Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Nov. 14, 2024 - The David Knight Show

03:01:00

Thr 14Nov24 David Knight UNABRIDGED Will Jeremy Clarkson Be the UK's Trump; Finally, Justice for Corporate Mandates

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Music Music Music Music Music Music Music Using free speech to free minds.
	Music You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	As the clock strikes 13, it's Thursday, the 14th of November, year of our Lord 2024.
	Well, today we're going to take a look at some justice for the mandates.
	Some big justice.
	And there's a lot more justice about to break on some of these companies.
	These big companies that were firing people for not getting the jab, they're now going to pay.
	We're also going to take a look at food issues.
	If there's no CO2, there's no food.
	And we have perhaps a rebellion starting to build in the UK as people see the agenda.
	Yes, the power to tax is the power to destroy.
	And the question is, how are they going to do that in the UK? An unlikely hero has emerged, Jeremy Clarkson.
	And we're going to talk about that.
	Is he going to become the next Donald Trump?
	The Donald Trump of the UK? It could be Jeremy Clarkson.
	And we'll talk about Gates' appointment.
	Matt Gates is going to be a firebomb.
	It's going to be interesting to see what happens.
	we'll be right back well a woman was fired for refusing a covid vaccine and now a couple years later she's gotten 13 million 13 million dollars from a lawsuit against blue cross blue shield of michigan uh
	That's even better than the offer from the Republican governor of Ohio, DeWine, I called him the whiner, who was offering people, you had a chance to win a million dollars if you take this unsafe vaccine.
	Well, she didn't take it, and she got $13 million.
	And there's a lot of other people who are there in this legal lottery that are lined up to bankrupt.
	Some of these companies, perhaps, they probably won't.
	I mean, Blue Cross Blue Shield is so big.
	They can get hit with billions of dollars, just like Monsanto got hit with billions of dollars.
	They had, I think, $60 billion worth of liability because of glyphosate damage.
	And Bayer said, oh, that's nothing.
	And they bought them.
	That doesn't even affect our profitability.
	Lisa Domsky was awarded almost $13 million in compensation from her former employer, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan.
	She's a Catholic.
	She refused to take the vaccine for religious reasons.
	She had worked at the insurance company for 38 years as an IT specialist until she was fired for standing up for her rights.
	And this is a familiar story.
	And what they did to her is also familiar.
	We have seen how they've weaponized this type of thing, but they don't have any immunity.
	You know, quite frankly, even the vaccine companies don't have any immunity for fraud, which is what they've engaged in.
	And so those kinds of lawsuits are still to be determined.
	Domsky was awarded the massive payoff after a federal jury in Detroit ruled in favor of her religious discrimination case.
	The company fired her for refusing the injection, despite her insistence that it conflicted with her Catholic faith.
	Her lawyer, John Marco, and he's got a lot of these things.
	He's got hundreds of these lined up, and so does another lawyer just in Michigan.
	Several hundred cases lined up with these two.
	I think it's almost 700 cases lined up just between these two lawyers to come after various employers who fired people just in Michigan.
	Domsky's lawyer, John Marco, revealed that she had worked remotely during the pandemic and was on a hybrid arrangement before the COVID outbreak.
	She had been working at home remotely.
	And so she posed absolutely no risk to anybody else.
	But they were determined that even though she was working by herself in her home remotely and was going to continue to do so, she still had to have the vaccine.
	Isn't that amazing?
	If I was on that jury, I'd definitely...
	$13 million?
	Let's go higher than that.
	That's just outrageous.
	This is a woman who was working from home in her basement office who was not a threat to anybody, was completely fulfilling all of her job obligations and had done so for 38 years.
	She submitted a written statement to her employer detailing her religious beliefs.
	She attached the contact information of her priest and her parish to confirm the information.
	And yet, Blue Cross Blue Shield never followed up.
	So she's got a trail there.
	A document trail showing that I gave them all this information.
	I gave them people that they could ask them if they knew me, if I was sincere in my religious beliefs.
	They didn't care.
	They fired her anyway.
	They denied her accommodation requests.
	They threatened to terminate her if she didn't comply with the vaccine mandate.
	She refused and was subsequently fired.
	And again, they are absolutely unrepentant in this, even after they have lost this.
	The thing is, as he points out, she posed no risk to others.
	But this insurance company, Blue Cross, Blue Shield, and many others like it, will destroy a pediatrician's practice if he doesn't have a sufficient percentage of his children vaccinated, according to the schedule that they push.
	Again, people have to understand how it isn't necessarily orders.
	We can all see the orders, but we don't understand the economic pressure that is put on people, both incentives and bribes and blackmails.
	It can go either way.
	And so you can bribe people to do this.
	If that doesn't work, you can blackmail them and say, well, not only that, I'm going to cut across the board, which is what the insurance companies do.
	We've had pediatricians talk about that.
	If you don't get 80%, I think it was, of your patients all fully vaccinated, all these children, then we're going to significantly cut down across the board everything that we pay you that is submitted to insurance.
	Just like that.
	And that's the same way that presidents do this as well.
	Money is always about control with these people.
	And it can be very subtle.
	So...
	They put this policy in in October of 2021.
	Under the policies, employees are mandated to be fully vaccinated or obtain a religious or medical accommodation.
	So they supposedly had that there.
	I'm sure that their legal people said, we can't overrule that.
	But then somebody else in the company decided that they were going to do it anyway.
	I guess somebody in Human Resources.
	The legal department puts that in there because that's the law.
	And that's what they violated.
	But somebody else, human resources, went over it.
	The insurer questioned her sincere religious conflict, and of course, we all know that they were doing that.
	As a matter of fact, they were openly doing it, and the mainstream media was publishing articles to show companies how to do this.
	Just ask them, have you ever used an aspirin?
	Well, do you know that aspirin is using aborted cells?
	Do you know that?
	Well, okay.
	Well, then you're a hypocrite.
	You really don't believe any of this stuff, so I'm going to throw out your religious objection.
	They were wargaming the tactics on how they would trick and trip up people.
	How they would come against them, and it was put out by mainstream media so that even small companies could see this.
	The company claimed that it is ignorant despite the fact that she had written statements and contact information for her church.
	So she got $10 million in punitive damage, $1.7 million in lost wages, and $1 million in non-economic damages.
	The company says it's disappointed in the verdict.
	It still defends its vaccine policy.
	Good.
	Let's keep coming at them.
	Tens of millions of dollars.
	This is the lady who worked for 38 years, and now this is three years later.
	Okay, so she's ready to retire, and this is a nice bonus for her.
	Throughout the pandemic, they said, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan, together with its employees, worked to promote the health and the safety of our colleagues, our stakeholders, and communities by forcing people to get an untested vaccine.
	And you know, this is not the first rodeo for Blue Cross Blue Shield.
	They lost a big judgment in Tennessee.
	Not nearly as big as this.
	A $700,000 settlement, Blue Cross of Tennessee.
	Another woman was fired for not complying with the no jab, no job mandate.
	Tennessee federal jury.
	Found that Tonja Benton proved by a preponderance of evidence that her decision to refuse a vaccine was based on a sincerely held religious belief.
	She also worked on a mostly remote basis before the pandemic.
	This lady was 100% remote.
	And instead of $700,000, she got $13 million.
	And so, Blue Cross is unrepentant.
	They said, as part of our shared work for everybody's health, Blue Cross and its subsidiaries enacted a vaccine policy requiring all of its employees to be fully vaccinated for COVID-19 or to obtain a religious or medical accommodation, which they did not accommodate.
	And so they didn't accommodate the objections, and they're not about health either.
	As a matter of fact, our personal experience, we had a friend when we lived in North Carolina who had insurance with Blue Cross of North Carolina for a very long time.
	And when he got brain cancer, they dropped him.
	And I forget what the technicality was.
	I mean, that kind of sealed the deal for me with Blue Cross.
	But these are people who worked for them.
	And Blue Cross, I said, designed this accommodation process.
	Again, that is a lie.
	It's been proven to be a lie in court.
	That's why they've got to pay $13 million.
	The company said it is reviewing its legal options.
	In other words, are they going to appeal?
	And will determine its path forward in the coming days.
	So, the lawyer who represented her said he was representing 170 others.
	Now, some other reports say that the figure I think was 180 in some other reports.
	And separate wrongful termination cases who were taking similar action against Blue Cross and Michigan.
	So, just that one company.
	It's got nearly 200 people coming after it.
	In the first judgment, they lost $13 million.
	The trials are set to begin next year.
	According to the complaint, she also alleged that Blue Cross was interviewing employees seeking religious accommodations, and one of the questions was whether the employees took over-the-counter medications, such as aspirin.
	See?
	That's exactly what I said.
	Aspirin, Sudafed, Tums, Tylenol.
	Falsely claiming that Tums and Tylenol were developed and produced using aborted babies.
	Aspirin, for example, okay, been around since the 1800s.
	Was it willow bark or something like that, that they then refined?
	But, yeah, they go back and they find, well, you know, recently they did some additional tests on these things, and they used this reprehensible method.
	But that doesn't mean that it was based on that.
	So, anyway, this is the tactic that they used, the tactic that was publicized by the mainstream media.
	Her lawyer told the defender that Blue Cross denied over 500 religious accommodations.
	They denied 75% of the requests that were filed.
	And again, this is probably something that comes down to individual human resources people making that decision.
	So the policy was that we're going to recognize religious accommodations, but it's going to be determined on an individual basis depending on who you talk to.
	That's why they approved 25% of them, but there was a huge Bias against this within the company.
	So he's got about 170, 180 of these so far.
	He might be able to get 500.
	The people have spoken, he said.
	When the jury assessed $10 million in punitive damages, it was a day of reckoning.
	Violations of one's sacred rights are no longer tolerated.
	Again, as I said before, Pfizer's got immunity for this garbage, and it is poison.
	It's worse than garbage.
	They've got immunity for this, but not for fraud.
	And they've made a lot of fraudulent claims.
	They also don't have immunity for manufacturing defects, but of course the FDA is looking the other way for that as well.
	But they can be litigated against for fraud.
	And, you know, when we look at the...
	It's just the corporate minions of this Trump globalist agenda that was pushed on people, and Biden, Trump and Biden.
	It's the UN agenda, the WHO agenda, the Gates agenda, and on and on.
	All this stuff that was run through these people.
	They get immunity, legal immunity, but you don't get any immunity against any disease.
	What you get is immune disorders.
	It's only going to get worse for Blue Cross.
	Lawsuits challenging workplace vaccine mandates and rejection of religious exemption requests are starting to win in court, said Reuters in a report published on the 1st of November.
	The report cited recent rulings against not only Blue Cross of Tennessee, but also the Bay Area Rapid Transit.
	This was out in San Francisco where someone was fired because they did not take the vaccine.
	A 2023 U.S. Supreme Court ruling raised the burden of proof for employers who want to prove undue hardship, making it easier for plaintiffs to file such lawsuits.
	And in 2021, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission advised employers to quote, That an employee's request for a religious exemption is based on a sincerely held belief.
	That should be the default position.
	Why would you go in and start trying to trip them up in some kind of inquisition?
	Well, really, how sincere are you with these religious beliefs?
	It's like, boy, it's just...
	But anyway, they...
	The lawyer said that he represents, again, 180.
	They're reporting in the other article they said 170.
	But there's another attorney, Noah Hurwitz, who served as a co-counsel in this particular case.
	He told Detroit Free Press that he's involved in approximately 300 lawsuits filed by people who were fired after their employers refused to grant their religious or medical exemption requests.
	This is a booming field.
	Any lawyers out there?
	Want to get into this and make some money?
	Go for it!
	Everybody should sue their pants off of these people.
	And those 300 additional lawsuits...
	Are not just, you know, the other part of the 500 that are at Blue Cross.
	No, this is a variety of employers.
	T-Mobile, Carhartt, Honeywell, Henry Ford Health, Ascension Health, Trinity Health, Motor City, MGM, Grand Casinos in Detroit, and Ann Arbor, right?
	And so a lot of these, the Henry Ford Health, Ascension Health, Trinity Health, those are probably, I'm guessing, hospitals.
	That are going to be there.
	So these are nurses, doctors maybe even, who were fired.
	The lawyer said juries are much more likely than judges to rule in favor of employees in discrimination cases.
	He said unlike the judiciary, citizens are not a part of the system.
	Absolutely.
	We're going to solve this, folks.
	If we hang together, there's more of us.
	This is why I keep trying to tell people.
	First of all, understand how they use money.
	How they use money to bribe and blackmail people.
	Then understand how we can fight back if we hang together against this stuff.
	And we can fight them at the local level.
	We can get, if we have good people at the local level, we can ban these vaccines.
	You've seen it in Idaho.
	You've seen it in Australia.
	But it's small, local movement.
	It's going to be from ground up.
	That we're going to revolt against this.
	It's not going to be from the top down.
	You're not going to get this fixed by electing people to office in Washington.
	And if you get totally caught up in that, you'll get nothing done.
	All the stuff in Washington is against us.
	They're at war with us.
	They're loyal to Israel.
	They're not loyal to the Constitution.
	Americans come way down on the list.
	They hate us.
	They absolutely hate us.
	They want to impose a globalist agenda.
	As a matter of fact, it's not that the globalist agenda is something that is outside of them.
	Whether you're talking about UN or Gates or any of this stuff, that's coming from them.
	They create these outside organizations to push us out other places.
	And the perception of too many people in America...
	Is that, well, you know, this UN, we need to cut off the UN. Yeah, we need to shut it down.
	Absolutely need to shut down.
	But understand, as Pogo said, we has met the enemy and they is us.
	We're the major funder of the UN. NATO is out there pushing for a global war in Europe, but we fund NATO for the most part, right?
	So we create these organizations, and then they say, oh, wow, you know, these organizations are making me do it.
	That's just deniability on their part.
	We are the source.
	Washington, our elected politicians in Washington, and the Washington bureaucracy are the ones who are opposing us.
	They've got their own agenda.
	They don't care about us.
	We're going to fight this at the local level, or not at all.
	And all of this vicarious hand-wringing and cheering or whatever that is happening, that's just a distraction.
	That's just to keep you from doing anything at all.
	So he says, all vaccine injury cases deserve to be tried by a jury of one's peers.
	He said, the likelihood of juries siding with plaintiffs in such lawsuits help to prompt laws granting a liability shield to manufacturers of vaccines and other medical countermeasures, you see.
	The reason we got the Childhood Vaccine Act of 1986 was because Fauci told Ronald Reagan, hey, we gotta give them...
	Legal immunity, or are they going to be sued out of existence because these vaccines are hurting so many people?
	Oh, okay, well, we'll give them legal immunity.
	And then we get the autism explosion.
	Karen corrected me when I was talking about Rain Man.
	I said 1979.
	It's 1989.
	I think it came out.
	Because right after that, you know, it was, well, let's start telling people about autism.
	It's already starting to pick up a little bit after they stopped the liability issues there.
	And so it was also the 1986 thing with Reagan.
	It was the George W. Bush PrEP Act that came in in 2005.
	Took away the rights of people to sue for injury for this very reason.
	Everybody knows that these things are wrong.
	So now they're going to go after the corporations.
	Here's what I think is going to happen, quite frankly.
	I would not be surprised to see Congress, regardless of whether it's controlled by Republicans or Democrats, I would not be surprised to see Congress Take away your ability to sue the corporations that coerce you.
	I really think that's going to happen.
	I think that'll be their response.
	I think that'll be their response rather than stopping these vaccines.
	I think they'll give legal immunity to the corporations that compel you.
	They'll say, we're going to kick you out on the street if you don't put this poison into your arm.
	Well, flying is less safe now because of the COVID vaccines.
	And this is coming out of the UK. The Daily Skeptic Nick Hunt said, last month I wrote about Pfizer's latest analysis of millions of patients' data from a range of European national healthcare systems, including the NHS. The data is segmented by categories like age, sex, and importantly, by COVID vaccination status of each patient.
	The very data that governments around the world continue to refuse to make public.
	Pfizer's results included a hazard ratio, which is a measure of the relative frequency of serious adverse events between COVID vaccinated people and unvaccinated groups.
	He said Pfizer itself is now reporting to medicine regulators that its COVID vaccine has significantly increased the occurrence of a range of heart conditions.
	And he shows them there.
	He said what he didn't say at the time was that I'd also written to Sir Stephen Hillier, chairman of the Civil Aviation Authority in the UK, asking for his comments about the implications of this for aviation safety, in particular, the increased likelihood asking for his comments about the implications of this for aviation safety, in particular, the increased likelihood of a COVID-vaccinated pilot being Let's just understand.
	We're talking about...
	People like to talk about COVID vaccines, and it helps them keep this double thing together.
	These are the Trump vaccines.
	They're so proud of being the father of.
	A month on, they still haven't replied, despite being chased.
	Therefore, I'm writing this article, he says.
	You might say not so fast, even if Pfizer itself is now saying that it's COVID vaccine, it's Trump shots.
	Increase the frequency of heart problems, the affected pilots will no longer be flying because they will have been screened out by the regular medicals.
	And the number of UK pilots falling into their aeromedicals, all causes, has soared.
	And he says, for example, take a look at this.
	He goes back to 2018, 19, and 20.
	Now, 2018 and 19, 1500, 1600, okay?
	There's nothing at all about COVID. In 2020, it plunges to 851 because the airlines are largely shut down.
	But then, and also then in 2021, as they start to fly again, it goes back up.
	But he says the vaccine was not pushed to the pilots until November, for Australian pilots in November, but not even at that for the British pilots.
	And so, U.S. and Australian pilots, it was pushed to them in November, but the British pilots did not get it until 2022.
	So what happened?
	In a normal year, it would be between 1,500 and 1,600 that would be kicked out for medical reasons.
	In 2022, it went up to 2,800, a 75% increase in Britain when they started vaccinating the pilots, failing their medicals for heart issues.
	Unfortunately, the Aviation Authority has refused my Freedom of Information request for data on what proportion of those medical fails were for heart conditions.
	It said there is still a major problem, though.
	The periodic medical examinations required by aviation regulators don't eliminate the risk of in-flight incapacitation.
	They never did.
	In fact, aviation regulators have for years scaled the periodicity and the depth of those medicals against the frequency of sudden incapacitation in the general population.
	So if you've got two pilots flying a plane, they use the 1% rule.
	Probability that one of the pilots will become incapacitated mid-flight must be less than 1% per year.
	So they want there to be less than a 1% chance that one of the pilots is going to fail.
	And then you've still got the backup pilot there.
	They said that in dual crew operations, the risk is only critical during takeoff and landing phases.
	Simulator data suggests that the second co-pilot successfully takes control 99 times out of 100.
	Therefore, they come up with this 1% rule.
	So you've got a 99% chance that when it's takeoff or landing, one person suddenly dies, that the other person can take over and handle it.
	The corresponding rule for a solo pilot is an order less, so it has to be a 0.1% per year because there's no second pilot.
	Pfizer's latest report of increased heart problems in the COVID vaccinated, the Trump-shotted, has most likely invalidated the aviation authority's prior assumptions about the risk of incapacitation in the general population.
	So, he says, flying has therefore become less safe.
	There's one final important point worth making.
	Pfizer's report also has implications for other sectors where an individual is in control of a safety-critical system with potentially catastrophic fatal impact on other people.
	The obvious ones are going to be drivers of buses, drivers of trucks and trains, and all the rest of this stuff.
	And so he says, perhaps in the UK, perhaps the House of Commons Transport Select Committee will investigate the safety impact of the Trump shots on aviation and all other sectors within its purview.
	Or, as many think, they're all just in denial of the adverse safety profile of these shots or want to avoid the economic impact of a loss of confidence in air travel.
	Or maybe, he doesn't say this, but the obvious thing is that they're corrupt and they're bought off by the pharmaceutical companies, that they don't want to have the finger pointed If you start telling people that this thing is killing people, right?
	Even if Trump were to, as LifeSite News was dreaming, on day one, he could have a big win if he would just take the Trump shot, the COVID shot, the mRNA poison that he developed, if he would just take that off of the vaccine schedule.
	But of course, he's proud of it.
	And if you say that anything is wrong with it, Now they're going to come after you.
	You have to pretend that it was a good thing in order to save your skin.
	So, as you look at the fact that they absolutely refuse to acknowledge anything at all about the elephant in the room, this mRNA vaccine, that we all know what it's doing to our friends and neighbors and family, but the media and the government will not acknowledge it one way or the other.
	Now we've got the FDA, and this is highly publicized everywhere.
	Oh, look at how stringent the FDA is.
	And you've got conservative and libertarian press hectoring them over the fact that the FDA recalled 80,000 pounds of Costco butter because it didn't say, if you're allergic to milk, this is going to be a problem.
	So they don't think that you understand that butter is made from milk.
	And everybody's looking at this and it's like, this bureaucracy is just out of control.
	And it is.
	It is.
	But I think they don't see the real agenda here.
	The real agenda is to tell everybody, look at how stringent the FDA is.
	When the FDA, as I've said many times, means that you are free to do anything if you pay the right people.
	And so they're going to make an example out of this.
	And they're going to strain at a gnat and swallow a camel.
	They're going to strain at a label that doesn't say that butter has milk in it.
	And they're going to allow this mRNA genetic code injection, this nanotech, this thing that is polluted with DNA garbage and all the rest of this stuff, they're going to allow that to continue to go.
	And to be used everywhere.
	They're not going to do anything to pull back on this.
	And by any standard, even by purity standards, these jabs fail.
	But they don't care about that.
	And they're not going to, even though they put the black label on things like antibiotics, they don't tell you, right?
	The doctors don't tell you.
	The pharmacists don't tell you.
	You want to talk about a black label?
	What does that mean, even?
	Oh, but we're going to throw away 40 tons of butter, because you didn't say it may contain milk.
	I guess they figure that people are so stupid not to know what's in the vaccines and they won't even know that it's milk or butter in this stuff.
	The butter listed cream as an ingredient, so you shouldn't think that you wouldn't know that butter and cream come from milk, right?
	It also comes from cows who can have bird flu, you know.
	Costco had to waste 40 times of perfectly good butter because shoppers apparently didn't know that butter contains milk, according to the FDA. These guys are on it.
	See how the FDA is guarding your health?
	See how the media is guarding the FDA's health?
	The FDA classified the recall as a Class 2, meaning that the labeling error is, quote, a situation in which the use of or exposure to a violative product may cause temporary or medically reversible adverse health consequences, or where the probability of serious adverse health consequence is remote.
	So I would assume that maybe a Class 1 would be something like the mRNA trump shots.
	Where it's not temporary.
	It's not medically reversible.
	And the probability of serious adverse health effects are not remote, but imminent.
	So they're not going to warn you about the vaccines.
	But again, there's another aspect to this, right?
	I guess maybe in the defense of the FDA, they figured that since they let all kinds of things be labeled remote, Falsely labeled.
	I'm thinking here of honey, right?
	Most of the honey that is out there is not real honey.
	And they let it be labeled as real honey anyway.
	So I guess they figure, well, you know, butter, you know, under the rules that the FDA operates, you know, butter may not have any milk in it.
	Maybe it's just ground-up bugs or something, you know?
	I mean, that's the world in which they're trying to get us to live in.
	And so I thought, you know, it's kind of interesting.
	How do you tell pure honey from adulterated honey?
	And I found this little video that I thought was really pretty good about this, and it's got four different ways that you can do a honey purity test.
	First one, you can see, does it dissolve?
	And so you can put some pure honey, and they've got these two things side by side if you're listening to this.
	So what they do is they put some water in, and then they pour the honey in.
	And if it dissolves, it's adulterated.
	Then they do a flame test.
	They take a little napkin and they wad it up and they stick it in the honey so you got honey on the tip of the napkin.
	And then you try to light it.
	And the pure honey will burn.
	But the other one will not if it's adulterated.
	Third one is the blotting test.
	And so you pour some of this into a paper napkin and you fold it over and look at how it blots.
	And you see the other one is very watery.
	It looks like water.
	The honey looks like honey.
	And then the final one is kind of a viscosity test.
	Just take a little bit of it, put it on your fingernail there, your thumbnail, and the adulterated honey will run.
	A pure honey doesn't.
	So these are several different ways that you can test it because, you know, the FDA is not going to test it.
	Interesting the use of the word adulterated.
	I think maybe what they need to do for honey is they need to say, this is adult food.
	People will go for it.
	It's an adult movie, right?
	That's what it means.
	It means it's an adulterated movie.
	It's got an adulterated, impure version of sex that ruins the stuff, right?
	And so, you know, that's the genius of it, right?
	You just call it, well, we're not going to call it adulterated.
	We'll call it adult.
	So if they're going to adulterate the honey, just call it adult honey.
	And everybody will be lined up.
	You'll probably even have Shumlee Boteach, I have his daughter, selling it.
	This kind of stringent labeling seems less necessary for products that clearly contain a specific allergen.
	If a jar of peanut butter, for example, neglects to add that it has peanuts, should that all be destroyed by the FDA? But that also begs a question about our FDA. And the question is, why do we have so many allergies anymore?
	Right?
	That was another thing I started to see explode with the peers of our sons.
	So I see this explosion in allergies.
	Could that have anything to do with the vaccine schedule?
	Hmm, I wonder.
	And yet, you know, when we talk about, and people should take it seriously, I mean, these allergies are very serious.
	You can go into shock.
	But there's a lot of people who go into shock because of polyethylene glycol that they were wrapping this nanotech garbage in the vaccines in.
	And Children's Health Defense saw that.
	I think it was Dr.
	Brian Hooker who's there.
	He said, wait a minute.
	He said a lot of people go into anaphylactic shock if you've got PEG. And so he contacted the FDA and they said, we don't care.
	Contact Pfizer.
	They will destroy 80,000 pounds of butter because it doesn't say it's got milk and people might have a milk allergy.
	They will come after something if it contains peanuts and it's not labeled.
	But they will let people put PEG into the vaccines and they don't care.
	And you inject that.
	You don't ingest that, right?
	It's a lot more potent if you put something in your veins than if you take it orally.
	That's one of the other arguments against all vaccines.
	And so they don't really care about anaphylactic shock when it comes from polyethylene glycol, when something is pegylated.
	They allow that to happen, and they didn't do anything about it.
	And lo and behold, we did have a lot of people who got anaphylactic shock after they took the vaccines.
	So, I'll finish up with this.
	This is from Expose News in the UK. Exiting the WHO is not enough.
	We need to exit the entire corrupted public health industry.
	I absolutely agree with this.
	You know, when you look at what RFK Jr.
	is saying, well, make me head of HHS or FDA or something, I'll get rid of a lot of these different things within it.
	That's not the issue.
	That's not even the issue.
	I mean, you can rearrange these deck chairs and anything, and part of, you know, we're going to get into this Department of Education, what can or cannot be done by Trump if he's serious about this, getting rid of the Department of Education.
	You know, the Department of Education was created in 1980, and what they did was they took what had previously been the HEW, the Health Education Welfare, And in 1980, they split it.
	They took health and welfare and put it under HHS. And they made education a separate department.
	I mean, did that change anything, really?
	No.
	I mean, you're just reorganizing it.
	Changing an org chart is not the issue.
	This mindset of public health, of public education, they're not about health.
	They're not about education.
	It's about control.
	It's about a centralized, socialist, communist form of control.
	And for those reasons, they both need to be done away with.
	They both will always breed petty little dictators everywhere.
	Whether it's at a local health department or whether it is a classroom teacher.
	It's going to have the potential for that kind of abuse.
	All the way up and down the structure.
	So they say, additionally, WHO promoted policies that have harmed the world's most disadvantaged.
	Deprivation of millions of people of food, education, and health care.
	And they have contributed to the growth of national debts.
	To arrest the degradation of health, human rights, and sovereignty, we need an exit strategy from the unethical public health.
	This will require an exit strategy from approaches that were mired in conflict of interest and an emphasis on evidence rather than corporate profits.
	Or these people who are trying to build their little bureaucratic empire.
	we had the government in 2020 was turned over to public health dictators everywhere.
	And of course, the money was flowing out of Washington.
	That in and of itself is a reason for us to exit from it, just like we should exit from the pubic schools that operate on the same principles.
	We're The common man.
	They created common core to dumb down our children.
	They created common past to track and control us.
	Their commons project to make sure the commoners own nothing.
	And the communist future.
	They see the common man as simple, unsophisticated, ordinary.
	But each of us has worth and dignity created in the image of God.
	That is what we have in common.
	That is what they want to take away.
	Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation.
	They desire to know everything about us while they hide everything from us.
	It's time to turn that around and expose what they want to hide.
	Please share the information and links you'll find at TheDavidKnightShow.com Thank you for listening.
	Thank you for sharing.
	If you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers.
	desires the david knight show.com all right we're going to stay on food because i want to talk about the war on farms and what is really about this i'm
	Is this, as some people have said in the UK, is this about the government taking land from the farmers?
	They changed the tax structure so that farmers would be forced to sell their farms.
	And so we know that that is, you know, to destroy the farms.
	The question is, what do they want to do with the land after that?
	And so there's two trains of thought.
	One of them is that they want to give it to migrants.
	The other one is that they want to use them for solar and wind.
	And I actually subscribe to that latter one because I think when they call them solar farms and wind farms, I think that's what they're looking at.
	I think they want to take all the land for those purposes.
	Some of the comments, Atomic Dog says, big corporations can't be repentant because that would be an admission that they did wrong.
	They will have to just fight each case and hope that doesn't destroy them.
	again you know uh 60 billion dollars in judgments for glyphosate giving people these various forms of leukemia and things like that they just shook it off as a matter of fact it wasn't even odious to bear they said oh yeah we'll buy that not a problem don't frag me bro self-destruction of corporations via forced medical treatment
	as part of their plan it will create opportunities for tptdb to take over and shut down more and small and medium uh businesses patriot gal 513s Son works an IT job from North Carolina for a hospital system in Tennessee.
	Mandated to take the jab.
	Now he is very sick.
	32 with two children.
	I am so sorry.
	I'm so sorry.
	It's just, you know, it really was Russian roulette.
	And they used the fact that whenever you look at these poisons and everything, and whatever happens with people, all these drugs, you know, just like it is with the chloroquine family, the phloxans, the cipro, and all the rest of these antibiotics like that, that whole family.
	Well, we've got 250,000 people who have filed claims who don't know how many people were harmed by it 40 years ago, and they never do anything about it.
	Oh, well, it's rare.
	It's rare.
	I'm sorry, if it was first do no harm, if that were the ethics behind the medical community, then you wouldn't be saying, well, I don't know, it's only 3%, 5%, 10% of the people who get sick or die from this stuff, so we'll just keep doing it.
	Where do you draw that line?
	They're so adamant.
	Zero CO2. We're not going to tolerate any CO2. And we have zero tolerance for you disagreeing with us about anything as well.
	But they will tolerate death and injury for their profits, for their agenda, because that's really what all this is really designed to do, was to kill and injure people.
	So sorry to see that.
	Birdhouse Blues.
	We lost a lot of old-school, well-trained, experienced doctors since 2020.
	Can't say that I blame them.
	That's absolutely right.
	Yeah.
	It's like what they did with the military as well.
	They wanted to purge out people who stood for individual liberty, people who stood for the Constitution, people who stood for their religious beliefs, because they might stand for yours.
	If they don't stand for their own, they're not going to stand for yours.
	That's what they wanted to have behind it.
	And that's going to be one of the important things, and maybe that'll be something that's very critical, and I don't know that some of these picks that Trump has put in there, I don't know they're going to get past the Senate confirmation situation.
	I mean, there's ways that even though the Republicans have a majority, the Democrats can use a filibuster to stop it.
	But one of the things that Pete Hegsgath, I guess it is, is all about is to shut down some of this, I hate to use the term woke, but you know what I mean, this DEI garbage.
	That they've been putting into the military, and perhaps some of these other things, decriminalize being a Christian.
	So that could be a positive aspect, but all these people he's bringing in, they want war.
	It was already in the cards that Trump is going to go to war for Israel with Iran, I think.
	But when you look at what the people that he's put in there have said, it is full on.
	No question about it.
	Not going to get any pushback from them on that.
	Thomas Falco, thank you very much for the tip.
	He says, David, his name is Vivek Rama Slimy.
	Is that a smarmy?
	Yeah, I think that is better.
	Vivek the snake Rama Slimy.
	We'll talk about Doge coming up here.
	Lar Bear says, so thankful you speak often about the dangers of the demonic agendas behind the jab.
	It's the biggest deception of our time.
	God bless you and yours.
	Well, thank you very much.
	I'll be interested to hear what Trump has to say about the vaccines now.
	Is he going to continue?
	He's not going to continue to brag about it.
	I think he got that message, was finally drilled into him.
	You had all these, Wayne Allen Root, Alex Jones, all of them were like, stop talking about it.
	You know, you're putting us in an uncomfortable situation, and they hate it.
	And you know your people hate it.
	But if push comes to shove, if anybody asks him about the vaccine, he will fall back on his little scripted thing.
	It was going to be like the 1918 flu, and I saved you from the 1918 flu.
	I saved millions of people's lives.
	I think I saved two million.
	I'll just make this up, right?
	He's had time to see the damage.
	No more BS about it.
	Well, he's had time to see the damage for years.
	I mean, it was earlier this year.
	He was still bragging about the vaccines.
	I don't think he's going to change with any of that stuff.
	He knew about it.
	That's why I could not support him.
	12 June 1776, Trump has doubled down on his military Operation Warp Speed domestic terrorism.
	He refused to admit anything.
	Well, let's talk a little bit about the other big MacGuffin.
	You know, we've got the big...
	Pandemic MacGuffin and the public health tyranny that's there, the medical martial law, all the rest of the stuff.
	But, of course, we also have the climate MacGuffin.
	And that's the one that's been going on for a long time, and that's the one that they're really focusing more on now.
	And so the war on fertilizer comes to Britain.
	It's coming from the Daily Skeptic.
	Having made an excellent start in trying to make British citizens both colder and poorer, The net zero fanatics and the new labor government are turning their attention to making them hungrier.
	New taxes on agricultural fertilizer could add 150 million pounds to the cost of local farmers faced with a choice of producing less food or raising prices.
	And they point out that when the president of Sri Lanka tried to pull this garbage, and we pointed this out when you had Mark Rutte doing it in the Netherlands, It's kind of interesting.
	What happened to Mark Ruda?
	He had to get out.
	He was thrown out of office as well.
	Where did he go?
	Well, he's now head of NATO. They take care of their own, you see.
	It's like, okay, we're going to try this.
	If they throw you out, we'll give you this other job.
	You'll like it even better.
	You don't even have to stand for election anymore.
	Well, when they tried to do this in Sri Lanka, Sri Lanka imposed a ban on fertilizer.
	And the local harvest failed, and he was forced to hightail it out of the country in a military jet ahead of an angry delegation of concerned citizens.
	One protester told the BBC at the time that they wanted to put him in an open-air prison, quote, where he can do farm work, unquote.
	I heartily endorse that.
	See, that's the problem, though.
	You know, our public schools, our public schools, our government schools, Have so pacified our populations that I could never see that happening in Europe or the U.S. We would never do that.
	We've been pacified.
	I mean, our ancestors would have grabbed these people and tarred and feathered them.
	That's pretty bad stuff if you look at what that was.
	That was hot tar.
	And they would have tarred and feathered them at the very least, if not strung them up.
	We don't do anything.
	We're kind of afraid to even talk out on social media.
	Shh, don't say anything.
	The UK finance minister has confirmed plans to levy a carbon import duty on a number of vital supplies, including fertilizer, cement, and aluminum.
	And you know, this will probably not even be just like the synthetic fertilizer stuff.
	Remember, in the Netherlands, they were so manic about it.
	They tried to roll it out there first.
	Let's try the Netherlands and let's see what we can get away with in a European industrialized society.
	And they made manure, manure contraband.
	What's that stuff you're taking across the border there?
	You don't need a specially trained dog to sniff it out either.
	That's the thing, I guess.
	Chairman of a liquid fertilizer firm, Brineflow, suggests that farmers will have to bear an extra annual burden of 150 million pounds.
	Well, guess what?
	These types of tariffs...
	Are going to be passed on all the way down the chain and eventually wind up on the table of the consumer.
	And that's what you need to remember about Trump's trade wars.
	When he starts putting the tariffs out there, he's not going to take away any of the other taxes.
	These are going to be additional taxes that are going to be there.
	And they're going to show up in higher prices for everything.
	Nobody, no corporations, no farmers are going to be able to absorb these.
	They're operating on a profit margin right now, and it's very competitive.
	They're trying to stay in business.
	Maybe they've got a 20% profit margin or something.
	You raise taxes like that, they have to pass the cost on to you.
	One way or the other.
	And if they don't, they go out of business.
	They have to maintain their profit margin.
	They have to make a living just like you do.
	The blow comes just weeks after the government imposed an inheritance tax on farms, starting at values of only a million pounds.
	And that's not a lot when you start talking about the land that is there.
	And imagine land in the UK is a big premium.
	Many small family holdings may need to be sold in the future.
	They will be sold.
	Because the farmers are not cash rich.
	It's like, oh, a million dollars?
	No problem.
	Let me just get it out of my drawer here and pay off the tax.
	No, they have to liquidate the farm.
	Although they will find willing buyers who are loaded with subsidy money so they can blanket the countryside with unreliable giant wind turbines and solar panels.
	I think that's what's going to happen.
	As I said earlier, Nigel Farage, Jeremy Clarkson, said this is an ethnic cleansing.
	They want this money so they can build housing for the migrants that are coming in, and they might do some of that.
	But I think that it is really about taking the farms and blanketing the countryside with wind turbines, solar panels, wind farms, solar farms.
	They even tell you.
	Why do you think they call them farms?
	So...
	The government's power to tax is the power to destroy.
	Nothing has changed.
	If they want to destroy the farms, they will tax the farms.
	If they want to destroy the farmers and their way of life, they will tax them out of existence.
	And that's what the Labor Party is doing.
	The world is rapidly moving towards some restoration of sanity and a realization that it's impossible to live in any degree of comfort and security without hydrocarbons.
	Unfortunately, Britain finds itself under the control of one of the most extreme gangs of net-zero fanatics on the planet.
	Keir Starmer, complete with his sidekick, the unhinged Millivolt.
	I have no idea.
	This is the first time I've seen this name in print.
	This person, whoever they are, male or female, I don't know.
	Their name is actually Millie, with a capital V, Volt.
	Millivolt.
	This sounds like some kind of a cartoon minion.
	Starmer and Millivolt.
	Sidekick, the unhinged Millivolt, the only world leader from a major economy to turn up at COP29 in Azerbaijan.
	The rupture of the right in the last general election caused by past leaders such as Boris Johnson embracing or accepting extreme net zero, open borders, virulent, woke policies led to this new labor government.
	In other words, he wasn't offering them an option.
	He was going to go do the same stuff when it comes to net zero and borders.
	He's doing the same thing that the Labor Party was going to do.
	At The Daily Skeptic, we frequently make the point that if you want to understand what the extremists are planning, look at what they write.
	UK Fires is a group of green academic activists.
	It's funded with a five million pound grant from the previous conservative government.
	And these people are extreme radicals.
	They said it takes an absolute view of net zero.
	It's a fanatic and that table that you see right there scroll up and show that table the table shows what it means by 2050 there will be no hydrocarbons in use they say and look at that going down that line there they have different activities And you see, as you've got flying and shipping, it shows what is happening in 2020, and they show that gradually tapering down.
	It gets to the 2030 to the 2040 time frame.
	It scrolls in, and let me see the date up there at the top.
	No, scroll.
	Yeah, there we go.
	By 2050, absolute zero.
	And so you see this scrolling down, scrolling down, and then when they get to zero, they put a big red circle there with a line through it.
	So there will be no flying.
	There will be no shipping.
	And then when you look at some of the other things that they have there, heating.
	Well, they're going to cut heating by 40% of current use.
	Energy for cooking, transporting, food will be reduced by 60%.
	And you're not going to have building materials.
	Any new construction is going to be severely restricted.
	And mostly not allowed.
	And so you can see, it is a strangulation.
	And when you put it out on a chart like this, you can see how they're trying to strangle us.
	These people operate like a boa constrictor, you know?
	Every time you exhale, the boa constrictor tightens up and then holds it, ratchets that up.
	And that's what these people are doing.
	They continue to ratchet this up.
	The war on food and on farmers fits nicely into this planned scenario.
	Widespread use of nitrogen fertilizers has led to soaring crop yields.
	This has also been helped by a recent 14% increase in plant growth caused by higher levels of carbon dioxide.
	Yes, carbon dioxide has gone up.
	It is still minuscule.
	It is still 0.04% of the atmosphere.
	And only 3% of that is man-made.
	But carbon dioxide has increased.
	What has not increased is the temperature, according to the models that were put out by Michael Mann and others, that were pushed by Al Gore in his turn-of-the-century lie, An Inconvenient Truth.
	A very convenient lie for them.
	But it was supposed to track.
	The temperature was supposed to track with CO2. It was supposed to be driven by CO2, and yet it hasn't.
	And so it's gone up.
	At a much higher rate than temperature.
	Temperature has not really gone up.
	We had a little bit warmer year last year.
	I think they said it was like, what was it yesterday?
	0.29 degrees.
	It's like, come on, you can't even really accurately measure that.
	And you don't have the basis to compare that to.
	Nevertheless, we have seen an increase in plant growth because of an increase in CO2. And that's a good thing.
	So with fertilizer, an increase in CO2, we're getting better yields, they said.
	But we got instead a generation of maniacs who want to push back on their use and to risk mass death and starvation on a global scale.
	That's the purpose of all of this stuff.
	It was always the purpose of this stuff.
	The entire environmental movement.
	It was always set up to kill people, to ban cars, of course, as well.
	That's what they were talking about in the 1960s.
	It was always this Malthusian depopulation agenda.
	And they just used the climate as an excuse.
	Add to this the virtue signaling about rewilding, a plan to further curtail food production.
	Just take it back to the wild.
	And then eat bugs.
	It's difficult to see how these people will feed the world, let alone half of it.
	One of the original founders of Greenpeace, Dr.
	Patrick Moore, is in little doubt about what will happen.
	He said, if we ban fossil fuels, agricultural production would collapse.
	People will begin to starve, and half of the population will die in a very short period of time.
	That's what they intend to do.
	Go back and look at Deagle or any of these other things.
	We're trying to strangle the population.
	If they can do it with a pandemic, if they can do it with war, if they can gradually strangle us, that's what they want to do.
	Now they've got a new fear out there, not just CO2, but nitrous oxide, they say.
	They said, well, there's very little of it in the atmosphere, and the amounts have varied greatly over time, but a group of four scientists recently noted that nitrous oxide is growing at only 0.00085 parts per million per year.
	It might contribute almost an unmeasurable 0.064 degrees centigrade of warming over a hundred years.
	These kind of projections, folks, are absolutely meaningless.
	They ought to be laughed off the stage.
	These climate quote-unquote scientists and their models Our 21st century court jesters for this depopulation agenda by these politicians.
	Thus, rather, the death cultists plan for mass starvation and population extinction, a process that unfortunately is alive and kicking in the UK. It is.
	So Nigel Farage comes out and he says, well, this labor government is trying to take the farmers off the land.
	No question about that.
	No question.
	The question is, what are they going to do with it?
	He says, we're going to take the land for migrant housing.
	But again, I said, I think that the objective is to turn it over for solar and wind and to pay the politically connected people exorbitant amounts of money to do that.
	It's a green grift.
	It's a green washing grift.
	But the important thing is to stop it.
	Regardless of what their next stage is.
	We know ultimately they want to kill us and starve us.
	They want no food if we don't have farms.
	They want to eliminate farms to starve us.
	We know that's the case.
	And you just need to focus on that.
	And we can speculate about what they're going to do after they get the land.
	But we know that they don't want farms.
	And we know that they don't want food.
	So just leave it at that.
	But he pulls it in with a migrant housing.
	I think it's good.
	Reform wants to stop it.
	They're the only ones who want to stop it.
	So I'm not criticizing him.
	I'm just saying, you know, that is, we know these other things.
	And they're bad enough.
	Isn't it bad enough that they want to starve us?
	Yeah, but you're bringing in those migrants, too.
	Just focus on that.
	Now, Jeremy Clarkson is right there with him.
	Jeremy Clarkson is saying the same thing.
	He's very angry about this inheritance thing.
	And he also brings it into immigration.
	He has become, as they point out in the UK, he's become culturally significant in British politics, particularly with his show Clarkson's Farm.
	It's gained immense popularity, made him a household name.
	His popularity is attributed to his ability to connect with the public, signaling that he is, quote, with us and not with them, unquote, unlike other celebrities who are seen as elitist.
	You know, maybe Jeremy Clarkson, who was with Top Gear, maybe he can save the farms.
	Next thing he can do is save the cars.
	Bring the cars back from death row.
	But, yeah, he set up Clarkson's Farms on Amazon.
	I've never seen it.
	Probably many of you have seen it.
	I haven't seen it.
	And then he's gotten a pub.
	And he's all about local, right?
	He's about the local farmer.
	He's about the local pub.
	He's nationalistic.
	Let's do things for Britain.
	You know, he's not focused on some global agenda or some other country that has bought his government.
	They're focused on local things, local farmers, local pubs.
	And in his program, he shows how difficult it is.
	He's very rich, multi-multi-millionaire from his years on Top Gear and everything.
	So he can take a hit financially, but he's looking at this stuff and he's like, wow, how do these other people survive?
	And he's showing the plight of the farmer to everybody.
	And it's a great thing.
	Despite attempts to cancel him, he remains untouchable due to his massive popularity, with his comments on various issues, including politics, have generated significant attention.
	He's been vocal in his criticism of the Labour government, particularly with regard to farming, which has led to speculation about the potential involvement in politics.
	There is a growing sentiment that he should run for office or get involved in politics, with some people even suggesting that he could become a powerful force in British politics.
	He's had an ongoing war with Piers Morgan.
	I think he punched Piers Morgan once, but I remember both of them were flying on the Concord back in the days when that was still flying, the supersonic transport.
	Very expensive ticket.
	And he dumped a drink on top of Piers Morgan on the Concord.
	So there's that.
	Piers Morgan is probably the face of elitism.
	He's not seen as a typical celebrity, rather as someone with whom the public has a relationship.
	A media personality who has an intimacy or a friendship with his audience.
	Jeremy Clarkson should get involved in politics properly.
	And he's going to go on this protest with farmers in the next week or so.
	And this has a potential to become a political earthquake in this country.
	Said some person who's done a YouTube video, Dr.
	Parvini.
	He also does magic tricks, I think.
	I don't know who this guy is.
	Clarkson has expressed strong views on the government's plan to extend the inheritance tax threshold.
	He believes it will lead to wealthy people buying up farmland and pushing out farmers.
	That's a given.
	That's a given.
	With Clarkson describing this as an ethnic cleansing of the countryside.
	He said it's part of a sinister plan to ethnically cleanse the countryside to make way for immigrant towns on farmland.
	And again, it's to starve us.
	That's good enough.
	And I think making that argument, it helps Clarkson and Farage to make that argument because there's a lot of resentment about what is being done with the migrants, and justfully so, I think.
	But it also allows the left to demagogue and try to portray them as racist, which is what they all will do anyway.
	Clarkson believes that this would, of course, favor wealthy people who are seeking a tax break.
	There's going to be a lot of wealthy people who get a subsidy from the government to put out solar and wind farms and will also get a tax break for doing so.
	Anyway, many people, especially on the left, will scoff at the idea that Clarkson can topple our political elite, but as James Kanagasurium, the polling expert who coined the term red wall, he says it's fair to say that he has a reasonable handle on what ordinary voters think.
	His latest pronouncement, therefore, should be taken seriously, because, he says, we could soon have our own Donald Trump In the UK, in the form of Jeremy Clarkson.
	It's exactly the case, right?
	Again, Wilbur Ross working for Rothschild, when they went because of Trump's pending bankruptcy with his casinos, saw how popular it was and said, we could use this.
	Well, you know, Jeremy Clarkson at this point I don't think is being run by anybody.
	I think he does his own thing.
	But it's going to be pretty interesting if he joins with the farmers and protesting.
	It could be very, very positive.
	I hope that he does.
	Well, let's take a look at what RFK Jr.
	said about pork farms.
	And again, I don't support RFK Jr., but I support what he says on a lot of different issues.
	We just take issues one by one.
	I don't support anybody, frankly.
	We take everybody on an issue-by-issue basis.
	And when they say and do the right thing, I support them.
	And when they say and do the wrong thing, I criticize them.
	I don't have any loyalty for or against any of these people.
	I just talk about what they do.
	But I think in this particular analysis, when he talks about what happened with the Chinese and the pork business and Smithfield and North Carolina, I know about that.
	And he is spot on in terms of the problem.
	Hey everybody, here I am in Sherwood, Connecticut on Sherwood Island.
	There's the little woodchuck hall.
	Shirley Troubadour asked a question about why Gates and China are being allowed to buy up all the farmland in our country.
	And I'm going to tell you something that I had an experience with.
	I spent many years, about 20 years, doing the factory farms, the big hog farms, and the big chicken producers like Tyson and Bo Pilgrim and Frank Perdue.
	But Smithfield Foods was the biggest pork producer.
	And Smithfield came in the state of North Carolina.
	They built a slaughterhouse that could process 30,000 pigs a day.
	And then they had a partner named Wendell Murphy.
	Who was in the State Senate and he passed 28 laws in the North Carolina State Senate making it illegal to sue a factory farm.
	He left and went into partnership with Smithfield, created a way to raise pigs, instead of raising them on farms, to raise them in warehouses called Murphy 1100s.
	They dropped the price of pork from 60 cents a pound to 2 cents a pound.
	It put out of business all 28,000 independent hog farmers in the state of North Carolina, and it replaced them with 2,200 factories, all of them either owned by Smithfield or contracted to Smithfield.
	The only farmers who could stay in business were farmers who signed that contract With Smithfield to mortgage their homes, to put those big hog sheds, the Murphy 1100s, on their property, and then they lose all control.
	They become serfs on their own land.
	Smithfield dictates all their farming practices.
	It gives them the food.
	It delivers the piglets, picks up the grown animals, and brings them to slaughter.
	They put out of business 28,000 farmers.
	And a control now of 80% of the hog production in North Carolina.
	Because they dropped the price in North Carolina, Iowa had to adopt the same system.
	Had to cave in to Smithfield.
	They ended up taking control of 80% of the hog production in our country.
	Then they sold themselves to China.
	So now China owns all that hog production in America.
	And it controls our landscapes.
	And that's the end of Thomas Jefferson's vision of an American democracy rooted in tens of thousands of independent freeholds, each one owned by family farmers, each with a stake in our system of government.
	And that's why all of this industrial agriculture not only gives us upstandard food, but they're also taking control of our landscapes, and that is a huge threat to American democracy.
	I hope you guys.
	He's absolutely correct about that.
	The question is, how do we save our bacon?
	And this is just one industry.
	The same pattern can be repeated over and over again.
	And it also, I think, highlights the importance of being involved at the state level.
	How did this happen?
	Well, you had a legislator, and he got other legislators on board in North Carolina who sold out to that company.
	And eventually the company...
	It uses this new waivers of existing rules to get a monopoly nationally, and then they sell out to China.
	So if you know what is happening in local news, that's really how we stop this.
	They think globally, but they act locally.
	And one of the reasons that things like this can happen is because everybody is thoroughly obsessed with presidential politics.
	Well, before we leave this, just one last thing.
	You know, COP29 going on in Azerbaijan.
	Baku, Azerbaijan.
	And the president of Azerbaijan called them out to their face because they produce a lot of oil and natural gas.
	And that's basically their economy.
	And so, as they're all there talking about how they can transition to sustainable energy sources, and as I pointed out earlier, the only person who showed up from any of the Western countries was Keir Starmer and his weirdly named minion.
	The host country president declared that oil and gas are, quote, a gift from God, and he derided Western media for perpetrating the idea that those resources are bad.
	He accused Western fake media, he said.
	Call them fake media.
	Especially in the U.S. And he said environmental organizations are running a campaign against oil and gas.
	He noticed that, did he?
	Yeah.
	You know, we, again, we in the United States are at the center of this global governance.
	Quote me that I said that this is a gift of God and I want to repeat it today.
	Here at this audience, he said to them.
	See, the problem is that the globalists want to be free of both oil and God.
	They don't want to have anything.
	And they think that they're going to be God.
	UN Chief Guterres is still not giving up, though.
	At COP29, he said,"...the sound you hear is a ticking clock." We're in the final countdown to limit global temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius, and time is not on our side.
	That's right.
	Time is not on your side.
	We're on to your scam.
	the tick tock that you hear is the uh time limit on your lies that are coming due um muliton milankovic thank you very much for reminder please share and like the stream dk needs to be on the editor pick editors picks thank you very much i appreciate that yeah that would help us a great deal and it just takes a little bit of time doesn't cost any money we really do need that and appreciate that and thank you uh for reminding us uh anonymous
	thank you for the tip and writes uh the global agenda It's setting up a scenario in Revelation 6, and I heard a voice among the four living beings say, a loaf of wheat bread or three loaves of barley will cost a day's pay.
	Yeah, that's right.
	That's right.
	They make food expensive.
	They've got us.
	And again, you know, it's not just...
	When you talk about energy, that's how they come at us with that.
	Energy is not just about...
	About the quality of your life.
	It's about the quantity of your life as well.
	If you have cheap, abundant energy, life expectancy goes up.
	In places where they don't have cheap, abundant energy, life expectancy goes down.
	We have abundant energy.
	All of the restrictions are synthetic and political.
	They are forced upon us.
	There's no reason for any of this, except for the politicians that are in place.
	It's the politicians in place and the games that are being played by these corporations and politicians that are artificially causing all of these issues.
	It's way beyond, well, we know, look, we've got these super efficient ways of generating energy, you know, and, well, you hear all these stories all the time about, you know, the inventions getting bought up and disappearing and all the rest of this stuff so they can keep us on oil and gas.
	It's much worse than that.
	Much worse than that now.
	It is open, and there's no question about it.
	It's not something that's hidden.
	It's not about speculation or conspiracy theory.
	It's an open conspiracy.
	The open conspiracy is, we've got to take everything from you, and you're going to applaud this, because otherwise the temperature's going to go up and we're all going to die.
	And how have they been able to do that openly and in our face?
	By propagandizing all of our children in school.
	That's what this is ultimately about.
	And N.B. Shea, thank you so much for the tip.
	I appreciate that.
	We're going to take a quick break.
	break.
	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.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Bye.
	Thank you.
	And Handy sent this to us, just as we were talking about this and talking about medical imposition of these vaccine mandates.
	He sent this.
	This is Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield.
	And they, in this, and I just got this.
	I haven't had a chance to look at it.
	They had goals.
	They wanted, you know, we want to have, we'll give you bonuses for If your practice meets these thresholds.
	So this was all about giving this to vaccine providers.
	I guess this is the individual doctors that are there.
	The results will be calculated in two time periods.
	September the 1st, 2021, initial incentive payment.
	And then December 31st, 2021, final incentive payment.
	If your practice meets the below thresholds for vaccination with at least one dose by September 1st You'll receive the initial incentive payment based on the following rates.
	If you get 30% of the Anthem members, Blue Cross Blue Shield vaccinated, you get $20 bonus per vaccinated member.
	If you get up to 40%, they take it up to $45 bonus per vaccinated member.
	50%, you get $70.
	60%, you get $100 bonus per vaccinated member.
	75%, you get $125 bonus per vaccinated member.
	See how they...
	Use this as a bribe?
	And do you see that your pediatricians who are part of this will sell your soul and your body in order to get this stuff?
	It's disgusting to see what the medical profession is.
	And I tell you what, it's to the point where I refuse to even go to the doctors.
	We just canceled our appointment this last week.
	Not even going for anything.
	Not for anything.
	The final incentive payment will be calculated, and it gets even bigger.
	You get a second one?
	Oh, well, you get 30% of the people.
	They're not messing around.
	You know, when you got 30% of the people in the first jab, you get a $20 bonus.
	When you get to the second phase, they really up it.
	30% of them, you get a $100 bonus.
	40%, you get a $150 bonus.
	50%, you get a $175 bonus.
	And this is per vaccinated person that you do.
	60% of them, a $200 bonus.
	75% of them, a $250 bonus per person.
	Folks, where's all this money coming from?
	It's coming from the federal government.
	They're laundering it through these private corporations.
	Why do they want you vaccinated so badly that they're willing to pay?
	These doctors, $250 per vaccine member.
	If you get somebody that's done twice, think about this.
	First round, they would have gotten up to $100, if they got enough of them, $125 per vaccine member.
	Second one, $250.
	So, I mean, they could make, if they really push this stuff, they could make $375 per person that they vaccinate twice.
	How much money do they have to give your physician to sell you out, to attempt to kill you, murder you?
	They know.
	Anybody that looks at this stuff knows it's not tested and it's not safe.
	This is completely, radically different.
	It's genetic.
	It's got nanotech in it.
	It's never been tested.
	Nobody's ever done anything like this.
	How dare them do something like this?
	It's like that, you know, that judge who, in that divorce trial, says, okay, you two have agreed that you're not going to vaccinate your kids.
	I think that's child abuse, so you've got a divorce, you want custody of the kids.
	Whichever one of you says you'll vaccinate your kids and get them caught up, I'll award custody right now.
	She says, I'll do it.
	They take the kids in.
	They got three of them.
	The oldest has got some known issues or whatever.
	So the pediatrician splits up these vaccines.
	It was 18 vaccines to get them caught up.
	And splits it up into a couple of days.
	But for the two boys, she gives them 18 shots at once.
	Now, if that isn't medical malpractice, I don't know what is.
	This poor father is now stuck.
	Both of the boys go immediately into intensive care.
	And they're there for several days.
	The youngest comes out with such severe autism.
	He was six years old.
	He was perfectly normal.
	He comes out with such severe autism that he's absolutely not functional.
	He's just in a vegetative state.
	And he can't even use the bathroom.
	The father now has to change his diaper every day.
	That poor father needs to sue the pants off of that doctor.
	For doing something like that.
	She should know.
	She should know.
	Well, let's talk a little bit about tech.
	New York City is attempting to scan the subway for weapons with AI. We talked about this a few months ago.
	It failed miserably as AI flooded the system with false positives and detected no actual guns.
	Well, it sounds like TSA. Yeah.
	Back up the system, make everybody wait in line, detect nothing at all.
	New York City's been forced to reveal that his AI-powered gun scanning pilot for sprawling subway systems was a total bust.
	CBS reports that experts who long opposed this, the company's called Evolve, their startup AI subway scanning tech, and it was championed by Mayor Eric Adams.
	The critics have now been vindicated that the plot has been shelved.
	Underwhelming results.
	It turns out the subway scanners had recovered exactly zero guns and 12 knives.
	But it also turned up 118 false positives.
	Again, maybe it's better than the TSA. How many nail clippers did it find?
	That's what I want to know.
	That's 118 additional New Yorkers who were subjected to additional stop and search who had their privacy invaded for no reason.
	It's a legal aid society.
	The fact that the New York Police Department notes that 12 knives but no arrests leads me to believe that these were completely legal knives.
	Evolves, because, you know, otherwise, you know, well, you've got an 18-inch long switchblade here, but I'm just going to let you go today, just with a warning.
	Maybe they would do that.
	I don't know.
	Evolve scanners have proven so faulty that they even proffered false positives on multiple occasions when a CBS reporter walked through them in 2022, then again earlier this year.
	City Hall, though, is still spinning it as a good thing by claiming that the tech was a crime deterrent.
	You see, they will never admit to a mistake.
	That's the key thing you need to understand about politicians.
	They'll always use money to control you.
	They are totally unaccountable.
	And no matter how bad, whatever it is that they did, they will never admit a mistake.
	That's why we know that Trump is not going to admit anything negative at all about these vaccines.
	And these politicians will not put any restrictions on them.
	If they're going to be banned or restricted, it's going to be at the local level, which is where we've already seen a couple of these things done.
	During the trial program, said a New York Police Department spokesperson, there were no shootings at any subway stations where the evolved technology was deployed.
	Well, again, like Thomas Sowell says, compared to what?
	Were there shootings at places where it was not deployed?
	And you want to prove that?
	Can you prove any of this stuff?
	Other likely explanations for the stats.
	As the New York Times found in 2022, subway violence is actually quite rare.
	Despite the fact that some pundits would have you believe with only one violent act for every one million rides.
	That sounds like Fauci.
	It's rare, right?
	How many millions of people ride that thing?
	That's the issue.
	The program was only deployed in 20 of New York's 472 subway stations for a single month.
	And yet, produced all those false positives.
	The creator of Linux is trashing all the hype about AI. He says, my approach to AI right now is that I will basically ignore it.
	This is Linus Torvalds, the creator of Linux, and a chief spokesman for it.
	He says, the tech is 90% marketing and 10% reality.
	Ouch, he says.
	He says, I think AI is really interesting, and I think it's going to change the world.
	And at the same time, I hate the hype cycle so much that I don't want to go there.
	Well, you know, it was the hype cycle that caused the dot-com bust.
	And I think it's going to be the hype cycle that causes this next bust with AI. And we've got a lot of things that are being hyped right now.
	Everybody is just hyped up about cyber, cryptocurrencies, and they're hyped up about AI. We'll see how that plays out in the long term.
	We're going to be talking to Tony Ardeman in just a couple of minutes.
	I want to get his take on what's going on in the markets with gold and with Bitcoin and So, my approach to AI right now is I will basically ignore it, he says, because I think the whole tech industry around AI is in a very bad situation.
	It is 90% marketing, and it is 10% reality.
	He says, most of the data centers or these data centers in the tech industry are running on Linux.
	According to Torvalds, the best may be yet to come for AI, with the next few years being a crucial litmus test.
	He said, in five years, things will change.
	And at that point, we'll see what of the AI is getting used every day for real workloads instead of something like ChatGBT.
	He said the current crop of large language models like open AIs, which he says with or something between a he says as he's got something between a smirk and a grimace on his face before rubbing his forehead.
	He says it makes great, you know, like demonstrations.
	It's obviously being used in many, many areas, but I really hate this hype cycle.
	AI advocates should consider themselves lucky that he went easy on them.
	For all the billions of dollars being invested in technology, which is hollowing out other industries under the premise that it's already reliable and transformative, a clear path to making AI profitable hasn't opened up yet.
	Everything from chatbots to integrated forms like Google searches AI overviews still suffer from hallucinations.
	Why not in our drugged out society?
	Why wouldn't we turn everything over to machines that are having hallucinations like they're on mushrooms?
	It's hard to deny, however good AI may be, that it is falling short of its extremely pervasive and annoying hype.
	And that's another tech publication that is there.
	And at the same time all that's happening, we see the hype that coding is dead.
	More than a quarter of new code at Google was written by AI. And I think that might explain some of the problems that we're having with reliability with Google products as well.
	If it's doing the coding, I think we can understand what's happening.
	Let's see.
	Dustin Helms says, Harrison Smith just posted on X that InfoWars is down.
	Good riddance.
	Well, I feel sorry for some of the people that are still there, like Harrison Smith and others.
	I hope that they can find something else.
	You know, Alex has been boasting, and I've said from the very beginning he's not going anywhere.
	Alex will continue on with an individual podcast or something like that.
	I mean, even Chris Wallace, when he got fired, I guess he got fired.
	I don't know if he fired or he quit.
	Even Chris Wallace is going to start a podcast.
	So Alex will be fine with his new pals of Tucker Carlson and Elon Musk.
	The rest of the people that are there, however, at Infowars, I'm concerned for them.
	And from what I've been able to tell, most of them have not really pushed to do anything else.
	So Alex was boasting that he's already got another studio set up, and they won't know until tomorrow From what everybody was saying, they had the auction yesterday, but the results of the auction are not going to be known until Friday, they were saying.
	So I don't know if anything has changed on that.
	I'll just say this real quickly.
	Is Tony ready?
	Oh, we don't have Tony yet.
	Okay.
	So we're still trying to get Tony.
	Let me just say this.
	I've said this for a long time, and I said it when the lawsuit was going.
	I said the problem is that what Alex, this judgment from Sandy Hook people, First of all, it's excessive.
	One and a half billion dollars.
	Whatever damage was caused to them is not worth that.
	But it's also something that if he should have, I think, fought for free speech, I think it would have been difficult for them to fight for free speech because when you make a false claim about somebody, you have to correct it within a certain period of time.
	If you do, you're safe.
	And so then that would have been what they would have litigated over.
	But Alex chose not to defend free speech.
	He chose not to defend his actions.
	He chose a tactic of delaying and of squirreling away money offshore and other places in the cryptocurrency.
	I know that.
	And so, he's going to be fine.
	Don't worry about him.
	And he didn't do anything to defend and to participate in the legal lawsuit.
	If somebody files a complaint against you, you have to respond to it, or they win by default.
	And if you are in a lawsuit, you have to respond and give them the information that they demand as part of discovery.
	And he didn't give them all the information.
	And I knew that he wasn't giving them all the information.
	Because he wanted to hide stuff.
	Including money.
	And so the...
	And all of that was proven...
	On the stand, as Alex Jones said, oh, this is your Perry Mason moment.
	It was all proven on the stand.
	He got caught red-handed.
	And I showed it to people.
	I said, see, this is what I was telling you.
	And his lawyer turned over his text messages, and there was a bunch of stuff in there that he claimed that he didn't have.
	And he got caught red-handed with it.
	And yet he's still telling people, they found me guilty in advance.
	No, you didn't comply with it.
	You didn't fight for free speech.
	That's the issue.
	You didn't fight for free speech.
	And you got caught.
	And red-handed and all that stuff.
	So, it is what it is.
	We're going to take a quick break.
	We've got Tony now?
	We've got Tony?
	Okay, good.
	We're going to take a quick break, folks, and we'll be right back.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	All right, joining us now is Tony Ardaban of Wise Wolf Gold, and Tony has kindly set up davidknight.gold to take you to his website and let him know that you're coming through us.
	And it is a very interesting time for gold.
	We have seen this stuff skyrocket over a couple of months, hitting all-time highs every other day.
	Now the same thing is happening with Bitcoin, and gold is going down.
	And so I wanted to get Tony's take as to what is happening in the overall market.
	Thank you for joining us, Tony.
	Oh, it's great to be here, David.
	Gold hit its all-time high 35 times this year, and now it's pulled back.
	Let's see what spot price right now for gold.
	But we pulled back into 2,571.
	Luciferian Bankster knows, make a troy ounce of the yellow metal.
	And again, we talked about this on Halloween, two weeks ago, about election outcomes.
	This is all psychological.
	I think if there had been a Harris administration, gold would probably be at $2,800 right now and climbing.
	Silver would be probably close to $40,000 right now.
	And Bitcoin would be pulled back into the $55,000 range or so.
	That's what I predicted.
	I agree with you.
	Yeah, because it was clear that Harris and the Democrats are going to go to war with crypto.
	They've been doing that.
	That's right.
	Yeah, and I think there's just been status quo, but this is the unknown, and I think the psychological effect of a Trump victory and a Trump administration, it's funny, the underlying fundamentals, though, that's what you've got to remember.
	All that's still there.
	The dollarization, the fiscal house that's on fire, the global tensions, all the things that drive the price of gold are all still there, but we have this temporary low, and if you look at Most market analysis right now, they're saying, well, gold's still going to be climbing to $2,800 and $3,000 in the next year.
	That's all still predicted.
	But we have to get through this little phase that people are in right now.
	The markets are in a phase.
	I do think that Bitcoin fundamentally is reflecting true price.
	I think we're probably getting closer to that.
	And that really has to do with the amount of Bitcoins that exist, David.
	A lot of people say, well, there's 21 million Bitcoins.
	Well, actually, there's not.
	There's only 16 million if you take into account the millions that are lost and will never be recovered or Satoshi's wallets.
	I think that the Bitcoin price is probably not too much of a hype, but I think it's hitting faster than it would have been under a Harris win.
	So we just post-election, this is all psychological, moving the markets, and I just tell people this is a time...
	To look at bargains.
	I mean, look at the silver price right now, David.
	It's $30.44.
	And, you know, I bought a lot of silver in the last few weeks, and it's hurting right now because I've got to sell a lot of silver that I bought at Spot, you know, $33, $34 that I'm still holding.
	So we're cutting into a little bit of my problem.
	That's just the game that you play when you're in the precious metals business.
	But fundamentally, the price of silver shouldn't be this cheap.
	And honestly, neither should gold.
	All the things that drove the prices prior to the election are still there.
	So it is a time for bargains.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	Like you said, all the fundamentals that were causing gold to go up, it wasn't going up because of madness of crowds and popular delusions.
	It was going up because of the fundamental things that were there.
	And it had been a long-term thing.
	It was just starting to come up a little bit faster.
	So it's a rate at which things change.
	And I think when you talk about Bitcoin, as you pointed out, it's not only just the expectation of what Trump is going to do and people around him like Lutnik are But it's also the fact that it's after, you know, was it six months after they did their halving thing, you know, or they cut it in half.
	So there's some things like that that are happening there as well.
	But I think you're seeing a lot of people looked at gold and said, hey, it's at all these all-time highs and it looks like everybody's jumping on the bandwagon for crypto so we can cash out of gold and jump on the crypto market, I think.
	But I look at it as it's Black Friday early.
	Yeah, you texted me that.
	That's true.
	It's Black Friday early.
	And all this is really, just fundamentally, it's profit-taking.
	People that held positions in a lot in the paper markets, especially for bullion and contracts, they liquidated those contracts after the election results to put it back into the market.
	And a lot of that's flowing into crypto, the outflows.
	Are really coming out of the gold ETFs.
	The inflows are going into the Bitcoin ETFs.
	And that's the way it's going to be probably until first quarter of 2025.
	But I think, again, when the dust settles, the fundamentals will come back.
	We'll still see the BRICS nations, you know, advancing their cross-border payment systems.
	Gold really is the reserve currency of the world now, even though it's still king dollar, but you see de-dollarization happening.
	And again, that's, I think, Really built into the narrative here is to pay attention to what really is and not what the markets are telling you, because I think this is just temporary.
	Yeah, when you look at Lutnik, who is the co-chair, you know, it's interesting, the other co-chair of the transition team for Trump is the wife of McMahon, the guy that did the WWE wrestling thing.
	That's McMahon.
	What's his name, McMahon?
	That's McMahon, yeah.
	Yeah, McMahon, yeah.
	What a joke that is.
	Anyway, but I guess during the transition period, that's where you see the presidents change into a dress or whatever, you know, change their clothing.
	They have a transition period.
	They turn into something completely different.
	They identify.
	As a different gender, maybe, or as a different political party.
	Anyway, so he's there, and he's been a big advocate, as I'm sure you saw, who was at Nashville, making the case for the government to own crypto as reserve, and also saying that it should be given the treatment that precious metals get that should be treated as a commodity.
	Rather than as a security.
	And so, with all that stuff that's there, that is, I think, a lot of what is driving it.
	Now, as we look ahead, though, and we look at the fundamentals, and you look at Lutnik and what he's been involved in at Cantor Fitzgerald, he was the king of ESG. And he's now, because there was a competition back and forth between Bessner and another guy, I can't remember his name, and the other guy dropped out.
	And so now Lutnik has put his name in the hat for Treasury Secretary.
	So we've got a choice between a kind of a Larry Fink ESG guy and Soros's right-hand man.
	Those are great choices.
	Yeah, what do you think is going to happen to the deficit and all the rest of the stuff in the Trump administration?
	And that's where the fundamentals are, right?
	Well, absolutely.
	And, you know, Larry Fink, BlackRock, has been a huge advocate of the Bitcoin ETFs.
	I mean, really, they started it and has been pushing it behind the scenes.
	He's also anti-gold.
	If you notice, there's comments that have come out over the years.
	Larry Fink is criticizing developing nations for gold mining and gold activities and things and getting away from the dollar and the traditional financial system.
	It's interesting.
	I think that, again, Bitcoin's being pushed by, and you have to just kind of shrug and take this with the information with what you will, because, again, I was in Nashville, too.
	I watched that Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
	talking about, you know, if he was elected president, he would order the Treasury to buy 500 Bitcoin a day until it hit about 18% of the world's Bitcoin reserves.
	Trump followed and said that he would make Bitcoin a strategic reserve asset for the United States.
	That's what the Bitcoiners call game theory, where around the world other nations start hoarding Bitcoin and using it as a strategic reserve asset.
	I do agree with that.
	I think that that's one way that you can do it electronically, but forgetting about precious metals and forgetting about the role that gold has played throughout history, I think it's really short-sighted.
	And it may be a head fake, along with JPMorgan Chase and what they've done with silver, shorting the silver market over the years.
	And you go dig a little deeper and you find out that JPMorgan Chase is the largest holder of silver in the world.
	Why would they short the silver market?
	Why would they want to make the price go down?
	Well, it's about accumulation.
	So again, this might be just a blind spot, a head fake.
	You can put a lot of people into Bitcoin.
	It's easy to accumulate.
	It's easy to get.
	It's electronic.
	But I don't think that it will supplant gold's role as a reserve currency of the world.
	I just don't see that.
	I think, again, history...
	Is our guide here.
	There's something, there's a role that precious metals have in the story of humanity.
	And I don't think that's going to go away.
	It'll be a part.
	And I think Bitcoin, if it continues on this trajectory, David, and it's interesting to watch, if it continues on this, it will have, I think, a rollout that will, I think, exceed a lot of expectations of even people that have been in the Bitcoin space since 2016, like I have.
	I'm really surprised.
	I said earlier on previous shows, I think $100,000 Bitcoin was in range by the end of the year.
	I think we're going to reach that.
	We were at $92,000 and some change yesterday.
	It's just within striking distance of $100K for Bitcoin.
	Again, it's just about supply.
	It's about what's moving into the ETFs and about liquidity.
	And that will drive price.
	How long will it last?
	I don't know.
	I think a lot of this is just market euphoria.
	Based on, again, just based on psychology is nothing else.
	Nothing changed on November 5th except the expectation that there will be different policies in January.
	We'll see.
	I agree.
	And I think what concerns me, and I talked about this on Monday, is the different policies that We see Musk, who became the world's richest man by exploiting this green nonsense, greenwashing everything.
	We see Lutnik, who is part of the ESG stuff, and we see that both of them have been very involved, and carbon taxes.
	And the kind of thing that I see developing with all this, and I see, and of course, they've even talked about incorporating a side, what is it, a side chain or something of Bitcoin in order to track some of these things.
	I see this as a way for them to essentially usher in A public-private partnership for CBDC. Because if they can start to sell credits, carbon credits, if they can process carbon taxes.
	And, of course, all these guys that are on the financial side with Trump, they're heavily involved in the carbon capture markets, the carbon taxes, and all the rest of the stuff.
	And this is a way for them to, on the side, as Elon Musk has said, he's looking at X as being something to process half of the world's financial transactions.
	He said money, whatever that happens to be.
	Well, that could be carbon credits.
	It could be anything like that.
	And so, to me, it seems like these guys are coming together.
	They've got some kind of a tokenized ETF scam on the side here, some kind of derivative thing that I'm very concerned about.
	And so, when I look at all this, it's not just that it's a bubble thing, because we look at the fundamentals, as you said, nothing has really changed.
	But the thing that concerns me is, Is the fact that they want to tokenize this stuff.
	They want to create derivatives.
	And these guys who are running all of these things that are part of the expectation are people who are kind of piggybacking on the in-your-face prohibitions from the Biden administration.
	Saying, you're not going to be allowed to have anything other than electric appliances, electric cars, electric heat, electric air conditioning, all the rest of this stuff.
	And people say, no, I don't want that.
	It can't work.
	So then what do they do?
	They come in and say, we can have anything that you want, but you have to pay me an indulgence fee.
	You have to pay me a carbon tax in order to do that.
	And we've got the mechanism right here with all of this crypto stuff.
	That's what concerns me.
	Did somebody say Hegelian dialectic?
	Sounds like that's what's happening, isn't it?
	We have a thesis, we present the antithesis, and we have synthesis.
	And that's really what's happening here.
	I don't think it's a thesis.
	I think it's feces is what it is.
	Even better.
	But you're right.
	And nothing, again, the technocracy knows no party.
	Understand that you're inside the 2030 agenda decade.
	That's right.
	They've been pushing since the opening in this decade.
	I'll never forget, you know, I opened up your show at the beginning of this decade and it was, I mean, fireworks right off the bat.
	Trump had assassinated The General Soleimani, the Iranian general, the hashtag was World War III, is right prior to COVID-19.
	We have not, the pace has not slowed down since then.
	All these rollouts, and of course we have the left-right paradigm in this country.
	Again, the fundamentals For all the reasons that you and I talk every Thursday about finances and parallel economies and being outside the system, all of that is still there.
	It just comes in a different guise.
	It's coming in a different face, a different form, and it could be public-private partnerships, which again, fascism is exactly what that is.
	So I don't trust any of these people.
	David, I'm concerned with...
	Those who went out and voted, and I said this on my show on Halloween two weeks ago, I said the most important thing out of this election, if there is a difference, it's going to be in foreign policy.
	If Trump really means what he says about staying out of these wars, it'll come out of personnel as policy.
	Well, then he nominates this Hegseth guy from the Fox News comic.
	If you look into what he said, and you've played these clips of him talking about...
	Vladimir Putin being so, you know, pro-Ukrainian and other things.
	I mean, echoes of neocons, of, you know, kind of a Donald Rumsfeld-ish approach in so many ways.
	I've listened to a lot of his commentary.
	I don't agree with him.
	And it seems to me we're signaling, if I'm looking at this cabinet pick and what's being rolled out, it looks to me like we are preparing for some sort of kinetic conflict.
	That's my take.
	That's right.
	And I think so...
	Waltz as well.
	Ratcliffe as well.
	Hegseth.
	All these guys, you know, big belligerent.
	I mean, they sound like Lindsey Graham when you listen to these people.
	And I think, you know, it was already in the cards pretty much that we're going to join Israel with a war against Iran.
	So that certainly has escalated with all this stuff.
	But then the question is, you know, they've made real belligerent statements about China, all the rest of the stuff, even with Ukraine.
	There might be some kind of a brokered peace deal, but if not, they're going to go much heavier into the Russian war.
	And I think that if you've got a war on the horizon, I think that then argues in favor of gold.
	Historically, it has.
	Yeah.
	Right, and that's why I think a lot of this stuff is just still on sale.
	These countries, the BRICS nations especially, that are wanting to get away from the dollar system, not even war, I think, is going to stop those cross-border payments and trade systems and being outside of sanctions.
	You know, nothing really, I mean, Gerald Salente is right, when all else fails, they take you to war, but that looks like what is happening.
	I mean, they're planning it.
	I don't think it stops the de-dollarization.
	All the fundamentals are still there.
	You know, they're just setting up, this is a different...
	I get different regime, different operation, same goals.
	Yeah, that's right.
	That's right.
	The value of Russia's gold reserves hits a historic high.
	They're not changing what they're doing based on the election.
	I don't see any change of that.
	They're going to continue down the same path.
	It hit a historic high in October.
	The share of gold's international reserves for Russia went up to 33%.
	They said the value of gold holdings grew by almost 4% just last month.
	Breaking the record that was set in September.
	I think that, like you said, the BRICS, Russia, China, others, they're going to continue to, the central banks especially, are going to continue to go into gold.
	And so that type of thing is what we've seen driving this in the past.
	None of the fundamentals in terms of debt and inflation, in terms of war, none of that has changed.
	I think the amount of Russian gold, I think it was at 200 billion.
	Is it like 32% of holdings?
	It's like 200 billion is the number that they're holding.
	And, you know, if you dig a little deeper into the holdings of gold by these central banks, David, what you'll find is a great majority of them are still evaluating based on the Bretton Woods Agreement of 1944.
	It's still $35 an ounce.
	They have not reevaluated.
	I think they're holding weighting.
	For the Great Reset.
	That's what they're doing.
	They're waiting to re-evaluate all of their precious metals, their commodities, their holdings.
	Another story that you and I have covered before, and I was speaking with Andy Sheckman from Miles Franklin a couple weeks ago, and I said, I go, what do you think about this story with the Russian government?
	And it was only covered in a few outlets, but they started putting silver as a reserve asset on their books and accumulating.
	He said it's one of the biggest stories of our time.
	And I thought the same thing.
	It's going to change pricing.
	It's going to change the way that we look at precious metals.
	And again, that's the whole point of BRICS. The point of BRICS is not, in my opinion, not to...
	Create a competing currency against the United States dollar.
	It's to reprice and reevaluate all commodities.
	And then that starts with gold, and that will reset all of their currencies.
	You know, there's 52 times more currency on Earth today than when I was born.
	So, the end of 1979.
	That's how, and again, we're just inflating our way out of it.
	Nothing changes.
	The fundamentals are all still there.
	And we can float for a little while, and you'll see prices go up and down, and it'll be all over the place.
	But in the long run, gold wins.
	I think gold wins this game, especially in this decade.
	There's no escaping it.
	There's going to be...
	They tell you what they're doing.
	They're doing a great reset.
	That's what they're signaling.
	We're five years out from their milestone and their goal of 2030, and all those things that we talk about every week are still there.
	That's right.
	I look at it, and when you look at Bitcoin, gold, and silver, all of that is a reaction to the creation of fiat currency.
	And yet, the other thing, and of course, the cycles that are there, the debt cycles and all the rest of the stuff that they have built up.
	But what is different for the physical metals is that it gets you out of what I believe is being set up as this technocratic trap.
	I think it's a net, it's a web, it's all these different things they talk about.
	And I don't want to be caught up in that.
	I want to go in the opposite direction from anything that can be used to surveil or to control me.
	And of course, Bitcoin is, when you look at what these people are using with it, that's my concern about it.
	They're still projecting, you know, Bitcoin 150,000 or something like that.
	I see a projection here from Brian London.
	Gold price has room to hit 8,000 this bull cycle as the Fed deals with the next crisis.
	And again, this is the crisis once people realize that everything has not been solved by this election, by putting Trump in.
	That's the naivety of this madness of this crowd.
	That's the popular delusion.
	The 3D chest, the three levels of delusion that we've got with this stuff.
	That's the popular delusion.
	Okay, it's a whole new world.
	And everything is solved now because Trump won an election.
	And as you've been pointing out, nothing at all has changed.
	Nothing.
	We've got a couple of comments here.
	Junk Silver says, yes, I highly recommend Wolfpack.
	You get to the end of the year and you realize you've significantly increased your Stack with an interesting assortment of metals without even realizing it.
	And of course, Wolfpack is the ability to...
	That's what Tony has set up.
	It's kind of unique.
	And you can just determine the dollar amount that you want to buy each month, and every month you just gradually accumulate it.
	Paleo Armory says, I wish I would have never started a 401k.
	If I just did gold and silver, I would have never lost a dime, ever.
	And you'd probably have some silver dimes as well.
	That's right.
	Some real silver dimes.
	That's true.
	I mean, if you put, it's funny, and because gold, it just is what it is.
	I mean, it's Warren Buffett criticized.
	It doesn't do anything.
	It just sits there.
	Yes, but against fiat currency, it keeps and holds its value.
	And even, you know, if you look at the S&P 500 and other indexes, gold's outperformed many of them and has stayed ahead of the curve, ahead of inflation.
	You know, and you get mirrors, in many ways, it mirrors the debt accumulation of the United States and the price fluctuation.
	So gold's just a safe haven.
	Gold is money.
	You know, gold's not, I don't claim it to bear, you won't find the word investment anywhere on any of my websites.
	I don't use that word.
	I don't advocate gold or silver as an investment.
	But gold and silver are money.
	Fundamentally, they are stores of value.
	They're stores of energy.
	And that's going to be more and more, I think, again, the price is going to be really surprising to people over the next five years because I don't think folks really understand the debasement that has gone on.
	If you study this every day like I do and you look at just the sheer numbers and the currency creation that's gone on and, of course, the debt that you and I talk about, the trillion dollars that's being accumulated every, what, 60 days now if you go by the new math of everything that's Everything that they're doing.
	And then you look at institutions.
	This is part of the fourth turning, but institutions are digging in their heels.
	Look at what Jerome Powell said when asked if he would step down if Trump asked him to.
	And he said no.
	He doesn't have to.
	You were so right.
	Congress authorized the Fed.
	Congress can defund the Fed, can audit the Fed, can end the Fed, can do what it likes.
	They didn't do an amendment to the Constitution.
	As a matter of fact, I can't believe that nobody really ever challenged that.
	If you look at the Constitution of the United States, only Congress can coin money and it has to be gold and silver specie.
	Nobody really ever took that to task because you have this outside I think it's an international banking cartel known as the Federal Reserve that's not federal and not a reserve.
	Again, but these are institutions, I think, that are also on the chopping block for reform in this fourth turning.
	Know your history.
	Look at the end of the last fourth turning, what happened in the new financial world order that was set up at Bretton Woods in 1944.
	We're on the cusp of a new financial world order.
	I don't think that king dollar will reign supreme for much longer.
	It won't be tomorrow or five months from now.
	But inside this decade, we'll see massive change.
	And again, we'll look back at some of these prices, and gold and silver will look extremely cheap.
	I promise you that.
	Oh, yeah.
	Yeah, as a matter of fact, Karen, pull up the picture for this.
	The Great Kentucky Horde.
	Two million dollars in Civil War era gold coins discovered.
	I saw that and I thought, you know, that's a couple of interesting things.
	First of all, that was two fourth turnings ago.
	We had the Civil War when everything changed.
	Everything was reset.
	And what was real money then?
	Was it the greenbacks that Lincoln was putting out there, putting on income tax on people at the time?
	Was it the Confederate fiat currency, the Confederate money that became famous as worthless?
	Or was it gold?
	That was what they were really looking at.
	And so they found this stash of Civil War gold now worth $2 million, these coins that they've got there.
	But, you know, I think that's an interesting thing.
	To me, it speaks of the permanency of the value of gold.
	And it speaks of what people turn to in troubled times, doesn't it?
	It's just a part of the human story.
	And the more I read on the history of gold, the history of the monetary system, it's just going to be with us.
	I mean, you can get into the cyberspace all that you like.
	I'm in it too.
	And I do love Bitcoin.
	And I think decentralized cryptocurrencies are fantastic.
	And you should learn how to use them.
	You should do all the research you can because it's part of our future, in my opinion.
	But nothing will ever replace Bitcoin.
	Physical gold and silver, it'll always be a part of our story.
	If you really want peace of mind, you want to store value, to me, physical precious metals, no counterparty risk whatsoever, that's my first choice.
	To me, gold is cash.
	You know, if I've got a one ounce gold coin, I know that I can liquidate that at any time or I can trade it.
	But I've got a store of value right there and I've stopped the music.
	I mean, again, it's a game of musical chairs with fiat currency and who gets left with nothing.
	And that's eventually the game runs out and The average lifespan, as I've said many times, of a fiat currency is 26 years, and we've doubled that here in the U.S., mainly because we are the reserve currency of the world, and the rest of the world is still using dollars.
	But after losing the petrodollar, David, we lost that in June.
	Nobody said anything.
	Those countries like Saudi Arabia, like China, Russia, they are starting to use other means to purchase crude oil and to denominate them in their own currencies.
	So 80% of all the energy transactions in the world go on in dollars.
	That is declining as well, as well as usage of the dollar.
	So all that stuff is going to matter here.
	And it may not matter tomorrow or during this, Happy days are here again market that we're seeing that I kind of shrug and say, well, that's fantastic for a lot of people.
	I hope your 401k looks good.
	But none of that's permanent.
	I think we're just riding a wave of euphoria.
	And again, it's this psychological value that we place on this economy.
	All the things that have caused our pain over the last five years, especially, are still there.
	Yeah.
	It's the sort of thing I know from my past experience, I get burned with...
	The dot-com bust and stuff.
	And I thought I was playing it safe.
	I thought I was investing in the companies that were selling the switching equipment.
	But everything went down.
	And so, you know, when I look at what happens with the market, and I know that it's the madness of crowds, and you get swept up in that.
	And so there's an element of that that's happening.
	happening we've seen an element of that with the ai uh fad and all the rest of stuff and um it is um you know when that when that goes down so much of the stock market has been concentrated in in the ai hopium and and just in a couple of companies that uh when that goes down it's going to be really huge and who knows what the effect of that is going to be so i'm just at this point in my life i i don't ride roller coasters anymore at the park and i don't like to ride roller coasters in the market
	i just don't have the the constitution for it i can't stand i can't stand it so uh you know i'm just looking for something that is safe and consistent that is tangible that's real that's outside of the virtual system that these people are creating because i don't trust the people that are creating these virtual systems at all So, I mean, that's really where I'm coming from.
	But, you know, again, whatever people want, we're just trying to...
	We're trying to kick the tires and see what we see here, and people can listen to us and make their own decisions about where they think things are going.
	Anything you want to tell us about what's going on at Wise Wolf?
	Well, we just got, again, we're a lot of challenges.
	In the down market, there's some great deals going on right now, and we're going to readjust Wolfpack invoices probably a little bit later today just to reflect those price changes.
	So good for all of our members are going to get a little bit lower pricing, and supply is still the issue.
	You know, again, I talked to, you should go look at, if anybody's interested in the interview I did with Andy Sheckman of Miles Franklin, it's up on my podcast channels at the Wise Wolf Golden Crypto Show.
	We had an interesting conversation.
	And towards the end of the show, he said, hey, you know as well as anybody that if there was an uptick in the ordering of physical precious metals that you couldn't deliver.
	And I said, I know.
	And, like, everybody knows.
	It's the little secret, folks.
	If you join Wolfpack, you go to davidknight.gold, and you get into Wolfpack, we have guaranteed delivery of product.
	And I put my name on it.
	So I've slowly built up enough to where even we had about we got at least a month of inventory that I can do as a reserve.
	But I can't guarantee anything else after that.
	I mean, direct sales will.
	I mean, if you look at the first quarter of 2020, David, we after the lockdowns on Friday the 13th of March, after the lockdowns, it was six weeks out to get a silver delivery.
	People forget that.
	You know, if you ordered a significant amount of silver, and I was down to just ordering silver dollars and things, that's how tight the market got after the lockdowns in 2020.
	And then, you know, again, towards the spring and into the summer, it eased up a bit.
	But we've never really recovered from that point in time.
	The variety isn't what it used to be.
	And so I do caution people.
	I mean, if you're on the fence about getting into precious metals or just accumulating a little bit at a time, look at the prices now, where they are, and, you know, get something physical in your hand.
	Because I don't know how long it will last where you can continue to get supply.
	And when the prices go down like this, people hold.
	So there will be even less supply.
	The precious metals business is antithetical a lot to economics.
	It doesn't always reflect supply and demand.
	I mean, there's been times when you couldn't buy Any physical silver, because of runs on physical silver, like the Reddit Raiders that did that back in February of 21, and you couldn't get any physical silver, but the price went down the next day in the spot price on paper, because they sold off 1.5 times the annual supply in paper stock in one day.
	So they drove the market down.
	Yeah.
	That's what the paper stuff is for, is to manipulate.
	And that's what concerns me, is because these guys who do the securitization, the tokenization, and all the rest of this stuff, I mean, these guys, they're the manipulators who brought us the real estate market crash in 2008.
	They're constantly manipulating everything.
	So it's like, yeah, just get out of that and try to get something that is real, that is tangible.
	because the thing that really killed it for people with real estate was that, yeah, it was physical, but you didn't own it outright.
	You had mortgages on it or whatever.
	And so that was where they got people.
	They got them underwater on their mortgages and things like that.
	So that's a key thing, having something that is real there.
	Jason, thank you for the tip.
	He says, Jason Barker, Tony says, let people know they can do a one-time Wolfpack purchase when they have some extra cash.
	instead of a subscription, if they can't afford the monthly.
	Well, that's true.
	Yeah, we make it really easy at Wolfpack.
	I mean, you can get one-time any of the tiers from 35, the Wolf Cub, all the way up to the highest level.
	You can get one-time purchases.
	And if you join and you have to skip one, you can do that, too.
	We make it really.
	I've got a great team.
	We're very quick.
	On changing anything with your subscription.
	We don't give you a hard time.
	There's no contracts or anything like that.
	You get in and out, just like I would want to do.
	If I was you on the outside looking in, I would definitely want to have the freedom to move in and out or purchase whatever I wanted to do.
	We make it that way at Wolfpack, for sure.
	Go to DavidKnight.com.
	Well, it's a great thing, and it's the kind of stuff I like dealing with you.
	I trust you, and you're also innovative, and you provide some services that other people don't.
	I really do appreciate that at Wolfpack.
	Appreciate you.
	Thank you very much.
	Again, Tony Arterman at Wise Wolf Gold, and you can get there through davidknight.gold.
	Let's him know that you're coming through us.
	Thank you so much, Tony.
	We're living in interesting times, and I think things are going to get real interesting real quick.
	In the next few months, I think it's going to be really crazy.
	That old Chinese curse just continues.
	Not to disappoint in this decade, David.
	Like I said, it started out with a bang.
	We have been running, I mean, full steam ahead into Agenda 2030.
	That's what I want to continue to remind people of.
	And even in these little...
	You know, again, a lot of times it's a blessing to see these psychological shifts in markets and things.
	It gives you a pause, gives you a time to think and take in a breath.
	But we're going to get right back, I think, in 2025, right back to fundamentals.
	I have my show next at 11 a.m.
	Central Time.
	I'll be on my Twitter at Tony Arterburn and Rockfin and Rumble on the America Unplugged Network.
	I was meditating yesterday.
	I was driving up from Texas.
	I'm up in my Branson office today.
	I was thinking about a book that Pat Buchanan wrote back in 2011 called Suicide of a Superpower.
	The subtitle was, Will America Survive to 2025?
	And he asked all the big questions, trade deficits, actual deficits, currency, culture.
	And I remember being a big fan of Buchanan at the time and had read The Death of the West.
	It's one of the books that changed my life.
	And I was thinking about that book and how spot on he was.
	I'll talk a little bit about that in my show here coming up next hour.
	Oh, yeah.
	Yeah, we're living in some very interesting times that are coming up.
	And, you know, that's the Chinese proverb.
	The other thing, too, is that they build their picture characters, they build them out of different concepts, right?
	So their thing for crisis is opportunity and danger.
	And that's really kind of where we are right now.
	We've got opportunity and danger, and it's not going to change.
	So, we're going to take a quick break, and we will be right back.
	Thank you for joining us.
	Again, Tony is going to be coming up right after this program, and you can go to davidknight.gold.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Welcome back.
	Karen just handed this to me.
	Drudge Report says The Onion buys InfoWars.
	Well, I guess they're crying at InfoWars.
	I thought that was a joke!
	Is this really for real, or did the Onion say, because, you know, there was all this stuff about, you know, Elon Musk, you should buy it.
	And somebody at the Onion says, yeah, maybe we should buy it or whatever.
	And then they contacted him, and he didn't have any follow-through on that.
	That's pretty amazing.
	I didn't think that they were going to have anything come out until tomorrow.
	Well, that's interesting.
	The Onion Buys Infowars.
	Well, okay.
	So that's very interesting.
	Let's talk about what's happening in politics.
	Again, you know, Alex is going to be fine.
	I don't know about the other people that are there, though.
	So I'm concerned about many of them.
	But Alex is fine.
	He's got a lot of stuff squirreled away.
	He's got a very wealthy family that squirrels stuff away.
	He says he's got another studio.
	Maybe he'll have a job for some of the people that work there.
	But I think he'll probably do a podcast with Tucker and things like that, so we'll see what happens with it.
	The key is, can you trust what he has to say?
	I don't have any axe to grind with Alex, but he hired me.
	I was able to do what I wanted to do until I was not able to do what I wanted to do.
	I got fired for opposing him because I knew he was lying to people.
	I had people say, well, why did you work for him all those years?
	It's like, well, he never told me what I could or could not say.
	And I said, he never paid me to lie.
	He fired me, though, for telling the truth.
	And that's the reality.
	But, you know, I don't have any personal issues with it, but I do want to warn people.
	I saw people being entrapped so he could make money for Stop the Steal.
	I saw people being lied to so that he could ingratiate himself with the MAGA people and with Donald Trump.
	I think that's reprehensible.
	And so I want to warn people, just like I warn people about what is happening in the Trump administration.
	So the Biden administration Has declared that the Trump cabinet picks are unqualified.
	Can you pull up that picture, Karen?
	This is on today's politics stuff.
	Look at that.
	This is Babylon Bean.
	So they show pictures of Richard Levine, I guess is what is now.
	I call him Dick Devine.
	Pete Buttigieg.
	Of course, Sam Brinton, the cross-dressing luggage thief.
	But I thought this was really funny from the Babylon Bee.
	It's like the party responsible for appointing a transportation secretary whose only relevant experience was an apparent love for toy trains.
	Well, I think he's also got another love that he is putting out front.
	That's why I called him Pete Buttigieg.
	He has declared that Trump's cabinet picks are unqualified.
	The Democrat Party fresh off appointing a dude who wears dresses as a health minister, a guy who steals women's luggage as a nuclear weapons officer, and a joker costume wearing lesbian who can't answer questions as press secretary.
	Well, they felt that Trump's choices didn't have the proper credentials for their jobs.
	President-elect Trump has beclowned himself with these appointments, said Elizabeth Warren.
	These are serious roles with real responsibilities.
	We need the absolute best.
	And hey, has anybody seen my luggage?
	The people responsible for Afghani civilians hanging on to a cargo plane's wheel wells stated that Trump's choice for secondary defense was incompetent.
	But you know, it was Trump's pick, I think it was Waltz, Michael, who was saying in 2017, not just your children, but your grandchildren are going to be fighting in Afghanistan.
	This is the guy that Trump is bringing in.
	And, you know, this is what the American Empire wants from you.
	You're cannon fodder for them.
	You're there to fund their wars.
	You're there to fight their wars.
	Rich man's war, poor man's fight.
	And they wanted to stay in Afghanistan because, you know, among other things, they've got a lot of opium.
	A lot of lithium, other things like that, but mainly they wanted it because they want perpetual war.
	The military-industrial complex demands it.
	Their profits demand it, and they demand it from us.
	The other one they've got, next one, Trump nomination of Matt Gaetz raises eyebrows.
	That one goes after him because of his plastic surgery.
	That's quite obvious.
	The Trump nomination of Congressman Matt Gaetz as Attorney General has raised eyebrows, left many in the political sphere in shock, including Gaetz himself, who responded to Trump's announcement with a stunned look on his face.
	Just leave the face up there.
	As a matter of fact, I was going to pull it up.
	I said...
	Yeah, he actually reminds me of kind of Max Headroom or that other guy that did the robot thing.
	Oh, good evening.
	How are you?
	As you can see, he said, I am surprised.
	Well, I don't think anything could wipe this expression off of my face.
	There's some people in the country who've been getting away with some shady stuff for a long time.
	And now it's time to pay the piper.
	That's why, on day one, I'm planning on going after all the members of Congress who gave me a hard time about wanting a new Speaker of the House.
	At publishing time, reports indicated that the eyebrows raised by Gates' nomination may have gotten stuck there.
	Well...
	I'll tell you what he represents.
	He represents what we were kind of wondering what Trump was going to do.
	He represents the fact that Trump is going to go for unrestricted lawfare against people.
	And I think there's a lot of people who should be gone after.
	But the question is, as I said, you know, you have so many people, so much political persecution from the Biden administration, obvious.
	And it's not just Trump.
	It's the people that Trump put in front of himself, used as human shields, the J6 people who have been rotting in jail, who I think he will largely pardon.
	I don't know so much about whether he will pardon the pro-lifers.
	I don't know whether or not this Republican Congress will get rid of the FACE Act and other things like that that are used to shut down people's ability to speak and to protest and to criminalize speech and protest as they did on January the 6th.
	People need to have consequences for that kind of stuff.
	But I think it ought to be done in light of restoring the rule of law.
	And I'm afraid that the perception and the reality is that it's going to be done to show people they better not mess with Trump or his people.
	And so I think he's looking for somebody.
	Matt Gaetz doesn't shy away from conflict.
	As a matter of fact, he loves it.
	And of course, he went after the speakers in Congress and created a lot of enemies there.
	He's not concerned at all about that type of thing.
	And I don't think anybody else would do it to the extent that Matt Gaetz will do it.
	He's going to be very loyal to Trump.
	As a matter of fact, the one obstacle for him getting in is getting approval.
	Even if Trump wants to have him as Attorney General, he may not get approval.
	It's kind of interesting.
	Chris Minahan at Information Liberation said that he is about the only person Out of Trump's cabinet that is not Israel First.
	He's taken no money from AIPAC. As a matter of fact, he accused AIPAC of setting him up.
	And that setup that happened, you know, when you look at most of the other picks from Trump, there's two things he's looking for.
	He's looking for personal loyalty to him.
	And he's looking for loyalty to Israel.
	Now, I think that Gates is very loyal to him, so loyal that if he's got any issues with Israel, it doesn't really matter to him.
	And yet, I think it will matter to the people who have to approve him in Congress.
	Few issues in America are more important than ending the partisan weaponization of our justice system, said Trump.
	I'm going to restore America's badly shattered faith and confidence in the Justice Department.
	Well, we'll see whether or not it is just the types of things that he does are going to be just a backlash and another kind of weaponization, or if it's going to restore the rule of law.
	But like I said, I think it's going to be about don't mess with me.
	I think it's going to be that.
	Matt Gaetz says, well...
	We have to have a full court press against this weaponized government that's been turning on our people.
	And if that means abolishing every one of the three-letter agencies from the FBI to the ATF, I'm ready to get going.
	Well, let me tell you something.
	If Matt Gaetz becomes attorney general and if he abolishes or neutralizes these agencies, I'd vote for him myself.
	He could run for president.
	Anybody that would get rid of this stuff, if you're really going to.
	I know that talk is cheap.
	If you really got rid of this stuff, or even if you really just fight against it, that would be huge.
	So we can hope that that's going to happen.
	It was interesting to see the reaction from NBC. To Matt Gaetz.
	And they did a couple of reports on it.
	This is the second one.
	First, they talked to a bunch of people in Washington.
	And then this is the second one.
	And, oh, they are just beside themselves.
	Heard the reaction on Capitol Hill to the Gaetz pick.
	Laura Jarrett is tracking reaction inside the Justice Department.
	What's being said there tonight?
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	One is the sex trafficking investigation that Garrett detailed there.
	It was ultimately closed without any charges.
	But if confirmed, Gates would be the top law enforcement officer of the very same agency that criminally investigated him for years.
	The other concern expressed by officials is more about how he could use the department's resources to settle scores against the president-elect's perceived political enemies.
	We have heard Gates take aim at top prosecutors in both New York and Georgia, along with Special Counsel Jack Smith-Luster.
	You're reporting Jack Smith may actually resign before Inauguration Day.
	He ran out of time.
	Bottom line there, both the federal cases he's overseeing in Washington and Florida are nowhere close to a trial.
	They were bogged down in delays and appeals from the very outset.
	You combine that with the timing, that's just a reality.
	The Justice Department will not prosecute a sitting president.
	The only question now, Lester, is whether he can get a publicly released report out before the former president is inaugurated.
	All right, Laura, thank you.
	Well, that's kind of interesting because what Chris Minahan says, says that Merrick Garland's Department of Justice declared to, declined rather, to charge Matt Gaetz in a sex trafficking investigation back in February 2023 after leaked texts revealed that the Israeli government appeared to be implicated in the $25 million extortion plot targeting Gaetz's family.
	And so that's what he had said at the beginning.
	Oh, that sounds like a conspiracy theory.
	Yeah, it seems like it was a conspiracy theory.
	And isn't it interesting that you hear NBC treating it as if he has been convicted?
	He was never even indicted, let alone convicted.
	Joel Greenberg, who worked as a tax collector in Seminole County, Florida, appears to have tried to entrap Gates into having sex with a 17-year-old girl for blackmail purposes.
	Unfortunately for Greenberg, the evidence that the DOJ compiled indicated that she had actually turned 18 when she was alleged to have taken a trip with Gates to the Bahamas in 2018.
	Texts from Jake Novak, media director for the Israeli consulate in New York City, showed that Novak had prior knowledge of Gates' sex trafficking investigation before any news had come out.
	And he appeared to be involved in a $25 million extortion plot to shake down Gates' father to get the case to go away.
	That's pretty amazing.
	That's pretty amazing.
	And, of course, this is the kind of stuff that you see in politics.
	Gates explicitly questioned whether the real hidden hand behind the extortion scheme targeting him and his father was the government of Israel itself.
	Because you see, the people who help them are not exposed here.
	Attorney General Merrick Garland declined to charge Gates with anything.
	And as I point out, they're treating this in mainstream media as if he had been charged and convicted.
	Now, Chris Minahan points out the obvious.
	He said, Gates unquestionably deserves to be treated as entirely innocent until proven guilty.
	I suspect that even if Greenberg did get something on him, the Department of Justice wouldn't want to risk it coming out in court, that the Israeli government was behind yet another Epstein-style blackmail plot targeting elected leaders.
	He says, though Gates has not been convicted of a crime, there is a big judgment issue, isn't it?
	Right?
	When you go around with a young girl like that.
	And not only that, but hanging around with Greenberg.
	Now, he doesn't mention the issue of quote-unquote dating an 18-year-old, somebody that is just barely legal, but it's also he's just saying he exercised bad judgment hanging around with Greenberg.
	Well, I think dating 18-year-olds or 17-year-olds or whatever also says something about his judgment.
	I think his plastic surgery says something about his judgment as well.
	Gates' nomination, however, will have to be approved.
	By the Senate.
	And they are going to have a lot of control over this type of thing.
	Look, a confirmation of any of these people, any of them, requires just a simple majority.
	But because they have the filibuster rule, they may need to have 60 votes there.
	Also yesterday, we had Tulsi Gabbard Tapped as Director of National Intelligence.
	Director of National Intelligence is an office that they created once they started creating Homeland Security and things like that, started consolidating these things.
	As Hillary Clinton made it famous, we've got something like 17 different intelligence agencies, if you count all the intelligence agencies of The various branches of the military and other things, CIA, NSA, all these are under the Director of National Intelligence.
	That would be Tulsi Gabbard.
	I would imagine that she would be able to get confirmed.
	I'm not so sure, though.
	About Pete Hegseth or about Matt Gates.
	I think they may push back against them, especially against Gates, because again, if he is at odds with Israel, if he has not taken AIPAC money, They are not going to want him in that position, even if Trump wants him there because of his loyalty to Trump and his willingness to prosecute this lawfare.
	And then when you look at Pete Hegseth.
	As I pointed out, he is definitely there to a lot of belligerent warmongering.
	I think he is there to indicate that, yes, we're going to get into a war with Iran once we get in.
	All these different people, as I said, not just Hegseth, but also Waltz, as well as Radcliffe.
	They all sound like Lindsey Graham.
	And so I think that is definitely going to happen.
	Whether it's going to happen in other places or not, we'll see if they get in.
	On the plus side, Hegseth has been very outspoken in terms of pushing back against this DEI agenda that's been foisted on people.
	By the current group of politicians that we call generals and admirals in the military.
	And so I think that that would be something that would change.
	Trump had already talked about creating a board of former generals and high-ranking officers that would try to turn around what is happening in the military, what's happening at West Point and all the different academies, Take a look at all of that, as well as a lot of the rules that are happening there.
	So the burdening of the military with all this tranny stuff, I think that is something I think that is something that Trump would get a lot of support doing that.
	And it's something that needs to change, quite frankly.
	I'm just concerned about all the warmongering talk.
	I think we've got like three little Lindsey Graham juniors coming in there.
	Just last week, Hank Seth said on a podcast that the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff should be fired, along with any general, admiral, whatever, that was involved in any DEI woke garbage.
	He's also reportedly called for the Defense Department to be renamed the War Department.
	Yeah, that's what it was always called.
	And I've talked about that in the past.
	The irony of the fact that when the military was set up to actually defend this country, they called it the War Department.
	And now when the military, after World War II and so forth, has now been focused on forever wars everywhere, all the time, they call it the Defense Department.
	And of course, getting involved in wars everywhere is not anything that does anything to defend our country.
	They're not defending the border.
	They're putting us at risk by getting us involved in these wars.
	So yeah, the War Department, that would be a better name for it.
	But it may also indicate that they want to be more active in starting, preemptively starting, wars everywhere.
	He also wanted a 10-year ban on generals working as defense contractors after leaving the military.
	So, with all of that happening, the press is saying, well, does he have enough experience?
	Well, you know, look at Austin, right?
	Who worked for such a long time for Raytheon in the military industry.
	He's one of the examples of this.
	he worked for them for such a long time that they had to get a special rule passed to be able to bring him back in.
	Perhaps that rule is why they could bring in Pete Hegseth, who's been gone for a while.
	Interesting, isn't it?
	That would pave the way for him.
	But he still has to get confirmation.
	But did Austin, did he do anything to help us for peace?
	No, not at all.
	Austin had too much experience.
	Yes.
	Maybe he had gone native in the military-industrial complex.
	Maybe he had the wrong kind of experience.
	Yeah, experience is not necessarily all they're chalking up to.
	John Bolton, who was Trump's national security advisor, told the BBC that the post of defense secretary should never be a loyalty appointment.
	But it always is, isn't it?
	Isn't it always a loyalty appointment?
	He said the question is, will he be a yes-man to Donald Trump?
	Well, the question is, who did Bolton serve?
	You know, you want to talk about a yes-man?
	You know, who will Hegseth serve?
	Sometimes you have moments, Steve, and I happen to believe that we can't kick the can down the road any longer in trying to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear bomb.
	They used the killing of Soleimani as an excuse to say, we're scrapping the Iran deal.
	We all know they were scrapping it anyway.
	So what better time than now to say, we're starting the clock.
	You've got a week.
	You've got X amount of time before we start taking out your energy production facilities.
	We take out key infrastructure.
	We take out your missile sites.
	We take out nuclear developments.
	That is not Take out port capabilities.
	Or, you know what, take out a Quds headquarters while you're at it, if you want.
	I understand that's not a popular idea.
	But I understand.
	I've been hearing that we believe that the Iranians are hiding missiles and weapons in some of these cultural sites, churches, or mosques.
	Of course they do.
	This is...
	This is what Islamists do, what they've done in the battlefield against folks like me and my entire generation.
	Human shields, using mosques, using hospitals, schools.
	This is what our enemies do.
	Now, that doesn't mean we go on and target cultural sites, but what it means is we are clear-eyed about how our enemies use the The rules that we write against us.
	And if we want to defeat them, this is something, having seen it, if we want to defeat them, we have to think smart about how these rules, how we navigate within these rules without playing a game that's rigged to help them so that we can't win.
	If we're going to fight to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear bomb, this regime, then we need to rewrite the rules that are advantageous to us.
	I don't want to hit cultural sites on purpose, but if you're using one to harbor your most dangerous weapons, then that should be on the target list.
	Well, isn't that interesting?
	You know, we see that he criticizes, when he talks about Ukraine, he criticizes Putin.
	He says, you know, they're bombing areas where there's men, and there's women and children, and there's men who are not in the military.
	It's like, well, isn't that what people are accusing Israel of doing in Gaza?
	What are the set of rules?
	Is there one set of rules depending on which side of the war we're on and another set of rules otherwise?
	And who sets the rules, Pete?
	Who sets the ethics?
	Is this something that is set by the Secretary of Defense?
	Do you get to set our ethics here?
	Or do the ethics transcend the politics and the political appointees?
	That's my key with all of this.
	You see, a justified war.
	A justified war has certain rules that come along with it.
	And you don't get to change them for your political advantage.
	You don't get to change those rules depending on which side you're on.
	If a preemptive strike is infamy, and it was, and it remains infamy, and you don't get to change the world saying, well, now we get to target civilians.
	I don't agree with that.
	But as I talk about the qualifications...
	This is the BBC. So they contrast the qualifications with Pete Hegseth, who has spent eight years working at Fox News.
	They said, well, you know, Leon Panetta served under former President Obama, was a former CIA director and a White House chief of staff.
	Robert Gates, who was appointed by George W. Bush and Obama, worked for the CIA for 27 years.
	Is that supposed to be a qualification or disqualification?
	When you look at Leon Panetta, I've talked many times about how disgusting his defiance of the Constitution.
	You want to talk about rules?
	We have ethical rules.
	We have moral rules.
	We have constitutional rules.
	We have legal rules.
	These people in the CIA, people like Leon Panetta, ignored all of those rules.
	I'll never forget, I had high expectations for Jeff Sessions when he came in, because he had confronted Leon Panetta, up to a degree, up to a degree.
	When Leon Panetta was saying, well, we're going to get involved in Syria or whatever, you know, we're going to move troops into that, and Jeff Sessions says, well, you were a congressman.
	Because, you know, Leon Panetto was a congressman, then he became a CIA appointee, well, White House Chief of Staff, then CIA appointee.
	And at the time he was talking to him, he was Secretary of Defense.
	And so he said to him, he said, well, you were a congressman.
	He said, you know how the Constitution works.
	You're going to tell us if you're going to send troops into Syria, if you're going to put boots on the ground.
	That was a big issue at the time.
	And Leon Panetta says, well, we'll consult with our allies at NATO and the UN, and we'll let you know what we decide.
	And he goes, what?
	What are you talking about?
	You know the Constitution.
	You can't do that.
	And he goes, well, Congressman, or Senator, we will consult with him, and we'll let you know what we decide.
	And he was, you know, Jeff Sessions was just livid.
	But he didn't lecture him any more about it.
	He said, well, I just can't believe that you're saying that, that type of thing.
	But at least he called him out on it.
	But the arrogance of Leon Panetta, and I'd watched him over the years.
	You know where he really got arrogant?
	It was after that stint at the CIA. It's amazing what a cesspool that is.
	So yeah, get rid of the CIA. Matt Gaetz, I don't think he's going to get rid of the CIA or the FBI. Nothing like that's going to happen, I tell you.
	And you say things like that, they will make sure that you don't get your confirmation.
	That's really what's going to happen, I think.
	But, yeah, you know, when you look at what the BBC considers to be qualifications, I think they are disqualifications.
	Elizabeth Warren urged her fellow senators not to confirm him, and again, as I said, it only takes a simple majority to confirm, but they can pull in the filibuster on any of these Trump appointments, and if it's a filibuster to stop that filibuster, you've got to have 60 votes.
	So the real—if it's somebody that's controversial— The Republicans don't have the votes to put them in.
	Especially now that they have picked Mitch McConnell's choice soon.
	There's not going to be conservatives there that are going to take much of a stand.
	So, to succeed at cutting government, Musk and Rama Slimy, as our listeners said, must take on entitlements.
	This is reason.
	And again, reason is taking this whole doge thing seriously.
	They realize that this is a joke.
	It's a con.
	It's a pretty obvious con.
	You can't have the king of crony capitalism, the guy who created the richest person in history, by exploiting government waste.
	You're going to set him up as the person who's going to be your efficiency expert?
	But they said, well, if you really want to do something, you're going to have to take on entitlements.
	It said, Doge, despite the name, looks like more of an unofficial advisory board that will work with the White House office of OMB. Well, I think, you know, when they talk about we're going to have it as the Department of Government Efficiency, I think what Musk has been is a one-man department of government exploitation for his own personal wealth and power.
	That's how he got to where he is.
	Anyway, they said, it's not like it's some secret knowledge that has to be uncovered about what is happening with government and where the waste is.
	They said, what is lacking is not ideas.
	It isn't that we don't know where the money is being lost and wasted.
	It's just that we don't have the political will to act on it.
	And that political will really needs to come from Congress.
	So, improper payments made by Medicare and Medicaid, $101 billion of improper payments, and the two entitlements made in 2023, accounted for 40% of all improper payments made across the entire government that year.
	So, $100 billion, if you were to get rid of that, then that's not really going to get you very far.
	We've got a $35 trillion deficit, and we're adding several trillion a year.
	You're going to save $100 out of $4,000 or $5,000?
	That's not going to make much of a difference.
	The question is, could Trump actually get rid of the Department of Education?
	Vox asked that.
	Trump repeatedly threatened to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education on the basis that the federal education apparatus is indoctrinating young people with inappropriate racial, sexual, and political material.
	Well, it's absolutely true.
	And everybody knows that.
	And everybody supports that.
	The question is, why are we funding that?
	And see, that's the issue.
	Whether or not the Department of Education comes or goes.
	As long as the federal government is funding that, as long as taxpayers are funding that with local taxes, that's the issue.
	Why are we funding institutions that indoctrinate kids with inappropriate racial, sexual, and political material?
	You know, the government schools are the issue, and rearranging the chairs, rearranging the organizations and the institutions with org charts Isn't going to make any difference with that.
	And if there's money coming out of Washington, somebody's going to be controlling those strings, those purse strings.
	Closing the department would not be easy for Trump, writes Fox, but it isn't impossible.
	And even if the DOE remains open, there are certainly ways that Trump could radically change education in the United States.
	So I'm going to talk a little bit about what's possible.
	Very much like all of the ideas that we have about the Federal Reserve, right?
	Oh, it has to be independent, and it has to be this, and it has to be that, and the President shouldn't have any say-so.
	And as I pointed out when I talked about it, was it yesterday or the day before?
	I said, yeah, we used to have the Secretary of the Treasury sitting on the board and making determinations about that.
	And when FDR came in, he said, well, you're not going to be allowed to own gold anymore.
	Turn your gold in to me, he said to the Federal Reserve.
	How independent are they if they've got to turn their gold into him?
	Well, they're not.
	And then we look at the fact that the Federal Reserve Act was created by Congress, that Congress could change anything that they wanted to about it.
	The issue is not that we don't know where the problems are.
	Part of the issue is that the Congress doesn't have any will, and the American people have been gaslit to think that the way things are are the way they always have been, or even the way that they should be.
	So can he actually close the DOE? No.
	Well, Professor Emeritus at School of Public Policy in Maryland said, well, it would take an act of Congress to radically restructure it.
	And so the question is whether or not there'd be appetite on Hill for abolishing the department.
	As I mentioned before, in 1980, when they created the Department of Education, they carved it out of what had been, for a very long time, health, education, and welfare.
	And they pulled the education part out, and they took the health and welfare and put it under HHS. Abolishing the department would require 60 votes unless the Republicans abolish the filibuster.
	Without the filibuster, legislation would need a simple majority to pass, but senators have been hesitant to get rid of it in recent years.
	And, of course, the likelihood that Democrats are going to join in with that is almost nonexistent.
	The push to unwind the department is probably largely symbolic, and it's largely just talk, as it has been for the last 44 years.
	Much of what Trump and MAGA activists claim the agency is responsible for, like teaching critical race theory and LGBT ideology, isn't actually the purview of the DOE. Things like curriculum and teacher choice are already the domain of state departments of education and local educational boards.
	And that's what Vox is saying.
	And Vox is completely wrong.
	That's a naive view of how things operate.
	It's always about the money.
	MAGA doesn't get this either.
	It's about the money.
	That's why they don't understand what happened with the pandemic.
	But look, if you're going to withhold funds from Washington because you aren't allowing boys in the girls' bathroom, or if you're going to do what Trump said and say, I'm going to withhold it if you do put them in.
	The money is being used as an instrument of control regardless of what kind of policy you're putting out there.
	And as long as the money is coming from Washington, regardless of whether it's coming from the Department of Education or whether it's being granted and given directly by the president, it's still going to have those types of strings.
	It's the money, stupid.
	Just like it's the welfare and the things like that for foreign citizens coming across the border.
	It's the money that controls all of this.
	Well, as we talk about the money, Cantor Fitzgerald CEO Howard Lutnick is now, as I mentioned earlier briefly, he's now put his hat in the ring for the Treasury Secretary post.
	So now we have a choice.
	Between a guy who is a pusher of carbon taxes, whose company has always been at the epicenter of ESG, just like BlackRock, except not as big, a guy who I think is coming up with a public-private partnership version of CBDC, or we can have the guy who was a Soros crony and schemer.
	These are the two front runners here for the job in the Trump administration for Treasury Secretary.
	Of course, you know, in the previous one, we had a Goldman Sachs maker the entire time, Steve Mnuchin, who is now, by the way, working with Lutnik to try to put together this kind of privatized CBDC. Lutnik has become increasingly visible to the crypto community due to his relationship with Tether.
	We talked about that as well.
	The stable coin.
	And his appearance at Bitcoin 2024 in Nashville this summer.
	Trump is selecting cabinet members for his upcoming administration.
	2025, the role of Treasury Secretary is now reportedly contested between Scott Besant and Howard Lutnik.
	So there you go.
	The guy who is the co-chair of the transition team has now put his name in the hat to be one of the people picked.
	According to Fox Business Reporter, Besant was, quote, all but certain to secure the position as recently as Tuesday.
	He was up against some guy named John Paulson.
	However, Paulson bowed out, and now Lutnik says, well, I'm going to run against that.
	He was appointed to co-lead Trump's transition team.
	As I mentioned earlier before with Linda McMahon, professional wrestling is what this is all about.
	There's so much about professional wrestling.
	You've got to have somebody from professional wrestling on the team.
	The inclusion of Lutnik is huge for crypto.
	He personally briefed the House Republican Conference last year on stable coins and is a big crypto bull.
	The popular delusion and the madness of crowds right now.
	September 2024, Lutnake argued that Bitcoin should be treated as a commodity and to get the SEC off of it.
	And I think that is definitely going to happen with crypto in general.
	He said they have no idea about digital assets or coherent digital asset policy.
	But he does.
	And we're likely to get it good and hard.
	Now, at the beginning of all this, I talked about how there was the joke from Babylon Bee about how Matt Gaetz said, yeah, there's a lot of bad actors there in the house, and I'm going to come after them, too.
	Well, it turns out that now you've got Chip Roy...
	I largely agree with Chip.
	He's done a lot of good stuff, and he is, I think, on the right side of trying to reform Congress.
	So that it isn't actually just one person at the top like Mike Johnson or Nancy Pelosi or John Boehner who is directing everything.
	I tried to make it more of a, you know, where all the different members have some ability to have an input into it.
	And that's what the conservative has been doing.
	Now there are particularly, there are House rules being proposed.
	To punish people like Chip Roy, people like Matt Gaetz and others.
	And these are coming from Republicans.
	Nick Lalota from New York, a Republican, proposed an amendment that would strip GOP members of committee assignments if they vote against the party position on procedural floor votes.
	So you better tow the party line.
	Or we're going to strip you of all committee assignments and you won't have anything.
	Because there's no power at all outside of the committees.
	That's part of what the problem is in Congress.
	And why we wind up with these omnibus bills and all the rest of this stuff.
	Another Republican from Wisconsin, Derek Van Orden, pushed another punitive measure that would remove members.
	Who vote to vacate a House Speaker without a party majority.
	Ooh.
	Because that's what these people have done.
	Right?
	You've had Marjorie Taylor Greene.
	You've had Chip Roy.
	Others said move to remove Kevin McCarthy and others like that.
	Well, Mike Johnson is cut from the same cloth as Nancy Pelosi.
	He wants to make sure that doesn't happen to him.
	Now, at the same time, he's got people doing this.
	He's saying, that's not coming from me.
	I don't have anything to do with that.
	Chip Roy said, I represent 750,000 Texans, not my colleagues.
	He said, we should be focused on developing, delivering on Trump's agenda, not wasting time with counterproductive efforts, demanding that we hand over our voting cards to the party.
	He said, that'll never happen with me.
	And so, as I said, Mike Johnson is saying, well, I've made it clear to members, as I've been having discussions with them, that I'm not in favor of punitive measures and rules.
	I don't think we should, we'll have a need for a party discipline.
	I expect for everybody to be singing from the same sheet of music.
	I expect your voluntary compliance.
	I don't have anything to do with these measures that have been introduced on my behalf.
	Yeah.
	You believe that?
	Any of that?
	I don't.
	Well, we're going to take a break, but before we do, Karen put this up.
	Some guy, Corn Pop 4584, is a troll.
	And he says, I'm telling you with 100% certainty that David Knight was never fired.
	Did you realize that?
	I was never fired.
	How about that?
	And I saw this and I thought, yeah, that's right.
	I mean, in a sense, I quit, right?
	Because I was told I'd be fired if I didn't stop talking about Stop the Steal.
	If I didn't stop pushing back against that nonsense.
	But no, he says, David Knight had already started his own audience, which the people that fund Alex Jones are also funding David Knight.
	So I told Karen, she put this up, and I said, get rid of him.
	Look, hey, Corn Pop, whoever you are, you anonymous troll, I don't platform lies.
	I told Alex to not come on my show in front of my crew.
	I said, this is a lie, and I don't want you on this show selling that lie.
	I don't want to have anything to do with it.
	I don't want to have anything to do with corn pop either.
	So, bye-bye, pal.
	And when you come back, we'll ban you again.
	I am not going to platform lies.
	Certainly not here.
	I wouldn't do it on my own show at Infowars.
	We're going to take a quick break, and 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.
	Liberty.
	It's your move.
	And now, The David Knight Show.
	Well, welcome back.
	We've got just a little bit of time left.
	I want to talk about what's coming up in terms of entertainment.
	I'll just say one last thing here.
	You know, I mean, you may agree with me or you may disagree with me.
	I always like to hear people, even those that I disagree with.
	It helps me to understand where I am on an issue.
	All I can say is I'm going to tell you honestly what I think.
	I'm not going to tell you that a vaccine is sugar water after I've been telling you for 20 years that adjuvants are going to cause autism and all other kinds of things.
	So I'll give you my honest opinion.
	I'll try to tell the truth.
	If you disagree with me, fine.
	But I'm not going to tolerate people like that.
	They come on deliberately telling lies.
	We don't tolerate...
	We'll kick people off for the day if they get into a fight with somebody.
	But you come on doing that kind of stuff.
	And, of course, they can create another anonymous...
	We'll just kick them off if they start doing the same thing again.
	That's the way it's going to operate here.
	I'm not going to platform lies.
	But let's talk a little bit about some other kind of lies, the kinds that come out of Hollywood.
	You got Netflix is going to be coming up for Christianity.
	And I thought this is really funny when I saw the headline of this.
	They're going to release a biblical epic, an origin story for Christianity.
	They're always doing origin stories for superheroes.
	This is how Spider-Man gets bitten and becomes Spider-Man.
	So this is what they're going to do.
	They're going to do it, call it Merry.
	Christmas season, Netflix is going to be bringing a retelling of the nativity story to audiences around the world, offering a fresh perspective.
	A fresh perspective on an ancient narrative.
	And so they also say they're going to be reimagining it.
	I don't know about you, but I'm quite frankly not interested in a fresh perspective reimagining God's Word.
	That's what Christians are looking at, and I understand, or another origin story, I understand that a lot of people like that.
	I'm not a big fan of Christian fiction.
	I'm not a fan of Christian fan fiction.
	I'm not a fan of The Chosen, for example, because they're doing a lot of reimagining there as well.
	Viewers will see the journey from Mary's viewpoint as she navigates the challenges of an unprecedented destiny.
	They have Anthony Hopkins who's going to be taking on the role of King Herod.
	Story needed more than ever in our world, they said.
	You know, it's needed more than ever in our world.
	A savior.
	A redeemer.
	And that's not the story they're telling here.
	This is a woman's story.
	Mary's story is important to me, says the woman who is producing this.
	We're going to show her as a relatable young woman.
	And of course, you know, we can all relate to people in the Bible, can't we?
	You know, we look at what happened in their lives, and we can relate to them, but we can relate to them in how they relate to God.
	Isn't that the point?
	I mean, I'm not just looking for, well, you know, it's kind of interesting.
	These people lived 2,000 or 3,000 or 4,000 or whatever years ago.
	You know, they had the same kind of struggles they did.
	Yeah, human nature doesn't change.
	And so we have the same issues in terms of trying to relate to God that they did.
	And that's, when I look at the Bible, if I'm looking at how somebody is, their story or whatever, did they rightly or wrongly relate to God?
	And what were the consequences of both of those types of things?
	Instead, what they want is somebody that's relatable.
	That is, you know, we bring them into the current milieu, whatever that is.
	We carefully fictionalized the moments between Mary's journey, adding tension, emotion, and pacing.
	And see, of course, that's what all dramatizations will do.
	They will all take dramatic license.
	And that's the big issue.
	Even if they don't deliberately try to create, as the Chosen did, they say, well, we're going to do Judas' backstory.
	Well, that's exactly what I need, isn't it?
	You know, as I said, our culture, even Disney, DC films, you know, Batman, everything, we don't even want to talk about the hero.
	We made our heroes darker and darker and darker, and now we want to talk about the villains.
	So they want to talk about Judas, for example, okay?
	And then they want to fictionalize moments that are there.
	See, the problem is that the details are important.
	The details of the story are important.
	And I don't want truth fictionalized.
	But whenever they make a movie out of something, they're always going to add tension, emotion, and pacing to all of this.
	And do you ever wonder why God didn't wait until he had pictures and movies and stuff to bring Jesus to earth, right?
	Why did they do it back then?
	I mean, you know, if they waited until now everybody could see Jesus and see what he was like and hear him, why, you know, I guess God just didn't think about that.
	Or maybe he did.
	Maybe that was deliberate.
	You know, one of the interesting things about the Bible is that throughout it, you'll constantly see that there's not really any focus at all on what people look like.
	You might have like a general mention of the fact that Saul is very tall or that David is ruddy, but in general, it doesn't describe them.
	What do we focus on?
	We focus on their appearance, right?
	Because people are focused on the outside.
	But God looks at our heart.
	And that's not what you're going to see with the films.
	Films are all going to focus on that.
	Texas Coast South, thank you very much for the tip.
	I appreciate that.
	Wheat and chaff, brother.
	Honored to help when I can.
	Nearly homeless, but bigger things are at stake.
	Well, thank you so much.
	That is so kind of you.
	Thank you so much.
	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.

▲