Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Dec. 6, 2024 - The David Knight Show

03:01:13

6Dec24 UNABRIDGED The Czar of PPP Fraud Picked by Trump and A New Twist on Censorship

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Using free speech to free minds.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	As the clock strikes 13, it's Friday, the 6th of December, year of our Lord 2024.
	Well, today we're going to begin by taking a look at some of the new people that have been appointed by President Trump.
	A very troubling couple of appointments.
	Quite frankly, the deputy to the Treasury Secretary ran the PPP program.
	And then we have the appointment to the IRS also has been exploiting a similar fraudulent program left over from the Trump administration.
	So we're going to begin with all of that.
	But we're also going to take a look at a school shooting that happened targeting Christians and rising persecution.
	That's happening in professions and other things as well.
	And of course the Supreme Court back and forth questioning about whether or not kids should be protected from mutilating surgery as a result of gender gaslighting and of course the hormones that we know cause cancer and many other adverse effects.
	We'll be right back.
	Yeah, we're also going to talk about Kash Patel and the issues that have come up about him, both good and bad, some issues.
	Real concerns about his devotion to free speech and the Constitution in general.
	But let's begin with the Deputy Treasury Secretary.
	This is not somebody that has to go through confirmation hearings.
	The reason...
	Article says the PPP was a COVID-era disaster.
	I misspelled error.
	It was the COVID error.
	People made a mistake in believing any of that.
	Trump wants to promote the guy who ran it.
	You know, I've complained about this program and how it was abused and how it was missold and how it was twisted.
	Yeah, it just, to this day...
	It bothers me that Trump called people on Main Street non-essential.
	Well, he kept the Wall Street big box companies open.
	And then to help those people who were not essential.
	You know, just get used to it.
	We're going to take your jobs.
	We're going to take your businesses.
	You'll own nothing.
	And we'll put you on universal basic income.
	That was what this was about.
	It was about moving the Overton window towards that.
	And there are articles coming out and saying, in this country and in other countries as well.
	So in the UK, somebody was saying...
	It's completely this lockdown and welfare check.
	Running that for several months completely destroyed the work ethic.
	Of the general population.
	It's amazing how quickly people become spoiled on welfare.
	And of course, we always knew this.
	All of this talk about universal basic income.
	Who was the first person to support universal basic income in a big way?
	Elon Musk.
	Elon Musk.
	It's all the billionaire class.
	The globalist class.
	If you go back to the 2020 election, Bloomberg was running, and of course he was pushing the idea of universal basic income, but it completely went over the head of the media, especially the conservative media.
	He criticized farmers.
	He called them stupid.
	Know what he was talking about?
	Yeah, he did.
	Okay, he did.
	There's that.
	Okay.
	The arrogance of this guy.
	And everybody's defending the farmers, saying they've got a very complicated task.
	They have to fix all the stuff themselves, typically, and keep it running.
	And they're right about all of that stuff.
	But he said, you know, we had a lot of farmers, and we got rid of them.
	And then we had factory workers, and we're going to get rid of them.
	The smart ones of us are going to replace everybody's jobs with robots and AI. And we've just got to figure out how we're going to keep them.
	It's going to make them angry, said Bloomberg.
	We've got to figure out how we're going to keep them from coming after us with the guillotines.
	And so then, as part of that election cycle, you also had Andrew Yang, who ran, and initially the only thing he was running on was universal basic income.
	Who was his first supporter?
	Elon Musk.
	Gave him millions.
	That should cause you concern.
	You see, it's the stealth.
	It's the backstabbing.
	This guy who's now reinvented himself as a populist, conservative, libertarian, fill-in-the-blanks, He's now bought the presidency, brags about it in his memes, and this is the guy who wanted universal basic income.
	He's completely on board, folks, with that globalist agenda.
	And, of course, so is Trump, if you look at his actions rather than what you would like to imagine him being.
	And so Elon Musk, the guy who wants to control your brain, puts probes in your brain, you know, brain-computer interface, he was a part of that as well.
	But this PPP, I've complained about it because of the corruption, but especially because of the fact that right away this was set up to help the small businesses, the people that Trump had said were not essential.
	And so they said, we're going to provide them some financial assistance.
	So it was set up for small businesses.
	What's the definition of a small business?
	Fewer than 500 employees.
	So the Trump administration said, well, we want to make sure that the big hotel chains like Trump's or the big restaurant chains like McDonald's or whatever, we want to make sure that they get it as well.
	So we're going to say...
	That everybody is eligible if they've got fewer than 500 employees at one location.
	So that basically made pretty much most of the big Wall Street companies, like McDonald's for example, eligible for this.
	They don't have 500 employees at any given McDonald's.
	And what happened was the bank said, well, we would rather, we have the same amount of overhead in terms of doing paperwork for the big loan to a chain of McDonald's franchises.
	We have the same amount of paperwork for that as we would for somebody who's got a hair salon.
	So we'd rather do that because we get a percentage of the fee or whatever it is that they got.
	And so as a result, more than 50% of the money went to 5% of the recipients.
	And those are the big recipients, the recipients that were not even small businesses.
	They only qualified because Trump and his cronies redefined what a small business was.
	Now this guy is at the epicenter of that.
	And so now he's going to be rewarded for that betrayal of the American people with Donald Trump to be appointed Deputy Treasury Secretary.
	And the Deputy Treasury Secretary does not have to go into any confirmation hearings.
	Reason says, now the guy responsible for running this thing is getting a promotion because they said it's an amazingly wasteful mess.
	Bloated.
	It was known from the very beginning that it was going to be corrupt.
	I forget the guy's name, but I interviewed a guy who actually wrote a book about it.
	And he said, he had a background in accounting.
	We should look it up next time we have to put somebody in.
	But he wrote a book about it.
	He had a background in accounting.
	And he said, I looked at this program as it was defined.
	He said, this is just an invitation for fraud.
	And he had worked in Washington.
	He called people that he knew there that were involved in setting this program up.
	He goes, this is going to be one of the most fraudulent programs ever.
	They said, well, we haven't had any fraud.
	He goes, you haven't even started it yet.
	This is just the outline, the design.
	Of course you haven't had any fraud yet because you haven't started any money yet or processing any forms of the way you've set this thing up.
	It's an open invitation for this.
	And so this is how it worked.
	The money was supposed to go to businesses, says Reason, that had been shuttered.
	By the pandemic, no, not by the pandemic, they said in parentheses, or by various government edicts.
	Yeah, it's the government edicts that did it.
	There wasn't any pandemic.
	The virus didn't do anything.
	There wasn't a virus.
	There wasn't a pandemic.
	If there had been something like that, it was our responses to it that made absolutely no sense.
	It was the edicts that did it.
	Everybody, oh, the virus did this to us.
	The China flu did it to us, or China did it to us, or whatever.
	It was supposed to keep furloughed workers on the payroll and reopening.
	But we now know that much, maybe even most, of the PPP funds ended up being wasted or stolen.
	This guy that Trump is going to appoint oversaw PPP. They ultimately distributed more than $800 billion.
	Folks, that's nearly the T-word.
	Trillion.
	Right?
	That's nearly a trillion dollars.
	Only 23-34% of the program's funds went directly to workers who would have otherwise lost their jobs, says a study by the National Bureau of Economic Research.
	Another study by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis found that taxpayers paid roughly $4 for every $1 of benefits and wages to workers.
	That sounds really like a deal, doesn't it?
	A lot of it was simply stolen.
	So much, in fact, that the Government Accountability Office says a full accounting of losses will never be known with any certainty.
	The overwhelming size of the PPP's losses points to mismanagement as a significant factor.
	Another study, an audit that was published by the Small Business Administration, Inspector General, See, this is something that bothers me that Reason doesn't point out that the purpose of the PPP was to help small businesses, and yet exactly the opposite happened.
	I remember talking about how more than 50% went to 5% of the companies who were not small businesses, who they changed the qualifications for, and there were so many small shops that got checks for under $100.
	Well, there's other people getting millions.
	It disgusts me to see this kind of corruption.
	And the fact that Trump has never held accountable for it.
	And the fact that he is now doubling down and rewarding the guy who oversaw all of this stuff.
	Don't tell me that he doesn't own it.
	The Inspector General of the Small Business Administration pointed out that the agency which handled the PPP applications and distributed the cash did not have, quote, a centralized entity to design, lead, and manage fraud risk.
	Until February 2022, two years later.
	That was one of the things the guy was talking about.
	He says, you got absolutely no oversight or check for fraud whatsoever in this.
	Well, that's because the whole thing was a fraud.
	It's just one great big party ship of handing out money to people.
	And, of course, your friends can get into the thing, and nobody's going to suspect anything if there's a whole bunch of other people who are freeloading off of the taxpayers.
	A comprehensive review of PPP published by, this is yet another.
	Now we're on to the fourth entity looking at this.
	This is the Project on Government Oversight, POGO. I guess Pogo says we has met the enemy and they is us, right?
	A non-profit watchdog group found that millions of PPP loans were flagged as being suspicious, but most were never investigated.
	Despite then-Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, the Goldman Sachs banker that Trump put in for the four years that he was there before.
	Steve Mnuchin promised in April 2020 that all PPP loans would be subject to, quote, a full review.
	That the ones that they did do, that were flagged, they didn't review them, they didn't investigate them.
	The most damning detail in the POGO report is the fact that 40% of those that were flagged and attached to suspicious loans were cleared in January of 2021 as the Trump administration was coming to a close.
	So as they're going out the door, The things that have already been flagged that were so incredibly obvious, they just, let's get rid of it.
	I mean, folks, this is as corrupt as anything that Biden has done.
	It's amazing.
	That includes 99% of the flags attached to roughly 28,000 loans that exceeded $2 million.
	Like I said before.
	There have been a whole series of articles done about how little money was given to the businesses that Trump called non-essential.
	You know, small mom and pop service businesses, less than $100.
	And you got 28,000 loans that exceeded $2 million?
	And there were red flags?
	And they decided not to investigate them?
	And they just wiped this off?
	First of all, if they got money that size, they're not small businesses most likely.
	They don't probably have 500 or fewer employees.
	So all of this was set up as fraud.
	Just fraud everywhere.
	Donald Trump is a New York City Democrat pedophile criminal.
	A dirty casino mafia boss.
	This is part of what that is.
	I'm not going to cover for that guy.
	I don't care what kind of blowback I get from audiences.
	The bulk closure of those flags suggests a last-minute attempt at superficial due diligence.
	No, the bigs have this.
	All this, says Reason, points directly back to Falkander, this guy, who's the first time I've used his name.
	He won't have to endure a Senate confirmation hearing before taking a deputy secretary post.
	A shame, because he ought to be grilled.
	And he ought to be asked these questions, says Reason.
	Why did the PPP program fail to anticipate or respond to widespread fraud?
	Especially when the guy that I interviewed, the guy who wrote a book, warned them about it.
	Eh, don't worry about it.
	We know all this.
	Did this guy who ran the program, Falkander, did he order mass clearance of the flagged loans just before they went out the door?
	If he didn't, then who was actually running the PPP? Reason says there's no good answers here.
	Falkander was either asleep at the post or actively complicit in what one former U.S. attorney has called the biggest fraud in a generation.
	Folks, this is much worse.
	This is much worse than the savings and loan fraud or Enron or any of that kind of stuff.
	Much worse.
	Much worse than Sam Bankman Friday.
	You know, this is a government corruption.
	What do we do about that?
	Oh, we promote the people who did it.
	In a paper that he co-authored earlier this year, Falkander attempted to defend the PPP's track record.
	The program, he said, saved 13.8 million jobs at an average cost of approximately $33,200 to $37,600 per job saved, he wrote.
	They said, well, the math doesn't add up.
	At those figures, the PPP would have cost taxpayers about $500 million rather than the $800 billion that was actually spent.
	This guy, there's a third alternative besides the fact that he was actually complicit in this, or asleep.
	He's also a liar.
	Who can't even do arithmetic.
	He puts this stuff out.
	He doesn't even multiply the two numbers together to see whether it matches his budget or not.
	And of course, he's making all of this stuff up.
	Remember when the conservatives mocked Obama for saying, well, in our unemployment thing, we have this many jobs that were saved.
	How do you know that?
	You don't know anything about it.
	This isn't the first Trump pick.
	They said to have some COVID era baggage.
	They talked then about Chad Chronister.
	And again, as the listener pointed out yesterday, and thanks for doing that.
	I did not catch the connection.
	I looked at this and it's like, so, you know, where in the world did this guy come from?
	I mean, are they, you know, has he got some friends there?
	I kind of thought maybe it was a connection with Pam Bondi because she'd been Florida Attorney General and he was a sheriff in Hillsborough County.
	So I just kind of thought that was the connection there.
	But no, his father-in-law is a criminal, convicted criminal, billionaire that Trump pardoned.
	Remember that time I paid you for the pardon?
	What if I gave you a little bit more money to appoint my son-in-law as DEA head?
	Because, you know, he could probably do some deals with DEA stuff.
	There's a lot of corruption to be had in the Drug Enforcement Agency, isn't there?
	So, yeah.
	And they say that he withdrew.
	But, of course, Trump angrily says, I pulled him.
	I didn't like what he said about my pastors.
	Yeah, right.
	What a fraud.
	Well, you know, I like the term baggage.
	And I was thinking about that this morning.
	I thought, you know, Trump is always looking for new merchandise.
	Maybe he could come up with a line of baggage.
	Trump COVID. And I'm sure that MAGA people would buy it so they could carry his baggage because they're always carrying this guy's baggage.
	I'm sure they would love to have this.
	Trump COVID baggage.
	Look, I got it.
	And I got the thing on my ear that says fight, fight, fight.
	Yeah.
	Well, let's take a look at his pick for the IRS because there's some surprising similarities between these two guys.
	Trump's picked for the IRS and his pick for Deputy Treasury Secretary.
	He has nominated former Congressman Billy Long, Who did not serve on the House Committee tasked with writing tax policy during his six terms in office.
	And so this is the leftist press.
	Ross Story is very upset about this.
	Oh, he's just going to be somebody who's going to help rich people get tax breaks.
	What about these 80,000 agents that are on their way and the $80 billion?
	Is anybody going to talk about that?
	Is Trump going to talk about it?
	Instead of shutting down the IRS, instead of shutting down the income tax, instead of shutting down the agency becoming seven times bigger, he's going to put this guy there.
	Now, this guy, he was criticized by Ross Story.
	He spent his time in the House pushing to abolish the very agency that he's chosen to run.
	Well, now, that could be a good thing.
	Except it's not going to be serious.
	These guys are never serious about this stuff.
	We have seen, over and over again, people who said we need to shut down the Department of Education made the head of the Department of Education.
	Rick Perry is a good example.
	Rick Perry, remember when he was running in 2016?
	And he says, I'm going to get rid of three agencies, you know, and the Department of Education, and I forget what the other, maybe Commerce or something like that.
	And he goes...
	And there was a third one.
	I can't think of what that third one was.
	One of the people on the debate platform there with him said, Department of Energy.
	Oh, yeah, yeah, Department of Energy.
	Yeah, I'm going to get rid of that one, too.
	Trump made him head of the Department of Energy.
	It's a joke.
	Rick Perry's a joke.
	Donald Trump is a joke.
	The joke is on you.
	These people who say they want to get rid of the agency, they wind up running it.
	And here we've got this again.
	Here's a guy who introduced all these bills to get rid of the IRS. And now he's going to run it.
	As a Republican congressman from Missouri, long repeatedly sponsored legislation to dismantle the IRS. But now he's going to be running an agency that is going to grow and be seven times bigger than it was.
	With an army of 80,000 people.
	With $80 billion to hire these people and add artificial intelligence.
	And he doesn't have a problem with that now?
	We'll have to see what happens.
	He also co-sponsored legislation to repeal all estate taxes.
	Well, that's good.
	Because, you know, you can't avoid death and taxes.
	But we all ought to be able to avoid death taxes.
	Yeah.
	You've already paid taxes all of your life.
	That's just a way of stealing money from your family and also of destroying small businesses and family farms.
	It makes it so that they can't pass it on.
	This is the very type of thing that's causing something of a revolution in the UK now, because they've decided that they're going to end the family farm.
	They're just going to, I guess you could say, grandfather it out.
	You know, got a grandfather clause.
	As long as grandfather is alive, you can have the farm.
	But when he dies, you can't pass it on to Luke and Kate or even Pepina.
	You know, they...
	He said almost nothing on the floor regarding taxes, the IRS, and taxation during his 12 years in Congress.
	Said one guy, well, how do you jive these two things?
	If he, I mean, this is Ross' story, of course.
	And so there's some contradictions in what they have to say.
	First of all, they say he repeatedly sponsored a legislation to dismantle the IRS. He co-sponsored a legislation to repeal all estate taxes.
	But then he said nothing on the floor regarding taxes.
	Where does that come from?
	So hopefully, we'll see.
	We'll just have to wait and see.
	Ron Wyden.
	And I've talked about Ron Wyden, the guy who exposed James Clapper as a liar and a fraud, and somebody who should have gone to jail.
	He lied to Congress.
	He lied to the American people.
	He violated the Constitution.
	Nobody ever charged him.
	That was in 2013, a couple of months before the Snowden Papers came out.
	And statute of limitations expired in 2018. Nobody brought up charges for lying to Congress.
	Funny how that works.
	But anyway...
	Ron Wyden was the one who pointed out, and I've congratulated Ron Wyden and said, you know, great job.
	It's the right thing to do, but I typically disagree with him on everything else.
	This is the example here.
	Ron Wyden pointed to vastly improved, quote-unquote, taxpayer service, unquote, under the leadership of the current IRS commissioner, Danny Werfel.
	Well, you know, when I see that term being used by the IRS, taxpayer service, It always reminds me of what farmers call it when a bull performs his duty on a cow.
	Servicing the cow, right?
	And that's basically what the IRS is doing to taxpayers when they service us.
	Whiten said, if Trump fires Mr. Werfel, it won't be to improve on his work.
	It'll be to install somebody that Trump can control as he meddles with the IRS. Long has promoted, now this is where the connection...
	To the PPP type of fraud.
	This is a similar program.
	This is the first time I've seen this program.
	It's the Employee Retention Tax Credit.
	ERTC. Another pandemic error.
	E-R-R-O-R. That was intended to incentivize employers.
	To continue paying workers.
	Same purpose, declared purpose as the PPP. And yet, it wasn't just the massive fraud of the PPP that was nearly a trillion dollars, but it's also the fraud of this program.
	And this program has continued.
	And what Long has been doing since he left Congress, he's been helping people, guiding them, to get money out of this fraudulent program.
	How are we going to get rid of the income tax in the IRS as long as we've got fraud and waste of this degree?
	I've said many times, and I even had a bumper.
	You know, let's make government small enough to fit inside the Constitution, right?
	It can't even put one leg of those pants on.
	It's so bloated.
	He has worked to help businesses claim the credit from the IRS. But fraudulent and improper claims have so permeated the program that the IRS stopped processing new claims temporarily.
	The U.S. House passed a bill to entirely halt ERTC claims, but it's been stalled in the Senate.
	So, this is not a separate...
	Entity, right?
	PPP was run by a separate entity, and this other guy, Faulkner, presided over it.
	This is a similar purpose, but it was administered through the IRS. These ERTC mills that have popped up over the last few years are essentially fraud on an industrial scale.
	Just like everything in the pandemic era.
	They con small businesses, and they rip off American taxpayers to the tune of billions of dollars, said Ron Wyden.
	And he's right about that.
	I'm going to have a lot of questions about Mr. Long's role in this business.
	First and foremost, why the American people ought to trust somebody involved with a fraud-ridden industry to run an agency that is tasked with rooting out fraud?
	Trump's nominee has clearly stated that he wants to abolish the IRS, says another person, Congressman Don Beyer, Democrat, Virginia.
	The change Trump proposes in IRS leadership would be a gift to tax cheats and a blow to anyone who believes that it is important to rein in deficits.
	Maybe the way we need to approach the deficits is by stopping these PPP programs and these other things.
	All this talk about, you know, we put this Doge program together.
	We got Musk and Ramaswamy, these geniuses, and they're going to hire hardworking geniuses just like them.
	And they're going to save us $2 trillion.
	Well, just take a look at the PPP. That was nearly a trillion dollars right there.
	Senator Elizabeth Warren...
	Added that Trump's nomination of Long signals the weaponization of the tax agency.
	Where has Elizabeth Warren been?
	Get her off the reservation.
	This has always been the purpose of the IRS. It's always been about surveillance.
	It's always been about self-incrimination.
	It's always been about blackmail.
	Richard Nixon was one of the charges against him.
	He wanted his IRS commissioner to come after his enemies.
	And his IRS commissioner...
	Was not loyal to him and exposed that.
	But he's not the only one that's done that.
	Warren said if he's confirmed, taxpayers can expect longer wait times for customer service.
	Well, you know, I could always wait for that.
	That's something that is worth waiting and not having right away.
	It's kind of like a colonoscopy or something, right?
	North American House Depot, thank you very much for the tip.
	Good morning, David.
	Knight family, friends, troublemakers in the chat alike.
	Happy Friday.
	Hope we're all having a great day.
	Well, thank you.
	I look at this, you know, Bill Maher says, I just might quit.
	I just can't handle another four years of Trump.
	I'm eagerly anticipating it.
	The outright fraud, hypocrisy, and stupidity Of this administration, the people who support him is just, I find it to be very entertaining, as dangerous as it is.
	And thank you again for the tip.
	He says, talking to the true believers in the Neocon website comment section is like telling a six-year-old there's no Santa Claus.
	Yeah, except that the six-year-old will just cry.
	He won't attack you.
	Guard Goldsmith.
	As a matter of fact, I told my six-year-old that was, you know, there's no Santa Claus.
	Oh, yeah, I know that, Dad.
	If there was anybody like Santa Claus, he'd be in the Bible.
	That's the best answer I've heard.
	Guard Goldsmith.
	Good to see you, Guard.
	Liberty Conspiracy every night on Rockfin and also on Rumble.
	He says, ah, there's so-called tax credit.
	Which one can't tell now whether it will be a tax break or a subsidy renamed as a tax break?
	Yeah, it's just a giveaway.
	Giveaway to friends.
	DG8, thank you for the tip.
	He said, David, notice Trump hasn't mentioned freeing the January of the Sixers.
	The Pied Piper Trump led them to D.C. only to abandon them disgustingly.
	Yeah, I agree.
	I agree.
	And I talked about that the other day.
	I said, you know, one of the guys, Cowboys for Trump.
	He even talked about that.
	He said it was entrapment, the biggest entrapment we have ever seen.
	And he said it was Trump who was leading the entrapment, and Alex Jones was right there with him.
	And yet, who are the people that MAGA trusts?
	They just keep having this done to them over and over again.
	Well, before we take a break, I thought this was highly entertaining.
	This is the back and forth of the Secret Service director, Roe, and a GOP congressman, Fallon, and they get into a screaming match.
	Oh, it's kind of entertaining.
	What happens with this?
	I'll give you a little bit of the context to start out, because this clip kind of starts where they begin to lose it.
	Fallon is criticizing his work at the Secret Service.
	So, you know, the guy is already getting angry.
	Roe is already getting angry with him.
	And one of his criticisms is he pulls up a picture, and it's not about protecting Trump or anything.
	It's the fact that Biden is at one place in the picture, and then Roe, who is the lead protecting agent, this is before he became the head of the Secret Service, after the epic failure of the DEI pick that Biden had.
	Anyway, he was the lead protection agent.
	And he's supposed to be right next to Biden.
	He says, how come you're way over here?
	And he circles the two of them in the picture.
	And so then, to misdirect people, Roe starts saying, well, that was 9-11.
	And I was at 9-11.
	And how dare you question 9-11 and my credibility about 9-11?
	You've got to see this.
	Congressman, what you're not seeing is the sack of the detail off out of the picture's view.
	And that is the day where we remember the more than 3,000 people that have died on 9-11.
	I actually responded to ground...
	What does this have to do with you protecting Biden?
	...going through the ashes of the World Trade Center.
	I was there at Fresh Kills.
	I'm not asking you that.
	I'm asking you, Congressman.
	I was there to show respect for a Secret Service member that died on 9-11.
	Do not invoke 9-11 for political purposes.
	Oh, I'm not.
	I'm invoking this.
	You are, sir.
	And you are out of order.
	I would like to ask him a question.
	You are out of line, you're just men.
	Don't try to only me.
	Order.
	I am an elected member of Congress, and I'm asking you a serious question, and you are playing politics.
	I am a public servant who has served this nation, and you won't answer.
	Red herring.
	It's a dark day in our country's darkest day.
	Committee will come to order.
	Committee will come to order.
	I'm asking you serious questions for the American people, and they're very simple.
	They're not true questions.
	Were you the special agent in charge that day?
	No, I wasn't.
	I was there representing the United States Secret Service, sir.
	Mr. Ballin, your time has expired.
	You know why you were there?
	Because you wanted to be visible, because you were listening for this job.
	I was there to pay respect for a foreign member of this agency.
	You are out of line, Congressman.
	You are out of line.
	Mr. Chairman.
	Mr. Chairman.
	Well, okay.
	Jeb Clanton, thank you for the tip.
	He says, I can't wait for Trump to actually get in office.
	I've got extra popcorn ready while I laugh.
	Supporters doing mental gymnastics.
	Well, there we go.
	We got our first box of popcorn.
	We just finished right there.
	A great delusion.
	Yes, it is.
	Thank you so much.
	And we're going to take a quick break.
	And we will be right back.
	And we will be right back.
	And we will be right back.
	And we will be right back.
	And we will be right back.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Well, the Washington Post editorial board Wrote an editorial ripping Biden's pardon as selfish.
	Selfish?
	Why?
	Well, because, as Breitbart puts it, they basically seem to accuse Biden of undermining their narratives about him.
	Yeah, it embarrassed them and it embarrassed the Democrats and all of these talking heads on the left because they had said, you know, we have the moral high ground here.
	We support the rule of law as they abused J6ers.
	Don't talk to me about the rule of law when we see what's going on with J6ers.
	As a matter of fact, Hiccup 1 says J6ers are real Americans being tortured in a gulag.
	They were persecuted.
	The First Amendment was torn out, ripped to shreds, and burned in front of our eyes.
	So these people could be put in jail for excessive punishment, taking out the Eighth Amendment as well.
	Rip that one up.
	And then tortured in jail.
	And nobody's paying for any of that.
	But yeah, they supposedly own the moral high ground, do they?
	And that is the issue, you know, Stuart, John Stewart, almost said Jimmy Stewart, far from Jimmy Stewart, John Stewart.
	John Stewart was saying, you know, the problem with all this stuff isn't that this is just an old guy who doesn't care and is like, I'm on my way out of the office and of life and I'm not going to let them jail my son.
	So there, you know, because that'd be one thing.
	But he goes, why is it such a big deal to the left?
	Because they all put themselves out there, beating their chest.
	Democrat politicians, Democrat media.
	Oh, we are the good guys.
	We've got the moral high ground.
	The Post-Editorial Board said his statement on the pardon, in which he uses the words, I believe in the justice system, but it claims that no reasonable person could reach any other conclusion.
	Then Hunter was singled out only because he's my son.
	Yet such considerations are apparently not so compelling when he pledged previously not to pardon Hunter.
	And his son clearly broke the law.
	Now, they do point out such laws, however, are rarely enforced.
	They're on the books to help keep firearms out of the hands of those who might pose a danger to themselves or to others.
	Well, again, all of this is rank hypocrisy and corruption.
	We have known for the longest time.
	Where is the press when they talk about rule of law?
	They don't care about Burisma?
	They don't care about the massive rat line of money and corruption being sold and tied into the most corrupt country on earth?
	According to Bill Gates, he should know because he's probably...
	Probably bribed Muslims.
	By the way, talking about Bill Gates and corruption, just thought about it.
	I talked the other day about how in Nigeria, he had gone in and he had bought legal immunity with the government there.
	And also, for anybody that works for his foundation, if they live there, they don't have to pay taxes, and they have diplomatic immunity.
	Isn't that amazing?
	They can commit any kind of crime.
	They got immunity and pay no taxes.
	Well, there's a group of lawyers that had a problem with that.
	And they took it to Nigeria's Supreme Court.
	And Nigeria's Supreme Court has now put a hold on that.
	But yeah, that's the, you know, Bill Gates knows where the corrupt places are and where you can buy your way around.
	Biden casually, says the Washington Post, casually impugns investigators at the IRS and the FBI, career prosecutors, Attorney General Merrick Garland, and a federal judge in Delaware.
	Far from it for us to believe that the IRS, the FBI, Merrick Garland, or a Democrat judge in Delaware could be wrong about anything, according to the Washington Post.
	They never are.
	They said, any Democrat who refuses this week to condemn Mr. Biden's pardon will have less credibility to criticize Mr. Trump.
	Ah, this is, see, this is why I said, at the very beginning, I said, this is really good.
	This is really good because not only does it give him legal cover to pardon the January Sixers, which he doesn't need legal cover.
	He needs a spine.
	But he doesn't have one.
	So this kind of shoves up his rear end to give him a little bit of a spine, maybe, and puts pressure on him.
	You know, it's more than just giving him legal cover.
	It now puts pressure on him.
	Wait a minute.
	You know, this incredible pardon that Biden did for Hunter, and you won't do anything about these J6ers?
	I mean, he's pretty much compelled to do something about it now.
	So that's why I said I think it's really good news, and why I'm really surprised at how the MAGA media, Breitbart especially, Wants to hammer this and hammer this and hammer it as the worst thing that ever happened.
	And it's like, you're just undermining the argument to pardon the J6ers is all you're doing.
	And you're doing it for partisan political gain.
	You're doing it because you want to own the Democrats.
	You want to own the leftist press.
	They don't care about principles.
	It's simply their partisan fighting.
	That's all Breitbart and these places like that are about anymore.
	So, Washington Post says this pardon will have less credibility.
	Now, if you don't criticize Biden's pardon, you'll have less credibility to criticize Mr. Trump and his meddling at the Justice Department and his choices for key positions in the agency.
	No one should be surprised if Mr. Trump invokes the Hunter Biden pardon to justify clemency for many more of the allies, potentially including January the 6th insurrectionists.
	But again, what did they do?
	What did they do?
	You know, Pat Cipollone is said to have been the one who was advising Trump not to pardon, not to issue a blanket pardon for all non-violent J6 protesters.
	Now, Pat Cipollone is a lawyer.
	Has he never read the First Amendment?
	No.
	Does he not understand that we have a right to peacefully assemble and to redress our grievances?
	The non-violent protesters on January the 6th were there, peacefully, non-violent, peacefully assembled to redress their grievances.
	How is that a crime?
	It doesn't say anything in the First Amendment about, and they can't go too near the Capitol building.
	And even if the capitol building is open and there's police guards telling, come on in.
	You can't do that either.
	That's a crime.
	And so, what was Pat Cipollone, the lawyer, advising Trump?
	Was he explaining to him how the First Amendment doesn't really mean what the First Amendment says?
	Is that what he...
	Well, Mr. Trump, I know that you've read the First Amendment and you're a strong constitutionalist.
	But that whole thing about peacefully assembling and regressing grievances, that doesn't apply here.
	Now, Pat Cipollone was telling Trump, as your personal lawyer, I'm telling you this is...
	I wasn't there, but I can tell you without having been there, that what Pat Cipollone was saying is...
	Mr. President, they're going to come after you.
	They're going to make you the focus of all this stuff.
	If you pardon these January the Sixers, you don't want to do that.
	Let them twist in the wind.
	That's what Pat Cipollone was saying.
	And that's the advice that Trump took.
	He was his personal lawyer.
	He says, you don't want this fight.
	Just let them go.
	You entrapped them there.
	If this even happened.
	I mean, this probably worked out long in advance.
	I knew it was happening.
	A lot of people knew it was happening.
	Quite frankly, Alex Jones, Roger Stone knew this was going to happen as well.
	They profited off of it just like Donald Trump did.
	They don't care about these people.
	They rip off their own supporters and trap them and do nothing when they go to jail.
	And a lot of people say, well, you know, Alex is all about the January the Sixers now.
	Well, go back and look at how he treated his one employee who acted as a real journalist on that day.
	I had Sam on.
	He was running for office.
	And I had him on.
	And...
	Everybody else that was there on that day acted as they typically do with Alex Jones.
	He would always take everybody out of the office.
	He'd leave one person behind, basically, as a feat.
	But he'd have everybody around him.
	So it looks like everywhere he's going, he's got a big press scrum, like he's somebody important.
	And it was his own people.
	And that's what they were doing on January the 6th, except for Sam.
	And Sam Montoya went in to the, peacefully went in, exercising not only his right to protest.
	They said, well, you shouted yay or whatever when you went in there.
	Well, that's a protest, right?
	He has that right to free speech.
	He also has a right to freedom of press.
	He's covering a major news event.
	Now, he did not go to prison, but he came very close to it.
	And he was under house arrest for quite some time.
	And I guess they decided not to press that.
	Now, Alex is going to defend him, he said, publicly.
	What Alex did was fire him.
	Let him twist in the wind.
	I'm telling you, I've seen it.
	I've seen what this is all about.
	I've seen what these people are like.
	Junior Barner.
	They set the precedent for discernment toward our government on January the 6th to make people scared to speak out.
	That's right.
	That's why I believe he'll do nothing.
	These poor people will rot in jail.
	Well, that's why I think this is good.
	This is an unexpected thing.
	I think it's going to press his hand on this.
	We'll see.
	High Boost.
	I'll be honest, I would like to see how many protesters are still in jail or have already served their sentences.
	Well, I can tell you that, like I said before about Joe Biggs, who I worked with at InfoWars as well, he's looking at decades in jail.
	I think it's 17 years.
	They wanted 34 years.
	They got like 17 or something.
	And the Department of Injustice is saying, well, we want to appeal that sentencing.
	We don't think that's enough.
	We want more.
	And Joe Biggs didn't do anything other than walk in, smiling and laughing.
	There's lots of pictures of him doing that.
	They circled that with the congressional hearings and said, look, there's Joe Biggs.
	It's like, what's he doing?
	He's walking.
	He's walking.
	Part of a protest.
	He's not even carrying a sign.
	I didn't see any pictures of him shouting at anybody.
	Certainly no pictures of him violent.
	And as I said before, if Joe was violent, if they had any footage of him, they have cameras everywhere, they would have shown that because they were targeting him.
	Oh, he's Proud Boys and all the rest of this stuff.
	So anyway, he's in for decades.
	I hope he gets pardoned.
	But...
	You know, it's interesting to see, you know, we'll have to stay tuned and see what happens.
	But it's interesting to see Fetterman.
	Fetterman continues to surprise me with the things he says.
	Fetterman says Trump should be pardoned.
	He said the New York City case was politically motivated.
	He said this on The View.
	You can imagine Joy Behar having an aneurysm over that, right?
	But no, we'll have to see what happens with the pardons, with Biden, for example, before he leaves.
	There's a lot of talk about him pardoning his brother.
	There's talk about him pardoning himself.
	There's talk about him, rumors about, well, maybe all these people that Trump has criticized, maybe he'll pardon them.
	Maybe they're on his enemies list.
	And maybe he'll pardon them in advance.
	Well, Fetterman says, pardon Trump.
	So that was yesterday on The View.
	Joy Behar said, President Biden's decision to pardon his son Hunter is facing bipartisan backlash.
	Even the Democrats are all over it.
	But what do you think?
	Is it much ado about nothing?
	Is it his son?
	It is his son, after all.
	And people do have sympathy for that.
	But a lot of people are angry with him about that.
	What do you say?
	Fetterman said, I think it's undeniable that the case against Hunter Biden was really politically motivated, but I also think that it's true that the trial in New York for Trump, that was political as well.
	I even looked at the clip of this.
	I could just imagine Joy Behar's face.
	In both cases, I think a pardon is appropriate.
	And I really think, collectively, America's confidence in these kinds of institutions has been damaged by these kinds of cases.
	Really?
	Really?
	Didn't damage my confidence.
	I had no confidence in the Department of Justice or the FBI for decades.
	He said, we cannot allow these kinds of institutions to be weaponized against our political opponents.
	It's very clear both trials are politically motivated, weaponized on the other side.
	It's very clear that we've never had this kind of weaponization as we've seen in the Biden administration.
	And if we continue to go down this path, We're going to be a country that's like, I don't know, Ukraine, where the losing guy goes to jail, jailed by his winning opponent.
	You want to be like corrupt Ukraine?
	Well, the Democrats do.
	The Democrats are joined at the hip with Ukraine.
	The entire DNC, Hillary Clinton, Obama, Biden, they are joined with this corrupt regime in Ukraine.
	And they act just like them.
	Behar said, well, they'll say that about the J6 people, too, though, right?
	That's what they're going to say on the other side.
	That that is weaponized also.
	Because she knows it is.
	And so does Vetterman.
	Here's where he reverts back to what you would expect a Democrat senator to say.
	He said, no, no, no, I'm not referring to that.
	I'm talking about the New York trial.
	And now the Democrats on our side.
	And there were some that were gleeful now that he is a convicted felon and those things.
	And now for our party, we were talking about criminal justice and we are now talking about second chances.
	And now all of a sudden you're like, well, he's a convicted felon and all these things.
	Now clearly again, both of those trials, 101 and the trial in New York for Trump, that was clearly those politically motivated and those kinds of changes would never have been brought unless one side could realize that they could weaponize that.
	Yeah.
	Well, we're going to take a break, and when we come back, we're going to talk about Kash Patel.
	And, again, when you look at the fact that Trump—how in the world can you push this off even on a lawyer like Pat Cipollone if that is going to be the way they're going to do this?
	Well, my lawyer told me that I couldn't pardon nonviolent protesters— Can you not read?
	You know, supposedly, in the Trump Bible, you know, we have the King James Bible that he had there, and he puts the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and things like that in there.
	And I said, when he came out with that Bible, I said, it's a collection of works that Trump has never read.
	From the Bible, to the Constitution, to the Bill of Rights, he's never read any of these things.
	Has no interest in reading any of these things.
	sayings.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	Well, S.A. Miller123, thank you very much for the tip.
	And this is very important.
	I was not aware of this.
	Thank you for letting me know.
	He says, David Thomas Massey brought Bill H.R. 8421 to committee.
	It needs to be brought to the floor for a vote in order to end the Federal Reserve.
	Everyone call 202-224-3121.
	202-224-3121.
	Light up the switchboard, folks.
	They really do listen to this kind of stuff.
	I've said many times.
	Going back to the late 80s, early 90s, the completely Democrat-controlled state government in North Carolina decided that they were going to outlaw homeschooling at the insistence of the teachers' union.
	And the few homeschoolers that were homeschooling in the late 80s and early 90s all got active and contacted everybody.
	And, I mean, there weren't that many of them.
	But people don't typically say anything.
	And so, just speaking up, that really does magnify your voice.
	You know, voting doesn't mean anything, folks.
	It really doesn't.
	You're going to be one out of millions.
	But if you actually call or write about something, you are, you know, because so few people actually call about something, In their minds, you know, each of your letters or phone calls represents thousands of people who are really angry about something.
	Because they expect that, you know, only going to be one in a thousand or less that are going to contact them.
	So it's like, if I'm getting this many letters, there's got to be a lot of really angry people out there.
	And there weren't enough homeschoolers to make any difference, but we shut that down.
	Democrats beholden to the teachers unions, the national teachers unions, and they backed off of homeschooling.
	So it's very, very important.
	Very important.
	Well, we'll talk about Kash Patel, but just before we do, they keep insisting...
	That they don't idolize Trump.
	And yet there's going to be a massive fight, fight, fight statue going to be under construction.
	It's a couple of stories high, two stories high.
	Bronze statue of President Trump in the iconic pose that he struck.
	Just on the spur of the moment, sure, nothing was planned.
	Surviving the assassination attempt in Pennsylvania earlier this year.
	It's going to be funded by cryptocurrency investors.
	Associated with Dollar Patriot.
	Yeah, you know, they're making a lot of money with the crypto stuff, and we'll talk about that coming up.
	They are incredibly grateful to Trump for what he's doing.
	He is their hero.
	He is even harder working to defend crypto than Biden and Elizabeth Warren and all the people of that ilk were working to shut it down.
	And I think it should be defended.
	My only concern is I think they're going to go the other direction.
	And I'm absolutely certain, especially when you look at Trump's pick for the SEC, this is a guy who has a long, long history of tokenization.
	And this tokenization thing is how they do the great steel.
	The tokenization thing and the private-public outsourcing of tyranny, the outsourcing of CBDC, is what I'm really concerned about.
	Especially when you look at the background of people like Lucky Lutnik and others like that.
	I think that they're setting up a...
	They're not just defending Bitcoin, and they're not just defending cryptocurrency freedoms, which they should.
	They're going to redirect everything.
	And see, this is what Trump did in the first term.
	They used this New York Democrat...
	to get people's support and had him enact the globalist agenda in 2020 as he had established himself as an anti-globalist everybody oh he's the most he is the polar opposite of klaus schwab except he was there with klaus schwab just before he ran this scam And he did everything that everybody else did.
	As a matter of fact, he created the vaccine.
	That's what I'm saying.
	He lays the precedents.
	He creates the vaccines.
	He creates the, I think, what's going to happen in this next term.
	He's going to create the tokenization methods and other things like that that will be used to create a de facto CBDC. And as Aaron Day was saying the other day, we really already do have that, essentially, as a de facto.
	And now you've got the banks, you've got MasterCard, all the rest of them working, and the people that Trump is putting in.
	It's going to be this massive redirection.
	Before the election, they were saying the Five Eyes Countries, I get them interchanged.
	I mean, the CIA calls itself the company all the time, and it really is a for-profit concern.
	But these spy agencies, basically the U.S. and U.K., but they also have Canada, Australia, New Zealand.
	They realize, because they're looking at people's social media, they're looking at the news, they realize that everybody was on to this CBDC thing, and so they're not going to come at people directly, like the Democrats.
	They're going to say, okay...
	Not going to do a CBDC. And then they'll do it de facto.
	They'll outsource the tyranny.
	Public-private partnership.
	That's what's coming.
	That's what concerns me about all this stuff.
	These crypto bros.
	Anyway, this guy says, I've sculpted and cast 400 life-size or larger bronze statutes.
	Statues?
	Statutes.
	Yeah, that's what we need is some...
	I think we need some bronze statutes because they're harder to break.
	That's what you need for the Republicans and Democrats.
	Statutes that they can't break.
	Now, these are bronze statues across America, and the Patriot statue is our largest single figure to date.
	And people doing this article at Zero Hedge says, President Trump deserves a statue.
	Every idol does.
	And I wonder if his will have feet of clay like Daniel's.
	I know Trump has feet of clay in real life.
	It's kind of scary how naive people are, isn't it?
	You know, even the Trump cabinet people are looking at this and saying, well, you know, people are just too stupid and naive to be able to handle TikTok.
	It's pretty easy.
	You don't even put it on your phone.
	You don't bother with that kind of stuff.
	But no, we've got to protect people from TikTok.
	And so there's a big debate as to whether or not TikTok needs to be banned.
	And there was an article by NBC looking at the various people that Trump has talked about putting in his cabinet.
	And it is very telling how little respect there is for the First Amendment.
	No wonder they let the January Sixers go to jail.
	These people around Trump have absolutely no respect for the First Amendment.
	That's really what TikTok is.
	It's like saying, yeah, we know there's going to be a lot of stupid people out there.
	We know there's a lot of gullible people out there.
	We know there's a lot of people who fall for anything.
	I mean, President Trump is president.
	That's proof right there.
	But, you know, instead, Trump acknowledged in March that he believes TikTok is a national security threat, he said.
	But he said a ban would double business for Metta's Facebook, which he calls the enemy of the people.
	So, in other words, he opposed the ban, kind of, only because he didn't want to help Facebook.
	Not because it was against free speech.
	He doesn't care about that.
	It's just about, who are my friends and enemies?
	In June, Trump started his own TikTok account, which now has over 14.6 million followers, the most of any U.S. politician.
	Although he hasn't posted since Election Day, in a Truth Social post in September, he said he would, quote, save TikTok in America, unquote, if elected.
	If Trump sticks to his word, he could be TikTok's best chance to avoid a ban, but that's not a sure thing.
	Most of Trump's cabinet and other administration picks who have spoken about TikTok have strongly encouraged a ban.
	In his goals outlined for the FCC Project 2025, Trump's choice for the FCC chair, Brendan Carr.
	So he wrote goals.
	For the FCC, they're part of Project 25, and now Trump has picked him to run the FCC. He wrote that one of his main priorities is reining in big tech, including banning TikTok.
	During his campaign, Trump disavowed Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation's project.
	But...
	At least three of his staff picks contributed or wrote sections of Project 2025. In the foreword to Project 2025, Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts writes that TikTok and other social media platforms, quote, are specifically designed to create the digital dependencies that fuel mental illness and anxiety.
	I think we can say the same thing about government, especially today.
	So let's begin by banning government.
	And then we can get around to TikTok, okay?
	But yeah, it's government that is there to fuel dependencies.
	He says also to fray children's bonds with their parents and siblings.
	Well, again, as I said about the ban in Australia, first of all, it's a backdoor to digital ID. That's what that's really about.
	But yes, social media is very harmful.
	It's not good for adults.
	It's not good for kids.
	If you're a parent, it's your job, not the government's job, to protect your children from harm.
	And part of protecting them from harm is keeping them away from social media and away from government schools.
	Both of them will destroy your children Mentally, spiritually, and perhaps even physically.
	We'll talk about that, the arguments in the Supreme Court.
	It's your job as a parent.
	Don't create a nanny state.
	Do your job as a parent.
	Protect your child.
	That's your job.
	What's the matter with people today?
	And when I saw this debate about all this stuff in Australia, it's like, well, we need to have the government doing it because I just can't control my kids.
	It's like, take the phone out of their hand.
	Do they have the money to pay for the phone and pay for phone service?
	Are you doing that?
	You're the one putting the phone in their hand.
	Anyway, federal policy cannot allow the industrial-scale child abuse to continue, says Heritage Foundation.
	If only the Heritage Foundation would say that about government schools.
	Heritage Foundation has not supported free speech.
	Going back to 2018, August 6th, when all of us at Infowars got banned or shadow banned.
	I was banned everywhere.
	You know, YouTube, Facebook, everything.
	Except on Twitter.
	And I was shadow banned on Twitter.
	I haven't been since then.
	So I've been fixed right there.
	Nobody sees anything, you know.
	But...
	Shortly after that, Trump held a Rose Garden party, and they were going to talk about free speech, but he didn't invite any of us that were banned.
	Not that I wanted to go.
	I mean, I certainly was not high-profile enough to get invited to that.
	But still, if you want to have people that are going to be there to talk about it, you at least invite maybe Alex, who got banned with this stuff.
	But they had the Heritage Foundation, Cato Institute, and they were saying, well, corporations can do whatever they want.
	Corporations have rights.
	No, they don't.
	They have privileges.
	They are creatures of the government.
	The government created them, gave them privileges to exist.
	And the government can control them.
	Human beings are created by God.
	Human beings have rights.
	That's the Declaration of Independence.
	Heritage doesn't care about that heritage.
	The heritage of the Declaration of Independence.
	The heritage of the rest of the stuff.
	And neither did Cato Institute.
	All they care about is sucking up to their corporate donors.
	I have absolutely nothing but contempt for Heritage Foundation and Cato because they have nothing but contempt for the First Amendment, the freedom of the press, and of the public square.
	And here they are at it again, as far as I'm concerned.
	Keep supporting prohibition, right?
	It worked so well with alcohol and with drugs and with guns and everything else that they prohibit.
	It always works, doesn't it?
	You don't like guns.
	Oh, well, you just prohibited them.
	We're done now, right?
	No, that never works.
	So, Trump's pick for the head of the CIA, John Ratcliffe, another author of Project 2025, said TikTok is a national security threat, he said on Fox in 2022. Again, these are the people who are going to bring us digital IDs and CBDC stuff through the back door.
	People don't realize what these people are about.
	That's why they've been selected for a second term.
	So politicians on both sides of the aisle have also referred to TikTok as a national security threat as a way for the Chinese government to get data on Americans, while its proponents have argued that such data is accessible with or without TikTok.
	It's easier if you're running the social media program.
	It is easier to get data on them.
	However, anybody can scrape this stuff.
	How many times have we seen government agencies hectoring people in the UK, for example, or employers hectoring people because of something that they posted on social media?
	Anybody can scrape that stuff.
	You don't think that foreign governments like China can do that to Twitter and to other places?
	Of course they can.
	How stupid and naive.
	Sebastian Gorka, Newsmax host, incoming deputy assistant to the president, described TikTok as a CCP instrument.
	Chinese Communist Party.
	Tulsi Gabbard.
	And RFK Jr. take a different approach.
	They have both publicly criticized legislation that would force the sale of TikTok or lead to a U.S. ban.
	RFK Jr. wrote in April, he said, Don't be fooled.
	The TikTok ban is not about China harvesting your data.
	That is a smokescreen.
	Congress and the administration don't understand that TikTok is an entrepreneurial platform for thousands of American young people.
	The company isn't even majority Chinese-owned, he said.
	There seems to be some disagreement about that.
	Some people say it is.
	Some people say it isn't.
	In this article, I haven't investigated it.
	I really don't care.
	It's your decision, you know, whether you want to use this or not.
	If we're going to say that we've got to keep people safe, so we've got to take away their liberty, that's what our government has been selling you about every issue.
	I've got to keep you safe.
	Give up your liberty.
	What did Benjamin Franklin say?
	Those who surrender essential liberty for the promise of security deserve neither.
	And history has shown us that they get neither.
	You don't get security.
	You don't get more safe and secure when you give up your liberty.
	You become less safe, less secure.
	Gabbard said that she opposed the legislation to force a sale, quote, on the grounds of free speech and civil liberties, arguing that it would give the president unilateral power to declare a country a foreign adversary and to ban any app the country owned a majority stake in.
	She said maybe they're just going after the ones that they can't actually control and intimidate into doing work for them.
	RFK Jr. also spoke to TikTok users in June, calling it perverse, twisted, and unconstitutional, and characterizing it as a private property seizure and a violation of free speech.
	I agree with him.
	He says, I have an account on TikTok.
	It's important for me to be able to communicate with people on TikTok.
	There's a lot of content on TikTok that I disagree with, but that's what democracy is about.
	You know, people would use that argument against Gab, for example.
	Look, there's a lot of neo-Nazis out there, you know, hateful speech and all this.
	Well, that's what you have, and that's a hallmark of a free speech platform.
	You're going to have lots of speech that you don't like.
	Bad people are free to speak when you have free speech.
	And the answer to bad speech...
	You oppose it.
	Don't try to get the government to shut down your opponents.
	Mehmet Oz.
	Uses the platform's TikTok shop feature to earn commissions on health and wellness products that he advertises from the company that he advises.
	Vivek Ramaswamy flip-flopped on TikTok when he ran his own presidential campaign in 2023. In between two Iowa campaign stops, he went from calling TikTok, quote, digital fentanyl, unquote, to joining it At the advice of Jake Paul, the controversial boxer and YouTube star.
	He had a road to the campaign stop experience, I guess, instead of Damascus.
	Just had this epiphany.
	Oh, I should join it.
	He says, in retrospect, it was a little bit of an old-fashioned decision to say that there's an entire mode of communicating with young people that I was going to turn off.
	Yeah.
	Why bake the snake?
	He'll do anything.
	Musk opposes a ban, even though TikTok is a competitor.
	He says, in my opinion, TikTok should not be banned in the U.S., even though such a ban may benefit the X platform.
	Because, again, that's going to establish a precedent where people are going to ban X everywhere.
	He said, doing so would be contrary to freedom of speech and expression.
	It's not what America stands for.
	Trump's incoming national security advisor, Michael Waltz, voted in support of the bill to force a sale of TikTok and advocated for a ban.
	In February, after Biden's campaign joined TikTok, Waltz told Fox News the campaign should be ashamed.
	Yet, President Trump later joined.
	And he didn't criticize President Trump for doing that.
	Isn't that interesting?
	All these people, all these Trump sycophants and Breitbart and all the rest, they won't criticize Trump for doing the same thing that everybody else does that they criticize.
	It's just like when he goes to Davos and you got, there was a lot of criticism for the governors of Virginia and Georgia, Youngkin and Kemp.
	They went to Davos.
	They said, look at that.
	These guys, you know, they're globalists.
	Yeah, okay.
	But when Trump does it, he's not a globalist.
	And what did all three of them say?
	Trump, as well as these two governors that they label as globalists, say, well, I'm just going there to get jobs for people.
	I'm going to bring jobs home to my country or my state or whatever.
	Yeah, right.
	Yeah, right.
	No, you're interviewing for a job.
	Wall said, the ban is long overdue.
	We should not allow our greatest adversary to access 150 million Americans and their data.
	He asked, why is it okay to ban TikTok on all government devices?
	Because it's essentially a spyware tool.
	But it's okay to have it on our kids' phones, monitoring everything they look at?
	Well, first of all, the government phones belong to you, I mean to the government, and they can do whatever they want.
	And why are government workers using TikTok at work anyway?
	Unofficial phones.
	I mean, I would ban all social media for all government employees.
	They should not be on social media while they're on the job, just as an employer.
	But secondly, they're not your kids.
	That's the answer, Mike.
	They're not your kids.
	And so, they're not your kids.
	They're not your phones.
	It's none of your business.
	That's the bottom line.
	And I would urge parents...
	Look, I don't advocate...
	I'm not on TikTok.
	I don't advocate that.
	Just like I don't advocate any of these drugs that they ban.
	But the government prohibition programs have always failed to accomplish the intended thing.
	And it always just creates a more weaponized version of it.
	Marco Rubio has been advocating against TikTok since the company first merged with the app Musical.ly in 2019. He co-introduced legislation to ban TikTok, so he's at the forefront of this.
	But he said he would defer to Trump on this.
	Yeah, we'll see.
	What a snake that guy is.
	Christy Noem.
	Doug Burgum.
	Both banned TikTok from state-owned devices.
	Well, that's a very different thing.
	Again, why would you have people playing with social media at work?
	Trump's choice for Surgeon General.
	The Branch Covidian member.
	Dr. Jeanette Nshaywat.
	Remember how horrible she is?
	Well, she has personally advocated for ban, not just for TikTok, but for all social media.
	She is the kind of person who wants to bring in a digital ID in the back door.
	But let's talk a little bit about Cash Patel.
	And this is the new pick for FBI director.
	Cash Patel is somebody that was very useful to Trump in terms of exposing the political persecution of Russiagate.
	He has said many good things about how the FBI needs to have its wings clipped.
	But as I showed last week, somebody put up a meme, the ring, and inside of it says FBI. And then they say, throw it into the fire.
	And then they get a picture of Kash Patel.
	I think I can fix it.
	I think I can use that.
	And that's the real issue.
	If he's really against the FBI, is he...
	Is he clueless enough to think that these problems with the FBI are a recent thing?
	That's what you see from most of the conservative and MAGA media and MAGA supporters.
	They think the FBI was always great back when J. Edgar Hoover was running it.
	And when he was creating propaganda films like the FBI with Ephraim Zimbalist Jr. Remember that?
	That was all produced by J. Edgar Hoover.
	I mean, it was pure propaganda to make him look like heroes.
	And yet, the reality of it was that decades before even, you had Truman saying that the FBI is trending towards a Gestapo.
	You had Richard Nixon saying, J. Edgar Hoover's got files on everybody to blackmail everybody.
	It's been corrupt because that's who J. Edgar Hoover was.
	His name is on the building.
	His values are in the institution.
	So, he's correctly identified the corruption.
	But I'm concerned that Kash Patel basically wants to use, it's not like, well, I'm going to fix this thing and then he gets caught up with the power.
	I think he wants to use it to come for partisan purposes, to come after Trump's enemies.
	I'm not convinced.
	That he wants a rule of law.
	I think they want to weaponize the FBI for their own purposes.
	That's just, we'll have to see.
	That's my feeling coming into it.
	But there's other real concerns.
	And again, it comes back to free speech.
	Patel has been open about what kind of changes he'd like to pursue.
	He's proposed reducing the FBI's footprint in Washington, dramatically limiting its authority.
	All those are good.
	He hopes to curb the power of the Justice Department's civil division and to jettison a Pentagon office that produces classified assessments of long-term risks and trends, arguing that it is just a tool of the deep state.
	And I think that this is probably the organization that he identified as being most associated with this Russiagate nonsense.
	But he has also said he intends to aggressively hunt down government officials who leak information to reporters and to change law to make it easier to sue journalists.
	Oh, okay.
	So, he's going to be the Gestapo to enforce secrecy for the Trump administration and to come after the free press.
	Yeah.
	See, all of this looks like he wants to continue to use the FBI as a weapon, but for their purposes against their enemies.
	In 2021, when Trump floated Patel for deputy director of the CIA or the FBI... Former Attorney General William Barr said that would happen, quote, over my dead body.
	And so that is taken by many people say, well, if William Barr doesn't like him, then that means that he's good.
	No, it doesn't.
	He can still be awful and still be hated by William Barr for different reasons.
	Former FBI Director, Deputy Director Andrew McCabe said, Said that no part of the FBI would be safe with Patel in leadership position.
	So Zero Hedge is looking at this and saying, this is great, you know.
	Not necessarily.
	In response, Patel said, those calling me a danger, let's just ask them for proof, a piece of evidence that actually shows I've committed any constitutional violations or any ethical quandaries, and I'd love to hear their response to this.
	In other words, prove it.
	Well, it's not that.
	It's this penchant that looks like he wants to go after the press for false information.
	Who would determine what is false information?
	Well, of course he would, I guess, or President Trump would.
	That's the way all censors operate.
	I only want to come after the people that are telling lies.
	Yes, we're going to come after people in the media who lied to American citizens, he said.
	Those who helped Biden rig presidential elections, we're going to come after you.
	Whether it is criminally or civilly, we'll figure that out.
	Yep, there it is.
	Right there.
	That's the issue.
	That, I think, is going to be the crux of the hearings, and rightfully so.
	He's now tried to walk that back.
	But just think about what the Democrats would do with that precedent.
	When Trump decided that he could ban whatever guns or attachments that he decided that he wanted to ban, immediately Lala Harris said, well, when I become president, when I grow up and become president, I will give Congress 100 days to pass my list of gun control stuff, and if they won't do it, I'll do it by executive order.
	And if you're going to go out there and say we're going to persecute people in the press, I mean, haven't we seen enough of this already?
	Isn't the shadow banning and the canceling and economic canceling, all the rest of this, that many of us have experienced at the behest of the Trump and Biden administration, isn't that enough?
	Do we want to do this in a more overt way?
	Do we want to bring the FBI in and do it directly now?
	Instead of supporting free speech, they're supporting more of this type of thing.
	And so, now, he is trying to pull that back somewhat.
	He once said that he would come after journalists, he said.
	Now he's hanging over his confirmation.
	And where did he say that?
	He said that when he went on with Steve Bannon in 2023. He goes on with this guy who is this belligerent blowhard threatening everybody, doing the Alex Jones shtick, Steve Bannon.
	And he starts talking like Steve Bannon.
	So hopefully that's all that it is.
	Maybe the guy is not really a wannabe censor tyrant.
	But he said, again, we're going to come after the people in the media who lied to American citizens about Biden.
	You're going to prosecute people for saying things in a political environment campaign that you don't agree with?
	Criminally or civilly, we'll figure that out, he said.
	So the question is whether he'll really come after journalists.
	It's troubling both sides of the aisle, likely to become the central point of contention for his Senate confirmation.
	But again, you know, it's part of the shtick that Steve Bannon does.
	It's something Megyn Kelly does now.
	You know, oh, I'm really tough.
	Look, I can use the F-word everywhere.
	And every time she uses the F-word, all the press says, look, look, she knows what she's doing.
	It's just a dog whistle.
	And Bannon knows what he's doing as well.
	In a brief interview with NBC News in February, he backed off on the tough talk that he had with Bannon.
	He seemed to suggest that he believed that his words had been blown out of proportion, adding that he had meant for his threat to apply only to people who had broken the law.
	But I basically said that we're going to use the Constitution and the courts of law to go after people criminally or civilly if they broke the law, he said.
	He accused some folks in the media of coordinating with the government to pull out a false narrative about Trump.
	Well, I read you the quote twice, what he said.
	The people who lied about Biden, you know, who helped him get a light.
	We're going to come after them.
	He says, I got a problem with that.
	I think that there should be some form of accountability.
	For what people say, in other words.
	He accused some folks in the media of coordinating with the government to put out a false narrative about Trump.
	So what if they did?
	You don't think that's always happened, Kash Patel?
	You go back and look at the founding of our country.
	One of the reasons why you've got a lot of papers that say such and such Democrat or whatever, they proudly put their political affiliation right there on the masthead of the newspaper, saying, this is who we are.
	We're Democrats, or we're this party or that party.
	And there's always been lies told about the other side.
	Reason did a good video about that a few years ago.
	They had all the insults that had been hurled at other candidates in the 1700s and early 1800s and things like that.
	And even going up to Abraham Lincoln.
	I always get it wrong.
	Travis usually corrects me.
	Something like the son of a nutmeg addict or something like that.
	The hatchet-faced son of a nutmeg addict.
	Highly partisan, highly insulting, making all kinds of claims, you know, that were completely false.
	Completely false.
	Did they try to put each other in jail for that, or did they let the people sort this out?
	I mean, you look at this most recent election, Frank Nicely, the lies that were told by this Republican Jesse Seale, who won.
	Just amazing.
	He didn't say anything about his program or his life or anything, but he lied up one side and down the other.
	Cartoonish.
	I've never seen anything else like it.
	Should Jesse Seals go to jail?
	No.
	He shouldn't go to the Tennessee Senate, but he shouldn't go to jail.
	And yet, this is kind of what he's saying.
	Well, you know, I've got a problem with the media.
	And government coordinating on a narrative.
	Well, of course they're going to coordinate on a narrative.
	You don't think Washington Post and New York Times are going to coordinate with the Democrats?
	Does he think we don't know that?
	Are we that naive that we have to have our First Amendment removed by people like Kash Patel to protect us?
	Because we can't figure this out?
	Maybe we can figure out what Kash Patel is trying to do as well.
	He said, I've got a problem with that, and I think that there should be some form of accountability for it.
	I don't know yet what that looks like.
	If you have freedom of the press, to whom are you held accountable?
	I mean, you're held accountable if you slander somebody.
	You're civilly accountable for that.
	But who does he think he is?
	Is he going to decide what is false?
	He's saying, well, this is false, and they have to be held accountable for it.
	He sounds exactly like he's a mirror image of all these people on the left, all these people at Davos.
	Well, you can't just go out there and say anything that you want.
	We have to shut down that misinformation.
	I don't care what else Cash Patel has done.
	As far as I'm concerned, this is disqualifying.
	This guy's a lawyer.
	He should know better than to use that kind of language.
	And then when he's defending himself, he only gets into it further.
	It's like the tar baby, right?
	This quote becomes like a tar baby.
	As people start to probe him on it, well, I think people ought to be accountable if they say things that are false.
	But that's not the FBI's position, you see.
	That is, if the person wants to sue them for false statements, And that has long been around.
	That is not anything that has to do with the FBI cash.
	Asked what Patel's intentions are with respect to journalists, a Trump transition spokesperson, so the nominee's focus would be trained on traditional FBI values.
	Hmm.
	Well, I have a problem with that.
	Traditional FBI values are the values of J. Edgar Hoover, of political weaponization, of coming after their political foes.
	You want to talk about weaponization?
	You just didn't see it.
	What about traditional American values?
	What about the values of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights?
	You know, when I ran for Congress, it was the election cycle, 1996. It was after 1994 where you had Newt Gingrich's contract with America.
	He had a 10-point plan.
	And he said, these are the 10 things that we want to do in America.
	And there's things like term limits and line item vetoes and things like that.
	And so the next time I ran and I said, oh, 10 points?
	I've got 10 points.
	How about this?
	My contract with America is the Bill of Rights.
	And every single one of those is being violated by the Republicans as well as the Democrats.
	And I talked about, I put out a flyer, and I talked about how each one of the Bill of Rights was being violated.
	Just a few of the examples of how each of them were being violated, because there's just too many to put into print, frankly.
	And they went on to say, besides traditional FBI values, the spokesperson said, Kash Patel is going to deliver on Trump's mandate to restore integrity to the FBI. Well, again, why don't you restore the Constitution?
	What about the values of the Constitution?
	The values of the Bill of Rights restore the integrity by following the Constitution.
	FBI values are not good enough.
	Mike Davis, a pugnacious Trump ally, former Senate GOP chief counsel for nomination, says NBC, said, Cash and I use hyperbole to force people to pay attention to our broader point.
	Sorry.
	Saying that you're going to prosecute people of the FBI for false speech?
	That's not hyperbole.
	That's balderdash.
	And so then, you know, what about the pardons?
	Well, we're going to talk about the pardons when we come back.
	Anonymous.
	Thank you for the tip.
	My best friend's sister called last night.
	Informing me she passed away Tuesday suddenly.
	Worked for the RCMP, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, who mandated the jab.
	Can't say for certain that was a cause.
	Top of my list, though, he was 50. I'm so sorry to hear that.
	So sorry to hear that.
	Sprumford.
	That creep, Noel Harari.
	This first name is not Noel.
	It's Yuval.
	Yuval, I think.
	Anyway, yeah, Harari.
	I know who you're talking about.
	World Economic Forum.
	Atheistic anti-human creep.
	He is definitely.
	Did say that in the near future, the most coveted thing by corporations will be data.
	Oh, that's already here.
	They want that data more than anything to train AI. And that's a big part of what is behind this TikTok thing.
	Owning the platform, as I said before, makes it easier for you to get the information about humans and to get more complete information about them than if you were to just scrape it off.
	And so that's part of it.
	They don't want the Chinese government to be able to profile and mimic American thinking.
	By using TikTok and feeding that into artificial intelligence.
	That's the quiet part that they don't want to say out loud because they don't want you to realize that that's the purpose of all social media.
	That's the purpose, really, of the Internet as well.
	You know, the Internet was created by a DARPA psychologist.
	The concept was created by a DARPA psychologist in the 1960s, J.C.R. Licklider.
	It only became...
	Practical in the late 1990s when the switching circuitry got up to a certain capability.
	And at that point, the CIA openly created a venture capital firm, In-Q-Tel, to help to fund these internet companies like Google and Facebook and all these other things.
	And if you look at the venture capital boards that funded all of these social media startups and search engine startups and things like that, it was filled with people from the intelligence community.
	It's not just In-Q-Tel.
	They had NSA and other intelligence community.
	They had people who were sitting on the boards of these venture capital firms.
	That was the purpose of the Internet, the purpose of social media from the very beginning.
	And now it's been taken to a whole new level with artificial intelligence.
	Octospook says banning anyone's free speech is the beginning of banning your own.
	That's right.
	Handy.
	Tick-tock.
	Tick-tock.
	What an insidious name for an eater of your most finite resource.
	Your time.
	Oh, that's good.
	I like that.
	Yeah, throw out your app and get a grandfather's clock.
	Make you appreciate the passage of time.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	All right, let's take a look at pardons real quickly here.
	Sequoia's Sean McGuire is talking about the Hunter Biden pardon.
	He says, this is a guy who owes my family $300,000 and back rent.
	Sequoia partner Sean McGuire posted on X claiming that Hunter Biden owes his family $300,000 in back rent for a Venice, California home.
	He shared this information just hours after Biden pardoned his son for crimes spanning over 11 years.
	He says, so what happens to the $300,000 plus in back pay rent that Hunter Biden owes my family from 2019 to 2020?
	Is that pardon now, Joe?
	Well, of course, this pardon was for crimes...
	Of course, he can always sue.
	This is a civil issue.
	Many people pointed that out to him as well.
	But he said it was $25,000 a month.
	For this house that he has on the canals in Venice, California.
	That's amazing.
	I mean, he's living the high life, isn't he?
	You know, because when you're raking in millions, tens of millions with your using influence peddling in Ukraine and not paying any taxes on it, I guess you would have that except he keeps that money because he's got to use it for drugs.
	He said, yep, true story.
	Hunter was our tenant in Venice, California.
	Didn't pay rent for over a year.
	Tried to pay with art made from his own feces.
	It's an absolute excrement bag.
	Indeed, he tried to pay with a book of art made from his own feces, but those aren't worth anything except when you're laundering money, he said.
	That's true.
	So...
	He said he changed the locks and he used the Secret Service to enforce it.
	And we had no access to the property.
	Well, here's the real kicker.
	Joe Biden, his dad, used the CDC to keep all landlords from being able to get paid or eject tenants or any of that kind of stuff.
	And Trump was the one who started it.
	Trump's CDC started that.
	And then continued it once while he was there.
	And then Biden just kept continuing it and continuing it and continuing it until the Supreme Court finally had enough and shut it down.
	They even lied to the Supreme Court and said, oh, we're fixing to stop that.
	And then they didn't do it.
	So then the Supreme Court came back and said, all right, now we're telling you you've got to stop it.
	But both Trump and Biden did the same type of thing.
	Use government authority to keep people from being paid.
	And, you know, you've got your own expenses.
	I don't know if this guy owns the stuff outright or if, you know, a lot of people lost their property because of that type of thing.
	So, again, starting in 2014, crackhead Hunter Biden was paid a million dollars a year by Ukraine gas giant Burisma because he was a, quote, energy expert, unquote.
	But was really a way for Ukrainian oligarchs to buy influence from Joe Biden.
	This is also the first year of his retroactive pardon by his father.
	Yeah, that's why the 10-year, 11-year period.
	So, when you look at the corruption, it is pretty much in our face.
	But it is not all that much different.
	And I thought it was interesting, as I said, on Monday when I covered it, I said, this is really good news because of January the 6th parties.
	But the conservative press wasn't about that at all.
	As a matter of fact, the Breitbart was furious with Mark Hamill, an actor, Star Wars.
	Of course, actors can have opinions as well, but who cares?
	Yeah.
	He didn't write anything about Star Wars.
	He just read what other people had written.
	He's kind of like a news presenter in that regard.
	But Mark Hamill, they said, look at this.
	He uses this as an opportunity to criticize Trump.
	And I looked at it, and what Mark Hamill said was exactly the same thing I said.
	I said, yeah, take a look at the fact that...
	Look at Trump's pardons as well.
	And look at how corrupt they were.
	And look at the fact that he pardoned Jared Kushner's dad and is now sending him as an ambassador to France.
	I said, haven't you had enough of this?
	But we're not allowed to do that, right?
	So if you use that as an opportunity to, you know, if you criticize both of these people, you're evil.
	You're evil.
	So Biden's pardon risks further erosion of confidence in the U.S. government, says Zero Edge.
	And it's like, are you kidding me?
	Who has any confidence in the U.S. government at this point anyway?
	The rule of law narrative and all the rest of this stuff.
	One person says, Charlie Sykes says, a smart person texts me, says, Joe Biden has just removed the issue of pardons from the political arena for the next four years, and Trump probably once again can't believe his own dumb luck at this point.
	And sadly, he is right.
	Yeah, well, again, that is the good thing.
	Of course, Jim's pardon is coming next month, says one person.
	Mass pardon for those that are identified as perhaps enemies of Trump.
	But I just want to read you these headlines.
	They came out on Monday from Breitbart.
	This is their reaction.
	You know, the main media has ignored the fact that it has implications for January the 6th people for a couple of days.
	And then there's a little bit of minor reporting on it, but for the most part, the conservative press, the MAGA press, just wanted to use it for partisan purposes.
	Listen to this.
	Adam Schiff in 2018, pardoning a president's son could be an effort to obstruct justice, he said.
	That's what Adam Schiff said in 2018. Speaker Mike Johnson, the Bidens damaged trust in our justice system.
	No more so than you, sir.
	That's a corrupt Speaker of the House.
	Disney star Mark Hamill, that's the one I told about, uses Joe Biden pardoning Hunter Biden to trash Trump.
	Well, what Trump did was trash.
	Trump pardoned trash.
	Pardoned one of the biggest, one of the most vile criminals.
	Again, because he got caught red-handed in a crime, and was going to be reported by his sister, He sets up his brother-in-law with a prostitute and films it and then says, I'm going to make this public if you come against me.
	Well, she did come against him.
	And he got charged for witness tampering.
	And that's the way Breitbart would be.
	Well, it's just witness tampering.
	What's the big deal with that?
	It's amazing.
	Trump, all hell to pay if hostages are not released by January the 20th.
	Oh, that's not the J6 hostages, by the way.
	He doesn't care about the Americans that he endangered and entrapped.
	This is about Israel.
	Again, Breitbart.
	All these are Breitbart.
	Jill Biden gushes over White House Christmas decor.
	And defends Hunter's pardon.
	There certainly is no defense for her Christmas decor.
	MSNBC contributor Jong Fast.
	Speechless over Biden pardoning Hunter.
	CNN's Hunig.
	Hunter Biden will tarnish Joe Biden's legacy.
	So that's all Breitbart.
	Then Zero Hedge.
	Special counsel rejects Hunter Biden's pardon, files a scathing rebuke in a court case.
	Jonathan Turley.
	Joe Biden shredded any residue of veracity and credibility as president.
	That's off the press.
	MSN. The extraordinary breadth of the Hunter Biden pardon.
	And then finally, Politico gets to what I think is the most important part.
	The thing about this, the Hunter Biden pardon gives Donald Trump powerful new political cover to pardon the J6ers.
	You know, and as I said before, it's not so much cover as it is going to force him to do something.
	People are going to say, he did this for Hunter Biden and you won't do this for the people that you entrapped yourself?
	Non-violent protesters, that is specifically protected in the First Amendment.
	Well, we're going to take a quick break, and when we come back, we're going to take a look at the arguments before the Supreme Court about mutilating children.
	There was a law that was passed in Tennessee and many other states, but Tennessee was one of the, perhaps maybe the first one.
	But for whatever reason, Tennessee is the one that is arguing this case before the Supreme Court.
	We had arguments, and some amazing things were being said about that.
	And we're going to talk about that when we come back.
	We're going to talk about that when we come back.
	We're going to talk about that when we come back.
	We're going to talk about that when we come back.
	show. - Wow.
	Well, let's talk about what was said at the Supreme Court.
	And I want to begin with comments that were made by the first tranny to argue before the Supreme Court.
	This is in the case, as I was saying before we went to break, the prohibition of giving hormones and surgery to minors because of the possibility of them not having, not the possibility, but the reality of of them not having the judgment to permanently alter their body.
	The Supreme Court on Wednesday heard arguments about whether or not Tennessee and many other states can ban transgender surgeries and hormone treatments for minors.
	And look, let's also understand, as I pointed out last week, Testicular cancer is something that they found for people who had been using this hormone therapy for quite some time of preparation before they were castrated.
	When I first saw the headline, the way it was said, you know, testicular cancer in people who are castrated.
	It's like, how does that work?
	But it's leading up to it, right?
	Years that that happened and it creates a cancer that then starts spreading throughout your body.
	Tennessee's law that I sponsored will effectively be the test case for the nation.
	So, we're very excited, said Tennessee Senate Majority Leader Jack Johnson.
	We're very excited, we're humbled, and cautiously optimistic that the Supreme Court will see it as the Sixth Circuit did.
	So, I have one in these challenges prior to this, and one in the Sixth Circuit.
	Now, this tranny lawyer, as the headline says from Todd Starnes, a bearded female ACLU attorney, Says that toddlers can be transgender.
	This person goes by the name Chase Strangio.
	I'm not kidding!
	That's the person's name.
	A bearded...
	I didn't have to make this one up.
	I had to make up Booty Gay and other things like that.
	This is Strangio.
	Strangio, a bearded woman...
	Since the circus has now been shut down, she's now working for the ACLU. I played a gig for the retirement home of the Ringling Brothers in Sarasota one year.
	Did a New Year's Eve gig for them.
	That was always highly coveted work.
	That was one strange thing.
	But now, we've got bearded women all over the place.
	Become the first openly transgender attorney to argue before the High Court Deputy Director for Transgender Justice.
	The ACLU. And here she is so you can see and hear her.
	What I would say is nobody has to provide this medication to adolescents.
	These are not doctors being forced to provide this medication.
	These are doctors who are wanting to treat their patients in the best way that they know how based on the best available evidence to us.
	And these are young people who may have known since they were two years old exactly who they are, who suffered for six, seven years before they had any relief.
	And what's happening here, it's not the kids who are consenting to this treatment, it's the parents who are consenting to the treatment.
	And as a parent, I would say, when our children are suffering, we are suffering.
	And these are parents who love their children, who are listening to the advice of their doctors, of the mainstream medical community, and doing what's right for their kids, and the state of Tennessee has displaced their judgment.
	Well, you know, remember that it was Mehmet Oz on his TV show a long, long time ago.
	Who had a kid there.
	And the mom said, yeah, the pediatrician said that he was a girl.
	You know, it's like, oh yeah, well, how did you handle this?
	This is a bipartisan thing.
	This insanity is not limited to the Democrat Party.
	And you heard her say that this is something, you know, two-year-old, and they've suffered with this for six to seven years.
	They've suffered up to the point that they're eight or nine years old, and they just have to get mutilated and sterilized.
	This is criminal.
	It's not just stupid.
	This is criminal, folks.
	And it's time we put a stop to this kind of child abuse.
	That's what they correctly did in Tennessee.
	And hopefully, when we look at what is said, it is kind of interesting.
	But this is why Vox reported it.
	Vox headline says, The Horrifying Implications.
	Of today's Supreme Court argument on trans rights.
	What don't they find horrifying about it?
	Not the fact that you are going to mutilate and sterilize these kids and driving many of them to suicide after they get this bottom surgery and it completely destroys their life.
	Yeah, you want to talk about suicide?
	The Supreme Court heard oral arguments Wednesday.
	So the case asked whether discrimination against transgender people can violate the Constitution.
	That's not about that at all.
	It's about you pedophiles and your obsession to destroy children.
	That's what this is really about.
	Chief Justice John Roberts, says Vox, for example, suggested giving the government broad authority to engage in such discrimination in the medical context, a ruling that could also have severe implications for women generally, including cisgender women.
	By that they mean normal.
	Normal.
	They tried to label normal people abnormally.
	Ketanji Brown Jackson said at one point in the argument, I'm getting kind of nervous, said Vox.
	At least four justices, Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Kavanaugh, appeared all but certain to vote to uphold Tennessee's law.
	Amy Coney Barrett, meanwhile, was a bit less direct in her questioning.
	Well, there you go.
	So, it takes five.
	Will it be Barrett?
	Will it be Gorsuch?
	Because Gorsuch didn't say anything.
	And Gorsuch has, in the past, sided with trannies.
	Amy Coney Barrett was always put out, oh, she's too much of a Christian to be on the Supreme Court.
	Remember Dianne Feinstein saying that, essentially?
	She's too Christian to be on it.
	Well, she has voted in the past to shut down churches over the Fake pandemic and all the rest of this stuff.
	Sotomayor compared trans medical treatments to aspirin.
	Yes, that's right.
	I mentioned that the other day, yesterday.
	And questioning about the side effects during oral arguments.
	Yeah, it's just like an aspirin.
	She likened the side effects of transgender medical procedures on minors to that of taking an over-the-counter painkiller.
	Every medical treatment has a risk, even taking aspirin, she said.
	There's always going to be a percentage of the population under any medical treatment that's going to suffer harm.
	I am so disgusted with this argument.
	Every time you nail these murderous pharmakia down, well, hey, anybody can have a reaction to anything, right?
	No.
	No.
	That's always their excuse.
	I mean, when you look at Cipro and the fluorochloroquins and things that injured my son, Whistler, their response to that, just like their response to autism, anybody can have a reaction to that kind of stuff.
	Well, how about if you've got millions of people who have a reaction and you don't care about it?
	What is the number that matters to you, right?
	Right?
	What is the number that matters?
	How many people have to die?
	How many people have to be disabled their entire life before you stop calling it rare?
	I think we need to stop calling it pharmaceuticals and we need to start calling it harm-a-ceuticals.
	Because that's what they're about.
	They don't care about harming you.
	All they want is money.
	And the FDA allows them to harm anybody that they wish as long as they wish.
	And all they want is money.
	Well, you know, you look at this situation up there, that insurance executive, you know, denied whatever it was, the three different things.
	It was a book about how the insurance companies are set up to not pay off.
	And when you look at the denials of claims, this insurance company that this guy who was killed with is UnitedHealth or something, they're number four.
	On the Fortune 500 list.
	And they're number one by a massive amount when it comes to denial of claims.
	About a third of the claims they deny.
	And that's about 50% more than the number two.
	Way above the average.
	So, you know, but these people think they can do anything and will do anything for money.
	They had hospitals who kill people because Trump paid them the money to do it.
	I'm disgusted with these people.
	So this is the argument she's making.
	She said, so the question in my mind is not, do policymakers decide whether one person's life is more valuable than the millions of others who get treatment, who get relief from this treatment?
	No, it's about money.
	Look, this is about money, too.
	This is a major, major new profit center for Planned Parenthood.
	Let's just be honest about what's involved here.
	That was not brought up at the Supreme Court.
	I'll bring it up, okay?
	Okay.
	That's the elephant in the room.
	These murdering depopulationists at Planned Parenthood have found a new way to make money, and the best way to do it is to gaslight children.
	That's what they want this for.
	She says, so it becomes a pure exercise of weighing benefit versus risk.
	Yeah, right.
	What benefit?
	And the question of how many minors...
	Have to have their body irreparably harmed for unproven benefits as one that is best left to the legislature, said the guy who is representing Tennessee.
	In other words, this is none of your business.
	Just like you don't have the authority to define when life begins.
	And that's the Supreme Court.
	This group of people at the Supreme Court previously said that.
	We don't have the authority to determine when life begins.
	But for 50-plus years, we had a Supreme Court succession of people who said, yeah, we do have the authority to decide when life begins.
	And we do have the authority to define marriage.
	And we do have the authority to say that children, minors, who are not given this kind of ability to make decisions, can make this decision.
	Or their parents.
	Look, if parents are harming kids, that's a legitimate reason to take the kids away.
	But we don't have CPS acting in a legitimate way.
	If they did, they would be confiscating all the kids from these parents who are trying to transition them.
	They're not.
	They're taking kids away from people who haven't done anything.
	They're taking away kids from parents who have homeschooled their kids.
	Kavanaugh and Barrett pressed both sides with tough questions.
	Gorsuch was silent, they said.
	Well, when we look at the arguments, because Sotomayor was comparing it to aspirin, Jonathan Turley had an excellent article.
	I love the title.
	Take two puberty blockers and call me in the morning.
	You're going to use an aspirin analogy?
	That's what we're talking about here.
	He said she just dismissed any medical concerns over the risks of puberty blockers, comparing it to taking aspirin.
	And oral arguments in the U.S. versus Scrimetti.
	That's the attorney general in Tennessee.
	Sotomayor pointed out that there are risks to any medical procedure or drug, again, always dismissed as rare whenever you harm somebody.
	It also highlighted how the Biden administration and liberal justices were discarding countervailing research that was inconveniently at odds with their preferred legal conclusion.
	And this is where Alito really nailed them in the questioning.
	Really nailed him.
	And including not just the Biden lawyer, but also this lawyer for the ACLU that I just played for you, the Strangio guy.
	Girl.
	Strangio girl.
	And as he pointed out, Tennessee cites studies that indicate...
	Excuse me.
	Serious complications or risk associated with the treatments for children.
	That's the issue.
	It's treatments for children.
	That's the issue here.
	So while the conservative justices acknowledged studies on both sides of the debate over risk, the liberal justices seemed to dismiss studies that were inconsistent with striking down the law as a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.
	That produced a difficult moment for Solicitor General Elizabeth Preliger when Supreme Court Justice Alito confronted her about statements made in her filing with the court.
	Alito quoted her petition to the court that claimed that there was, quote, overwhelming evidence, unquote, supporting the use of puberty blockers and hormone treatments as a safe and positive results for children.
	Again, children.
	Prove it.
	Prove it.
	By the way, whether or not it was safe and effective, right?
	Let's say that they were able to give them surgery and these kids were able to urinate properly and all the rest of the stuff the rest of their life, which they're not.
	Let's say that that was safe and effective.
	And all you did was sterilize and mutilate them, right?
	Let's say that it wasn't a mutilation.
	Let's say that they got it all right, okay?
	It actually is a mutilation.
	And let's say that the hormone blockers Don't do things like cause cancer and other stuff like that.
	The kids still don't have the maturity and their parents don't have the right to sterilize them.
	Do we support that anywhere else?
	Where else can parents decide, well, I think that I should sterilize my kids?
	Justice Alito, however, cited extensive countervailing research from European countries showing significant risks and potential harm.
	Even, even the World Health Organization Has recognized these risks and the lack of evidence supporting these procedures and researchers in Finland recently published a study showing that suicides among kids with gender dysphoria are extremely rare in contradiction to one of the most common arguments made for this treatment.
	And I've covered many times some of them high-profile celebrity trans kids.
	or have talked about it publicly wanting to commit it because of the results of these mastectomies and these other mutilations that they've had the bottom surgery as they say alito also cited the uk's cast review It was released shortly after the Biden lawyer, Preliger, had filed her statement saying that there's overwhelming evidence.
	He says, no, the Cass study found scant evidence that the benefits of transgender treatment are greater than the risks.
	And then, says Jonathan Hurturley, he delivered the haymaker.
	He said, I wonder if you would like to stand by your statement in this position, or if you think it would now be appropriate to modify that and withdraw your statement.
	In other words, you lied to this court, and we caught you on it.
	And then you had the ACLU attorney that I played for you earlier, Strangio.
	Who had previously argued that children as young as two years old can identify themselves as transgender and then suffer for six or seven years until they're eight or nine and the monsters that say that they're medical mutilate them.
	Strangio seemed to later acknowledge that very few gender dysphoric children actually go through with suicide.
	Sotomayor seemed intent on diffusing the problem.
	With the opposing scientific research in her exchange with Tennessee Solicitor General Matthew Rice, in his argument, Rice stated, quote, they cannot eliminate the risk of detransitioners.
	So it becomes a pure exercise of weighing benefits versus risk.
	And the question of how many minors have to have their bodies irreparably harmed for unproven benefits is one that is best left to the legislature.
	So he didn't just say, you have no business here.
	This is not anything that has to do with your authority.
	This is when Sotomayor then interjected, I'm sorry, counselor, but every medical treatment has a risk, even taking aspirin.
	There's always going to be a percentage of population under any medical treatment that's going to suffer harm.
	You know, it's like somebody starts a war, right?
	Well, people are going to die.
	Sorry that happened.
	Sorry we bombed that hospital.
	But, you know, things like that happen.
	It's got to be done, you know.
	You don't care.
	It's rare.
	Rare, right?
	According to studies, aspirin can have potential side effects that are largely quite mild, as he points, including these things, though.
	We're talking about irreversible double mastectomy, not like aspirin effect.
	Genital surgeries, sterilization, infertility.
	There can also be long-term effects in terms of bone growth, bone density, and other developmental areas.
	And, of course, also cancer from this hormone therapy.
	The hormone therapy that we used to use on convicted rapists that they're now using on gas-lit kids.
	The point is not that the justices should resolve this medical debate, says Turley, but that it is properly resolved elsewhere, including in the state legislative process.
	And, of course, our federal system says that not everything needs to be decided by the Supreme Court or the federal government.
	States have authority in these things.
	It could have saved 63 million-plus lives if the governors, first in Texas over the Roe v.
	Wade thing, but all the rest of the governors should have said, you've made your decision, let's see you enforce it.
	You're wrong about this, and you have no authority to define when life begins.
	I said that for a decade before Dobbs, and finally the Supreme Court said what I'd been saying all along.
	Sotomayor's aspirin analogy seemed gratuitously dismissive for many, but Reminiscent of the response to scientists who questioned COVID protocols and policies, from everything from the six-foot rule to mask efficacy.
	Well, of course, Jonathan Turley is not going to say even, you know, the Trump vaccine, because he's a Fox contributor.
	So he's not going to talk about people who questioned the vaccine.
	People who questioned even the virus.
	No, no.
	But he says, for scientists attacked and deplatformed for years, Sotomayor's statements are painfully familiar.
	The thrust of the comments from the justices were dismissive of the science supporting Tennessee and 23 states with similar laws.
	I'm sorry, that was just one justice.
	That was Sotomayor.
	No one is arguing against adults being able to opt for such treatment.
	See, that's the important thing, too.
	But such states do not want children to be subject to the treatments in light of this ongoing debate.
	We had Navy SEAL. The Navy SEAL that was pushed And put up on public, you know, by Michael Flynn in 2015. Chris, I forgot what his last name is.
	His name was Christopher, and they went by Chris.
	But they got a Navy SEAL to transition.
	And then eventually he detransitioned in the last year or two.
	And he said, if they can gaslight me, an adult, a Navy SEAL, think what they can do to the kids out there.
	And, of course, it was Michael Flynn.
	Michael Flynn.
	Look how we are checking all the DEI boxes.
	Don't talk to me about Trump being opposed to all this stuff.
	Trump and his cronies and people like Michael Flynn were pushing this from the very beginning.
	Trump pushed the tranny stuff for his beauty contests.
	Sotomayor in 2022 similarly humiliated herself during arguments over the Biden administration's VAX mandates by claiming that over 100,000 children were actively hospitalized with COVID when the real number was 3,300.
	And that itself was a lie, based on rigged PCR tests.
	The Omicron variant and denial of service, denial of treatment, I should say.
	The Omicron variant was as deadly as Delta, she said, and that COVID deaths have never been higher.
	None of that was true.
	She also described herself as a product of affirmative action.
	I think we know that.
	You're a poster child for DEI. She also argued in 2022 that anyone who is familiar with the FBI crime stats must be banned from the Capitol case juries because they would have racial bias.
	Well, then also involved in taking up the cause of mutilating children.
	Was Brown Jackson, Ketanji Brown Jackson, who President Biden selected after pledging in a corrupt backroom deal with South Carolina Representative James Clyburn to pick a black woman for the Supreme Court.
	In exchange for his endorsement, she compared the bans on child sex changes to bans on interracial marriage.
	This is from Information Liberation, by the way.
	Ketanji Brown Jackson just compared bans on sex changes for kids to bans on interracial marriage, tweeted Greg Price.
	And of course, you know, this is the woman who famously couldn't say what a woman is.
	Remember that?
	In her confirmation hearings.
	Asked by the Tennessee Senator, Marsha Blackburn, what is a woman?
	Well, I can't say.
	These people are DEI clowns.
	They're political hacks in black robes.
	The question was whether it was discriminatory because it applied to both races and it wasn't necessarily invidious or whatever.
	But, you know, as I read the statute here, excuse me, the case here, you know, the court starts off by saying that Virginia is now one of 16 states which prohibit and punish marriage on the basis of racial classifications.
	And you look at the structure of that law, And it looks in terms of, you know, you can't do something that is inconsistent with your own characteristics.
	It's sort of the same thing here.
	That's her argument.
	This is a kind of mental midget that you get with DEI politics.
	She can't even make a coherent argument.
	Everything to her is about race.
	It's all about race.
	So this must be like the law that prohibited interracial marriage.
	That's what this transing of kids is all about, isn't it, to her?
	She said it's sort of the same thing.
	So it's interesting to me that we now have this different argument, and I wonder whether Virginia could have gotten away with what they did here by just making a classification argument the way that Tennessee is in this case.
	How pathetic.
	Alito, in his questioning with his trans lawyer, you know, this guy right here.
	Nobody has to provide this.
	Strange you, right?
	So Alito says, she is there, the woman dressed like a man.
	Like Victor Victoria, confused.
	Yeah.
	She's making the argument that this has to be done to prevent suicide.
	That's the benefit here.
	These kids are going to commit suicide if we don't mutilate and sterilize them.
	So Alito says, well, you know, the Cass report finds no evidence that gender-affirmative treatments reduce suicide.
	In other words, prove it.
	Strangio, that person there, says there is no evidence in those studies that the treatment reduces completed suicide.
	Yes.
	But there are multiple studies that do show that there is a reduction in suicidality.
	In other words, ideation of suicide.
	I don't think so.
	Prove that.
	Prove that.
	And, you know, to assert that somebody is maybe thinking about it.
	Give me a break.
	Lest anyone forget, right, it's information liberation.
	Justice Gorsuch and John Roberts poured oil on the fire of this trans insanity by ruling in 2020 that transgenders must be considered a protected class under the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
	This case would have not even been brought if Roberts and Gorsuch hadn't done that.
	But now this is about children.
	This is not even about the alphabet mafia.
	This is about children.
	Gorsuch was silent during arguments Wednesday.
	Didn't ask a single question during the roughly two and a half hour long proceedings.
	Well, the attacks on children just keep coming, and there was a shooting of a couple of very young children at a Christian school yesterday.
	We're going to talk about that, as well as these seminaries of Satan that we call school.
	When we come back, we'll be right back.
	Thank you.
	Well, we have Brandon Bennett.
	Thank you very much for the tip.
	He writes, Glory to Jesus Christ.
	Amen.
	Dougalug, thank you for the tip, says I'll second that.
	I appreciate that.
	Wright Overture said, We live in a generation that thinks plastic surgery is normal, reversing pregnancy is normal, so why wouldn't some think that mutilation isn't also normal?
	Very good point.
	Well, let's talk a little bit about what is happening in terms of Persecution and attacks, especially starting with attacks on children.
	Because let's understand this whole trans kids thing.
	It's a direct attack on children.
	This is an institutionalized attack on children.
	This is gender gaslighting, trying to separate the kids out away from the parents and then harm them.
	Classic pedophile tactics.
	But this is a more direct attack.
	This is a gunman who in a Christian school in California targeted this school, shot two children.
	And this was a religiously motivated attack as well.
	And these two kids, as I looked up their condition today, are still in a very critical condition.
	An attack that was apparently motivated by the school's religious affiliation.
	This man met with school officials at the Feather River Adventist School in Butte County, California, with a stated desire of enrolling a family member before he opened fire and shot two children.
	The two children, kindergartners, are in extremely critical condition, said the sheriff.
	We have received some information that leads us to believe that the subject responsible for the shooting targeted this school because of its affiliation with the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
	Had had a bad experience with it.
	They've now, today, what they've given is more information about the guy.
	He's 56 years old.
	He had attended an Adventist school, church school as a child.
	And very much like this tranny shooter in Nashville, was angry about it for whatever reason and decided that they would attack people that didn't have anything to do with their experience.
	Especially the children.
	I don't understand.
	There hasn't been much detail in terms of what actually happened with us.
	Again, he meets with somebody.
	He says, I'm thinking about, I've got some kids.
	I want to send to this school.
	Let me talk to you about it.
	They said the meeting was very cordial.
	There wasn't anything about the meeting.
	They gave rise to concerns about the administrator.
	So again, I guess as he's leaving, he pulls out a gun and shoots a couple of kids.
	And there wasn't anybody there that stopped him.
	He didn't shoot any teachers or administrators.
	He basically was able to leave and then committed suicide.
	Really strange.
	So, the school is K-8.
	According to its website, it says the Feather River Adventist School exists to show children Jesus, to nurture their love for him and others, to teach them to think, to empower them to serve, said its website.
	It only has 33 students.
	So yeah, please keep these children in your prayers.
	It is truly amazing.
	Show the picture of this one little boy.
	What a beautiful little kid, Elias, five years old.
	This monster shot this child in the chest and the abdomen.
	Shot him twice.
	Again, it is a demonic attack.
	It really is.
	To project any bad experience, and that's another victim right there who is a year older, six years old.
	But the first one, Elias, there's a GoFundMe page that was posted by his grandparents.
	That's how we know the details about that.
	They said the bullet went through his chest and abdomen.
	Piercing and nicking multiple organs before exiting, said his grandparents.
	They said he was airlifted to the hospital where he underwent emergency surgery to stop the bleeding.
	He's currently sedated and on a ventilator.
	Awaiting additional surgery, though, in critical condition, he is stable at the moment.
	Then the other one, Roman, is a six-year-old with a twin brother.
	That's why you see right there the two twins.
	I'm not sure which one is Roman.
	But was also struck and is in critical but stable condition.
	His recent surgeries have been successful, but he still has more to come and a challenging recovery ahead.
	head, so please keep them in your prayers.
	You know, there's a lot of persecution that is ramping up in this country.
	And a lot of it is coming from a disregard for the First Amendment.
	Free speech, disagreement of people, the intolerance for anybody who says something that you don't like, that you think is wrong, whether or not it is wrong.
	But when you look at what ex-Muslims face in many countries, this is an article from Faithwire.
	Talking about ex-Muslims in Iraq and what they face after becoming Christians.
	Ex-Muslims in Iraq who convert to Christianity face consequences that could range from beatings to kidnappings, even to death.
	Is this going to come to Western countries?
	Well, the Muslims are coming to Western countries.
	We have, you know, the most popular name in the UK now is Mohammed.
	The Great Replacement is there.
	And a lot of the people that are coming as replacements...
	Are the ones who are doing this kind of stuff in Iraq?
	It all really depends on the level of fundamentalism.
	So the person they talked to, this was an organization that looks at open doors is what it's called.
	They look at Christian persecution.
	They said, so that's really just the broad gauge.
	It's a very fundamentalist family, if it is.
	It can be very typical of what you're going to be, that you're going to be kidnapped and beaten.
	And that would probably be the lowest level, the lowest response.
	And he says, it's hard for Westerners to understand, but these beatings, I think, are typically done by the family.
	He said, and then you would be tortured, and it could go up to weeks of torture, even murder.
	And the kidnapping, the beating, the torturing, the murder, is typically done by the family.
	And so, Iraq is the 16th most dangerous country in the world for Christians.
	So what are the top 10?
	It's kind of interesting.
	You know, I know a pastor, Jeff Weiss, who has a – he mentors a church, I guess is the right term for it, in Pakistan.
	And those people are living life on the edge.
	It's actually number seven.
	Number seven.
	They're living life on the edge, and one of the things he told me was he said at one service that they had, they wrote on, you know, it was about forgiveness.
	Christians are called to forgive.
	We must forgive.
	Forgiveness is a trap on us, and it is something that harms us, but we do it because we're told to do it, because God tells us to do things that are good for us.
	But it is actually required by God.
	It's not just that we do it because this is nice, you know, eat your vegetables and forgive people.
	No, it's something God actually tells us to do.
	He said what they had them do in one of these services was to write people that they wanted to forgive.
	And these are people who are trying to harm them, unlike anything that we experience yet in the West.
	And they would write these names on and basically throw them into the fire, I think is what they were doing with it.
	But here are the top ten.
	North Korea who are just having a Bible.
	It's a death sentence.
	Somalia.
	Where Ilhan Omar came from, where her dad was a communist official.
	That's number two in terms of persecution against Christians.
	Big Somalian community in Minnesota, created by our great replacement programs.
	And number three, Libya, you know, where Hillary Clinton did her dirty work.
	And created chaos and slave auctions in Libya.
	Number three, Christian persecution.
	Then number four, Eritrea.
	Number five, Yemen.
	Number six, Nigeria.
	Many of these places like Nigeria's political component to it as well, competing.
	Number seven, Pakistan, as I mentioned before.
	And also when you look at...
	In Pakistan, as one person was saying, every Christian in Pakistan is a second-class citizen.
	They refer to them as chura, meaning filthy.
	They said if we touch food, the food is thrown away.
	The Muslims won't eat it.
	One woman said when I gave birth, they took me into the clinic and they wouldn't even change the laundry from the previous woman who had given birth because I was a filthy Christian.
	Yeah, think about that.
	That's the seventh, number seven.
	Number eight, Sudan.
	Number nine, Iran.
	Number ten, Afghanistan, where there are no Christians anymore, thanks to our involvement there.
	But Iraq is the 16th most dangerous country in the world for Christians, also our involvement there.
	Anyone who converts from Islam will likely face intense pressure from their families and communities.
	Maybe kidnapping, beating, torturing, death.
	The terror brought about by ISIS was deeply harmful to the Iraqi Christian population.
	ISIS went into Christian areas and they emptied them all out.
	They destroyed the towns, they destroyed the wells, everything.
	They wanted to end Christianity and that has been in Iraq for a thousand years really.
	Since the very beginning there's been Christians in Iraq.
	Well, similar thing to Syria, like I talked about yesterday.
	Syria, right now, the same thing is happening.
	It was ISIS that they called themselves when the American allies went in and attacked the Christians, just like they did in Afghanistan.
	Now they're doing this in Syria.
	Oh, but they're moderate rebels.
	They're moderate rebels.
	And every time they do one of these new campaigns, they change their name.
	You know, they go from al-Qaeda to ISIS to al-Nusra, and now they're, what was it, HTC or something?
	I don't know what it was, but it doesn't matter.
	They're ISIS. They're al-Qaeda.
	Same thing.
	They're our surrogates.
	Our government's surrogates.
	So, when you see this type of thing happening there, you don't think it's going to happen in America?
	What our government does in these other countries?
	Like what they did with the Shah of Iran.
	Like I said, that shows what CIA values are.
	And the CIA runs this country.
	They're just biding their time until they have changed people's minds, until they have changed the laws and other things.
	They're waiting to do the same thing to us because it's the same people that are behind this stuff in Iraq and Syria and other places that are running our country.
	They just don't have the accumulated power yet, but they're working on it.
	So in Iran, there is a shocking bill making its way through Iraq's parliament that he said could legalize child rape.
	Is that more harmful than the mutilation that's just been discussed before the Supreme Court?
	The proposal would lower the age of consent for young girls in the country from 18 to 9. And this is fundamentalist Islam seeking the legislative initiative there.
	So you can rape a child at the age of 9 and say they consented to it.
	Here in the United States, you can mutilate them at the age of 7 or 8 and say that they consented to it.
	And we got all the Democrats lined up to support that.
	I talked about the situation in Ontario where you had a small town of 1,300 people.
	And a few years ago, they had some alphabet mafia people demand that they celebrate Pride Month.
	And the town council and the mayor refused.
	And so then they took them before this thing called a Human Rights Council.
	What a joke.
	And said, well, you're going to have to pay as a town.
	You have to pay $10,000 fine.
	And the mayor has to pay a $5,000 fine.
	And the mayor and these counselors have to go to a re-education camp, have a struggle session.
	They don't call it that, but that's what it is.
	It's Marxist.
	Chinese, communist, Marxist tactic completely.
	Xi Van Fleet experienced it as a child.
	She said, that's what these things are.
	All these anti-racist, anti-sexist things and everything.
	It's just a struggle session.
	But now the mayor is refusing to pay the fine.
	The $5,000 penalty that they want to level against him.
	Mayor Harold McQuaker, civic leader for EMO, population 1,333 in Ontario, further rejects orders to undertake re-education training, as directed by the Ontario Human Rights Commission, as an act of personal contrition.
	A struggle session, again.
	You know, it's not enough to tolerate somebody else.
	You must celebrate them, and you must denounce yourself.
	This is pure Marxism.
	You know, all these people say, stop talking about cultural Marxism.
	Are you that naive that you don't understand what Marxism is?
	You don't understand how it operated in China?
	That's exactly what this is.
	This is the template that's being overlaid.
	They just put some new terms up there, so you don't want to use that term?
	You're going to use their terms about woke?
	Being woke is a good thing.
	You know, that's not in the sense that they're using it, but I'm saying to be awakened is a positive thing.
	That's why they grab these terms like woke and gay and things like that and repurpose them.
	McQuaker also insisted that he will not yield to demands that he must host a drag time story hour in the local library anytime soon either.
	That was another part of the commission.
	You've got to denounce yourself, you've got to pay money, and you've got to have a drag queen story time in this town of a thousand people.
	Borderline Pride had tasked Emo with the job of declaring June as Pride Month and ordered municipal authorities to fly an LGBT rainbow flag for a week of your choosing.
	Despite the fact that they lack an official flagpole.
	Borderline Pride asked Emo to, quote, email us a copy of your proclamation or resolution once adopted and signed.
	These people are full-on Marxists.
	Why don't they just put comrade after that?
	You've been noticed, comrade.
	This is not about tolerance.
	This is about an arrogant abuse of power.
	And who is empowered?
	Well, it's the people that you're not allowed to criticize, of course.
	Emo Township refused, and that rejection sparked a years-long arbitration process in which the tribunal found against the township.
	The mayor says, I refuse to pay the $5,000 because that is extortion.
	And whether or not the town will pay the $10,000 penalty is yet to be voted on.
	That's like $10 per person.
	This is a town of 1,000 people.
	A lot of respect, he says, for our four counselors.
	We have a special meeting of counsel.
	They will decide what to do next, whether we'll pay the fine or appeal it.
	And then, of course, it's not just there.
	It's also in soccer, professional soccer, FIFA. And FA, you know, the International Soccer League, they have their pride rituals that they demand that you do obeisance to.
	Some of the players would have to wear rainbow shoelaces.
	Others would have to wear rainbow armbands.
	Not others, but the captains, the team captains, would have to wear rainbow armbands.
	All the rest of the players would have to wear rainbow shoelaces.
	Well, in two teams, You had two captains who refused to do it on the basis of religion.
	One of them, a Muslim.
	One of them, a Christian.
	The Muslim refused to wear the rainbow armband whatsoever.
	The Christian wore the armband and wrote on it, I love Jesus.
	FIFA doesn't like either one of those things.
	Mark Gruhl and Crystal Palace will be formally reprimanded by the F.A. after the player wrote, I Love Jesus, on his rainbow captain's armband because of a ban on religious and political images.
	The problem is, is that the rainbow stuff is now both a religious and a political issue.
	The alphabet mafia is very political.
	And it is a religion.
	They have their dos.
	They have their don'ts.
	You must do this.
	You cannot do that.
	It is an all-encompassing worldview.
	These people identify themselves and everything that they do as that.
	You know, put me in that position because I do this sexually.
	The player in the club faced a charge with FIFA and FA rules banning any political, religious, or personal slogans, statements, or images on players' equipment, which includes arm bans.
	Bosses at the FA have instead decided to remind Güell and Crystal Palace, his team, of those regulations rather than to take further action.
	They're backing away on this.
	Because people paid attention to the tyranny.
	Daily Mail also understands that the Ipswich Captain Sam Morsi will also not be punished after refusing to wear the armband.
	He's the Muslim.
	Morsi, 33, is a British-born midfielder who plays for Egypt.
	And as a practicing Muslim, he was the only one of the 20 captains to not wear the armband.
	A spokesperson for the National LGBT Mafia, they call themselves Stonewall, did not condemn the actions of either players.
	Hey, it's been incredible to see so many football teams at all levels support our Rainbow Laces campaign to make sports safer and more inclusive for all, except not inclusive for the Christians and Muslims.
	Anybody who has a different religion than LGBTism.
	Gould is a devout Christian.
	Previously spoke about how his faith plays a major role in his career.
	He says,"...I've grown up loving God, and when I had a chance, I still go to church with my family, and my faith is definitely a big part of my life.
	Faith is everything that I'm involved with, really, even in football, where I'm trying to be a role model and to show God's graciousness and God's glory through my life." His father, John, is a church minister.
	In fact, his role with the church caused a scheduling drama during the Euros after he took a service at church in Lucia on the day of England's clash against Serbia.
	This is reminiscent of Chariots of Fire, isn't it?
	Story of Eric Little, who had trained as a, I think he was a sprinter, and he wound up, the event was scheduled on a Sunday.
	He says, no, I'm not going to participate in anything on a Sunday.
	And he was like, their chance to win a gold medal.
	And instead, I think he did like a long distance run or something like that and set a new record.
	But this time it's the father who didn't show up, and they were upset because his father didn't show up, because his father is a church minister and he has a church service.
	The player said, God comes first.
	I'd expect him to be at church, but he could turn up.
	I don't know.
	I'll have to message him later to ask.
	But again, he risks a ban after he doubled down on writing the words Jesus Loves You on his art ban.
	His church minister father says, the FA is happy for the crowd to sing God Save the King when England plays.
	That mentions God and religion.
	And it is happy to have the religious hymn Abide With Me during the cup final.
	And yet it has to go at my son for expressing his beliefs.
	Where's the sense in that?
	What exactly has he done wrong?
	Again, God save the king, that is their national anthem, and then they play abide with me because England used to be a Christian nation, and that's exactly what he says.
	He said this country is a Christian country, and we're reminded of that when we go to public buildings, that we have the royal coat of arms, which has the words Dieu et mon droit, if I'm pronouncing that right, which means God is on my right, on my right hand.
	He says, I backed my son for what he did.
	He's my son, so of course I stay with him.
	I don't see anything wrong, though, in the message that was on his armband.
	Do you?
	I haven't had a chance to speak with him yet about it.
	I'm a church member, I'm a devout Christian, and so is Mark.
	He didn't refuse to wear the rainbow armband, so where's the problem?
	Moray, the person who is Muslim, refused to wear the armband, but my son didn't.
	He wrote on it.
	And he added that his son had been trying to convey a message of, you gave me the armband, and as a Christian, I don't believe in your cause, but I will put it on.
	And I'll add my message to it.
	He says, the LACES campaign likes to think about inclusion, and why then are all of its supporters so intent on singling out and ostracizing those who disagree with it?
	Yeah, exactly right.
	Well, it's not just that.
	Now, look in the United States.
	That's in England, and that's a sports situation.
	But take a look in the United States.
	You've got a pastor who's fighting to keep his realtor license because the National Association of Realtors Has-gone Marxist LGBTism.
	Complaints about biblical social media posts.
	A Virginia realtor is facing the possibility of having his license revoked because of social media posts that he made back in 2015 when the Supreme Court was talking about whether or not they're going to acknowledge same-sex marriage.
	Let's see.
	He's been a realtor for four decades.
	He appeared before the Virginia Association of Realtors on Wednesday in a hearing to determine whether he violated the National Association of Realtors Standard of Practice 10-5.
	It was adopted in 2020. The standard declares that realtors must not use harassing speech, hate speech, epithets, or slurs based on race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status, national origin, sexual orientation, or gender identity.
	Now, it was adopted in 2020. What they're not mentioned in this article is, where's the fact that what they're accusing him of happened in 2015?
	Well, they don't care about that.
	These people are not about the rule of law.
	They're not about fairness.
	They're not about justice.
	They're not about tolerance.
	He said this all started, you could say, with a post that Wilson made on social media in 2015. Michael Sylvester of the founding Freedoms Law Center in Virginia Family Foundation told the Christian Post that this came as the U.S. Supreme Court was considering whether same-sex marriage was a constitutional right in the Obergefell case.
	The lawyer stressed that his client offered his analysis on the matter and his capacity as a Christian minister.
	This is very similar to what this former high-ranking official, she had been a legislator, she had been a cabinet member in Scandinavian country.
	I think it's Finland, if I remember correctly.
	But she has been the prosecutor there.
	When you talk about political persecution, this prosecutor has come after her multiple times for this very same issue.
	Her church was going to hold some kind of LGBT celebration.
	It was about same-sex marriage, I think, at the time.
	It goes back years.
	And she quoted some Bible verses about it because the Bible is very explicit and clear about all of this stuff.
	And for that, the prosecutor there has come after her.
	She's now, you know, she won at every one of these cases, and he keeps appealing it, and now she's going to have to make that argument before the Supreme Court.
	But this is a professional association here in the United States, the National Association of Realtors.
	And I guess they're justifyingly being judged by God in terms of this recent court case that said, you've got to return a lot of money that you've overcharged people to.
	Maybe that's a bit of a judgment against them.
	Anyway, he's a Christian minister.
	So he posted the biblical view on marriage in 2015, as this was being talked about, and put it on social media.
	He shared thoughts from Franklin Graham.
	He never faced any blowback or pushback against any of that, but now the National Association of Realtors is coming after him.
	A social media post highlighting the biblical position on marriage came up when he was running for public office eight years later.
	He was asked if he still stands by his Christian beliefs on this topic.
	So I guess that's where this comes, right?
	Eight years later, that would be after they had passed this.
	He told the Christian Post, the lawyer did, that his client answered in the affirmative.
	He said he loves everyone, he serves everyone, he doesn't hate anyone, he doesn't discriminate against anyone, but he stands with the Word of God.
	Earlier this year, his social media posts became the subject of a complaint lodged with the Virginia Association of Realtors over a purported violation of their new rule that they put in in 2020. The Virginia Association of Realtors did not dismiss the complaint as frivolous, but instead they issued a statement a few months afterward, in April, saying that the allegations, if the allegations are true, that he may have violated this new hate speech rule.
	Our position is that Wilson said nothing that constitutes hate speech.
	Instead, he comes from a heart of love and he serves everyone, said his lawyer.
	The hearing, which was expected to last at least four hours, consisted of the presentation of witnesses and cross-examination about his religious expressions.
	Does this sound familiar?
	Does this sound like what people were going through when they had religious objections to the vaccine?
	Oh, well, do you take other things that were used that were developed this way or that way?
	Remember, they openly war-gamed how they were going to set up an inquisition to test your religious beliefs.
	You can't do that.
	Whatever I religiously believe, that's none of your business, and it is not for you to judge that.
	Just like it's not for you to judge whether somebody's speech is true or false, or whether or not it's hateful.
	But that's where we are.
	That's why it's a big deal when Kash Patel says the things that he said.
	Because that's the zeitgeist that we're here to fight.
	This is our fight at this time.
	And if we lose this fight, folks, it's going to be a new dark ages for generations to come.
	This is our fight right now.
	His lawyer said the situation is something that could have impact extending far beyond this real estate cartel.
	That's what they are.
	What Wilson's problem is, is everyone's problem.
	Because the same standard practice that we're talking about here has been held up by some as a model that perhaps other professions should adopt as well.
	You know, this is essentially...
	The same principle.
	That's what I was talking about before.
	Christians in Pakistan.
	Second class citizens.
	Sorry, you're not going to be able to have a professional job.
	Sorry, you can't go to that university.
	Sorry, you can't get that degree.
	You can't have that job.
	No, because you're a Christian.
	You're a second class citizen.
	This is very important.
	Very important.
	Also, this has been going on for a while.
	You know, they passed this rule in 2020. In 2021, there was also another case.
	This is a guy who is an ex-gay, now Christian, realtor, who dropped his license over the association's ban on hate speech.
	He allowed his real estate license to expire rather than to comply with a new requirement.
	Matt Moore was his name, a realtor who lived in Minnesota.
	This other case was in Virginia, and this is the case three years ago.
	He announced his decision on Twitter.
	He said in addition to serving as a real estate agent, he said he creates, quote, digital content from a Christian worldview, unquote.
	The content available on his website includes a podcast that he called More Musings, His last name is Moore.
	He wrote, Would you pray for my wife and me as we seek God's will and for what's next?
	This week, my broker informed me that I cannot continue to talk publicly about Christian views if I want to remain with the brokerage firm.
	So he said, you know, the new regulation as of July 1st, he said, I'll no longer be a realtor.
	He says, this week, my broker informed me that I can't continue to talk publicly about Christian views, LGBT issues, if I want to remain with this brokerage firm.
	He acknowledged that there are other brokerages in town, but he cited the widespread uneasiness about the real estate agents talking about this issue in light of the policy implementations of the National Association of Realtors.
	Who are these people that they get to monopolize all this stuff?
	I don't know whatever happened, but I remember a couple years ago, it was the National Association of Realtors, so we've got to stop referring to master bedrooms as master bedrooms.
	Because that connotates master and slave relationship or something.
	Are you serious?
	He formerly was a member of the LGBT community, is now in heterosexual marriage.
	He uses this platform to emphasize biblical teachings on sexuality.
	In a blog on his personal website, he wrote an open letter to the National Association of Realtors expressing concern about changes made to the group's code of ethics, which he warned could foster discrimination against Christian realtors, of course.
	And we see this still happening three years later.
	Originally, realtors were encouraged to follow the principles of the code of ethics in all their activities, but only with respect to real estate-related activities and transactions.
	Now they're going to bring your religious beliefs into it.
	And they're going to judge your religious beliefs by their religious beliefs.
	So he said, this also includes, again, hate speech and stuff about sexual orientation, gender identity.
	The new policy means that a realtor can now be reported to his or her association for any perceived commission of hate speech against a protected class.
	In any sphere of his or her life, including on personal social media profiles.
	These two concepts, hate speech and a protected class, they have no place in a free society.
	There is no class that is protected that you can't criticize.
	And yet, there is, right?
	We cannot criticize the so-called scientists who pulled this pandemic MacGuffin on us.
	We can't criticize the so-called climate scientists who pulled that on us.
	We can't criticize politicians.
	Or you get a January the 6th thing against you, right?
	These are protected classes.
	And when you look in Germany, the politicians there, people putting up a meme, you know, making fun of an individual politician, they get SWAT teamed.
	We've had a couple of these examples in the last couple of weeks.
	Yeah, you don't say anything bad about these politicians, and of course it's the green politicians used to being protected.
	Oh no, science is settled, and you'll do what we say.
	And the politics is settled.
	And the religion is settled.
	And it will all be my politics, my religion, my science.
	And you'll shut up, or we're going to jail you.
	That's when I have a problem with Kash Patel.
	I don't care what your politics are if you're going to try to jail people that disagree with you.
	He said it.
	So Moore warned that under the new policy, realtors who express a historic Christian view of homosexual and transsexual behavior could become regular targets for undeserved allegations of hate speech.
	He said there exists no legal or standard definition of the term hate speech in the United States.
	No, there is.
	Here's what the definition is.
	Hate speech is speech that those in power hate.
	It can be against any of their agendas, scientific or political.
	It can be against Israel, for example.
	No, you will not say anything about that.
	You will not criticize a foreign country's prime minister and his policies.
	He said countless are the times that I've been falsely accused of using language that inflicts harm or incites violence on gay and transgender people.
	He says I've been called hateful, bigoted, homophobic, even though I have expressed my loving intentions toward the LGBT community and communicated myself with gentleness and respect.
	He said he and his wife aren't angry about this.
	He described the new policy and his decision to give up real estate as a wrench thrown into our plans.
	He expressed confidence that God's plan is still in place.
	He will direct us in the way we should go, and we are excited to see where that will be.
	He said all realtors should be free to share their religious beliefs outside of their job duties.
	Full disclosure, I'm not sure where the line is between seeking the good of others, in terms of advocating for religious liberty and policies, and quietly bearing the crosses that God assigns to us.
	He said the world's rejection is certainly a cross.
	I'm trying to navigate that the best I can.
	I think my open letter to the National Association of Realtors in which I pleaded with them to reconsider their changes to the CEO is appropriate advocacy.
	I am being forced out of my real estate position because of the imposition on my personal life, the code of ethics, that is an appropriate advocacy.
	He said, I'm not looking to bear the political torch because I have to focus on gospel things.
	He said, perhaps God has called one of you to take up the political torch, but I think he's called me to move on.
	Well, I think this is the fight of our lifetime, quite frankly, folks.
	I, for one, am not going to move on.
	Andromeda won.
	Thank you very much for the tip.
	David, I appreciate your observational humor while presenting facts of our insane rulers.
	Blessings to you and your family.
	Thank you.
	Junk Silver.
	Quote, gender-affirming care, unquote.
	No different from Islamic female genital mutilation.
	Muslims use similar arguments to justify their barbarity.
	I agree.
	And I mentioned this before.
	It's so surprising to me.
	I remember Dean Adele.
	He was one of the first big national radio people.
	He was even before Rush Limbaugh.
	And so we'd listen to him a lot of times in the car when we were driving, and he had an axe to grind about Jewish circumcision.
	He just hated that.
	Yet that doesn't harm the kids.
	There's no lasting harm.
	There is for the female genital mutilation that the Muslims do.
	And so you had some people would oppose one, some people would oppose both of these things, and yet the silence is amazing when it comes to this This trans kid mutilation stuff.
	It's amazing to see that.
	A high boost.
	David, I would put Genesis 9-11 on my rainbow arm and establish my covenant with you.
	Never again will all life be destroyed by the waters of a flood.
	Never again will there be a flood to destroy.
	Yeah, that's what the rainbow really was.
	This is why this is – but, you know, that is a satanic thing, isn't it?
	To steal, to copy, to co-opt.
	And that's what they do.
	Well, we're going to take a quick break and we're going to come back.
	I want to talk a little bit about some of the financial things that are coming up.
	We will be right back.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	Welcome back.
	S.A. Miller again, as he said earlier, or she, 123. David Thomas Massey brought Bill H.R. 8421 to committee.
	It needs to be brought to the floor for a vote in order to end the Federal Reserve.
	Everyone call 202-224-3121.
	202-224-3121.
	So, again, pay attention to that.
	That is at the center, at the center of the financial problems.
	That most of us face, the concern about what is going to happen with inflation.
	That's coming from the Federal Reserve.
	But we also have other concerns as well.
	Michigan bill would take the first steps against a CBDC. Michigan has become the latest in a litany of states enacting legislation to oppose CBDC. This is from the Tenth Amendment Center.
	This bill is similar to the law passed in Alabama in 2023. In Indiana, South Dakota, North Carolina, and Georgia in 2024. Well, I think it's important for us to put prohibitions against a state central bank digital currency.
	But we have to understand that all of the characteristics of a central bank digital currency can and will be there with a public-private partnership to create a digital currency.
	All the ability to track in everything that we do, and of course the ability to shut us down.
	Those are the, rather than prohibiting a specific thing at this point, I think we need to understand what the agenda is and we need to have a more broad legislation that is going to say you will not track our payments.
	You will not use our payment history to deny us products based on our carbon usage or other things like that or based on our politics that you don't like.
	So you will not be able to use anything that we call a currency As a way to cancel people.
	Because this is the way it's going to happen.
	JP Morgan, MasterCard are teaming up to integrate tokenized blockchain payment system.
	And as I just reported earlier, we have Trump's pick at the SEC. I mean, he had Gensler, who was there.
	He was adamantly opposed to Bitcoin, and he was going to shut it down.
	He was going to say, well, we're going to treat it as a security, and we're going to shut this thing down.
	So he's now replaced him with a person who has spent the last, I think, seven years running an organization about tokenization.
	And so that is really key.
	This is the way it's going to happen.
	And so we have to be wise about the broader principles that are there.
	And so in November, this is Wine Press.
	I covered the report they had in November about the danger of tokenization.
	We should play that with some of these best of things if we have to do that again.
	Because that's very important.
	That's an excellent report.
	Read it from Winepress, or we'll put it out again so I can cover it one more time.
	But tokenization is a very dangerous thing.
	MasterCard's multi-token network has connected to Conexus digital payments on a payment settlement solution to enhance the availability of cross-border payments to businesses and applications.
	This is also the kind of stuff that Lucky Luke Nick is involved in.
	And this is the type of thing that MasterCard has been working with.
	MasterCard has been working with the EU to try to track and control people on basis of energy usage and that type of thing.
	Part of the climate agenda.
	We know exactly where this is headed and that is my concern.
	The connections with Goldman Sachs and with MasterCard and with all these people in the Trump administration.
	All of the framework of this stuff is being put there.
	And it's kind of interesting to see that Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell saying, well, Bitcoin and gold are not competitors for the dollar.
	Ha ha ha!
	You can tell he's lying because his lips are moving.
	Now, that's exactly what they both are there for.
	Gold has always been there, and the dollar was set up as competition to gold.
	Bitcoin was set up as competition to the dollar specifically.
	And yet, you know, when we look at where we move forward, we have to understand that what is driving both of them is the desire to get away from the Federal Reserve and its economic manipulations.
	And that's a very, very important thing.
	If you want to have some kind of insurance against that, Tony Argum has the stable and approving, improving, I should say, standard to counteract the Federal Reserve.
	Whether or not Thomas Massey is able to stop it or not, you can disconnect yourself from that system.
	And you can do it safely, privately, physically, with silver and gold.
	Go to davidknight.gold.
	That'll take you to Tony Arderman.
	You can start accumulating it on a regular basis as part of his Wise Wolf program.
	I don't know anybody else that has anything like that.
	It's a savings program where you can gradually save silver and gold, average out your costs, and that type of thing.
	Very important because of this very thing.
	Because of the tokenization and because of what is being prepared in the background.
	Thank you all for listening.
	Sing.
	Have a good weekend.
	The Common Man.
	They created Common Core to dumb down our children.
	They created common past to track and control us.
	Their commons project to make sure the commoners own nothing.
	And the communist future.
	They see the common man as simple, unsophisticated, ordinary.
	But each of us has worth and dignity created in the image of God.
	That is what we have in common.
	That is what they want to take away.
	Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation.
	They desire to know everything about us while they hide everything from us.
	It's time to turn that around and expose what they want to hide.
	Please share the information and links you'll find at TheDavidKnightShow.com Thank you for listening.
	Thank you for sharing.
	If you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers.

▲