolutely nobody coming to the rescue to ask them any of the questions.
	And so he says, so when he talks about this, when he talks about personality, I found it interesting that he doesn't talk about character.
	Because if you don't talk about character, what does it mean to talk about core principles that then develop into policies?
	If somebody doesn't have integrity, can you trust them?
	On a personal level, can you trust them in terms of having principles or changing those principles into policies?
	What about the people who are so obviously lacking in integrity that they won't even talk about principles or policies?
	The difference, he says, between the founders of this country and where we are now is that voters have inverted this triangle of building up from core principles to policies and so forth.
	He says we're making decisions based on personalities rather than principles and policies.
	So you have Trump Because, you know, seizing on the comments.
	Every day, it's from one side or the other.
	A gotcha thing.
	Well, you know, the comedian said this about Puerto Ricans at the Madison Square Garden thing.
	So we're going to run a couple of days on that.
	And everybody's going back and forth on it.
	And, you know, it was the sort of thing where it's not the kind of humor that I like.
	I never liked, who was the guy?
	Don Rickles.
	I hated it.
	That stuff.
	And it became a really big thing back in the 70s, is roasting stuff.
	I don't like that kind of comedy.
	But, you know, that's what this guy does.
	And Jon Stewart actually defended him on that.
	And said, you kind of have a sense of humor about it.
	That's not your style of comedy, but he goes, it's not racist.
	But they seize on this stuff.
	And so, you know, because he says that Puerto Rico is an island of garbage, then Biden says, no, the MAGA supporters are garbage.
	And so then Trump flies in on his personal jet and puts on a garbage man's outfit with a reflective vest, and he rides around in a garbage truck to go to the rally.
	This is silly stuff.
	This is really serious stuff.
	You want to tell me, like Musk is telling people, like Alex is telling people, oh, this is the most important election ever.
	It's like, Seriously?
	They don't seem to be taking it very seriously, do they?
	I mean, it's all about playing gotcha and having insults and building on those insults to insult the other side.
	Well, that is their personality, and it tells you something about their integrity.
	And so I would say that these candidates don't have any integrity, that this is all just as superficial as their McDonald's jobs.
	And the superficial marketing that they're doing about their personality, just like all their promises about the money that they're going to hand out to targeted voter demographics, maybe they'll do that, maybe they won't.
	A lot of people are going to be very disappointed if they don't get this stuff.
	But...
	You know, this person says, so my recommendation is that we go back to the way the founders did it.
	We've got to start with principles, and then with policies, and then we've got to deal with the personalities of this stuff.
	Well, again, you're not going to get any of that if these people don't have any integrity.
	And where is the integrity on our side?
	Don't we have a responsibility, if we are people of integrity, to hold them responsible for what they have done when they violate that?
	Or should we just say, forget about it, I don't really care what he did.
	I don't care that he vaccinated people.
	I don't care they spent three and a half trillion dollars.
	I don't care that he did gun control by executive order.
	None of that stuff matters.
	What does that say about our integrity when we do that?
	If we don't have integrity, we're not going to have leaders who have integrity because we're picking those people, ultimately.
	And if we don't have the integrity to walk away from this stupid pageant, So you can participate in it if you wish.
	I'm just saying, don't get caught up in it.
	Because it's a game.
	And they are trolling people in this game.
	DG8, thank you for the tips, says, Dave, please look into Project Esther from the Heritage Foundation.
	It shreds the First Amendment, and Trump said he is for it.
	Project Esther.
	I will look that up.
	I know that they were making claims about, in one of these churches they went into, they were making claims about Lala being like Esther.
	You know, you picked for such a time as this and so forth.
	I don't know.
	I'll look that up.
	Project Esther.
	I have not really looked that much at Project 25.
	I know that that's become a big thing for the left, and, you know, Trump has said that he doesn't like Project 25, but if he bought into Project Esther, I'll take a look at it.
	But I don't think, I've said, I don't think that, this is another one of these things, I don't, just as I don't think that either Trump or Lala is going to do anything for fiscal solvency, they're not going to stop spending, they don't care about the deficit, and neither of them cares at all about the First Amendment.
	Not at all.
	And so, you know, they're doing everything that they can to put out there and to threaten people with censorship.
	Jason Barker.
	I don't know, David.
	Six points is the difference between brain dead and AOC. That's good.
	I like that.
	Talking about finding an embryo that's got a six-point IQ. That's a good joke, Jason.
	For the love of the road, thank you for the tip.
	Whenever you mention change agent always reminds me of Gattaca.
	Yeah, with Ethan Hawke.
	Yeah.
	The world will probably be like that someday.
	Eugenics and transhumanism are definitely on the New World Order wish list.
	And if you remember the key thing about Gattaca, he had to pretend that he was somebody else because they looked at his genetics and said, no, you're going to stay in this job forever, right?
	Brave New World, Plato's Republic, and everything.
	They always want to pigeonhole people.
	No, you're going to be...
	You're an epsilon.
	We bred you for an epsilon.
	We're never going to let you try.
	So he's trying to get other people's DNA to pass off as being a different class of people that they've engineered than somebody else.
	I tell you, there's just so much that can be done with science that is evil, and these people have really hijacked it.
	Matthew Ronson, thank you for a tip.
	He said, God's blessing to David, his family, his true friends, and associates in Jesus' name.
	Thank you very kindly.
	Flower sower, thank you very much.
	That's very kind.
	Grateful for your dedication and faithfulness in proclaiming the good news of our Lord Jesus Christ and His generous mercies that helps to counter the negative news in the world around us.
	I don't know why I wouldn't be able to do this program with all the bad news in the world if it wasn't for the good news.
	It's that contrast between light and darkness that each of us needs to be able to see.
	Well, we're going to take a very short break, and we're going to be right back.
	And I'm going to talk about the censorship that is now expanding to removing entire websites.
	Very, very quickly.
	Quickly, we'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	Well, we had a news site that was very critical of U.S. foreign policy that was hacked and then even removed from the web.
	Now, it kind of appears to be back.
	It's Consortium News.
	When I went to it yesterday, I only saw, though, a French version of it, not an English version of it.
	That might tell us something about who the hackers are.
	It might be that it is the people who are running US foreign policy that they're critical of.
	As I talked about many times, you know, in August of 2018, We're good to go.
	But it was all the people that were there were against the police state, against the surveillance state, usually against U.S. foreign policy.
	All disappeared real quickly from social media.
	Now you've got Consortium News, which has been critical of U.S. foreign policy, disappearing from the web.
	That's the next step.
	WikiLeaks put out security state critical U.S. news site Consortium News has been hacked and replaced.
	So, this is something that goes back to the 1980s.
	Robert Perry, who died in 2018 at the age of 68, founded it, and he had broken a lot of news on Consortium News.
	I guess this is why it rang a bell.
	That's not something that I typically look at.
	It broke a lot of news about the Iran-Contra garbage that was being done by Bill Casey, the CIA guy running the Reagan administration.
	And they had a lot of very important archives there, and they deleted it.
	Now, again, it's still kind of in an indeterminate state.
	Same thing is happening with the Wayback Machine.
	They don't want to have the Wayback Machine, the Internet Archive.
	It's been under attack, and that was a very valuable source of information.
	They want to memory hole a lot of stuff.
	And, you know, the U.S. government, they say some other hackers too, but the people, look at who's going to benefit from this.
	Who's got the motivation for doing this?
	Who has the technical ability to do this?
	It's been under attack for a long time, and they've been able to shut it down, at least to the extent...
	That, you know, some archives are there now, but it was completely gone for a few weeks, and now it's kind of back, but you can't really search it.
	It's not able to do new stuff.
	We just had a listener who was saying, take a look at Project Esther.
	It's anti-free speech.
	Well, we'd only have to look at that to know what Trump and Lala think.
	There was an article on Reason about Trump thinking that news outlets should lose their broadcast licenses, even when they have none.
	Well, they do talk briefly about Lala, but this is a problem both of them have.
	Look, she comes after Twitter and social media because that's what's opposed to her.
	The rest of the mainstream media, they like her, so she's going to leave them alone.
	Trump is just the opposite way.
	They said, despite his cluelessness, the former president's inclination to punish constitutionally protected speech reflects his authoritarian disregard for civil liberties.
	And so we know where they stand on these issues.
	They're not going to come out and necessarily say it, but in this particular case, he did.
	And it was all because of personal vendettas.
	Last November, he complained that MSNBC, quote, uses free, all uppercase, free government-approved airwaves.
	to execute a 24-hour hit job on Donald J. Trump and the Republican Party for the purposes of election interference, he said.
	Well, first of all, MSNBC, as many people pointed out, was not a broadcast thing, so it didn't have involvement with the FCC. But then he came after some of these other outlets, ABC, CBS, because he didn't like the way they covered him, or he didn't like the way they covered Lala Harris.
	Now, they are part of the FCC, but as Reason pointed out, he was doing this when he was president in the first term.
	Nobody wants to talk about how he hated...
	The First Amendment in its first term.
	During its first year, as a matter of fact, as president, he suggested that NBC and the networks, quote unquote, should lose their licenses because of their partisan, distorted, and fake news coverage, he said.
	He said it's bad for the country and it's not fair to the public.
	Ajit Pai, the Republican chair of the FCC at the time, pushed back, and he said, the FCC, under my leadership, will stand for the First Amendment, and under the law, the FCC does not have the authority to revoke a license of a broadcast station based on the content of a particular newscast.
	You know, there was a thing called the Fairness Doctrine, and they used that to threaten and to intimidate and to shut down broadcast stuff.
	And it was a lifting of the Fairness Doctrine that allowed Rush Limbaugh to get very big, that allowed all of conservative radio to get very big.
	We want to be able to have freedom of ideas and debate and all the rest of this stuff.
	And yet, Trump went on with Dan Bongino on the October 18th program.
	And he said, it's a very embarrassing moment for them, he said to Dan Bongino.
	But the media is not pressing it.
	You would think that the media would be pressing it.
	And I go a step further.
	It's so bad that they should lose their license and they should take 60 minutes off the air.
	And of course, Dan Bongino immediately said, haven't you read the Constitution?
	Don't you know that'd be a violation of our God-given rights of free speech?
	No, Dan Bongino cheers him on.
	Dan Bongino cheers him on.
	He doesn't challenge this guy.
	He's going to lick his boots.
	That's Dan Bongino we're talking about.
	A news organization doesn't have to be licensed.
	That is the antithesis of free speech.
	And again, he doesn't care about that at all.
	And yet, now we've got the Democrats...
	Just in case you think that they're any different, they want to come after social media.
	They say, we've got all this misinformation about the hurricane.
	See, the Uniparty, Democrat and Republican, hates free speech.
	They hate the free press.
	They hate you having information.
	See, winning has been the focus of these people, not principles.
	That's why it is naive to think that we're going to build on principles and then policies and that these people are going to have the integrity to put it through.
	We don't even have the integrity to throw them out and reject them.
	When they violate our fundamental principles.
	And that comes back to us.
	Instead, what do we do?
	We cheer them.
	Just amazing.
	This election is like being back in 2020 again.
	Thank you for joining us.
	Have a good day.
	The David Knight Show is a critical thinking super spreader.
	If you've been exposed to logic by listening to The David Knight Show, please do your part and try not to spread it.
	Financial support or simply telling others about the show causes this dangerous information to spread farther.
	People have to trust me.
	I mean, trust the science.
	Wear your mask.
	Take your vaccine.
	Don't ask questions.
	Using free speech to free minds.

▲