Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Nov. 29, 2024 - The David Knight Show

03:03:06

The David Knight Show -11/29/2024

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Thank you.
	Well, the science is settled.
	We've heard that so many times, right?
	That's kind of the refuge of a scoundrel.
	As I've said so many times, science is never settled.
	The only way that science advances is if people question some of the long-held assumptions.
	And so that's what we're going to do today.
	You know, when somebody tells you something like a good math teacher, they should show you the work.
	They should especially show you the data.
	If they don't do that, you ought to get ever more skeptical about this.
	And after four years of this nonsense, the masks and the lockdowns and the six-foot distancing and then the vaccines that weren't tested, if you're not...
	I'm skeptical about this stuff right now.
	This show is not for you, but I think most of you who watch this show are.
	And so I wanted to cover the book.
	We have a couple of doctors from New Zealand.
	The book is The Final Pandemic, An Antioch.
	Antidote to medical tyranny, and it really is the antidote to medical tyranny.
	We want, however, to make sure that we have answered the questions and the objections, and that's why I wanted to get them on.
	That's a very thorough book.
	My guests are Dr. Mark Bailey and Dr. Samantha Bailey.
	They are married.
	both of them are physicians in new zealand so thank you for joining us thank you thank you and and of course let me give the website as well it's dr sam dr sam bailey.com and so that's where you can find more information you can find the book everywhere but thank you for joining us and it is fascinating i haven't been able to read the entire book but i've read a great deal of it you've done another book
	That was 400 pages long, had 1400 references.
	This one's about 180 pages long and it's got, so I got it wrote down here, 444 references.
	So you document stuff very well.
	People can do their own research.
	It's a great beginning point for somebody if they want to question the foundation of what has happened to us for the last four years.
	But let's begin by letting you give us a little bit of your background as physicians.
	What caused you to question something that most people say is an unquestionable orthodoxy?
	Thank you, David, for that really great introduction to introduce this topic.
	As you mentioned, Sam and I were both conventionally trained doctors.
	I graduated in 1999, one of the last doctors to graduate from the last century, and was in the medical system for two decades.
	Now, during that time, there were definitely speed bumps for me.
	I questioned what we were doing a lot of the time.
	Many of the things we did with regard to pharmaceuticals, vaccines and surgery were not things that I would do to myself or to my family.
	So there was always that uneasy relationship.
	Now despite having an established career in medicine, I decided to leave in 2016. I hated the structure of the medical system, was having increasing amounts of conflict with other practitioners within the system because of disagreements about what we were doing, and decided to completely get out of it.
	Now, the best thing to come out of my medical career was meeting my wife Sam next to me here.
	So we met in 2007 when we were both hospital doctors and we worked in all kinds of specialties, including clinical trials.
	So we were research physicians supervising first-time human dosing of new pharmaceuticals and spent quite a few years Getting to grips with how the biotech industry worked and how the pharmaceutical industry worked and how they funded studies and how they got new products to market.
	So that was a fascinating insight for both of us.
	Now in 2016 I was so done with medicine that I said to Sam, I think you've got to get out.
	I really believe it's going to get worse, and Sam said, yeah, it's pretty bad, but she had some work that she was enjoying, and I'll hand over to Sam.
	Before we get to 2020 and what happened, I'll hand over to Sam.
	Okay.
	Yeah, so basically, I was still working in clinical trials, and I had a great...
	Patients and I loved the work and I wasn't ready to kind of leave.
	And anyway, and then I formed my own business which was like an online doctor business and this was kind of the first of its kind in New Zealand before all this became normal.
	And by chance I got kind of invited to become a TV presenter on a health show like in a mainstream network in New Zealand.
	So I did that and I really loved it and one of my friends suggested that I should start my own YouTube channel.
	So I did that at the kind of end of 2019 going into 2020 and then this was the real start of my awakening when you actually hit the kind of wall of what you're allowed to do and so...
	People were asking about coronavirus and what it meant and I didn't know and I'd hunker down with Mark and we'd kind of research and answer a lot of these questions and we came across this book, Virus Mania, which was a huge shift in everything that I once thought to believe And it was actually Mark who sat me down because he read the book first.
	Yeah, it was one of those situations, David, where I'd been out of medicine for four years when this whole COVID thing started and I wanted to stay out.
	And as Sam said, she started this YouTube channel And by January 2020, people are saying, what's this rumor coming out of Wuhan?
	Can you talk about it?
	Can you talk about these things?
	And I started researching.
	And the first thing I looked at was the World Health Organization documents.
	And I said to Sam, there's nothing here.
	These are just so-called expert opinions.
	They refer to some protocols.
	They refer to historical events.
	I can't find the foundational science behind what they're talking about here.
	Then around February, we start seeing publications claiming that they've found this novel virus and it's causing a new disease.
	Now, Sam and I as clinicians looked at these papers and said, what new disease?
	This is pneumonia.
	This is all of the same things we've seen before.
	There's nothing special about these patients.
	And then people would say, well, look at the CT scans.
	And we'd say...
	Yep, those lungs, that's generic kind of findings for people with pneumonia.
	This place, Wuhan, is obviously highly polluted.
	There's plenty of reasons why people are going to get sick there, and we don't see anything novel going on here.
	So that led, as Sam says, to the discovery of Virus Mania.
	Sam subsequently became a co-author of that book, but at that time it was new to us.
	We started looking into virology and we just couldn't believe it because there were two things that were apparent.
	One was that when we were at medical school and working as doctors, the wool had been pulled over our eyes.
	We had not been shown all of the failed experiments that had taken place over a century.
	And also, we didn't realise that people had been trying to get this information out for years.
	So we had the Perth Group in Australia, we had Dr Stefan Lanker, David Crowe, other people, Kerry Mullis, who had various views, but one of them was that there were major problems with aspects of virology.
	So we discovered this and our audience just kept saying, go deeper, go deeper.
	And so before long, in 2020, we found that we were at the tip of the spear with Andy Kaufman and Tom Cowan and Mike Stone, Christine Massey and all of these other great individuals that decided in 2020 that they'll dedicate their time to researching these issues.
	Yeah, it is amazing.
	I came at it from a different angle, which my audience is familiar with.
	I came at it from Dark Winter and the Germ Games and things like that.
	And when they started doing this and there wasn't really anybody dying and they declare a pandemic, they're like, wait a minute, this is not even an epidemic.
	So, it truly has been an amazing thing to see how they were able to pull this off and how long it lasted.
	But I want to get to the root of the cause, and that really is the pandemic.
	And when we're talking about a pandemic, we're really talking about not so much even really the existence of of a virus or germ, but it's about being able to prove that this is being transmitted, that you've isolated this, that it's able to transmit it as a contagion, that it can make people sick, that it can replicate, that type of thing.
	Talk a little bit about what the problems are with that.
	Yeah well I guess contagion studies itself are one of the best first windows to get into because it opens people's minds because you don't know or most people don't know that there have been major studies that have been done in the past exposing the problem with contagion and the best example I always because this is what really woke me up was the Rosenau experiments that were done in the States where They head a group,
	this is during the Spanish flu time, so the Spanish 1918. Yeah, the gold standard of all the pandemics.
	That's one that everybody wants to talk about.
	Yeah, and we've actually made quite a few videos on these subjects because I think it's really important to unravel because there's lots of things going on.
	But what people understood, so with these Rosenau experiments, was that they had a group of about 50 patients that were prisoners who, on a condition of getting out of prison early, they could partake in this study,
	which was to be around extremely sick Spanish flu patients and these are usually young men and at the height of their illness and then they had to basically cough in their faces, take mucus secretions from their nose and eyes and rub it in the prisoners' eyes, these healthy volunteers.
	They took samples, blood samples.
	They did everything you can imagine to try and make these prisoners, these healthy prisoners sick and And none of them got sick.
	And these experiments were repeated.
	And again, they could never transmit the so-called illness.
	And we have to remember here, David, these were allegedly the most infectious diseases that humanity has ever seen.
	Yes.
	And yet when it gets put into the experiments, no transmission.
	And then from there, we looked into everything.
	So there are two different things to consider.
	One is the microbes that we can see, so bacteria.
	Fungal cells, etc.
	And the other is these imagined ones, which are the viruses.
	And they have tried transmission studies with all of these things.
	And it is just astounding how the evidence relies on things.
	Take polio, for instance.
	That was a case of taking diseased tissue from a dead child.
	And inject, mashing it up, some spinal cord tissue, and injecting it into monkeys' brains.
	And if it killed them or gave them paralysis, they would conclude, well, that's evidence of transmission.
	Completely nonsensical.
	No control experiment.
	And we all know that injecting Foreign material Directly into an animal's brain Is likely to cause a massive reaction And possible death Through to things like the measles and chicken pox Now we're all told that you're in the same room As someone, you're going to pick it up Or someone's going to pick it up It can travel through the air, over distance Etc.
	This has never been Shown in a scientific study Instead What they refer to, and everyone relies on this, the CDC, Wikipedia, the textbooks, wherever you look, the medical schools, what they rely on is studies like, with the measles and chickenpox, they will take fluid from a diseased human,
	so, you know, they have the skin rash and the fluid build up, take some of that fluid, inject it into an animal, and then if that animal gets a rash, declare that that shows contagion.
	Complete nonsense, because these are not natural roots.
	And these are not controlled studies.
	And also, with regard to the germ theory, there's no independent variable.
	So they haven't shown that they found a germ that by itself could cause all of these problems.
	And people will be astounded.
	I mean, this is everything.
	This is things like gonorrhea, the so-called sexually transmitted infections.
	We've made presentations about this, Sam's done videos about how these things have not been shown to transmit via natural routes in settings that you would see in nature.
	So it really is an incredible state of affairs and the problem is that everyone comes at you with the anecdotal stories and says, well, explain this.
	And we've spent a lot of time saying, well, that's not a scientific study, it's an anecdotal story, because we go to the scientific studies which show something quite different.
	Yeah, in the foreword of your book, you talk about four different things.
	Circular light, well, kind of explain that, the logical fallacies of this before we talk about some of the anecdotal stuff, because I do want to come back to the measles thing.
	That's really the obstacle.
	Things like that, I guess, are the obstacle that we in the general population have in terms of, you know, leaving this paradigm.
	But talk first about what you have in the foreword, about the four key errors that are there when they're trying to present this as a pandemic.
	Well, I think, so are you talking about the forward?
	The circular logic.
	Yeah, the circular logic, you know, isolating something instead of having an isolate, having some kind of a computer sequence that they kind of guessed at, the PCR test, you know, things like that.
	In his excellent foreword, Professor Tim Noakes basically summarises what us and other researchers have been exposing over many years now.
	And this is the fact that the techniques of virology are not adequate enough to show what they are claiming.
	So what they are claiming is that they're The definition of virus, for one, has changed so many times, and they continue to change it.
	Oh yeah, they changed it just before the so-called pandemic, they changed it significantly.
	They changed the definition of pandemic.
	Yeah, the definition of virus, the definition of pandemic, the definition of vaccine, they all changed right before.
	That's nothing suspicious at all, right?
	No.
	And the word virus is so ethereal that even the virologists don't seem to know what it means half the time.
	And I suspect if you asked many doctors or scientists what it actually means, they wouldn't know because we actually spent ages researching this stuff and you find documents all over the place which talk about all these different things.
	But essentially what people imagine is that there is a particle, an infectious particle, tiny little Thing that you can only see within an electron microscope.
	And that somehow the virologists have been isolating this.
	And when we say isolating, most people will think physically isolating, not changing the definition of isolation.
	And then using these particles to do an experiment, using it as an independent variable.
	So, for instance, we could say...
	If you suspect that a bacterial cell like E. coli, which is found commonly, causes disease, you isolate E. coli, and they do this all the time, and then you run your experiments and see, is it pathogenic?
	Can it cause disease by itself?
	Can it attack healthy tissue?
	So that's all fine.
	The virologist can't do that because they can't find the independent variable.
	So when they take disease tissue and extract it directly, they can't identify the viruses in there.
	It doesn't look any different than tissue that's said not to have viruses in general.
	So instead they resort to the cell culture technique, which Professor Noakes talks about in his introduction.
	Now the problem with this technique is that it's indirect.
	They didn't identify the virus in the first place.
	So they start conflating things, and instead of finding an independent variable, they look at the results of the experiment, which is the breakdown of tissue in their cell culture, and then say, well, that must have been due to the virus.
	But this is a complete circular reasoning logical fallacy.
	But I've seen the virus.
	It's a little spiky ball.
	It's in all the articles.
	Every time they talk about it, we've got a little spiky ball there.
	I never really heard that.
	What's that?
	Sam did a whole video on electron microscopy because that is an issue in itself about the nature of what you can image, whether it represents living tissue.
	But here's the biggest problem with it.
	Those images appear after the fact, not before.
	So those little particles that they're imaging are the result.
	So they're the dependent variable in the experiment.
	They're not an independent variable that was identified at the start.
	Now, this is not permitted in science.
	You can't create an independent variable after the fact.
	You have to start with it because that's the thing you're supposed to manipulate.
	But because they can't do that with viruses, they get into the circular reasoning.
	Cell breakdown equals virus, you know?
	Virus equals cell breakdown.
	And we keep pointing out to them, where is the independent variable?
	How can we prove that this is what happened?
	So yeah, a lot of the introduction is Professor Noakes outlining, summarising what many of us have pointed out over the years, is that these techniques that they are using, and that's from everything through to the cell culture, through to the genomics and PCR,
	etc., are invalid because they don't follow the scientific method they are not controlled experiments and they should never ever have been permitted to go this far because what we're dealing with here is a hypothesis that has been refuted it is not a theory because a theory implies that it has been tested and found to withstand all attacks you know all falsification which is simply not the case but Sorry,
	I didn't mean to interrupt you.
	Go ahead.
	Did you want to finish?
	Yes, certainly let us know if there are other aspects, genomics, PCR, etc., that you want to discuss, because there are just so many areas to this, but people need to understand it's all been built up on the foundational thought that, A, germ theory and contagion was never shown to be valid, and with regard to virology, the single biggest issue has been they never found these particles in nature.
	They were artifacts from experiments.
	They were imaginings in people's minds.
	They were not solid scientific evidence.
	Yeah, and I want to talk about those other aspects, but I just wanted to interject here with the first one of these logical fallacies in the foreword that was written.
	I forgot, Dr. Tim Noakes.
	But there was an interesting article, and they made parallels between virology and physics.
	And they said the people who were doing, the physicists will tell you that they don't know.
	And they're trying to get, so give them more money because they've got to do more studying.
	The virologists will tell you.
	They know everything.
	Give them more money.
	And when I look at it, it seems like when you say that they're inferring the existence of something that they haven't actually been able to isolate or measure or directly observe...
	That it's very much like what the physicists do with dark matter, I think, you know, where they look at it, they see some kind of an effect, and then they create an abstraction, a theory to try to, or hypothesis to try to explain what they're observing, but they can't directly observe that thing.
	They can't observe dark matter, they can't observe directly the virus, and they see the after effects of it, and then they come up with this hypothesis that it exists.
	Is that right?
	Would you say that's the correct way of looking at it, or am I wrong?
	Definitely.
	I mean, I've had people reach out to me who are theoretical, saying that they realise the problems of virology because it parallels exactly their own experience with theoretical physics.
	And the trouble is, is there's all these other things that make it real for people.
	Like, you've got...
	PCR tests, which make it real for people, you know, the lateral flow or rat tests.
	People have one of those and they go, oh, I'm sick, so this makes it real.
	They see pictures of it, which are just computer drawings of what a virus is supposed to be.
	And they think that that makes it real.
	And this is the problem is that, was it the Perth group once said that they have the virus.
	Yeah, meaning that once they introduce this word into the public's imagination, it takes a lot to reverse it because everyone has witnessed people getting sick in clusters.
	They have seen what they believe is chickenpox and influenza, etc., which are all conditions that the body goes through, no doubt.
	But the problem is an explanation was given to them and most people have accepted it.
	And we have to be honest, David, that when we were at medical school and practicing physicians, we believed this too.
	And now we can see that it is so incorrect and that there are other explanations for these things.
	But that's why one of Sam's ideas was to systematically deal with every virus that I've ever invented.
	But we realised that this is a big topic, you know.
	This would be like going through the Lord of the Rings and writing stuff.
	Writing dossiers for every single character, writing about their background.
	And this is what we have to do.
	But we've sort of covered the main ones, you know, Epstein-Barr and measles and influenza, common colds, obviously COVID, all this kind of stuff, HIV, and making videos about every single one to show people that there are other explanations and that the entire foundation...
	And people can find that at drsambailey, B-A-I-L-E-Y. Yeah, you didn't do the Silmarillion, you just kind of stayed on Sauron.
	We kind of focus on that.
	And I think the genius of the PCR test, abused by Fauci from AIDS on, is that it gives us illusion of objective measurement, which is not there at all.
	The way they magnify this stuff is absolutely absurd.
	But I think that's the real genius, as you point out.
	the pictures that they create of, you know, the little spiky ball and everything.
	And so, you know, they create these pictures, computer animated pictures.
	They got PCR, which is about as connected, maybe not even as connected to reality as the computer-generated stuff.
	But then talk a little bit about the computer-generated genetic sequences that they use.
	Because since they can't observe this, they create a genetic sequence and they send that around, right?
	You know, what we focus a lot on here is the origin and significance of these sequences.
	I wrote a paper, A Farewell to Virology, a couple of years ago.
	It's about 29,000 words.
	It carefully lays out the problems of the virological techniques, including a lot of it being dedicated to genomics.
	And we've shown that take something like these coronaviruses, for instance, and they say, well, we've been sequencing these, typing them for years, we can go back to our databases, we can trace their evolution through their so-called phylogenetic trees, all this kind of stuff.
	Well, we don't get distracted with that because, you know, a lot of people will get stuck in the weeds and they'll go, well, look at this sequence and look at that sequence and look how that's mutated.
	Sam and I just go, all very interesting, but show us the source documents here.
	And what I did in a farewell to virology with alleged coronaviruses was trace back to the original papers where they claimed that they were coming up with the genomes of these entities.
	Now, I carefully document this.
	This is around 1982 to 1984. Those papers are complete pseudoscience.
	There's no controls in them.
	They simply have diseased tissue.
	They're doing experiments with chick embryos and such tissue.
	And then they are sequencing the genetic sequences.
	But at no stage did they find any viruses.
	They just assumed.
	They said, oh, we've got tissue breakdown.
	We've got these lesions that are forming.
	We suspect that there's a virus in there.
	We're going to take sequences.
	These were mixed tissues, okay?
	These have got all sorts of things in them with the chick embryos and other fluids, etc.
	And they said, well, these sequences, they don't seem to come from where we expected, so we'll call them, quote, viral sequences, and they were deposited into a database.
	Then other people all around the world started doing sequences and said, hey, we've found very similar sequences.
	Therefore, we have also found the virus.
	And the thing is, David, you can do this anywhere.
	And this is the whole problem now with what we call metagenomics, which is simply taking environmental samples.
	So this could be the snot up someone's nose.
	It could be the sewer.
	They seem to love taking samples out of the sewer.
	They do.
	It could be an orange.
	Cow's milk.
	It could be cow's milk.
	Wherever you want to go and you look for these genetic sequences.
	Now the power of PCR to amplify sequences is incredible.
	So it can find the tiniest amounts.
	Now, so there are two issues here.
	One is, well, where did they come from?
	Because they never, ever showed that there was a virus that contained these sequences.
	And even if they did show such a particle, where was the evidence that that is the cause of the problem in the organism?
	Because we know, and every scientist who's involved in genomics should accept this because it is fact.
	that different sequences can appear when organisms are sick so when you get sick and have a cold or a flu your body your cells will start expressing different sequences and they will start coming out in your snot and fluids etc it doesn't mean you got attacked from the outside by some microscopic entity it just means that your body is going through a process where it will produce these sequences And again, we've been very careful with this stuff.
	We traced back things.
	So, for instance, the spike protein sequences, which cause a lot of excitement in recent years.
	Well, these are nothing new.
	These are just sequences that were described as far back as the 80s or at least 1990 from our investigations.
	And you find them in tissue breakdown experiments.
	You find them in mammals and birds.
	You will find them in humans, etc.
	But it doesn't mean that you've found the virus, etc.
	Because the same techniques have failed over and over again.
	They can't isolate these particles.
	They can't use them as an independent variable, etc.
	But yeah, you'll see, like I've been engaged in debates with genomics experts and stuff.
	And it's really difficult because I think they honestly believe this stuff.
	And you can't get them to just go back.
	Back to the foundational studies.
	Where's the virus, we always say, because it's simply not there.
	Yeah, and when you talk about the spike protein, the spike protein that seems to be generated by the mRNA vaccines, what do you make of that?
	You know, and the fact that it seems to be replicating.
	Is that our first virus?
	Yeah, there's a whole lot of problems here.
	One, it's not sure if it does generate once it's been injected because a lot of the experiments are done in vitro in test tubes.
	So when you do that, you've got single cells and you can transfect them.
	You can put genetic material in there and get them to start producing proteins.
	So that's technology that's been around for a long time.
	I mean, what would we say is that it's an inflammatory type product, whatever it does inside the body.
	But I guess for us, David, we always focus upstream and say you don't ever inject these products because their effects are unpredictable.
	Even, quote, regular products that they inject in the childhood schedule, The effects are highly unpredictable, even though much, much more is known about what they contain.
	But you'll get anything from no reaction to children that are permanently disabled by the injection.
	So I think like all things, we don't focus too much on that, except to tell people who think that the spike protein is something new and novel, etc., is that it's not.
	It's simply a class of protein that's been described for many decades now.
	Yeah, if it does get produced in your body, not a good idea, but we would emphasize that that's the same principle for every single injectable product in this category.
	There is no possible health benefit to the recipient.
	It bypasses the natural route of how we, you know, how we deal with, I guess, foreign material into our bodies.
	So like every time an injection, you're just bypassing so many natural routes.
	And this is the problem.
	The biggest problem with vaccines is that if you get loaded with aluminium, we can deal with it if we ingest it because it just passes through our system.
	But if it's injected, it doesn't.
	It's sequestered in the bone and the brain.
	And that's the problem with it.
	And the same analogy for people is that the reason you can swallow snake venom but you cannot inject it because that can be potentially fatal whereas most people wouldn't notice if they'd swallowed a bit.
	Wow.
	Yeah, I didn't know that about snake venom, but I'm not going to try.
	I'll take your word for it.
	You know, just out of curiosity, just out of curiosity, I think last I saw we were over 90 injections that they put into kids in America.
	I know we've got more than any other country.
	What's the ballpark figure there in New Zealand for childhood vaccines?
	Yeah, it's high.
	I don't think we're quite as high as America.
	But the worst part in New Zealand is that we have a very high uptake, percentage-wise, anyway.
	But it has gone down in saying that.
	People have woken up to so many different vaccines since COVID. They've started questioning everything.
	I don't know the...
	Yeah, I think, I mean, we're still in the dozens and dozens here, and the one difference is the United States starts right from day dot, whereas in New Zealand they tend to wait a few weeks.
	Not that either approach is the correct one, but I mean, as we point out in the final pandemic, this is one of the biggest scams in history, and if you want to expose it People can simply ask their family doctor, well, what is in these injections?
	Like, so my child's coming in, you're the expert apparently, tell me please, what is contained within these injections that we're putting in?
	And also, you know, perhaps asking, what is the history of this disease you're supposedly presenting?
	Because, I mean, it's so apparent that most of these things are And there are problems with diagnosis of entities called smallpox and measles, and they're all just conditions that the body goes through.
	But even on their own terms, the work of the team of dissolving illusions, the charts that have been produced by Greg Beattie and Jordan Henderson are so damning for the whole vaccine story.
	Some of these diseases were down in mortality by over 99% before the introduction.
	Yeah, I think that was a whooping cough, wasn't it?
	That was down by 99%, I think, in the book here.
	Yeah, lots of them were.
	And yeah, we include some charts from Christiane and Humphreys from Dissolving Illusions there, which is just superb.
	And the crazy thing is here, David, is that Last century, it was so apparent that these so-called infectious diseases had all disappeared.
	They were not significant at all.
	And yet here we are in 2024. The narrative is that they're worse than ever.
	And we're being attacked by even more germs now.
	And you need to have 10 times the number of vaccines that your grandparents have.
	Yeah, when I was going through and looking at the childhood schedule here in the United States, I was surprised, first of all, to see how many there were.
	And then when I saw the schedule, the fact that they're giving the same vaccine over and over and over again, I thought that was something that was new with the COVID stuff.
	I'd never seen that, that they're doing something on like a quarterly basis or a six-month basis for young kids.
	It's no wonder that we have this epidemic, so many epidemics of illness, autism and other things like that.
	When they load it up, and it's simply for profit.
	Now, in the United States, we've had, I think it was Children's Health Defense, talked to a physician, a pediatrician, who was explaining the economics of it and the fact that the insurance companies would actually require insurance.
	A high uptake percentage from the patients, or they would basically destroy the practice financially.
	Now, in New Zealand, government is paying you if you're a physician, is that correct?
	And they're setting all the different policies for how many vaccines.
	Is that correct?
	Exactly.
	Well, they have in New Zealand what they call a socialist system where it's capitation.
	So the doctors get a three-monthly slab of money if they do what the government says.
	And one of the requirements is a certain uptake of vaccines.
	And what's really interesting with it too is that how they classify whether someone's been vaccinated or not.
	So, for example, with COVID, people keep getting reminders, you know, to say, come in, come in, come in, because it's to do with their funding and the target they're supposed to reach.
	And so the way to get off that system is From the medical practices perspective is to say we're going to class you as what?
	What was it?
	Ineligible.
	This is why in New Zealand you'll see these ridiculous statistics and they'll say all this area of New Zealand had 98% uptake.
	It's because many of the people who were not injected said they didn't want it and then they'd put ineligible.
	No, that's a refusal is how it should have gone down.
	And I mean, this is nothing new.
	We've exposed this before with the CDC statistics, with things like tetanus.
	They will say things like, you're unvaccinated if you couldn't remember when your last vaccine was done.
	So this is a long-term trick that's been done, and It's often used to try to make out that vaccines are effective and safe and all this kind of stuff when statistics simply do not back that up.
	And the big teller is, and we didn't know this either until we started researching in 2020, just look up randomised control trials involving vaccines and there are virtually none.
	And the ones that they do have are so preposterous, like the follow-up is for a week.
	Or a month.
	That's it.
	They don't follow them after that.
	Or they do crossovers where the people that didn't get it then get it, so that you can't see any of the long-term effects that might have happened.
	Because otherwise it's unethical.
	And also, there are a couple of randomised control trials that Sam and the team mentioned in Virus Mania.
	Where they had worse outcomes for the ones that were getting very bad in terms of death rates, but of course they don't publish, or they do publish, but then they quickly sweep them under the carpet and pretend that it didn't happen.
	And you probably, you may have got to that chapter of the book where we point out what happened when the United States Dr. Paul Thomas collected his own statistics on childhood vaccines.
	And he said, guys, major problem here, that all the kids getting vaccines are having far more of these so-called autoimmune disorders and allergies, disruptions in their behavior, et cetera.
	And he said, I've got, this is one of the biggest data sets ever being collected.
	What was the response in the United States?
	They revoked his medical license and said they would prosecute him.
	So, I mean, this is the outrageous situation.
	And people have to understand that, that if you're going to see a licensed MD, most of them are restricted by legislation.
	And by money.
	Yeah.
	A, they are incentivized, and B, they will be punished severely if they go against the vaccine narrative.
	Well, and so I really appreciate both of you putting your career behind you in a sense so that you can tell the truth and follow the science wherever it goes.
	Let's get back to the contagion stuff.
	We definitely all agree on the vaccine thing.
	I thought it was very interesting when you talked about the UK's common cold unit.
	I'd never heard of that.
	Something that they operated for about 50 years, 1946 to 1990, so about 45 years, 44 years.
	Tell people about that, what they did at their common cold unit.
	Well, it was a bit of a holiday park, really.
	It was a getaway for...
	Involving coronavirus, apparently.
	Yeah.
	The housewives and things that wanted a bit of a holiday, they could book into the common cold unit where they were discovering lots of different, trying to find out the cause of the common cold.
	It was really funny, David, because they did all these attempts at transmission, and I should point out an excellent book too.
	By the Australian author Daniel Reuters, just published recently, Can You Catch a Cold?
	Because he looks at this stuff in great detail and he looks at 200 plus transmission studies which really go against this whole contagion model.
	Anyway, the Common Cold Unit, they were convinced that because common colds cause the British population to have so many days off work, Wouldn't it be great just to get to the bottom of it and work out what caused them and how to stop them, etc.?
	And it became apparent pretty early on that they were not really getting anywhere with A, trying to work out what exactly caused them or B, how to prevent them.
	So instead what they resorted to was discovering, quote, viruses.
	And this is where everything you've heard about Adenoviruses, rhinoviruses, coronaviruses, it all stems or a lot of it stems from this common cold unit that was operating just after World War II. And what they were doing was basically just people would come in with symptoms of a cold and the virologist would take a sample of snot from their nose and he would put it in a vial and he would say,
	I have just isolated a new virus.
	And we were looking at it going, what he said, look, I put it in this file and I put a label on the side and I'm going to call this one an adenovirus or a coronavirus.
	And they simply did experiments by adding things like ether, et cetera, and saw if it broke down.
	And on these sort of indirect measures, they said that they were discovering these contagious entities.
	But, I mean, it was farcical because for four decades, they basically came up with nothing.
	Now, keep in mind, they were trying to invent vaccines.
	And when they closed the unit down, they basically said, look, it's not possible.
	We've tried it with them.
	These entities, and there's just nothing doing, basically.
	And it was the same with the pharmaceuticals.
	They came up with no drugs, etc.
	So we didn't know about this.
	I mean, at medical school, they don't teach you these things, and what they show you is the fake highlights reel, which just shows you all these papers purporting to show, quote, viruses.
	But when you look at the methodology, all of the problems we've just discussed, no isolation of the physical particle, No independent variable in any of their experiments and many times they found that people and this is really important would get the symptoms if they expected to get the symptoms so they were sneezed on by someone and they were told this person has a cold and you may now get the cold and the next day the person would say yes my throat is a bit scratchy
	or whatever And then they would say, oh well actually the original person didn't have a cold so we're not sure what's going on here.
	They would put inert substances like just saline, just salt water and drop that up someone's nose and you know they did attempt to do some uh well you can't really call them controls because they still didn't have an independent variable but they tried to they would put completely inert substances up people's noses and then say we've just infected you with the virus sure enough within hours the person's coming down with what looks like a cold And then they tell them, oh no, sorry, actually, that was just normal saline.
	And then within hours, everything disappears and they go back to normal.
	So amazing the psychological effects to see, but in general, these so-called highly contagious entities were not shown to be anything of the sort.
	And most of the time they really struggle to get sick people to make well people unwell.
	And perhaps too, I think we should point out some classic examples here of particularly men who have worked in stations around the Arctic Circle in these highly remote areas where they are not in contact with anyone for weeks, months at a time.
	They also get these cold and flu symptoms.
	Yeah, well it's very cold there.
	That's what you're always saying.
	It was like the temperature.
	That's why people called it a cold.
	George Washington goes out riding by himself in the cold and he gets very sick and they bring the doctors in and they basically remove most of his blood and gave him massive amounts of mercury and he died.
	I said, you know, when we look at all this stuff, it really is talking about the psychosomatic stuff there.
	The science in this is really mostly behavioral science that we saw throughout all this, but we've been told all these years That, you know, they can't find a common cold cure because it keeps mutating.
	And we heard that same stuff throughout all the COVID stuff.
	We've heard it throughout all the years when they tried to sell the flu shot.
	The same type of thing.
	And the way that they marketed the COVID pandemic and the way they marketed the vaccine at the beginning was very similar in the United States to the way they always marketed the annual flu shot.
	Scaring everybody about it and saying, you know, well, we got a massive number of cases here and you're going to have to get this because it's going to minimize how bad this case is going to be for you.
	Same stuff, recycled, that they've been doing for years and years.
	Yeah, and I think another important point to bring up is the psychological priming that goes on with things like movies and press release science.
	So the public is conditioned to expect this is what's going to happen with a pandemic.
	And there were so many movies like that that were brought out so that when we actually see it, we're kind of expecting it and go, oh, yes, this is in my memory.
	There's something there that feels really familiar.
	And so conditioned response to that.
	Yeah, and I think too, not only within the Hollywood and TV sector have they been preparing the public, particularly since the 1990s.
	We were coming off the back of the fake HIV epidemic.
	AIDS is something that's a real syndrome, but the cause of it is not what they've been telling people.
	And so we had these movies, of course, like Philadelphia, and, you know, they really did scare the public.
	And then on top of that, we had Outbreak and Contagion and all these other movies, which were massive, massive blockbusters.
	And they became almost more popular in 2020 when people started watching them again, thinking that that represented some kind of reality.
	And as you say, I mean, they will just make up a story like it's mutating.
	So that just simply means that you can take some samples and detect some new genetic sequences and then claim, hey, presto, it's a variant or it's mutated.
	But all of these things come back to these unfalsifiable hypotheses.
	It's not scientific.
	Even the whole concept, and I know this really pushes people, and it's taken some unraveling for us as well, given our training in immunology, etc., Is that we don't believe in this concept of immunity that they have presented in medical science, because it's unfalsifiable.
	They just say to you, well, why didn't I get it?
	So people will look at the human transmission experiments, like the Rosenau one Sam talked about from the Spanish flu era, and people will say, well, obviously they were immune, that's why they didn't get it.
	Okay.
	How can you prove that?
	That's the excuse they're using.
	They're saying, well, you know, we'd say to people, why didn't we get this entity called COVID? Because we didn't do any of the face masks or social distancing.
	We were out and about in the community.
	We didn't take any of the products and the vaccines, and yet we didn't get sick.
	Well, people say, you must be immune.
	Yeah.
	And this is just, how could you possibly, how is that a scientific notion?
	You can't falsify it.
	And we've done deep dives into the antibodies, for instance, which they try and claim indicate immunity.
	And that simply is inconsistent because they are not specific.
	They do not relate to some sort of clinical condition necessarily.
	And yeah, so...
	No, there's so much enravelling to do and certainly for us there appears to be years of work ahead.
	But given, and we point this out in the book, look what we're up against here.
	These are Billion-dollar industries, you know, there's hundreds of billions of dollars that people are making and COVID-19 was one of the biggest wealth transfers of all time.
	It's one of the all-time record holders.
	The population just got absolutely fleeced.
	Most people don't understand how it happened or Or exactly why it happened, but you could see from 2020 what they were doing and why the population was going to end up poor and a small number of corporations and vested interests were going to end up with far more resources.
	Yes.
	It is so ingrained in our language, in our concepts.
	We talk about something, you know, going viral, you know, a video or meme going viral.
	Or we talk about a computer virus.
	And there's just so many different ways that they have put that in there.
	And of course, massive marketing, the drumbeat that we have seen in the last four years of obvious patent lies.
	I mean, but just repeat it over and over again.
	It's very effective.
	But let's Let's talk, and we mentioned it just briefly, so one last thing I'd like to cover before you go.
	And we mentioned it, and as you're talking about, the fact that we don't have an isolation, we don't have, you know, the proper scientific studies, it's kind of anecdotal.
	But just a simple case, I know you've got an entire video about rabies that you have on your website where you talk about that.
	And again, the website is drsambailey.com.
	So you've got a video about rabies, but let's talk about something that's really common.
	These childhood diseases that kind of began all of these vaccine movements.
	When I was younger, We didn't have measles vaccines and everything, so we would get together and then all of a sudden, you know, red spots start appearing.
	What is your idea about what is going on with that?
	That's, I think, the real, the experiential hurdle that's difficult for people to get over.
	Yeah, so I guess with children, they've got a very large skin surface area, and our skin is the largest organ, so it's one of the easiest ways for the body to eliminate toxic build-up, I guess, from inside the body.
	And so rashes are essentially an expression of that, and you often see children have rashes at the end of a healing crisis, because it's Trying to eliminate.
	We've actually made videos on measles and chicken pox parties specifically to address this because it's such a common thing.
	But in terms of it, we tend to, as we grow up, we have other ways that are more efficient at removing, you know, build-up, but essentially that's the Yeah, and I guess, David, it comes back to what we talked about earlier is that Sam and I always go to the foundational documents and say, well, where is a controlled study that shows the spread?
	Because we know about these anecdotal stories.
	And it's easy to counter with other anecdotal stories.
	For instance, when I was about 10 or 11, I was diagnosed with chickenpox.
	I was in a household of six.
	No one else got sick.
	None of my classmates got sick.
	Apparently it's highly contagious and yet nobody around me seemed to have it or get it, but that's what the family doctor told us is what I had.
	The other thing is we do not deny that people get sick in clusters.
	If you go to a birthday party and afterwards half of the kids break out in a rash, Probably the best thing to do is to look at what they were exposed to at the party, because if they were eating things that have colorings, whether they're soft drinks or lollies, etc., that's enough for a child to break out in a rash if they ingest these synthetic chemicals that are now put into foods.
	There are all sorts of factors that Daniel Reuters has outlined in his book, Can You Catch a Cold?, about clusters of illness that were put down at the time to germs, but later were found to be environmental toxins, psychological influences, and nutritional deficiencies.
	So a whole lot of, yeah, and this is what we find.
	One thing that has really encouraged us, particularly in the last year or so, More and more people around the world are now contacting us, saying, look, we recently had this sickness in our family.
	Once upon a time, I would have put it down to a germ or a virus, etc.
	This time, I put that aside and thought, what did we do?
	What exactly did we do in the last week?
	And people are starting to identify things, you know, whether it's something they ate.
	Or whether it's a place they went to visit and possibly got exposed to some sort of chemical, etc.
	So that's what we need to encourage.
	Not this silly, it's a germ, someone else made me sick.
	We're no further ahead.
	Nobody knows anything at that point.
	We're stuck in the same silly model.
	So yeah, I would encourage people to, if you're thinking measles, chickenpox, what about these parties, etc.
	Please watch Sam's videos where she...
	It does a dive into these topics and exposes the actual science and the actual claims behind these things.
	Because another thing just really quickly I wanted to bring up is that there was something I didn't realise with virology and just infectious diseases in general, is that all the assumptions are based on just a couple of papers.
	So these scientific papers that were made and everything else, they just constantly cite back to those original studies.
	Because people sometimes say, well, we've got new studies now that show that.
	So it's the same with COVID and SARS-CoV-2.
	There's literally thousands and thousands of studies.
	But the only ones that are important are the original foundational ones.
	And that's what we...
	Always go to and unpick the people and show how farcical it is because then everything else follows on from it and people can see that all these are just assertions, these are assumptions and say, well, those guys did it, so we're going to carry on from those assumptions.
	Yeah, it is a groupthink.
	It's an echo chamber.
	And as you point out, and you show many examples of it in your book, the fundamental papers are something that they didn't do science at all.
	And when you talk about the anecdotal thing, it made me think of 2009. I was diagnosed with swine flu.
	I had really bad pneumonia, and they diagnosed me with swine flu.
	But nobody else in the family got it.
	My wife didn't get it.
	Nobody got it.
	So, yeah, it is interesting.
	And I think it's very important for us to look at it.
	And your focus is now on what we can do to make ourselves healthier instead of, as you said before, instead of a focus on disease, you're focused more on health.
	Is that correct?
	Yeah, and just my biggest focus from the beginning is to reduce people's fear because I think fear is the massive driver of illness and behavior.
	They do crazy things because they think they're going to get sick.
	And once you understand that this is a myth, germs don't cause disease, it's so empowering and enlightening and inspiring.
	It makes you see the world in a different way.
	That's my focus.
	It's just to reduce people's fear and go, you don't need us.
	I mean, we're reformed doctors.
	I don't want to be associated with that group anymore.
	But I'm like, become your own doctor.
	We want to teach people how to be well so they don't need us anymore.
	Yeah, and it is.
	I mean, for us, David, it was amazing that our health as a family has improved so much since 2020. We always thought we were healthy and we thought, well, we're trained doctors and we know this and that.
	And we didn't actually.
	We missed a huge amount of it.
	And since that time, we've reformed the way we eat, the way we interact as a family, the water that we drink.
	And nowadays...
	And spiritually.
	Spiritually as well, much more connected and much more understanding of this beautiful world that God's given us, that it has been created in perfection and it's up to us to make sure that continues rather than ruin it.
	And one of the big things for us is, and I think all parents should take this message home, is that There's no such thing as these childhood diseases.
	There's just parental neglect.
	And I know that sounds harsh, and it took us a bit of time to get used to this.
	But when your children do get sick, you have to reflect, well, what did I do?
	You know, I've missed something here.
	And we have found with our own children...
	That they have just got, they've thrived more and more as mum and dad have moved out of the old allopathic germ theory paradigm and into the paradigm of saying, what can we actually do to make things better?
	And it has worked.
	That's a great note to end on.
	Yeah, fear is contagious, isn't it?
	That is one thing we can attest to.
	The psychological fear that is there.
	As you're talking about connecting spiritually, I've been told that is the one phrase that is in the Bible more than anything else.
	Fear not.
	So we will end it on that.
	It is the mind killer.
	It destroys us.
	And that's the thing that we need to push back.
	Again, people, the website is drsambailey.com.
	The book is The Final Pandemic, and this is the way that we end medical tyranny.
	It's The Antidote to Medical Tyranny by Dr. Mark Bailey and Dr. Samantha Bailey.
	Thank you so much for joining us.
	It was great talking to you.
	Thank you, David.
	We're big fans.
	It's been a pleasure.
	Thank you, David.
	Keep doing what you're doing.
	Thank you.
	I appreciate that.
	And again, their website as well as their books are a wealth of information.
	They lay it out there for you, but they have references to all these other things and videos about the measles parties and things like that.
	So a great source of information.
	And we really do need to get to the bottom of this.
	I am tired of being jerked around by these people.
	I know we're lying to me and ripping me off and stealing everything that we've got.
	I think it's enough.
	We need to figure out their game and expose it.
	And that's a great resource to do it.
	Thank you so much.
	And thank you all for joining us.
	Have a good day.
	Let me tell you.
	The David Knight Show.
	You can listen to with your ears.
	You can even watch it by using your eyes.
	In fact, if you can hear me, that means you're listening to The David Knight Show right now.
	Yeah!
	Good job!
	And you want to know something else?
	You can find all the links to everywhere to watch or listen to the show at thedavidknightshow.com.
	that's a website www.patreon.com
	www.patreon.com
	Thank you.
	you you you you Thank you.
	As you pointed out I believe that You can never truly own your property if you are under the threat that the government can take it from you because you fall behind on your semi-annual rent payment to them.
	They call property taxes.
	So I believe that we need to do away with this tax in perpetuity.
	So I've said in Indiana we have a 7% sales tax.
	So let's make it seven years.
	1% of the purchase price for seven years maximum.
	Now, if you can pay that at closing, either in cash or by rolling it into your mortgage and amortizing it over a 30-year period, then you're done.
	If you can't, you pay it 1%, escrowed into your mortgage like you're doing now, and at the end of seven years, you're done.
	All right, folks, and if you want to defend the American dream, you better start locally.
	And that's why we're going to talk local and state government.
	That's why I was open to...
	I interviewed Donald Rainwater, who had run for governor in 2020. We've talked about what was happening during that period of time.
	And he...
	Got national attention because he jumped up so high in the polls because he's about the only politician in any party that was really tackling this pandemic nonsense.
	And he did a great job of doing that.
	And so he is back and he is running for governor yet again.
	The RainwaterForIndiana.com.
	Rainwater and it's F-O-R. Indiana.com is his website.
	But we're going to talk about why he's running, what the issues are.
	So thank you for joining us, Donald Rainwater.
	Appreciate it.
	Oh, well, David, thank you so much for having me.
	I really appreciate the opportunity.
	Well, I'm glad to have you on.
	And I think, you know, I want to talk about issues because we have everything focused on the two parties and everybody is so focused on just the two parties, focused on personalities and not focused on issues.
	And it's killing us.
	I mean, these agendas that are out there and everything else, nobody is paying attention to that.
	They're so distracted.
	In this personality competition, it's like it's some kind of a beauty contest or a talent show or something.
	So let's talk about issues.
	Tell us, first of all, why you're running in Indiana.
	You know, what are the important issues for you?
	Well, you know, first of all, first and foremost, as a libertarian, I believe, and limited, very limited government, the safeguarding, as Thomas Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence, you know, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men.
	And so I believe that we need to refocus our government at every level on safeguarding every individual's rights equally and reducing the size and scope of government.
	It is much more difficult for someone with ill intent to utilize government in an inappropriate way if government isn't strong enough to be used in that way.
	that way.
	So I'm very intent on reducing the size and scope of government.
	And I heard you talk about the federal government and the importance of state government as well.
	And one of the things that I tell folks in Indiana is that I believe that the Constitution of the United States is a fence around the federal government intended to keep it within its intended purpose.
	The slats in that fence are the 50 states.
	The problem is that we've allowed the slats to fall down on the job.
	Our states are not holding the federal government accountable.
	Instead, they're standing there with their hand out Asking for more money, much like Oliver Twist.
	So the federal government now has the upper hand, and that's how things get out of whack.
	So I am running for governor of the state of Indiana because I want to reduce the size and scope of government.
	And I also want to grab the Ninth Amendment with one hand and the Tenth Amendment with the other and tell the federal government to back off.
	Good, good.
	Yeah, I just read an op-ed piece the other day.
	I think it was from Brownstone.
	It might have been from Mises.
	They said every one of these candidates for president, or any office actually, should be asked these two questions.
	What is the purpose of government?
	What is the purpose of government?
	You know, and what is its rightful role in our lives?
	And nobody ever asked them something like that.
	That would be so telling.
	I imagine most of them would say the purpose of government is to keep us safe, right?
	You know, I've heard that.
	I've also heard one of my opponents made the comment here a while back that conservatism is government not spending more than it takes in.
	And I think that that's an atrocious assumption.
	Government conservatism is government doesn't take in more than it needs to do its job.
	That's how Calvin Coolidge defined it.
	He said that when government takes in more than it needs, that's legalized robbery, and I agree with him.
	Mm-hmm, mm-hmm.
	Yeah, and it really needs to come from the standpoint of understanding what the proper role of government is.
	You know, we absolutely need to make government small enough to fit in the Constitution.
	And if it gets that small, we're not going to really worry about how it is financed.
	I mean, it'd be such a small tax.
	I think it was Ron Paul who said that.
	If we got the government to fit inside the Constitution...
	The way that we raise the taxes wouldn't really matter because it would be so small that we really wouldn't notice it.
	Yeah, the problem is that it's gotten so large.
	And so the problem that we see in Washington, one of the reasons why a solution, I believe, is not going to come out of Washington.
	The solution is being to keep Washington in Washington and far away from us.
	But the problem is all of the money.
	And when you look at the fact that Lala Harris got 500 million dollars, half a billion dollars in one month, that was five times the amount that George W. Bush got in 2020, in 2000 I should say.
	And he was accused of trying to buy the election by Al Gore, who only got 70 million.
	But she gets 500 million in one month.
	Why is that there?
	Well, it's because an election is an advanced auction of stolen goods.
	And these people know they're not donating, they're investing.
	And they're going to get more than they put in, a lot more.
	And so that's one of the reasons I think it's growing.
	And I think it's growing at the state level.
	And so let me ask you, you know, when you look at this at the state level, What is typical for your opponents, Republicans and Democrats, to be spending on their campaign?
	What kind of money are they talking about, roughly, when you're a gubernatorial competition, Democrat and Republican?
	I'm sure your budget is not anywhere close to that.
	You're out there doing this as a citizen, but what are they taking in?
	Well, I know that...
	They're taking in millions of dollars.
	And I'll be honest with you, I am much more concerned with what our General Assembly is taking in and how they're spending it.
	To give you a good example of that, at the beginning of 2023, We had a $4.5 billion surplus in Indiana.
	So the General Assembly found a way to spend $25 billion Spend that $4.5 billion surplus down so that then for 2024 and 2025 budgets,
	they made sure that they spent in the budget the money they thought they were going to be able to So that there would not be a surplus that they had to give back to the citizens.
	And that, I think, is an example of this idea that, well, it's conservative for me to say that we don't spend more than we take in.
	And that assumption is that we can figure out how to get it out of your pocket.
	We're going to spend it, and we don't care whether you need it or not.
	And I think that's...
	Unethical and immoral.
	Yes.
	And I think that this is part of the problem that we have in Indiana.
	One of our big issues right now, Now, most all citizens are frustrated with property taxes because even though we have a constitutional amendment in Indiana that says that residential property tax is 1% of the assessed value of the most all citizens are frustrated with property taxes because even though we have a constitutional amendment in they reassess every year, and they...
	Keep making that assessment go higher and higher, which means that people's property taxes go up.
	And if their property taxes are escrowed into their mortgage, that means their mortgage payment goes up every year.
	We've got senior citizens who've had their forever homes where all their memories of raising their children and all of their other significant events through their life Yes, And our state government doesn't seem to care.
	They're more worried about funneling money to economic development commissions at both local and at the state level.
	We have an Indiana Economic Development Corporation that was just given a $50 million Budget increase to go out and attract large corporations to come to Indiana,
	build Create new jobs that, because we are at the lowest unemployment in the history of the state right now, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce says that we actually have a worker shortage for every 100 available jobs, we are missing 25 people to fill those 100 jobs.
	And so instead of making Cost of living lower in Indiana.
	We're bringing in all these new jobs and then having those jobs filled by Hoosiers who are leaving small businesses and then the small businesses, the Hoosier entrepreneurs that have been trying to build and invest in Indiana.
	Their whole lives are not able to staff their businesses.
	And so we now in Indiana, over the last decade, have a net loss in small businesses and individual franchisees.
	And this, to me, along with our loss of family farming, is causing an economic crisis.
	There's a crisis in Indiana, and the state government doesn't care because what they're looking for is this corporatist style of government.
	And I vehemently oppose that.
	Yes, and we saw that in 2020, and you were speaking to that issue when you were running in 2020. The fact that mom and pop stores on Main Street were non-essential, but the big box stores from Wall Street, they were essential.
	They could stay open, but the small mom-and-pop service businesses couldn't stay open.
	So they're coming after the small mom-and-pop service businesses.
	They're coming after the farms, the family farms and things like that.
	They're coming after every kind of business that is done by individuals.
	Absolutely.
	It's the big corporations that are declared essential, and it is what the government at every level really is serving, that interest to drive out their competition and to make sure that we don't have any businesses.
	That's the key thing.
	Now, you said that you've got more jobs than you've got people to fill them in Indiana.
	What was the outcome from the lockdown?
	I guess you don't have a big city.
	You probably don't have the kind of commercial real estate problems that we're seeing on the coasts in California and New York, I guess, right?
	Well, I don't think to the same extent.
	What we are seeing, because I believe that the way that the Indiana State Government handled the pandemic, we saw a lot of folks who had to innovate and create new means of income.
	I think that the gig economy It was a place where folks found a lot of that.
	And so a lot of this worker shortage is actually a result of folks who were told they couldn't go to work during the pandemic, finding other ways to make income.
	And when the state opened back up, those folks said, oh, no, fool me once, shame on you.
	Fool me twice, shame on me.
	I'm not coming back.
	No, I'm going to make sure that I have the means to take care of my household and my family.
	And I'm not going to get, which is here again, such a problem with this attitude that government should be force-feeding large corporate economy to the state of Indiana.
	Because what we're really doing is we're saying we have a limited number of people, we're going to flood the state with jobs, and it's going to...
	Of course, small businesses either out of the market or they're going to have to raise their level of salary, wages, and benefits to match what we're bringing in.
	Well, you know, I hear a lot of Republicans complain about Democrats trying to increase the minimum wage.
	Well...
	When Republicans are bringing in all of these high-paying jobs and basically enticing workers away from small businesses, you're really doing the same thing.
	What you're saying is if you want to compete, you're going to have to raise your wages to match these big corporations.
	This is picking winners and losers once again, and I think it is abhorrent that our government takes it upon themselves to manipulate the economy in that way.
	That is not free market principles.
	The free market principle is if we encourage people to come here, And there are plenty of people who fill the jobs, then the jobs will come on their own.
	And then all of that can be done in a very organic way.
	But when you're giving corporations 35- or 50-year sales and use tax exemptions, as they're doing with Amazon Web Services in the South Bend area and Meta down in the Jeffersonville area.
	What you get are these huge corporations who are getting, you know, they're not even, it's not just the sales tax exemption for 35 or 50 years on the equipment for these data centers, which is a lot of money.
	But it's also that they get a 35 or 50 year use tax or sales tax exemption on their electric bill for a data center.
	Those data centers are going to really put such a burden on the infrastructure.
	We've got here in Tennessee, we've got the TVA is going to jump up the electricity prices by 5.5%.
	Part of that is It's the fact that they want to go to renewables, which means that they've then got to buy these very expensive battery energy storage sites, which are a massive fire hazard.
	So it's an extremely expensive form of energy that's being imposed on us.
	Because of climate fear.
	And as you point out, they're going to bring these companies in, give them heavy subsidies on energy usage, which is going to drive the price of energy up sky high for everybody else, if they can even get it.
	That's the issue as well.
	Well, and the reality is, when I go around the state of Indiana, and I talk to people, and I ask people, how many of you are small business owners, and you get 10 or 15 folks raising their hand, and you look at them and say, has the state of Indiana ever offered you a sales tax exemption on your electric bill?
	And they look at you and go, no.
	Of course not.
	Because in their mind, you're not big enough to worry about it.
	And I find it terribly offensive that in our state constitution, we have in our state constitution's Bill of Rights a clause that says that the state government will not provide any privilege to any citizen or group of citizens that is not provided to all.
	Now, what they do is they say, well, you know, anybody who invests $800 billion in the state of Indiana can get this privilege.
	That, to me, is, again, immoral and unethical.
	Yeah.
	Oh, yeah.
	It is deciding that some groups are essential and others are not essential, and it is violating the market principles.
	Look, I've seen this type of thing forever.
	We used to see it predominantly at the state level, local level.
	We'd usually see it with big professional stadiums, and those things kept going up and up, you know, first it's a couple hundred million, then it's up to a billion dollars for a stadium, and now, you know, to infinity and beyond with this stuff.
	But, you know, that kind of subsidy for certain businesses is, again, the government picking winners and losers, and usually they pick those winners and losers based on who's putting money in their pockets.
	Politicians are some of the best investments that anybody can ever make, and they're not donating stuff, but they're making investments.
	I've got, well, we're talking about money here, and you talked about the surplus that Indiana had.
	I don't know if that's coming from some of the COVID cash that they got.
	I know that California was looking before all this COVID nonsense, they were looking at a deficit of tens of billions.
	I forget what the exact numbers were.
	Then all of a sudden they got so much money out of Washington, out of the Trump administration, that they had, you know, like a hundred billion dollar excess and they quickly ran through that with all kinds of new spending programs.
	We're looking at deficits of tens of billions again.
	So they just ran through all that cash.
	But I've got a question here from a listener, DG8 on Rumble, and thank you for the tip.
	Appreciate that.
	David, could you please ask Mr. Rainwater about how much power and funding to violate the state's constitution the federal emergency order Trump signed on March the 13th, 2020 gave to these governors?
	What kind of largesse did they get?
	I mean, of course, we all know this is what the federal government does.
	It hands out a lot of money, whether it's the Department of Education or something else, to get the policies done that they want.
	They bribe them, and then later on, after the people, after they get hooked on this money, they can use that to blackmail them and say, you know, it'd be a shame if you lost all that money that you've gotten used to.
	What happened in terms of COVID cash in 2020 in Indiana that you can speak to?
	Well, I don't know specifically as far as COVID cash, but I will tell you, here's what we know.
	In the state of Indiana in 2019, the year before the pandemic started, the state budget was around $16 billion For the general fund and about $26 billion with federal money.
	In the four years since, we now have a state budget spending last year of about $26 billion.
	And that's for the general funds, so that's about a $10 billion increase.
	And with federal funds, it's a $20 billion increase.
	So we've added a significant amount of money to our state spending, to our state budget, because of the increased funding.
	From the federal government.
	And the problem that we have with this, of course, is that, once again, if government is flush with cash, then people are desperate to do whatever they can then people are desperate to do whatever they can to get control of that money.
	Which is why what we see in politics is the, you know, why are Republicans and Democrats able to raise millions of dollars that Donald Rainwater can't?
	Because Donald Rainwater is not for sale.
	As you mentioned earlier, these folks that put money into campaigns do so as an investment because they know they're going to get a lot out.
	And when I go out here and I say I want to reduce spending, I want to reduce taxation, I want to reduce the budget, That does not make me attractive to those folks who want to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars investing in their ability to manipulate the government for their benefit.
	That's right.
	Which is why my campaign, we've raised a little over $100,000, and the vast majority of that has come in the 2020 $50, $100 amounts from citizens who are tired of state government and local government taking advantage of them.
	Yes.
	And so we've got a lot of that.
	Now, if any of your listeners are...
	Genuinely concerned about better government, not bigger government.
	As you told them, they can go to rainwaterforindiana.com.
	And I've got a donate button there for PayPal, and I've got a separate one for debit credit.
	And if they want to make a big donation, I'd be more than happy to take it.
	That's right.
	But you're not for sale.
	And that's the key thing.
	That's right.
	Not even for rent.
	Right.
	For rent for four years.
	Yeah, we'll work for subsidies.
	When we talk about that, I've mentioned many times, I know I talked to people in Idaho at the time this stuff was happening in 2020. Brad Little, the governor there, the Republican governor there, Was given several times what the entire state budget was out of Washington, and it was money that he could spend at his discretion.
	And so, of course, that's a big, powerful political plumb that you've got there, big political leverage that you have that can help you get elected, help you do all kinds of things for yourself personally.
	When we see somebody getting a massive endowment, Like they did with Pete Buttigieg, giving him control of like $200 billion for infrastructure.
	That's something he could use to feather his nest politically with a lot of people and make friends with them.
	And so essentially that's what was happening with a lot of these governors, both Republican and Democrat, during the lockdown with that kind of money.
	And when we look at the corporations, when they invest in these politicians, it's a regular fee.
	If you go back and you look at what that corporation later gets and look at how much they donated, usually they're getting a couple of thousand percent return on investment.
	I mean, there just isn't any better investment you can make than a politician.
	So we were talking earlier and you have some very specific ideas about what you would do to help people on property tax, for example.
	Talk about that, because this is something that affects all Americans in every state.
	And, you know, this is something people could start to push their politicians and their state to do something about.
	Talk a little bit about your ideas about property tax relief, because nobody can own property in the United States as long as we've got these high property taxes.
	Absolutely.
	And of course, I tell people as a libertarian, in a perfect world, I would abolish property taxes entirely.
	When I suggested that four years ago, a lot of folks had their heads explode.
	So what we've done is we've said, okay, let's kind of give people a pragmatic approach.
	First of all, we need to make sure that property taxes never go up.
	Nobody should be scared to find out that their property taxes are increasing.
	So what I've proposed is that property taxes in the state of Indiana should be based on 1% of the purchase price of your property.
	Because I believe that the only true value of any item is what you paid for it until someone else pays you to buy it from you.
	Then you have a true value at that time based on what they paid you for it.
	So in between, and this is something that I find very ironic and a little hypocritical, is here again when I hear folks talk about the current vice president's is here again when I hear folks talk about the current vice president's idea of taxing unrealized gains, and they throw a fit about that,
	And then in the state of Indiana, we have Republicans and Democrats who want to tax the unrealized gains of property.
	And I think that's wrong.
	So here again, first we want to make it 1% of the purchase price of your property.
	It never goes up.
	And then as you pointed out, I believe that you can never truly own your property if you are under the threat that the government can take it from you because you fall behind on your semi-annual rent payment to them.
	They call property taxes.
	So...
	So I believe that we need to do away with this tax in perpetuity.
	So I've said in Indiana, we have a 7% sales tax.
	So let's make it 7 years.
	1% of the purchase price for 7 years maximum.
	Now, if you can pay that at closing, either in cash or by rolling it into your mortgage and amortizing it over a 30-year period, Then you're done.
	If you can't, you pay it 1%, escrowed into your mortgage like you're doing now, and at the end of seven years, you're done.
	One of the things that I keep pointing out to people is that if you pay 1% of the purchase price or 1% of the assessed value over a period of 30 years, You will have given your state and local government over a 30-year period over 30% of the equity in your home.
	Wow.
	You have given them 30% of the investment that you made in your home.
	Now, the government hasn't done anything to earn that money.
	And when we talk about one of the things that I hear a lot is, oh, well, you just want to defund the police.
	And I say, no, absolutely not.
	We have tax increment financing all over the state of Indiana that has been dealing with Property taxes from local governments for decades.
	We have 10-year tax abatements that our local governments can give to commercial and industrial businesses so that they don't have to pay property taxes for seven or eight years, depending upon how much their What a quote-unquote investment is, how many jobs they create.
	And so what you're talking about is really kind of having it go for seven years or whatever, 1% a year.
	You're talking about giving a property tax abatement on the back end for homeowners.
	That's one way for people to look at it.
	But I really like the way that you explained this.
	And your perspective of looking at this, because typically we talk about the injustice of the property taxes, and it is an injustice.
	We are being taxed on government-created inflation, because they say that the price of your home is going up.
	You know, you get a home and you have it for 30 years, and maybe you're going to sell it for 10 times what you paid for.
	But...
	That home is not worth 10 times as much as it was.
	It's 30 years old now, maybe.
	And so it is not worth more.
	It's just that your money is worthless.
	And so that's a tax on the inflation that's there when you have these property taxes that are being re-evaluated all the time.
	But I love what you're talking about in terms of the fact that people need to look at it.
	Since this is all being talked about now by the Democrats, it's great to talk about this as people refer to it as an unrealized gain.
	To think about this and saying, well, what if we looked at your stocks and we say that you had in your investment portfolio, you had $100,000 in stocks, and now your stocks have gone up in value under $150,000, so we're going to tax you on that $50,000, but you're still holding it.
	That could go down and it could become a loss and that type of thing.
	Something is actually true of your home.
	Your home can actually go down in value.
	We've seen that happen.
	It surprised a lot of people, you know, in the Great Recession, and it may happen again.
	But that really is, when you really evaluate this, I like talking about it in terms of being taxed on a gain that you haven't taken, as opposed to talking about it in terms of an inflationary tax.
	And it causes people to lose their home if they're on a fixed income, and yet the price of their home is not fixed.
	That's a great way to look at it.
	That's a very important issue, and I'm glad that you're talking about that.
	People need to think about this in every state.
	That is something everybody ought to be making an argument for.
	for in terms of property tax and I also like your idea about the 7% thing up front or paying 1% for seven years and then you're done that is also very important uh The home is, in many cases, not only the biggest, but sometimes the only investment that people in the middle class have, and this is the government trying to take that away from people, and they do it.
	Absolutely.
	Talk a little bit about your perspective on the gasoline tax as well, because that's good.
	Yeah.
	Yes, well, and there's, you know, there's constantly talk about gasoline prices and how high they are and how that unfairly impacts lower and middle income Hoosiers.
	And in the state of Indiana, We actually pay two separate state taxes on gasoline.
	We have a 7% use or sales tax, which is calculated on the average price across the state of Indiana of a gallon of gas for the previous month.
	So, for the month of August, the use tax was 20.3 cents per gallon.
	But then we also have a gasoline excise tax that our General Assembly back in 2017 decided to index for inflation.
	They added 10 cents and then made it indexed for inflation so it goes up a penny a year minimum.
	It currently sits at 35 cents per gallon.
	So for every gallon of gas that a Hoosier buys, they are paying 20.3 cents in sales tax, 35 cents in excise tax, which is a 55.3 cent per gallon tax on gasoline just for the state.
	I believe the federal tax is currently 18 cents a gallon.
	18 cents versus 55.3 cents seems to be a lot to me, and I personally don't believe that anyone should have to pay two taxes to the state of Indiana for the same product.
	So, I am advocating for the abolition of the state excise tax on gasoline.
	I'll take that a little further.
	We also pay 7% sales tax when we purchase a car, and then we are charged an excise tax every year.
	To renew our license plates.
	I want to do away with the excise tax.
	On vehicles, all vehicles in the state of Indiana, you shouldn't have to pay two separate taxes to the same government agency for the same product.
	Yes, good.
	And so, you know, when you start to cut the taxes, what would you do to cut government spending?
	Well, that's a great question.
	I'm so glad you asked that.
	You've got a long list, right?
	I bet you've got a long list.
	Right.
	Well, you know, there's a real simple formula that I learned during the pandemic.
	Because our governor, during the pandemic, was concerned that they might not raise all the revenue they were hoping for.
	So he sent out a memo, issued a directive to all state agencies, all 50-plus state bureaucracies in the state of Indiana, instructing them to cut their spending level, but their budget, by 10 to 15%. instructing them to cut their spending level, but their budget, When they did that, we ended up with a $6 billion surplus.
	So, and that's just out of the general fund spending.
	That doesn't include the federal government money.
	So, my proposal is that on the first day that Donald Rainwater's administration is in the governor's office, we will issue a memo that says...
	We're not in a pandemic, but we are in a financial crisis in the state of Indiana.
	People are suffering.
	People are hurting.
	Hoosiers are having to make decisions about how they will fill their gas tank, clean their mortgage, feed their kids, clothe their kids.
	And so we're going to cut, across the board, 10 to 15 percent No cuts in entitlements.
	I will tell you that even as a libertarian, I believe that entitlements are the last things we touch.
	That's right.
	They usually come after that first.
	First, you need to shut down a park, you know, because that's what people use.
	Right, it's the threat, right?
	Exactly, yeah.
	Absolutely.
	Here, let me show you what we're going to do if you try to take my money away from me.
	That's right.
	And it's not their money.
	It's our money.
	We gave it to them.
	Actually, they took it from us.
	So my plan is, during the first four years of my governorship, my first term, we will instruct all state agencies to cut their budget 10 to 15% each year of the four years.
	I also know, as I mentioned earlier, that there's about a $10 billion vote in the state budget over the last four years.
	So I'm also going to go to the General Assembly and say, first of all, I would like you to freeze the budget.
	Secondly, I would like you to rewrite the budget.
	To be equivalent to what it was in 2019. Let's reduce our state spending by $10 billion that it has blown up, ballooned in the last four years.
	Go back to 2019 spending levels.
	And then take that $10 billion and eliminate our state income tax.
	Because they say that if we got rid of the personal income tax in Indiana, it would cost $8 billion in revenue.
	So if I cut spending back to 2019 levels and reduce the budget by $10 billion, And if I reduce the revenue by $8 billion, that means I'll still have a $2 billion surplus as a result of cutting the budget and eliminating the state income tax.
	Because here again, you know, I believe firmly that the government should not have a claim, financial claim to our property.
	And when we allow them to take money from our paychecks, we are giving them a first right to our earned income.
	And I believe, here again, that that's immoral and unethical.
	So you'll notice, I'm big on the idea that the government doesn't need all this money.
	And that they're spending too much.
	And I've learned from being a little bit overweight...
	That if I want to reduce my weight, I have to reduce the food I put in my mouth.
	Because I am not going to be able to continue to cram food in my face and lose weight.
	So we have to reduce the taxes.
	You know, it'd be great if we could say, well, we're going to reduce all this spending, then we'll give people their money back.
	The reality is that our government at every level, local, county, state, federal, they are addicted to spending other people's money.
	Yes.
	And the good news is that you point out, since the pandemic, they illustrate that they can do that.
	It's not a theory.
	They actually, the governor comes out and says, we're going to cut across the board.
	Everybody cut your budget by this amount.
	They can all go find something that they can reduce their spending on.
	They've already done it in that state.
	And so it's been demonstrated, it's been done, and they could do it again.
	And that's the key thing.
	It's good to hear somebody finally...
	Who focuses on the problems of the people, of the middle class.
	It's good to hear somebody who is focused on just offering the opportunity for you to actually own property.
	That'd be the only state union where you could actually own property.
	And imagine the number of people that would move to Indiana and we wouldn't have a worker shortage anymore.
	That's right.
	Our small business owners and individual franchisees would have plenty of opportunity to staff their businesses.
	Well, it's very important, and it's important for people to hear this everywhere, because, you know, when you propose this and you couch it in those terms where people can easily understand it, I think that that's an important thing that could be taken to other places as well.
	Because when you're talking about getting rid of the income tax, that was done here in Tennessee.
	And they wound up with a budget surplus, even after they cut the state income tax.
	So, we're not talking about theoreticals.
	These are things that have already been done.
	The question is, does anybody really care to try to do this, or do they want to, you know, just fall into the trap of voting for the big parties and never can think about voting for...
	Any independents or third parties.
	That's the real challenge for you, isn't it?
	Because, as I've said, they play the games of ballot access and they play the game of debate access.
	If they had a debate that included you and the people of Indiana were able to hear what you want to do with property taxes, that would be huge.
	I would think that...
	Well, they will be.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	We are...
	There are three debates scheduled.
	We are guaranteed to be in two of the three, and the third one we are waiting for, the company is Nexstar.
	They own our Fox affiliate and our CBS affiliate.
	And they have said, first they said I had to raise $100,000.
	So we got out there and raised our $100,000, and now I think they're trying to wait to see if there's a poll that comes out where I have to poll over 10%.
	On a poll, if it comes out, or they can exclude me.
	But I'm definitely in two of the three debates.
	We debated four years ago in two debates.
	And you're absolutely right.
	The number of people who have told me that they did not vote for me in 2020 because they didn't know who I was until they saw me in the debate after early voting started.
	And that now they are committed to voting for me this year because of exactly what you're talking about.
	The fact that people understand and believe that there are common sense, simple solutions to big government and that we need to be shrinking the size and scope of government if we want, for example, to fix our economy.
	The The bald-faced truth is that That the inflation that we currently are saddled with was caused by government spending.
	And not just Democrat spending or Republican spending, just government spending period.
	It's all of their faults and they all need to be held accountable.
	That's right.
	That's absolutely right.
	Yeah, you're going to have to put that in there because they're not going to ask any questions about that.
	You're going to have to put that in there and say, here's why I'm running.
	I know that you want to ask me about that.
	Here's why I'm running because I want people to be able to own their homes.
	And you can't own your home now.
	You know, if you put something in there like that, that would be a killer.
	I'm glad that you're going to be in the debates.
	I really am surprised because we've had situations...
	When I was with the Libertarian Party in North Carolina, you know, we worked so hard to get on the ballot there, and then they would always exclude us from the debates, and the debates at that point in time, back in the early 90s, were being run by the press association, the statewide press association.
	They said, we don't want you on.
	You know, same thing that Fox is doing now.
	Trying to move the goalposts on you and all the rest of this stuff.
	It truly is despicable, and when I, you know, in 2020, is everybody, oh, what about this election?
	It's like, yeah, of course, there's always They're always messing with the vote totals and anything, but the rigging of the election really begins with the media and excluding people from the debates and with the excluding of people off of the ballots that you don't even have a choice.
	That's the key thing.
	So I'm glad you're going to be in two debates.
	That's excellent news.
	And we've talked a lot about money, but you also have some other issues, and it kind of is the center of an event that you're going to be doing.
	In September the 14th, you've got an event coming up.
	People can go to Rainwater4indiana.com, and they can get information about this event.
	You're also doing that with a candidate for...
	And this is about the Second Amendment.
	Tell people a little bit about that event.
	Well, we have a...
	In Terre Haute, Indiana, we have a...
	Small business owner who owns a gun shop in Range, and he is throwing an event for us to fundraise.
	Actually, the state party, the Libertarian Party of Indiana, is sponsoring the fundraising event there.
	And, you know, one of the things that is very important to me It's the fact that I believe that the Second Amendment says shall not be infringed, and there's a period after that.
	There are no qualifications.
	It's not shall not be infringed unless you have a medical marijuana card, or shall not be infringed unless we exercise our red flag laws against you.
	It says shall not be infringed.
	And so we are very fortunate after we ran in 2020, the Indiana General Assembly saw fit to pass constitutional carry in Indiana, even though they had summarily for about a decade denied constitutional carry to Hoosiers.
	But after I spoke out Fervently about it in 2020, they decided to go ahead and pass constitutional carry.
	Unfortunately, we do have red flag laws in the state of Indiana, which means that at any time the government can say, well, you're a member of this organization.
	We've determined that you all are brainwashed and have a mental defect, and we're going to take your guns.
	And then you have to go to court to get them back.
	I don't like red flag laws for that reason.
	I believe here again the Second Amendment gives us what we need to make sure that all of the other amendments are upheld.
	You don't have the First Amendment without the Second.
	And so I believe that enforcing our right amendment To keep and bear arms, period, end of sentence, is extremely important to our continued fight for freedom.
	And I do want to add, David, that when I say that, I think it is something that we as Americans, as Hoosiers, need to take very seriously.
	Our government is too big.
	It is too powerful.
	And we are in a daily fight to maintain and regain our freedoms.
	We are not a free people, as you said.
	Madison said, if you can't own property, you are not free.
	And therefore, if we pay property taxes with the threat of it being taken away from us, if we get behind, we are not truly free.
	When the only schools...
	That we are able to send our children to because we can't afford private school is the public school and the government enforces that by making us pay taxes to fund the public school whether we want to send our children there or not.
	We're not truly free.
	That's true.
	Yeah, when you talk about the red flag law, you know, it is really a form of civil asset forfeiture, another abomination from our government.
	Absolutely.
	To take something from you, you have no presumption of innocence.
	You have to prove that you're innocent to get this back and so forth.
	That's right.
	We have taxation without representation, really, and we have regulation, certainly, without representation.
	The important thing, folks, when we talk about third-party access and opening up the ballot is so that people can hear the types of things that you just heard from Donald Rainwater talking about a different way to fund the government, talking about actually being able to own our homes and not be forced out of them.
	That is so important.
	We talked about the gun issues in 2020 and brought them around to some of these issues.
	That's the importance of actually having additional people on the ballot so that you can actually talk about issues.
	And so that if they see support, and if the people in Indiana support Donald Rainwater because he wants you to be able to own a home, that's going to put...
	That's going to put a lot of pressure on these people to actually do something like this.
	Why is this guy so popular?
	Was it because of what he said about property taxes or whatever?
	Well, then maybe we should do something about that so we don't lose our position.
	It can be a very effective way to bring pressure.
	And if you don't do anything at all, they're going to continue to do what they've always done.
	And that is to steal from you and make it a career for themselves.
	So good talking to you and thank you for what you did in 2020. Thank you for doing this again.
	I'm very excited to hear that you're going to be in two debates.
	That's great.
	Nail them with that property tax.
	Absolutely.
	Thank you so much for having me.
	Thank you.
	And again, you go to Rainwater4Indiana.com and you can find out about that.
	You can find out about the events that they've got coming up.
	You can actually get some meet and greet tickets where you can shoot guns with Donald and the other candidate there, Richard Fitzloff, who's running for Congress there.
	And before we run out of time, I just want to thank some of the people who have given us tips today.
	On Rockfin, Dougalug, thank you.
	And he says he thanks us.
	And on Rumble, Sam Miller, that's very generous.
	I appreciate that.
	Thank you again, David, for your hard work.
	Great show today and every day.
	God bless you, he says.
	On Rockfin, Martin Halverson, thank you for the tip.
	And George McDonough, thank you as well.
	So...
	Again, we're just about out of time, but I want to thank everybody who supports the show.
	Without your donations and your support, without you being the producers, because it's producers who provide the funds for a show, we would not have this show.
	And so we have just passed our anniversary of this show.
	I guess it was the seventh anniversary that was last Wednesday, and most of that has been made possible by you, by your voluntary contributions, and we really do appreciate that.
	Have a great day.
	Thank you for joining us.
	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.
	TheDavidKnightShow.com
	TheDavidKnightShow.com
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	All right, welcome back.
	And now joining us is John Richardson.
	He is the founder and CEO of Richardson Nutrition Center.
	You can kind of remember that as RNC. It's the good RNC. And so, Richardson Nutrition Center, they promote wellness, healthy living through the use of safe and effective dietary supplements to help the body's natural healing processes.
	I wanted to get him back on.
	We had a very interesting talk last time.
	We talked about B17 and other things.
	I've had a chance to sample some of his products as well.
	Thank you for joining us, John.
	My pleasure, David.
	As I said, you're one of my heroes, and so I've called you for a long time.
	And so it's actually a pleasure to get on with people that are like-minded so that we can let your audience know about these truths and bring it into what's going on right now, right as we speak.
	Oh, yeah.
	And as we speak in just the last couple of days, I mean, we had yesterday, I think it was, Kate Middleton, you know, the future queen, I guess, who's been struggling with cancer.
	But they've been very closed-lipped about it.
	They do not want her to even mention what kind of cancer she has.
	At first, it was just, oh, she's got some kind of a stomach issue or whatever.
	Then they admitted that it was cancer.
	But they won't say what kind of cancer it is.
	Of course, they do that with Charles as well.
	And she just finished a course of chemo.
	But I thought it was also interesting that at the same time we had Elle McPherson, model and actress, people will remember.
	She also had cancer, but she treated it without chemo and said she beat it without chemo.
	And she talked in an article about all the struggles that she'd had with her family because It's the way the medical community puts pressure on you and makes you afraid to try anything other than what they are offering.
	And that's really the big obstacle that she had to overcome, was to try to think outside the medical box that they put everybody into.
	It's very interesting.
	Yeah, it's fascinating because I have like three degrees of separation from her.
	And I usually when I commit to that, I'm going to get to talk to somebody.
	She came out here to Arizona and lived here eight months, you know, right in this neighborhood, basically, because, you As people that don't know, it's one of the freest states for nutritional therapy for all diseases.
	They have schools.
	They have educational institutes.
	They have Dr. Henry Ely's out here.
	We just had a doctor come by, Dr. Martin, that came by the office, and he used to use B17 regularly in the 70s and 80s, and then he told me it disappeared right about the time my dad disappeared.
	They...
	Whatever happened to my dad, I can't, you know, I don't have any factual information about that they took him out, but it sure is strange that three of the most prominent doctors using B17 and Laetrile and the treatment of the C-word were all died within six months of each other back in the late 80s.
	Wow.
	Yeah, last time we talked, I said, you see the same thing with Carey Mullis and the PCR test, you know, just before this whole thing rolled out.
	PCR test, that was used by Fauci to give the impression that they were measuring things legitimately, that they were doing real science and measurement and everything.
	He called Fauci a fraud in the way that he said, you're abusing that, you're trying...
	You can't prove that there's an HIV virus that's causing AIDS by using my PCR thing.
	He says, whatever's causing it.
	He said, what you're doing is not science and you can't be...
	So he disappeared at that point in time as well.
	I mean, when you look at what the pharmaceutical companies are doing, when they know what they're doing, and this is now coming out over and over again when you look at the vaccines and everything, they knew with tests the adverse effects that were happening significantly.
	And in the past, when there was an oppositional FDA, they would stop when there was far less risk and far less harm.
	They would stop these drugs.
	But now they know they can do anything that they wish.
	And so if they have that kind of a calculation where they really don't care how many people they hurt or kill, There's not really anything that's going to stop them from whatever they want to do if they're strictly focused on the money.
	It's truly amazing.
	The whole system is made that way.
	No drug gets approved unless it's profitable.
	No FDA approvals on vitamins.
	There's no FDA approval on zinc or vitamin C. You can't, as a physician, legally tell your patient you're treating their cancer with vitamin C, even though Linus Pauling won awards back in the 70s and 80s.
	It's really a situation Where people are waking up from it Because of this COVID Unfortunately we had to go through this This medical tyranny But people are truly waking up To the fact that we've been lied to About so many things And the good thing for me Is that God has given me All of this material To where I feel stronger than ever I've known all this for 30 years David But when I would go out To try to tell people I'd only have my dad's story And G.R. Griffin's story
	We've talked about Gio Griffin in a world without cancer.
	Ed, who's 93, says he doesn't know anybody that's ever died of cancer that regularly eats amygdalin, apricot seeds, nitricides, whatever the name is that you want to call it.
	But they have systematically, just like this situation with Kate Middleton, just like the king, they've systematically covered up the fact that the king that got cancer said, told the world he's not going to use chemotherapy, radiation surgery, but you don't hear that anywhere.
	You don't hear that except in quiet circles.
	He's using natural remedies.
	And it wouldn't surprise me if Kate Middleton also did that, like you said.
	Yeah.
	They're not telling us what it is.
	If she's successfully helping herself with natural remedies, they're not going to tell us that.
	That's right.
	They're not going to tell us the cancer.
	They wouldn't tell us what she's using for treatment either, would they?
	No, they wouldn't.
	Yeah, they don't tell us what it is.
	We've got fake pictures.
	It's all a PSYOP. And the battles are raging on, as you know, and you and I are not on opposite sides about much, and I'm sure if we were, we could convince each other, but we do know this, that they lie to us constantly, and that we have to have a skeptical mind anytime something's presented to us as fact,
	because the truth is, there's They've covered things up so many times and lied about so many things that even people that we otherwise might trust might have bad information, but we have to dig deeper.
	And that's what I do at RNC. It's Richardson Nutritional Center.
	For anybody who thinks that I'm part of the RNC, it is funny that I've had people contact me and said, you've got to get rid of that Rona Daniels or I'm not going to support you anymore.
	And I said, well...
	I'm right there with you.
	I support you on that.
	But my dad came up with Richardson Nutritional Center back in the 70s because his patients would come to see him and then they would go home and not be able to get it because they were making a vitamin illegal that was being proven without a shadow of a doubt to help prevent the C word and help people use their immune system to fight it off.
	Yeah, I remember when that was in the early 90s.
	The FDA was trying to outlaw vitamin C, especially, right?
	And even that, but they were going to regulate the amount that you could have of all these different vitamins that you could sell over the counter.
	I remember the Libertarian Party was, that year I went to it, it was in Salt Lake City.
	And Orrin Hatch spoke there, about the only thing we'd agree with him on.
	And it was because, kind of like with Tom Emery, you know, he opposes CBDC because he's connected to people who are selling crypto stuff.
	Well, Orrin Hatch was connected with people who were selling supplements in the supplement industry.
	And so he was opposing it.
	You know, I don't know who would oppose.
	We were opposing it on principle.
	He was opposing it on the principle in terms of cash, right?
	Right, right.
	Well, how much money hit his bank account.
	That's right.
	Two different types of principle.
	But, you know, for whatever reason, you know, we would join forces.
	And so it's kind of interesting to see Orrin Hatch addressing the Libertarian Party trying to stop the FDA from stopping people being able to have even vitamins.
	I mean, that's where these people have been for the longest time.
	It's all about serving the interests of the pharmaceutical people.
	It's kind of interesting, too, when we look at L. McPherson.
	She said that she had breast cancer.
	She got it seven years ago.
	And she said when it first showed up, she said she had a lumpectomy in 2017, seven years ago.
	The doctors wanted her to do mastectomy, radiation, hormonal therapy, breast reconstruction, chemotherapy.
	She said, I chose a holistic approach.
	She said, saying no to standard medical solutions was the hardest thing I've ever done in my life.
	But saying no to my own inner sense would have been even harder.
	And she talks about how her family, one of her sons was with her on that decision, and the other one was like, this is absolutely not going to work.
	And so it was a struggle within her family.
	It was a struggle with herself, the fear of trying something that the establishment is telling you that you can't do.
	But I think what we've seen in the last couple of years, we've seen the establishment so thoroughly discredit itself.
	I think that really does help people a lot.
	But she did it before that happened.
	Kind of interesting.
	Yeah, it's a fascinating story.
	Like I said, she used to date Andy Wakefield, who I know intimately from the whole battle on autism and how the general public still thinks that they've never proven a link between vaccines and autism.
	But that could not be further from the truth, David.
	But you could go out and do a poll Outside of any hotel in downtown a city in any blue city in the country, and it'd probably be the majority of people think, oh, that's been disproven.
	That's not the case.
	And so we have been so inundated with medical misinformation because of the profit motive and also the fact that they like to keep population control and they like to keep us controlled because there's no better way to control us as a people than by our health.
	If you can control our health, David, you can control everything.
	It doesn't matter how much money you have, you'll trade it all for your health.
	and you know the situations are obvious but when we get uh something like when we come out with a lump or bump we believe that is the disease and this is what i'm here to tell your audience the lump or the bump even the lump she cut out of her breast is not the disease let me repeat that is not the disease no different than if you get chicken pox you wouldn't cut the little pimples off of your arm to try to cure chicken pox
	that is the what they've done for 50 or 60 years failing dread for dreadfully miserably so much so that the recent uh woman who was on uh tucker carlson gave up her her her surgery career she was the She was at Stanford Hospital.
	She was at the top of her class.
	Carrie Means is her name.
	If your producer can help us find that name.
	She gave up her career.
	She was just on Tucker Carlson, and she broke this news.
	And her brother was a...
	He would raise funds to try to battle...
	He was one of the people that convinced the politicians to go with more pharmaceutical drugs.
	I don't know, my brain's not working to find these words this morning, but she quit her career because all she said she was ever taught to do, she put in her resignation, all she was ever taught to do is cut things out of people's body and then bill them for it.
	She never learned the entire system of how it worked.
	Cancer is an entire body system failure.
	It means that you have a deficiency disease that cannot fight back the cancer.
	So if you start by cutting out a lump or bump, all you're doing is releasing it.
	It's almost guaranteed to come back.
	Chemotherapy is just a drug, a deadly poisonous drug that does kill a cancer, but it also kills all your healthy cells.
	So people's hair falls out, their nails fall out, their teeth get loose, they lose their appetite, they lose weight.
	Radiation is simply an x-ray pointing at the tumor trying to reduce it.
	Again, killing the symptom, the reason why we have that tumor is because it's surrounding the cancer.
	It's killing the symptom, and it may shrink, but it's not going to go away.
	These people end up dying anyway, and we've watched the statistics.
	Over 90% of the people that go into that system with chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery, over 90% of them die within seven years.
	It's a death It's a death cult.
	Cancer is the same death cult that we had with COVID, except we did it over 50 years and 60 years, and people like Dr. Hans Nieper, who treated President Ronald Reagan for cancer with laetrile and metabolic therapy in 1985. He had stage 4 colon cancer.
	He treated it, and he couldn't even tell people about it until later in life.
	He wrote books and information, but President Ronald Reagan, who you know, signed the law that said that you couldn't sue a pharmaceutical company.
	He was convinced.
	He was a good man, I believe, but he was convinced by these pharmaceutical companies that they needed to have this protection, otherwise we weren't going to be able to help children in the future.
	Now we have 72 vaccines.
	We have, you know, kids in California get 72 shots by the time they're 5 years old.
	And our health is deteriorating because the more medicine they stick into us that's supposed to help our immune system, the more we deny God's medicine, which is what Laetrile, vitamin C, vitamin D, vitamin E, all these vitamins we need, they have us go away from those instead of going to them when we get disease.
	Yeah, it's pretty amazing.
	You talk about Ronald Reagan and the doctor who secretly treated him.
	You know, they really try to keep that a secret, whatever anybody is suffering from, the presence.
	We've got to have this image that they're invincible, but also they don't want people to know that.
	It's truly amazing because Reagan, that would have been, he was maybe in his early to mid-70s at that point in time, and I think he lived to his early 90s, didn't he?
	Yeah, he lived 19 years past stage 4 cancer.
	He was extremely petrified.
	I've interviewed...
	literally from Connecticut, who knew Dr. Hans Nieper and helped work with this.
	And he knew that he was shipped off to a Navy vessel off the coast of West Germany because Dr. Hans Nieper was from West Germany.
	He was also connected with Sloan Kettering, Dr. Hans Nieper was, when they were doing this study.
	So he knew that Laetro worked in the mid-70s, but they lied about it.
	So he continued to use this in his practice, helping people with nutritional therapy for cancer, but he was also sworn to secrecy.
	So actually, his speechwriter didn't even put that Reagan had cancer until after he passed away, and then he just mentioned that he had colon cancer, but he cured it naturally.
	It's documented that he cut a little piece of his colon out, but avoided chemotherapy and radiation altogether, and that would have changed the world, David, in 1985, three years before my dad died.
	It would have changed the world, but they kept it quiet, and he lived 19 years and died of senility, basically, 19 years later, after he had stage 4 terminal cancer in his first And no one knows this story.
	We have all the documentation.
	We are putting it out there.
	And look at the similarities between Trump and Reagan when they both were pro-vaccines and pro-Big Pharma because they had so much pressure.
	They were both shot at.
	They both had attempted assassinations.
	And they both...
	on the face value both believe in uh freedom of choice and natural answers to uh to um to disease so you know of course you know when you look at uh you know the gag order that they put on hans nieper about that it's very much like what i started out of the program with i started talking about the uh debate and i said yeah it's a big pageant and everything i played a clip from um wag the dog and when they get the hollywood director there they said you're gonna you're gonna create a war for us it's gonna be a pageant but you can't tell anybody about it
	you can never tell anybody about it because we're gonna kill you if you tell anybody about it you know that type of thing and the fact that they would do that to cover up a cancer treatment that would be in opposition to what the big pharmaceutical companies want to do that truly is amazing with Now, of course, that book, you've held up a couple of books there, Hans Nieper and another one that was the study that they did.
	Those books are available at RNC as well, right?
	Yeah, we have rncstore.com.
	You can use the discount code that people know about that should be in the description that they can get discount on all the documents that we have.
	We've put together the most extensive list of proving documents that we can, and we have thousands more documents to go.
	I mean, just the strangest things we find from this vault, and it says, How to legally avoid unwanted immunizations of all kinds.
	This was a document produced back in the 1980s when people knew about natural answers, but they were trying to get this out there.
	Now with the internet, at least on shows like yours, we can get this truth out there.
	But we have so much documentation they've covered up.
	And how do we get it, David?
	It was hidden away to keep it from the raids of the three-letter agencies.
	The president of an organization called the Cancer Control Society had We hid it away to keep it from the three-letter agencies that were raiding his home in Northern California.
	And so he put it in containers, and we've brought it to Arizona to a location to be named later.
	We're scanning it.
	We're going through it.
	We're finding, I mean, literally newspaper clippings that were getting reproduced.
	- Wow. - They talk about Lantril on FDA safe list and then a poster that they put out, the FDA put out saying how it's unsafe and unnatural.
	We've got Patriots marshaling forces to fight Metocrats.
	Does that sound like something that could come out of a newspaper article from today?
	- Yeah. - It repeats itself.
	And then here's an author that wrote a book in the 60s who predicted his own arrest just from telling people about Laetrile and B17 therapy basically as a natural answer to the C word.
	Now, doctors have always gotten in trouble.
	From saying that it treats cancer, and that's what we want to avoid in this day and age so we can let doctors know just use it for their patients, use it for their people just as a support for the immune system, just like vitamin C, vitamin D, or anything else.
	So that's one of our messages we have at RNC Store as well.
	Not only do we have the products available, the information available, we also counsel doctors who are across the country are waking up in droves, not woke, But waking up in droves that natural answers, not only does it help the patients get out of the system, but they can also have a wonderful career helping people naturally, even as an MD. You can use a mixture of some orthodox medicine, especially with surgeries and accidents and things like that.
	But if you can be proactive on giving people the right nutrition that they need, doctors, MDs are learning right now that that's the path Yeah, yeah.
	I'm surprised with all those documents that you had there.
	We didn't see anything from the FDA saying, this is for horses, y'all.
	You know, it's that kind of stuff.
	They have completely destroyed their credibility.
	That's the only good thing that's come out of the last four years, is that people have finally seen how they operate.
	And I had seen how they operated before this because they pulled the same stuff with COVID that they had done for their annual flu shot stuff.
	And it's like, well, we've seen this before.
	We know exactly where they're going.
	We know exactly the kind of manipulation and propaganda that they used to people.
	But they went even farther this time and really destroyed their credibility.
	You know, we talk about Ronald Reagan in 1985 having natural therapy and other things like that and surviving and not having chemotherapy.
	That was not too long after that.
	It's in about a two-year period, not even, about a year and a half.
	My father had cancer, and he got chemotherapy, and his first time they gave him chemotherapy, he went into a coma, and he died a few days later from the chemotherapy.
	He didn't die from cancer.
	He died from their chemotherapy.
	Same thing could have happened to Ronald Reagan.
	And if he hadn't gone with a natural thing, instead he wound up living for another 19 years.
	A tale of two different things.
	A friend of mine, Dr. Rashid Batar, who was most likely murdered, you know, I just try to tell the truth, even though people go, oh, he was most likely murdered.
	I was texting him back and forth.
	When he said he was poisoned, he was definitely poisoned, and whether he was eventually murdered by that or it was an effect of that poisoning, anyway, he was taken out.
	But he made it well known as an MD that 90% of the people that got cancer died of the treatment from the cancer.
	Yes.
	And so you might be better off, and this is blasphemy, you might be better off just going home and enjoying the rest of your life instead of getting these poisons.
	Like you said, your dad was given a treatment.
	You know how many times I hear that people are given their first dose of chemotherapy and they're so sick afterwards, they're like, I didn't feel this sick ever during this whole bout with cancer.
	So even that, and the FDA had to admit, David, as you joked about, you know, quite horse paste, They had to admit that amygdala, without a doubt, caused people to get off painkillers.
	Our whole medical system, David, has become where painkillers, pain is the symptom that everyone wants to fix.
	Yes, yes.
	Something wrong with you, you got to get a painkiller to get that pain away.
	It doesn't have anything to do with taking care of the disease.
	So we're taking pharmaceutical drugs for painkillers or antivirals or antibacterial and anti this and that to get rid of pain when that's a symptom of what's wrong.
	That tells your body telling you, God telling you you're doing something wrong.
	Stop eating that thing.
	Stop doing that thing.
	Stop drinking that alcohol or doing whatever you're doing that's unhealthy.
	Learn to fix the problem.
	And that's what we've gotten away from.
	And that's what we're getting back to is resolving the underlying problem so that we don't die soon.
	We don't die of the treatments.
	Instead of dying from, quote-unquote, the deficiency disease, which we don't have to die.
	Ed Griffin, 93, the Hunzas, who he documented, lived in the turn of the century, lived to be 120, 130 years old, and they ate up to 200 apricot seeds a day.
	Now, I'm not saying here that apricot seeds are the all-encompassing answer to every disease on the planet, but I have studies that I found in this vault where famous, world-famous dentists proved that The cavities were actually a deficiency of vitamin B17. Believe it or not, David, we found that information.
	This has been covered up.
	Of course, it's much more profitable to drill holes and fill with things and do all sorts of treatments.
	I'm not saying dentists are all bad, but there's natural answers to the things that go on in our mouth just as proven over history as there are all these medical answers.
	Yeah, you stop and think about, you know, vitamin C and rickets.
	I mean, that's a, you know, that's just a deficiency in vitamin C. There's all different types of things.
	I know what you meant.
	Ricketts is vitamin D. 2.4 million people died a year, David, back 300 years ago.
	And that's a natural, easy answer.
	We don't Know about scurvy.
	The same thing is going on with B17. It's just so hard for us to believe it.
	They want to keep us in fear, just like they did with COVID, so that we try this vaccine, which is not a vaccine at all.
	It's been well proven.
	It's a gene therapy.
	No question about it.
	We no question that more people have died from the results of that vaccine than ever died of COVID. The treatments for COVID is what killed people.
	And this is information that Three years ago probably would have got me put in jail, but people were saying back three years ago, and now it's coming out in the general public.
	So people are more skeptical of the medical establishment than they've ever been.
	And time to wake up.
	Yeah.
	Oh, yeah, it is.
	And I wish, you know, and they pull this stuff on us all the time.
	I'm just at the point now where I'm absolutely done with the medical community.
	After what happened, you know, first, I told you what happened to my father, and then my son gets Ciprofloxin.
	Well, it's not actually that.
	It was of that family, of the Floxin family.
	Same thing as chemotherapy, and the people we're talking about says it's the same exact thing.
	It continues to attack your body, continues to attack your mitochondria after you take it, even just a small amount of it.
	And when I start looking online to see if I can find some natural remedies or things like that, what I see are, you know, from WebMD and these other places, Well, you should have some SSRIs if you're having trouble sleeping.
	It's like, are you kidding me?
	SSRIs?
	Or they say gabapentin.
	Gabapentin was something they gave my wife after she had a hip replacement, and it caused her to have all kinds of issues, just horrible.
	The initial dosage of that, it took us quite a while to get her detoxed from that.
	Made her pass out, all the rest of the stuff.
	It was just amazing to see these things that they just prescribed them like candy.
	They'll go down and these doctors, you talked about the doctor who said, well, my only job was to cut things out of people, you know.
	Well, the other doctors, their prescription is to look at a table of symptoms and then tell you what the pharmaceutical industry wants you to take at the moment.
	And without any regard to any kind of safety concerns, and they don't tell you what the safety concerns are.
	It's just amazing.
	They don't have any tests that test them all together.
	No matter what they say about a drug test, it's always tested by itself.
	They do that so that there's...
	They call it these double-blind studies.
	They test that one drug by itself.
	It's never tested with two, three, four, five vaccines, 72 vaccines.
	That never happens.
	Even when they try to say they've done safety tests, most of them, a couple people died or a couple people had heart failure or a couple people had liver.
	And now...
	They allow hundreds of people to die before they take a drug off the market.
	And this whole thing, one of the things we talked about was Zuckerberg coming out and now saying that he was convinced not to let people know about natural answers to COVID. He was convinced.
	He was strong-armed.
	It's amazing, David, to hear that, to hear that information coming out.
	But I think Zuckerberg is like the rat leaving the sinking vessel.
	He literally has seen that things he's done has killed people.
	People have had heart attacks because of him.
	People have lost their children because of him.
	And so it's all well and good that at this 11th hour, When it's all coming out everywhere, that he's going to jump ship and kind of try to throw the administration under the bus.
	But the truth is, he knew.
	He knew very well.
	He lied over and over again.
	And so, I'm one of those people, yes, I believe God can forgive people.
	You know, whatever they've done in their lives, I'm one of the people that still thinks that we need to pursue him paying for this.
	He needs to...
	Pay for this evil lying.
	Yeah, you can say it.
	I admit it.
	And I give him credit for that instead of waiting for him to be completely taken out later.
	But I don't forgive him and I don't forget it.
	And I'm not the one to judge him.
	God will be the one to judge him.
	Our criminal justice system needs to deal with him, whatever happens.
	I'm not saying it's going to, David, but that's what I'm putting out there.
	And I'm not afraid of Facebook and Zuckerberg, just like what happened with the CEO of YouTube.
	The powers that be, the evil ones that want us dead don't care who they kill.
	They're a death cult.
	And this woman who supported the vaccine and pushed the vaccine and told everybody to get it, died of turbo cancer at 54, can't even pronounce her name, but she was the CEO of YouTube that probably kicked you off, kicked me off.
	I had a channel with subscribers and got kicked off because I was just telling people about natural answers and she lost her life and they don't care.
	They kick me off for telling people about the Federal Reserve.
	They'll kick you off for anything.
	Well, like Ed Griffin.
	They call Ed Griffin a right-wing extremist because he told people the truth about the Federal Reserve and Creature from Jekyll Island and told people the truth about cancer 50 years ago, David.
	And even patriots or people that are right-minded, Still think cancer is the lump or the bump or they think it's something we catch or it's something, some chemical they give us.
	No, it's our immune system not having the proper nutrition, the enzymes.
	And I think I've mentioned this to you about the professor at Loyola University who came out in 1978 and said that this may be the end to breast cancer.
	His name is Dr. Harold Manor.
	He was the head of biology at Loyola University for 30 years and he studied amygdala with mice that were bred to grow breast cancers and wiped out 89% of the cancers and said this may mean the end of mastectomies.
	And he was fired in the 1970s, left penniless and had to move to Mexico and actually died 90 days before my father in 1988. Wow.
	Wow.
	That's amazing.
	And I really want to thank you for persisting on this.
	Because, you know, as these people are so persistent, we have to be equally persistent to tell people the truth, as persistent as they are to try to cover it up.
	I think many times my wife was protesting an abortion clinic in Austin.
	They had a sign that said, stop black genocide, you know, and they had the lefties show up.
	It was the first time we'd seen Antifa people.
	And they showed up with a black sign.
	They didn't have anything to say.
	They just want to stop you from saying what you're saying.
	And so he'd try to hold it in front of her sign.
	She'd go down below him.
	She'd go up behind.
	They're going up and down, up and down to show this thing.
	It's just amazing that they just want to silence people.
	And we know what it is that they want to do.
	Now, you were talking about Zuckerberg.
	You've got an article, an extensive article, talking about this.
	Tell people where they can find that.
	Well, it's on our website at rncstore.com.
	If you use the forward slash newsletter, you just sign up for it.
	You just put your name and your email.
	I know people are cautious about that.
	We don't use it for, you know, spamming people, but this is where we can send out this information.
	We have all the research about what Zuckerberg said and what he did and, you know, explaining to people that it's not time to go, oh, let's go jump back on Facebook.
	And now they're telling the truth because Zuckerberg's seen the light.
	Just know he's covering his butt.
	He's just covering his rear.
	And they brainwash the entire world by censoring and de-platforming.
	And it's not something you can just Ask forgiveness to get away from.
	They need to, if he really means it, and we'll see if that's just a news cycle.
	He came out and said that Trump was a bad, you know, ASS for standing up, and it's all like you said, David, just like my good friend Gio Griffin, it's all this play we're watching, and we don't know where it's all going to come down, but we have to fight our own battle.
	We have to That's why we can't just leave our health up to the powers that be.
	We can't leave our information up to the powers that be at Google and Facebook.
	We have to hold them to account and continue telling the truth.
	And like your wife, if you get censored here, you move it over here.
	If you get censored there, you move it over here.
	We're on, I think you're on the Rumble channel, and I think maybe we're on live right now on Rumble channel, which I think is a great platform.
	It seems like they're not censoring information and things are starting to go viral.
	People are starting to realize if they want the truth about health freedom or political freedom or even financial freedom, that they got to go to a platform that doesn't censor the truth, no matter what the truth is.
	And I'm a person that believes Freedom of speech is the most important freedom we have, because if you and I can't disagree about something without being shut off, or one of the other of us being told to go away, then we're not really a free people.
	We're not free, and we're never going to battle against this tyranny without freedom of speech and freedom of opportunity to get our message out there.
	Oh, absolutely.
	And it's ridiculous what they're doing now.
	I just saw there's an article in Germany that the German government is coming after some guy because on social media he called a German minister fat.
	Well, she actually is fat, you know, but it was what they're really after is saying you don't have the you don't have the freedom to insult.
	And that's especially true of our masters, our political masters.
	But this is a few years ago.
	You had Rowan Atkinson, the comedian in the UK, said, please feel free to insult me.
	You know, we must be able to keep this freedom of speech without it.
	He was saying we don't have any comedy, but we also don't have any freedom to say anything.
	If you can shut somebody down because you hurt their feelings about it because you said something that was mean spirited.
	The reality is that if they shut down our speech, that is the key thing.
	That is why it was number one on the list of Bill of Rights that Madison and other people added to the Constitution, because it is so foundational.
	I've said before, I think it is even more foundational than the Second Amendment.
	You're not even going to know who to shoot at if you don't have free speech, right?
	I mean, you will not even rise up against tyranny, let alone resist it in any way, shape, or form if you don't know that the tyranny is happening.
	And that's why the tyrants come after free speech.
	And it is a program that is designed to enslave us, designed to kill us.
	And that's what the medical side is all about.
	And so it continues to escalate.
	We've got several people who have left messages here.
	We're on live on Rockfin.
	Scott Helmer, thank you for the tip.
	He says, please post this full interview to David's X account so it can be shared with friends and family.
	We do that every day.
	We'll pull out every interview that we do.
	We put it on our Rumble channel, and on Rockfin, and on BitChute, and HugeTube, and we put it on our X account.
	So we do that every day, as well as Gab.
	We put it on Gab as well.
	And so every interview that we do is up there.
	And we'll also pull out a couple of clips from the show as well as the full show.
	Always will be up there.
	And on Rockfin, Jessica Morrow, thank you for the tip, says, Thank you, David, especially for your show today.
	I am a longtime listener, and I've been diagnosed with stage 4 melanoma.
	I'm 46 and a mother of two.
	Your topic today is so true.
	I have dealt with two different hospitals here in the Northeast, one of them being quite famous for cancer treatment, and all they want to do is a single protocol of drugs down my throat or in my arm.
	It's very sad.
	It is sad.
	Mayo Clinic, I'm guessing Mayo Clinic.
	And here's a funny, here's another funny story.
	I just want to tell her to take heart because I have a friend whose name is Rick Hill, who's celebrating his 50th year of being cancer free when he was sent home at the age of 24. By Mayo Clinic saying he had stage 4 cancer and he was going to die.
	He is celebrating in October his 50th year being cancer-free using metabolic therapy, including Laetrile.
	He actually spoke to the Congress in the 1970s to keep them from outlawing it.
	They wanted to outlaw a nutritional substance that's found in 1200 different foods that's primarily found in the apricot seed.
	That's why we talk about the apricot seed because it's the easiest way to get it.
	And I've got that right here.
	I've got apricot seeds.
	So tell us a little bit about that.
	You know, when you eat this, you've got to go a little bit soft.
	I couldn't believe it when you said there's that tribe that ate 200 of them a day.
	Because, oh, it looks like almonds.
	And so I popped several of them in my mouth.
	And it kind of gets, I don't know how to describe it.
	It was a very interesting sensation that you get when you eat that many of them, you know, at one time.
	But there's something there.
	Yeah, it's horrible tasting and the thought is that what the bad guys say, what Google says is you're getting cyanide poison when you get these reactions.
	It's absolutely nearly impossible to get cyanide poison unless you drank a bunch of beta-glucosidase at the same time.
	It's a longer story than we have time for now.
	But I want to tell people that God created vitamins to keep us disease-free.
	If we just listen to what he said, and I've repeated this, I'm going to go Genesis 129. Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the face of the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit, you shall have them for food.
	God did not provide us these seeds to poison us.
	That's the lie they want to tell us, David.
	Yeah.
	Amygdalin is broken apart only in the presence of an abnormal cell.
	That's where beta-glucosidase is.
	So if you eat a handful of them, you're probably going to give yourself an upset stomach because your body's not used to dealing with it.
	The average American diet gets about one milligram of amygdalin in a day.
	My dad said, and Ed Griffin said, you need 100 to 200 milligrams a day.
	Not a whole lot.
	It's only like 5 or 10 apricot seeds.
	There's 20 milligrams in each apricot seed.
	And David, I eat regularly 40 a day.
	Now, with a caveat, I don't recommend that to everybody.
	Because if you do that, you're going to get an upset stomach.
	You're not going to get cyanide poisoning.
	That doesn't happen.
	The body has a rodinase called the protecting enzyme, which breaks the, any free cyanide that's developed if you come in contact with a cancer cell is broken down by rodinase that turns it into a pain reliever.
	That's why the FDA can't deny that amygdalin causes pain relief.
	But I'm going to be at the Healing for the Ages conference this weekend with Dr. Brian Artis, Dr. Ed Group, who many people know from Global Healing.
	Yeah, I know.
	He used Laetrile.
	I just talked to Dr. Ed Group yesterday.
	He used Laetrile back in the 1990s and 2000s until he got demonized by the FDA. He had to move away from it and started global healing.
	We're working together on a project that I'm not going to announce yet.
	We're working on it to bring this to more people in a way that's not so nasty tasting as the apricot seed.
	Because this is the best way to get it.
	It's also the hardest way for people to do because they don't like the taste of it.
	So we're trying to make it, we're grinded up and put it into seed meal so people can put it in their smoothies or their oatmeal.
	But again, I must repeat, I'm not the only one that has it.
	It's not a trademark.
	God has the trademark on it.
	That's the thing that they hate.
	Yeah.
	They hate that this little seed can wipe out a $2 trillion industry, and so they'll lie, cheat, and steal to stop people from knowing about this.
	And I'm not the only one who has it.
	You can grow it in your own yard, and you can eat foods that have amygdala in it.
	Yeah, and it says there on the label, California-grown, tested pesticide and herbicide-free, air-dried.
	It looks very much like almonds.
	And like I said, you know, it's kind of a strong taste.
	I just grabbed a handful of them.
	It's like almonds.
	They're popping in.
	I say, take these one or two at a time when you're first doing it.
	It's like, oh, okay.
	But I survived.
	Didn't have any problems.
	I didn't even have an upset stomach with it.
	And then I've got this as well.
	The seed caps.
	Tell us a little bit about the seed caps.
	Yeah, seed caps is just our answer.
	It's very simple.
	We squeeze the oil out of it to keep it from going rancid, and we grind it up.
	Our seed powder, it has the oil pressed out.
	And that, we put it in a capsule, so if you don't like the taste, you just take it.
	It gets through your upper colon and goes to work in your stomach.
	So that's just a way to get it separately.
	You can get it as pure Laetrile.
	I have the bottles back here for somebody that wants more potency.
	100 milligrams of pure Laetrile.
	500 milligrams.
	We even offer it in the liquid laetro, which some people use to add to their IVs, just like vitamin C. Dr. Krebs, who is kind of the proponent of the 60s and 70s, who was getting the word out there, people said, how much should I do if I have something?
	He said, get as much into your system as your immune system can handle.
	So they did many toxicology studies back then, and even more recent, that amygdalin...
	Even though they try to make you fearful of the cyanide thing, and we've talked about that, is safer than sugar.
	And my wife even goes, honey, stop saying that because sugar is poison.
	The number one thing you need to do if you're trying to be healthy is get off sugar.
	But laetropure amygdalin is safer than sugar and we have many studies and many documentation and it's all available at rncstore.com for people to look up, understand and read that it's not just John Richardson having some patent or trademark on this item.
	It's available out there in the world and we want to teach people so they can't take that away from us.
	So they can't keep us afraid and going to do chemo, rushing to chemotherapy, radiation and surgery when we have an issue.
	Well, it's very important, and it's very important for us to arm ourselves with the truth before something happens.
	You know, it's just in our particular case, you know, you got an emergency infection that is really rapidly building, and you're concerned about that.
	We didn't know the history of these, you know, flocks and the family of these drugs and everything like that, and it didn't ring a bell.
	And I was sick at the time myself as well.
	And so, you know, they take advantage of Of your ignorance is what they do.
	I got a couple of questions here, a comment and a question on Rockfin.
	NN says, my sister worked at UAB and four researchers quietly announced that they had found a possible cure for cancer.
	I don't know what type, but they were shut down.
	Heard that over and over again.
	And I've got this from Brian and Deb McCartney.
	Can you ask him about Dr. Stanislaw Brzezinski and if he knew him?
	Yeah, I do know him.
	I more know of him.
	We're not personal friends, but he's out of Houston.
	I've driven by his clinic.
	I have a good friend that does know him.
	There was actually a study, David, done at a hospital in Houston that proved that amygdala helped prevent or treat seven different types of C-word.
	Now, I'm going to use that in that sentence.
	Because they were also shut down.
	Obama administration shut it down.
	People forget.
	Why would they do that?
	Why would they do that for an answer?
	Because people forget that the entire medical industry is supported by the pharmaceutical industries.
	So at this hospital, there was 10 or $20 million worth of drugs being tested through the pipeline.
	Pfizer is buying companies that have come up with a new drug for cancer.
	This is a profit machine.
	So if I, like I said, if there was a study done at a hospital or someplace like Sloan Kettering in the 70s that proved, read the title of this and you can watch this using your night as people's affiliate code.
	You can watch this for free on our website as long as it stays on Rumble because they took it down from Facebook.
	But it showed that it stopped the spread of cancer and they lied to us about it.
	This was in the 1970s.
	If you don't think they're doing that to us now, if people don't think they're doing that to us now, this is the answer that they don't want us to know about.
	And as long as I can keep standing up in my soapbox and preaching this and getting the information out there...
	For such a time as this, people are receptive to it, David, because they've gone through the things that you have, and many of your viewers have gone through the same thing.
	They shut down the natural answers because there's no profit in it.
	The system doesn't sustain itself that way.
	That's why we have to scrap that system eventually and go from the point of view of healing the person, not treating their pains or their symptoms and just masking them, but healing the person.
	That's what we have to go back to.
	Voodoo medicine.
	It's scientifically proven natural answers to disease that we need to open up to the world.
	And that should be the first route people take.
	That should be the first route they take.
	Absolutely.
	It's time for a paradigm shift.
	I mean, how can we look at what has happened in the last four years and not understand that?
	But, you know, just recently I looked up a supplement, NMN, and the people that I got it from, and I saw that they got shut down during the COVID stuff because they said something that was really pretty innocuous, saying, you know, well, this really does help with COVID, but you have to be very careful.
	If you make a particular statement or claim, they'll use that then to shut you down.
	They completely shut those people down.
	I remember when things were happening and people were concerned, said, well, we got this thing out there.
	And I said, look, you know, SARS and things like this, you know, these are not really novel or new.
	And I read quotes from people who had been, one of them was still at either the FDA or the NIH. And I said, here's what they're saying.
	They're saying that it builds up your body's defenses.
	It doesn't necessarily kill a particular disease, but it builds up your body's defenses so that you fight it naturally.
	And so I read the quotes from both the NIH and from the FDA for that.
	But if you go out and you say, well, it's going to cure such and such a disease, and that's not really the paradigm.
	Because as you point out, we're not focused on a disease.
	We're not focused on cutting off a bump or cutting off a lump or whatever.
	That's not really the disease.
	The disease is more systematic, and that's why you're approaching it from a nutritional standpoint.
	Absolutely.
	That's the safest way to approach it for doctors, for health practitioners, for people to understand that we're supporting the immune system.
	We have all over our website that this has never been approved by FDA. I'm not a doctor.
	I don't treat patients.
	I'm just a historian that's pushing this message out there and giving people the data they need to make their own decisions.
	And that's what we have to do.
	We can't bury our head in the sand anymore, David.
	We can't just hope someone else is going to protect us.
	There's going to be white knights coming in and rescuing us at the last possible second, even who are voting for president.
	Even though I think there's a clear difference between the two people on face value now.
	I don't think that's our answer to our future.
	Our answer is for us to be educated, us to learn the truth, and spread it amongst our tribe.
	The people that we love the most, the people that follow you, listening to your truth, they know you tell the truth, regardless of whether it's best for your financial reasons or not.
	Same thing for me.
	I sell a book on my website, David, that says Cancer Free with Food.
	It actually teaches anybody who buys it how to put me out of business.
	What a crazy thing to do.
	Because if you eat the right foods, you don't need John Richardson.
	You don't need this story.
	If you eat the right foods and take the right nutrients, you can avoid the C word in your lifetime and avoid it for any of your family members.
	It's really just an educational and making the right choices when you're eating.
	The problem is Most of our choices are limited to processed foods at the grocery store, the fast food place, and left to our own devices, we're going to eat things that are sugary and salty and taste delicious and have no nutritional value.
	So sometimes eating the right thing tastes horrible, but God told us that's what we need to eat for food, so I recommend people follow what God said.
	That's a really good spiritual analogy as well.
	Sometimes it's bitter taste, but it's what he's got for our best interest.
	And, you know, there's been a lot of talk about hyper-processed foods and all this other kind of stuff.
	And so there was an article that just was published.
	In addition to that, said, well, you know, a lot of people would say, well, I don't want to have junk food and everything.
	So they're eating really good stuff.
	They're eating salad and having fat-free salad dressings and everything.
	And said, well, do you realize that colon cancer is going up?
	Because this stuff is just loaded with chemicals.
	It's just an imitation of the other stuff.
	You know, that is natural, and it just is permeated throughout our food supply.
	You know, the wheat is adulterated from genetic modification, and it's from selective breeding even before the genetic modification, but now they're going to be doing GMO wheat.
	Everything is adulterated like that, so it is really difficult to eat natural and to eat really clean.
	Even the people who think they're eating clean are getting some kind of a fake imitation of food.
	You need a supplement, unfortunately, with what the food that we have available, but some of the guidelines that my beautiful wife has taught me to really follow, even though I've been a person who ate a lot of dairy She says if you're battling a disease and you want to get healthy and you feel better, stay away from dairy, stay away from gluten, and stay away from sugar.
	Those are the three hard things.
	Everybody likes the hot, fresh buns with sugar and cakes and things like that.
	If you can stay away from those three things besides what I'm talking about, Dairy, gluten, and sugar, you can avoid a lot of disease.
	And those things have been kind of pushed on us over time because those industries had the most money to spend to get on that food pyramid.
	And so it is a financial thing.
	But our food right now is mostly garbage, mostly garbage.
	So we do need to supplement.
	And that's unfortunate, but it's a lot cheaper than the other method to treat after you get it and try to fight it that way.
	Oh, absolutely.
	Well, I'm real interested to see what's going to come out with the collaboration between you and Dr. Group.
	Tell them I said hi.
	I will.
	Such a nice guy.
	I'll see him this weekend.
	I'll see him with Ryan Artis, Dr. Schmidt from Gold Care.
	They're doing amazing things, David.
	I don't know if you're familiar with what they've got going on.
	I don't know them, but I do know Dr. Group, and I have the most respect for him.
	He is such a nice guy, very sincere in what he does, and one of the nicest people I've ever met.
	I really like him.
	His factory is 10-12 minutes away from me.
	I don't want to tell people exactly where I am.
	So he's out in Arizona, too, somewhere.
	No, his main office is in Houston, but his factory is out here in Arizona.
	And we're going to be...
	Doing liposomal versions of BD17, which are absolutely amazing and we're working on it right now.
	It's not like I'm announcing something that's private.
	It's a naturally occurring substance.
	I'm never going to have a trademark to it.
	I don't want a trademark to it.
	I don't want to be the only person, David.
	It protects me with more people that know about it and more people growing in their garden and getting it.
	And when you're talking about liposomal, you're talking about having it bonded essentially to fat so that it's more absorbable into the system.
	Is that correct?
	Well, the whole body, it was invented by the skin care companies who spent millions of dollars on it.
	And then Dr. Group has spent the last eight years perfecting it nutritionally.
	He said they dropped it in the skin care line because they were taking all these poisons and making it to go all different parts of your body so it wasn't Helpful.
	Liposomal technology is only good if what you're bringing to people is actually good for them.
	So that's what he's developed at Global Healing, and we're going to be doing that, and I'm excited about it.
	Oh, I'm really excited about that.
	Yeah, liposomal vitamin C. We've been taking that for a while, and our family have known about that.
	So that's great to see that happening with other things.
	The Richardson Nutrition Center, RNC, and it's rncstore.com.
	Is that where people can find things?
	That's right, rncstore.com.
	Remember, don't tell me about how to run the Republican National Committee.
	I'm not going to help anybody with that.
	That's right.
	And he'll give you some special benefits and things to help you if you use the code NIGHT, and we're going to put up some links on our website to let you know about that.
	But yeah, I'm all about people trying to find alternatives.
	You know, we need to have alternatives to the fiat dollar.
	We need to have alternatives to this fake, dangerous medical system.
	We've got to have a parallel society.
	That's the only way that we're going to be able to survive this stuff.
	These people are out to destroy everything in our society, as well as our bodies and our souls.
	And so we've got to start educating ourselves and taking advantage of this.
	And you have a wealth of things to educate people about.
	There were publications...
	An excellent resource source.
	Thank you so much, John, for what you do.
	Again, it's rncstore.com.
	Thank you, John.
	Appreciate it.
	Thank you, David.
	God bless.
	Thank you.
	And thank you all for listening and for joining us today.
	That's it for today's broadcast.
	Have a good day.
	We'll talk to you tomorrow, hopefully.
	Has your news been censored, banned, censored, banned over and banned, censored, banned over and over again?
	Has vital information been held prisoner by mainstream and anti-social media?
	It's the duty of every thinking person to make the great escape to TheDavidKnightShow.com.
	There you'll find links to live streams, videos, audio podcasts, and support links.
	Live stream the show at DLive and every Monday through Friday, 9 a.m.
	Eastern.
	Videos at Bitshoot and Ugetube.
	New audio podcast, The Real David Knight Show, at Podbean, iTunes, Stitcher, iHeart, and more.
	But even though there's a light at the end of the tunnel, without your support, the show will run out of gas.
	The links to support this show are at TheDavidKnightShow.com to donate via Subscribestar, donate via *, or donate via *, Cash App, Bitcoin, or P.O. Box.
	Our sincere thanks to all of you who have stood with us to get this far.
	Please don't forget to share the links and pray for the country as well as our family.
	��
	��
	��
	Thank you.
	Oh We're good to go.

▲