Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

April 25, 2025 - The David Knight Show

03:01:14

Fri Episode #1997: Rising Above the Chaos: Heroes, Truth, and Love Ignite Hope

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	As a clock strikes 13, it's Friday the 25th of April, year of our Lord 2025.
	Well, today we're going to take a look at the rapidly changing society that we have here.
	The increase of the police and surveillance state.
	There's a new organization in the UK that actually is connected to this attempt to do geoengineering and dim the sun, but they're connected to a lot of other things.
	And it's kind of interesting because if you look at all the things that they're doing, it's all the same stuff that Elon Musk is doing and DARPA is doing.
	Even more secretive than DARPA, they say.
	We don't know any of the names of the people in DARPA, do we?
	These unelected people who are trying to transform our world, not just politically, physically as well.
	We're also going to take a look at what's going on with trade issues, the additional fights, and an amazing story about what has happened with our police state society when it comes to travel.
	Yes, since 9-11.
	The police state has been metastasizing, but starting with the airports and with travel.
	And they're always a step ahead, and we're going to show you what that looks like.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	Well, I saw this article and I thought, Twitter appears to be shadow banning accounts that criticize Elon Musk.
	Who knew?
	The shadow ban.
	That's my life here.
	Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of social media the shadow ban do?
	Yeah, that's...
	I'm the shadow, I guess.
	Don't sit here and cloak yourself in the First Amendment and free speech and then do things like that.
	New York Times reports that of three users that they focused on...
	Who had like a million followers or so, and then they quarreled with Musk or criticized him online in December.
	And they were promptly shadow banned.
	They saw their engagement basically go to zero.
	Yeah.
	So, yeah.
	You know, I've been banned by both the left and by the right because neither side cares about free speech.
	And the amazing thing is that you can see it in social media especially.
	You can see it in the people who just want to shut you up, who just despise you, and will attack you ad hominem.
	And that applies to anybody that's out there.
	I mean, you don't have to have a lot of people following you.
	That applies to anybody.
	There's just such intolerance for differences of opinion anymore.
	That's very concerning.
	Because the right is just as bad now as the left used to be.
	Both of them have done this.
	They have nothing but contempt.
	For free speech.
	And they don't try to hide it.
	But Musk does try to hide it.
	That's the interesting thing.
	He tries to pretend that he doesn't have that.
	Shadow banning the practice of severely suppressing a user's reach without informing them that they've been punished.
	Yeah, free speech but not reach is what they like to say.
	And you know, it's not surprising because it was something that had been established many decades.
	And the Republican and the Democrat national conventions when they nominate the presidents, right?
	Both parties would do this.
	And I remember one of the first reports that I did at InfoWars back in 2012 was talking about how this has been a very long time that they've been doing this, what they would do.
	And both political parties would do it at their conventions.
	They would say, well, we have a free speech area.
	You know, we later saw that at the Bundy standoff thing.
	Out in the middle of the desert, a little area with a professionally printed sign said, free speech area.
	Somebody did a handwritten sign that said, free speech is not an area.
	And so what they would do at the conventions is they would basically make caged areas.
	You literally go stand in a cage and they would have like a box that you could stand on and a microphone that you could hold.
	And you could do your political karaoke, I guess, if you wanted to do that.
	And so you're free to speak in that area, which was removed by many, many blocks from the convention.
	You had to look for it to find it.
	It was so far away.
	So, yeah, you can go there and you can have your free speech in that little area, but nobody's going to know that you're there.
	And that is the type of thing that we see on social media as well.
	And it's all born out of a contempt for any dissent.
	Nobody wants to debate anything.
	They're too insecure in their beliefs, I think, really, is what it is.
	They haven't really given any consideration to what it is that they believe or why they believe it.
	They're blindly following a group or person.
	And it's that kind of blind tribalism.
	That is so resentful of any critical thought.
	Don't sit here and cloak yourself in the First Amendment free speech and then do things like that.
	One of the allegedly shadow banned accounts was run by Anastasia Maria Lupus.
	I have no idea who she is.
	She had over a million followers, and she used to receive hundreds of thousands of views per day.
	Now, that's the other key thing, too, is I can look at something that I would post.
	And, okay, so I have like 130,000, 40,000 people.
	I don't even know.
	I don't even pay attention anymore to that because it's meaningless.
	But I can look at it and I can see that the number of times that somebody has been able to, has viewed my post, in other words, has just been in their feed.
	And it is, even though I've got those kind of followers, you know, I might get a couple hundred.
	Maybe.
	Maybe.
	And I would see people who had maybe, you know, 1% of the number of people that I had.
	And they would get 50 times the number of people watching what they, seeing what they had.
	It's amazing, you know, how skewed that is.
	And that's one of the easiest ways to see it there.
	In December, and of course this is coming from Futurism, which is on the left.
	And even though they're hectoring Musk for not supporting free speech, the way they present her, the way they characterize her, she said she also frequently shared misinformation on vaccines.
	Well, who are you to say it's misinformation?
	You call her anti-vax or whatever, but that's different than misinformation.
	You can call me anti-vax.
	I don't care.
	Don't say that I've got misinformation on vaccines unless you want to debate.
	Okay, but anyway, so they use the same thing.
	You know, information that is not allowed.
	Let's just put it that way.
	She put out information that's not allowed about vaccines.
	And these people don't like her doing that.
	They think she ought to be shut down.
	Isn't that horrible that Musk would allow somebody who's putting out misinformation on vaccines?
	This is the tactic that they use.
	And so that was okay.
	She could put out misinformation about vaccines, but then she publicly criticized Musk's support for an immigration program.
	To have the foreign workers come to the U.S., remember that was when he was talking about H-1B and how, you know, and he'd done that before as well with Rama Slimy.
	They were talking about how pathetic Americans are and how we just need to have people from other places like them.
	Anyway, I wonder why they had to come to this country from other places.
	It couldn't be because America had a better system or society, could it?
	And they're taking it down?
	Anyway, immediately her engagement dropped off a cliff, and now she's lucky if her posts crack the low ten thousands.
	In other words, they took her down by about a factor of ten.
	So she's lightly shadow banned.
	To confirm her suspicions of a shadow ban, she created a brand new X account and quickly received far more views and likes than the original one.
	Yeah, of course.
	Another account that they covered was Laura Loomer.
	Who got the same thing happening to her because of the immigration issue?
	Loomer was briefly stripped of her ex-premium status before Musk reinstated it.
	Her numbers wouldn't recover until Musk began interacting with her posts again weeks later.
	Maybe she talked to their mutual friend, Donald.
	She said, I think it's wrong to say that it's a free speech platform and then shut off people's ability to monetize.
	She monetized?
	I've never monetized any social media.
	I guess that's why she's so toxic on social media.
	She really is.
	So the drop-sending engagement could be explained, says Futurism, by other non-nefarious reasons, like maybe nobody wants to read your posts.
	Yeah, there's that too.
	That's why.
	I've got people who don't like me criticizing our fearless leader.
	And they make it clear they don't like that either.
	So that's an element of it, too.
	So maybe it's the shadow banning plus the fact that I'm not partisan here on it.
	That said, Musk has a history of vindictively abusing his power on the site.
	He's repeatedly suspended the accounts of journalists, targeting critics of his takeover of the website.
	Of course, he also blocked all links to Substack after it put up a feature that was similar to Twitter's feed.
	And it's kind of interesting to see that he's got his Boring Company, which, you know, pull that picture up, Travis.
	This is right down the street from where we used to live in Bastrop.
	It's amazing.
	Absolutely amazing.
	I didn't know it was there until we were moving.
	It's like, oh, all the better to be out of here.
	But he's got both Boring Company and SpaceX.
	A facility that's not too far away from where we used to live.
	Really, really, really close.
	And he's been at war with the Bastrop County officials over his utter contempt for any regulations.
	The Department of Transportation said, we'd like for you to do the cub...
	Well, they didn't say we'd like.
	They demand, you know, you put your curb cuts here and stuff.
	He did it wherever he wanted.
	They said, you can't do that.
	He said, well, find me.
	He doesn't care.
	They had regulations about what they wanted him to do with his wastewater, and he just dumped it into the river there.
	And the county was outraged, and they put fines against him, but he doesn't care.
	He pays the fines and keeps doing it.
	What a great neighbor.
	But anyway, this company, the Boring Company, which is about tunnels, and he wanted to do a lot of tunnels.
	They haven't done any tunnels except in Vegas, so they've got a little bit of income.
	But what he did was he applied for, as a small business, in order to get federal contracts.
	The richest man in the history of the world has got a small business, and he wants to get at the headline with federal contracts.
	And that's how he became the richest man in the world, with the federal contracts that he gets.
	And that's why he's there with the Trump administration, why he gave him $200 million.
	So, right after Trump won the election, His $7 billion tunneling company registered as a small business.
	We're not going to have Doge look at that, right?
	Or any of the military industrial contracts that are there.
	And this reminds me so much of the fraud of the PPP stuff.
	The payroll protection plan or whatever it was called.
	Remember when Trump locked everybody down?
	Can't open your business.
	Oh, but it's okay.
	I'll give you some universal basic income.
	It will give you the PPP thing.
	But it's only going to be for small businesses.
	And then they promptly redefined a small business.
	It was, you know, you have fewer than X number of employees, let's say.
	And I forget what the number was.
	500 or something, maybe.
	Or maybe it was lower than that.
	I don't know.
	But what they did was they made it per location.
	So that meant that McDonald's and all these chains could apply and get it ahead of the line for the small business loans, and they got all the money, pretty much.
	Over 50% of the funds went to less than 5% of the companies.
	And the banks rationed it as saying, well, our fees and everything that we make are the same depending on this, but we can, you know, overhead, but if we do it for McDonald's instead of for you.
	The mom and pop business.
	We can have more money that, you know, same amount of work and we can make more money out of it.
	And so that's the way the thing operated.
	And of course that allowed businesses like Trump's Hotels to also apply because it was based on per location.
	So Boring has struggled to generate revenue despite receiving hundreds of millions of dollars in funding.
	And so it's interesting that the Boring Company The president of the Boring Company is reportedly in charge of Doge's day-to-day operations.
	That's why he brought it up.
	So you've got Elon Musk, richest man in the world, and he wants his company to get special treatment as a small business.
	And then the guy who is the president of that company is the one who's running the Doge operations on a day-to-day basis.
	Isn't it great how this whole system worked?
	You know, I had a small business, Karen and I did, for 13 years.
	Never got a cent from any government.
	All we got was the back of their hand.
	We didn't do something according to their wishes.
	Claiming small business in nature means that Boring is eligible for special contracts that have been carved out for small businesses.
	A company owned by men estimated to be the richest in the world could potentially use this designation to win federal contracts that were meant for small business.
	Despite Boring having raised huge sums of cash, including a 2022 fundraising round in which it raised $675 million.
	That is a small business.
	It's a small world, isn't it?
	Yeah, Elon Musk can jet back and forth on all of this stuff.
	And so let's take a look at an agency that really strangely parallels what he's doing.
	Now, there's a couple of different reasons for it.
	I mean, you know, it could be that he's got his ear to the ground, he understands where everything is going, but the overlap is absolutely amazing.
	And, you know, so is the overlap with DARPA and the fact that, you know, their first prize, they run prizes just like Elon Musk did.
	Oh, well, okay.
	He got that idea kind of from them.
	The very first one of these competitive prizes was for self-driving cars.
	And then they've done other ones subsequent to that, like robots and things like that.
	But he did his XPRIZE, which is there, as I've been talking about this week, to suck CO2 out of the air.
	And it's interesting because this British government, the UK government's...
	Secretive Agency, this is out of the UK, Exposenews.com, said ARIA is the name of the program.
	I mentioned this earlier this week.
	The Advanced Research and Invention Agency, ARIA.
	They've got a budget of 800 million pounds, which is huge for the British government.
	I mean, we're typically looking at the absurd astronomical figures coming from the U.S. It doesn't mean a thing unless it's hundreds of billions of dollars anymore, right?
	Everett Dirksen is spitting in his grave.
	But ARIA's operations are so opaque that its secrecy is unparalleled, even amongst its peers, such as DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, and ARPA-H, the U.S. Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health,
	because they are so focused.
	On attacking our health, that they created their own advanced agency for doing that.
	And so, with a staggering 800 million pounds of taxpayer funds allocated over five years, ARIA claims to pursue groundbreaking innovations in artificial intelligence, climate manipulation, brain interfacing neurotechnologies.
	Oh, checks all the boxes.
	Yeah, Elon Musk is a creature of this system.
	Of the Five Eyes system, of the military-industrial complex, of the globalists, of the transhumanists.
	It's amazing to me to see how clueless the right has become.
	And it's because you've got right-wing influencers like Laura Loomer who will suck up to him on most issues.
	And who will heal this stuff over on most of these other issues.
	Oh, we're going to criticize him on immigration, but when it comes to brain interfacing technology and all that kind of satanic stuff, we're fine with him.
	And so he's not looking at any of the military-industrial complex issues and not looking at their use of the federal government to make money.
	Or his leadership operates like a cabal wielding immense power.
	With very little accountability.
	Oh, even more similarities here.
	And it is a taxpayer-funded black hole, like DARPA, like ARPA-H, like the CIA, like all these agencies that are the true government here in America.
	ARIA's budget...
	Again, nearly a billion pounds, represents a colossal drain on public resources, yet its spending remains a tightly guarded secret.
	The agency's exemption from FOIA requests, enshrined in its founding legislation, is a brazen betrayal of public trust.
	One person said this financial black hole fuels suspicion that ARIA is a playground for well-connected elites siphoning public funds into speculating gambles with no guarantees of societal benefit.
	Well, it's actually worse.
	It's weaponized against us.
	And one of the first projects that they've got is this one that I talked about earlier this week, the 57 million pounds to try to block the sun out with geoengineering.
	But also AI, safeguarded AI.
	There you go.
	AI systems for critical infrastructure or precision neurotechnologies like the brain-computer interface or scaling compute.
	So that you can lower artificial intelligence computing costs.
	Our programmable plants.
	This one I love.
	Programmable plants.
	We could engineer plants to remove CO2.
	God did that.
	He beat him to the punch.
	He already designed plants to take out CO2.
	That's the whole point.
	But I don't know.
	That's strange.
	Anyway, but they're going to do it genetically.
	We're going to make them better.
	They're going to improve on what God did.
	And then...
	You know, climate, earth observation, smarter robot bodies, all this other kind of stuff, right?
	Climate data, bio-inspired robotics, you name it, but it's all the same type of stuff that Elon Musk is doing.
	He really is, and it's been said by several people, he is kind of, you know, we can see that he's not running all of these different businesses.
	He's not even playing the games that he claims that he's in the top 20. You know, they got caught faking that as well.
	He's not running all these different businesses.
	He's just a figurehead.
	And it is a, when you look at what is ultimately underneath it, it is coming from the darkest forces on earth, folks.
	Our own government and the inner workings of the actual government.
	And then we look at Netflix.
	The CEO had an interview, and I thought it was kind of interesting.
	This headline caught my eye.
	It said, the movie theater model is outdated.
	Why?
	Well, most of the country, he said, cannot walk to a multiplex.
	Oh, well, there we go.
	Smart city stuff.
	You have to be able to walk to the movie theater.
	Well, we're not going to make a whole bunch of movie theaters.
	If we did, they wouldn't be that big.
	So we'll just have everybody watch stuff in their home.
	And he trashes the whole idea of a communal experience.
	And he begins by saying, well, take a look at the box office.
	Box office is awful.
	Could it be that the movies are awful?
	I quite liked the movie theater experience.
	I grew up in Tampa, and I have a great movie theater there that goes back to the Great Depression.
	They spent tens of millions of dollars in the Great Depression to make this thing.
	And it's beautiful.
	It's a beautiful old Art Deco Spanish architecture from the 1920s.
	And boy, it really did.
	Put a setting in there when you're watching something like Psycho or something.
	But it was pretty cool.
	I don't even know that they use it anymore for movies.
	They use it for live performances.
	But he said, why are they all struggling?
	Take a look at the global box office.
	Well, it's because their movies are garbage.
	It's just that simple.
	You can watch the stuff that Netflix is churning out.
	You can watch it on TV.
	It's just kind of background stuff that's running all the time, which is why a lot of people use television.
	You know, it's kind of like Gilligan's Island.
	And so this guy who's making things that are as sophisticated as Gilligan's Island, except that they've got real push to nudge you in certain different ways, culturally, religiously,
	you name it.
	Gilligan's Island wasn't...
	Doing that, I don't think.
	It was just mindless entertainment.
	But this is mindless, low-budget entertainment from Netflix to program you.
	It's their programming.
	They're programming you.
	And he said, folks grew up thinking, I want to make movies on a gigantic screen.
	I want to have strangers watch them and have them play them in theaters for two months and people cry and sell out shows.
	And it's an outdated concept, he said.
	Asked specifically if the desire of filmmakers wanting to make movies, quote, for movie theaters, for the communal experience.
	Is that an outmoded idea?
	He said, I think it is.
	For most people, not for everybody, if you're fortunate enough to live in Manhattan or some big city, right, you can walk to a multiplex, but most of the country can't.
	Well, we'll fix that.
	We'll make sure that everybody lives in a city, right?
	Except in those cities, you won't be able to walk to it in your 15-minute city.
	I mean, why do we have to walk to a movie theater?
	So, we used to have drive-ins.
	The car's going to be gone, too, right?
	So, is Real ID actually happening?
	And it is really...
	It's bizarre what is being done, and it is all flowing out of the airports.
	That's where the injection point is.
	You want to see where the government injects the cash?
	They do the quantitative easing through the banks and stuff like that.
	Well, if you want to see where they do the police state tightening instead of the quantitative easing, that is in the airports.
	And we'll talk about that when we come back.
	Stay with us.
	We'll be right back.
	be right back.
	back.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Is Real ID actually happening?
	Well, they say it is.
	They say it's going to happen next month.
	It's kind of interesting, isn't it?
	It's 20 years later.
	Because it was part of a suite of a whole bunch of programs that were put in in 2005.
	One of those, of course, was the infamous PrEP Act.
	It was put in in 2005 in the George W. Bush administration.
	That was the act that went much further than the Pharmaceutical Immunity, Legal Immunity Act in 1986 that said that they could not be sued for any harm that they did to children with their vaccine program.
	This one, the PrEP Act, was saying, well...
	If we do what we've been practicing to do already at that point in time for five years, remember the first one of these simulations that was exactly what Trump and company did in 2020.
	Dark winter.
	That was two months before 9-11.
	Then one week after, you have the false flag anthrax attack.
	And then two months after that, you have the model legislation sent out to all the different states so that you don't have a 10th Amendment problem.
	And the president, whoever that would be, like Trump, could just write them a check.
	And these governors who would get checks that were bigger than the entire state budget would be more than willing to comply with any measures necessary and run it through the public health bureaucracy that had already been given the legal framework for that 20 years earlier.
	And it's been there forever.
	Oh, but now we need it.
	They don't want you to see the direct effect, right?
	Just like the vaccines.
	Yeah, they had some people who died instantly with this stuff.
	And they do have children who die instantly with it.
	They call it SIDS and pretend that it's not their vaccine.
	But for the most part, it's a slow kill.
	It's a slow kill.
	And that's the way it was with this as well.
	They didn't want people to, they didn't want to run this legislation out and then use it the next year.
	You know, let's wait 20 years to do it.
	And so here we are now.
	You know, they do this hit in 2001.
	They do another hit in 2020.
	And then let's do the hit, give them a little bit of time to adjust to that, and then we will roll this other thing out on them.
	And so here we are.
	You know, 2005, they were rolling out all of these measures that were going to make sure that we didn't have another problem like that.
	And now here we are in 2025, and they're getting ready to roll this stuff out 20 years after it was passed.
	The Real ID Act may finally be enforced.
	However, the decades between the law's passage and enforcement, says Reason, Show that a terrorism prevention measure, it's hardly needed in the first place.
	Now, isn't that interesting?
	That's one of the things I said as they were rolling out these nonsense Simon Says rules during 2020 and 2021.
	Well, we told you that we're going to do this a couple of months ago.
	And now we're doing it, and I'm telling you that in two months we're going to do the next step.
	And guess what?
	All the countries are doing it the same thing, at the same time.
	And they were all waiting a couple of months before they would do the next one.
	Well, if it's an emergency, you would want to do all this stuff all at once, right?
	But it wasn't an emergency.
	It was a boiling the frogs conditioning.
	And so the Real ID Act was passed in 2005, part of the suite of these post-9-11 laws.
	And as Reason points out, the fact that we haven't needed it, the fact that they haven't used it all this time, says it's not really an emergency and they don't really need it.
	But that's the way these people operate.
	And that's a real tell, isn't it?
	It's a real tell that it's a conspiracy.
	And I said that when Biden and Macron say at the same time, well, we just did this and now two months from now we're going to do that.
	Because, you know, it's an emergency.
	Reason said this is aimed at boosting national security.
	No, it is aimed at boosting the police and surveillance state.
	They said it was intended to make it harder to forge identity documents.
	No, that was a stated reason.
	But, as they point out, any document anywhere can be forged.
	That's not an issue.
	Over the past two decades, enforcement of the law, how did they keep this from happening?
	Well, they put a gold star on it.
	Put a gold star on it.
	And a tribute to their forerunners, the Nazis, right?
	There, here's a gold star.
	Why don't you wear that so he can identify you?
	So, putting that gold star on that ID makes it counterfeit proof, right?
	Over the past two decades, enforcement of the law has been delayed a whopping seven times.
	Most recently, the Biden administration delayed enforcement for two years.
	So far, No additional delay has been announced by the Trump administration.
	Isn't that interesting?
	Trump administration didn't delay it in its first term.
	Trump administration is quietly going to roll out with this thing because now everybody's guard's down.
	You see, if Biden were to do it, well, let's not do that.
	Let's delay this for a couple of years.
	We're going to hand it off to Republicans.
	And the Republicans will do it.
	Because the Republicans are more likely to be the people that have an issue with real ID.
	They're going to push back if Biden does it.
	So let's do it when Trump is there.
	We'll install Trump.
	And then they won't have a problem with it.
	And so that's what they're doing.
	And Trump is going to run this thing through.
	That's why they always run these things through.
	It was a Republican, Ronald Reagan, who gave the pharmaceutical industries immunity.
	It was another Republican, George W. Bush, who did it to a greater extent with the PrEP Act and so forth.
	At least 17 states are less than 50% compliant.
	Many states have pushed back against the law with fears over creating a national registry of ID holders.
	Well, that's the absolute purpose of it.
	Acceptable IDs weren't even issued in all 50 states until 2020, a staggering 15 years after the law was passed.
	Jim Harper, who is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, said in 2022, some people deny it, but RealID is emphatically a national ID.
	It is national in scope, knitting together diverse state systems into a system that is uniform with respect to its data elements and its behind-the-scenes information sharing.
	Never mind that Real ID can be presumably forged like any other identity document.
	Real ID requires Americans to allow their private information to be entered into linked state databases.
	These linked databases contain the amassed hacker-bait details of millions of identification documents necessary for air travel, for air travel, and for access to government facilities.
	Well, you know, I could easily do without both of those things because they've made air travel such a hellish experience that I'm not interested in going anywhere at all.
	I used to like to travel.
	But it got to the point where the air travel itself was such a bitter pill at the beginning and the end.
	I said, you know, I quit doing it for pleasure.
	And now I wouldn't do it at all.
	And I certainly don't have any interest in going into a government facility.
	Nevertheless, when I got my license here, they were asking me for all this ID and didn't tell me that some of that was voluntary if I wanted to get a real ID.
	And I thought, wow, they've really upped these requirements for getting a driver's license.
	And when I got finished, I said, and now you've got your real ID.
	See the gold star?
	And it's like, I didn't want that.
	A lot of people don't realize that they're doing that.
	It's kind of, you know, the way that they run these things in the back door.
	The law enforcement, 20 years after its passage, Would trade privacy for an, at best, hypothetical gain in safety?
	Well, hundreds of years ago, Franklin said those who trade essential liberty for the promise of security deserve neither.
	And as I've said many times, history has shown that you get neither.
	You get neither security nor you don't get safety and you don't get liberty because you trade away your liberty and you don't get safety in return.
	And so that brings us again back to this guy, Kilmar Garcia, that the Trump administration deported, said that they did it wrongfully, but then refused to bring him back.
	And yet, there does seem to be, this is the thing I find to be interesting about it, when you look at his background, the case that they based this stuff on.
	Was based on a program that has been thoroughly discredited and stopped.
	The arresting officer was somebody who has been fired, and I believe criminal allegations have been made against him as well, for the kind of stuff that he was doing.
	And so that part of it is really dodgy, and that's the part where they have really put their foot down and, you know, said, no, this is what we're standing on, even though they said they made a mistake.
	But there's other evidence.
	Of course, the guy was here illegally, but it's an issue of what the appropriate punishment is.
	You know, if somebody's here illegally, deport him, but you don't necessarily send him to the supermax terrorist prison.
	But was he doing human trafficking?
	Well, it turns out that in Tennessee, it certainly looks like it.
	As I said before, and I talked about this once, he was intercepted by the Tennessee Highway Patrol.
	He had eight other people in a van.
	So, including him, nine people.
	None of the people spoke English.
	None of them had any documentation.
	None of them had any luggage.
	And he said he was transporting them across the country.
	That looked suspicious.
	But I thought it was also odd that the Trump administration just did not talk about that.
	It was Tennessee Star that dug it up.
	A state newspaper over in Nashville.
	They did some good reporting.
	They were the ones who were focused on this tranny killer's manifesto.
	And so they...
	Saw this, and they reported it, and they interviewed the highway patrol.
	Why was this guy released?
	They said, well, we called the FBI, and the FBI told us to let him go.
	But this was not the basis.
	It should be, but it's not the basis.
	Now you've got some people besides the Tennessee Star that are starting to pick this up.
	And it turns out, as Tennessee Star does more investigation, it turns out the vehicle that he was driving was registered to somebody who had been convicted of human trafficking.
	So, it looks like he was involved in that type of stuff, but that's not what they're saying.
	See, that's the issue.
	So, when we look at this, And we look at the deportation, we look at what is happening at the airports and all of the panic around the border.
	Again, they open up the border, just like, you know, the FBI under Biden says, let him go, let him go.
	They want a problem, because they've got a solution in mind.
	They want us to look at situations like this, and they want us to beg them for ID, which is what the conservatives are doing.
	And so you see the GOP in Florida and DeSantis putting in mandatory, mandatory E-Verify.
	E-Verify has been there for a while.
	Hasn't been mandatory.
	Now you're getting mandatory real ID if you want to fly and other things like that.
	And so we have to be very careful about this.
	They've got other schemes that they've got conservatives begging to get identification for.
	But I want to show you what...
	Tyranny has become at the airports.
	You know, how drastic this has become.
	And again, about 20 years ago, when we adopted our daughter, I remember we were heading back to the United States, and in the airport, there was an announcement in multiple languages, and finally they get around to English, and they're saying,
	if you were headed back to the United States, you'd have to do this, this, this, and this, and this.
	So for people who are going to...
	Special...
	Special requirements, special things done for people coming back to the United States.
	And she was just under five years old.
	And we had gone to a massive market of toys, which a lot of people go there and find suppliers of toys and bring them back in and import them.
	And we just went around buying stuff at retail, which you could do as well.
	And so Karen had kind of quietly bought presents for her because it was a long flight and she doesn't know what's going on and we can't talk to her.
	She doesn't speak English.
	And so she wanted to keep her busy and had all kinds of.
	And so we go through the anal examinations that they give you, and they found the toys, and one by one they start pulling them out and confiscating them.
	And her daughter's looking at it, and it's like, oh, oh, you know, she really liked this stuff.
	And you see the excitement and then the disappointment as they take it away.
	And they took every last one of the toys.
	Can't have those toys on the plane.
	I don't know why, but that's just their special authority.
	And so she wound up crying for like 20 hours on the plane, and it was a wonderful trip.
	Anyway, here's a couple of team girls.
	Arrested and deported while backpacking in Hawaii.
	They're German.
	And they were going around the world on an extended vacation.
	Kind of strange.
	They were very young, 18 and 19. Two teenage girls from Germany were detained, arrested, and deported in Hawaii after immigration officials said it was suspicious that they didn't have a hotel room.
	They were backpackers.
	And they've been able to do this in other countries.
	But not in America.
	You're not going to do that in America.
	Don't you try to smuggle in some toys!
	And you better not be backpacking.
	We're not going to allow that either.
	So, 18 and 19 years old, backpackers, they had arrived in Honolulu from Auckland, that's in New Zealand, doing a round-the-world trip.
	They planned to spend five weeks in Hawaii before moving on to California and then to Costa Rica for the next legs of their journey.
	But despite having ESTA travel authorization, immigration officials accused them of attempting to enter the U.S. to work illegally.
	They were placed in handcuffs and taken to a nearby detention center, which
	later learned was a deportation facility.
	Upon arrival, they were subjected to full body scans, strip searches, forced to wear green prison jumpsuits.
	They were then placed in a holding facility with serious criminals, including an alleged murderer who had been locked up for 18 years.
	They were forced to spend the night in a freezing cold double cell.
	How's that for the land of the free?
	Isn't that great?
	Isn't America great?
	This is the prison...
	That we are allowing them to build for us.
	And again, the prison begins at the airports, and it is being pushed out everywhere.
	TSA is not airport security.
	It's about transportation.
	They want to do this everywhere, under all circumstances.
	They'll use the TSA to keep you from getting out of the 15-minute cities or getting into one from another city.
	That's where it's headed.
	You think it's bad at the airport now?
	Wait till you see what happens with the freedom cities from Trump.
	It was all like a fever dream, said one of them.
	It was a shock.
	We didn't expect it.
	We had already noticed a little bit about what was going on in the U.S. But at the time, we didn't think it was happening to Germans.
	That was pretty naive.
	We felt so small and powerless.
	We've noticed that this is happening in America, but we think that it's just for people coming in from...
	Mexico and Central America and places like that, right?
	Or other places.
	It's never going to be that way for us, is it?
	After a sleepless night in a freezing cell, the girls were awakened early, escorted back to the airport in handcuffs.
	Upon arrival, they were forced to board a Hawaiian Airlines flight to Tokyo.
	They were told they would receive their passports back once they arrived in Japan.
	Included in their travel documents were interrogation transcripts that they had to sign, which, quote, contained sentences we didn't actually say.
	She said after the ordeal.
	They're 18 and 19 years old.
	They twisted it to make it seem as if we admitted that we wanted to work illegally in the U.S. Upon arriving in Tokyo, the girls were shipped home on a flight via Qatar, which they say helped them to come to terms with the ordeal.
	I sometimes think about how wonderful the time in Hawaii would have been and what we would have experienced there, she said.
	But, you know, this has never happened to Americans.
	This is for those illegals that are out there.
	Well, you know, we have an administration that is telling you that if you criticize a foreign government, that's now illegal, essentially.
	You can get kicked out of the country even though you were legally recognized to be here as a student or whatever.
	And look, I don't share the political views of these people that this is happening to, but do you see the big, broad picture here?
	This is not about their issues.
	Just like free speech is not about whether or not you agree with somebody on what they're saying.
	It's a principle.
	It's a fundamental principle.
	And the fact that you're going to punish people Because they say something that you don't like, and you're okay with that?
	You're okay with that?
	Well, then you don't support free speech.
	So, Senator Kennedy was on a show this weekend, and he was asked, they said, President Trump said this week that he'd like to send what he called homegrown criminals, meaning U.S. citizens, to foreign prisons like the one in El Salvador.
	Senator, do you think that the law allows a president?
	To send U.S. citizens to a foreign prison?
	No, ma 'am, he said, nor does it, nor should it be considered appropriate or moral.
	We have our own laws.
	We have the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution, and we shouldn't be sending prisoners to foreign countries.
	And then Andy McCarthy, Fox News contributor, conservative legal commentator on Fox News, criticized the Trump administration.
	Over what was happening with this guy, Kilmar Garcia.
	And again, you know, to me it looks like he probably was a trafficker, right?
	I don't know if he was a gang member and he needs to be put in as a terrorist.
	But that new evidence that they're not talking about that wasn't a part of the case to begin with ought to be looked at.
	They ought to do.
	If they said that they made a mistake.
	Why did they say they made a mistake?
	Instead, what you see is stonewalling and lies from the Trump administration.
	Does that bother you?
	See, that bothers me.
	To me, that's more bothersome than a mistake.
	Anybody can make a mistake and correct it.
	As we pointed out, the Trump administration did that.
	They mistakenly identified somebody and deported them to Iraq in the first administration.
	And they corrected that and brought it back.
	And then when they say, well, we made a mistake, but then you've got people like Stephen Miller and all these other people.
	Spokesperson, Pam Bondi, Caroline Lovett.
	They double down and they start doing ad hominem attacks on this guy about things that don't have anything to do with it.
	I mean, the trafficking issue where he got stopped in Tennessee, that's significant.
	But all this other stuff that they're doing about, well, you know.
	He had a protection order signed against him by his wife four years ago.
	Well, so what?
	That's not relevant.
	That's just character assassination, ad hominem attacks.
	He needs due process.
	And we need to see that due process is working, you see.
	This is in the same respect that, as I said, Trump has, there's a lot of bad people that did lawfare to him.
	It came after him for things that were not legitimate.
	And he needs to come after them and do something about it, but he needs to do it in a way that strengthens and upholds the rule of law, saying these people violated their position of trust for a personal vendetta, and we're not going to have that.
	Instead, what he's doing is, okay, well, it was a personal vendetta from them.
	Now I'm in charge.
	I'm going to show you who the strongman is.
	It's all about him.
	It's never about the rule of law.
	So Andy McCarthy said, there's no...
	Question that there was an order.
	He was not supposed to be sent.
	As Senator Kennedy said, that was a screw-up.
	In 20 years at the Justice Department, I had plenty of screw-ups, but the thing is, when the government screws up, it's supposed to fix it.
	And these guys are basically saying, yeah, we screwed it up, so what?
	He said, you know, try to do something about it.
	That's the key.
	Well, a couple of comments here on Kik, Knights of the Storm.
	Good to see you guys there.
	Again, KnightsoftheStorm.com.
	Check their programming.
	Check out their show.
	And they also have a list there where you can find a lot of like-minded shows.
	Can you make a short of the Elon story that we can spam on Twix?
	Yeah, we'll try to do that today.
	Thank you.
	I'm glad you liked it.
	On Rumble.
	T. Norman Artis said, the real ID is intended to collect biometrics and to contain your health information, all for your benefit, of course.
	Yeah, that's where it begins.
	You know, they're setting this up, and it's that shared and linked database.
	Once they've got that database, they're going to put all kinds of stuff in it.
	All kinds of stuff in it.
	And on Kik, JRun1 has subscribed on Kik.
	Thank you very much.
	We really do appreciate your support.
	We're going to take a quick break and we'll be right back.
	be right back.
	back. "The End"
	Making sense.
	Common again.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	The David Knight Show.
	Well, welcome back.
	And I want to thank people who have sent us checks.
	And these were the ones that I talked about earlier in the week.
	We are up to five-eighths now, including these, but I did not read these names off, so I just want to thank the people that are there.
	Fred and Jackie, thank you very much.
	Lloyd P., Stacy P., William G., John S., Stephanie K., Veronica Y., Scott C., Margaret Mary, T., David and Deborah W., Raymond B., Jeremy W.,
	Rodney D., and Felicia.
	Who sent us, Felicia M. from Alaska, who sent us a nice postcard.
	Very nice postcard there of Alaska, of a glacier.
	Which, by the way, is still there.
	It hasn't melted.
	They were supposed to all be gone by now.
	Isn't that interesting?
	And I wanted to say a special thank you to a couple who wanted to remain anonymous.
	And they said, I heard you talking about what happened with Rockfin.
	I was appalled.
	But they said that, you know, as I pointed out, We know that God is the one who will provide.
	But they stepped up and they said, we wanted to send you a check to cover what you lost on Rockfin, plus our usual monthly checks.
	I really do appreciate that.
	That is really kind.
	Thank you very much.
	I'll just mention this as well.
	This is from John S. He said, He said, I love Tony at Wise Wolf with his historical knowledge and his perspective.
	I feel sorry for the gullible who do not realize the digital pathway created from his or any other gold or silver coin cells to you, the receiver.
	So, you know, he agrees with Catherine Austin Fitz that it is a pump and dump.
	But, of course, you can also get out of that.
	And into gold at Tony's place.
	Again, he has dealt with Bitcoin in the past.
	It is something that has been very volatile in the past, and it's not something that I'm really interested in.
	But as a matter of fact, we've got somebody on today who is also somebody who, she's actually a Bitcoin advocate.
	Thank you.
	I like the gold.
	I like the silver because I like privacy.
	And I like the fact that I'm getting out of the system.
	And I do share Catherine Austin Fitz's concerns, and so does Tony, you know, about this possibly being rigged and what might happen with it in the future.
	But the reason I brought this up primarily was because, and I know many of you know this, you know, you can get more eggs out of the chickens.
	He said you can get them to, if you add lighting 18 hours a day, you can get them to lay eggs like crazy.
	He says he also has a fuel-less generator.
	From Creative Science and Research.
	And he says he bought the 92% kit, but you can purchase plans.
	The latest one, he says, makes 15 kilowatts.
	So that's kind of interesting.
	We're going to take a look at that and see what that is about.
	Finally, this is a card from Stacy.
	I'm so happy that your boy Travis and his beautiful wife and Whistler's nephew are home.
	You were missed, Travis.
	Miss hearing your mom chuckling at your dad's creative choice of words.
	Karen, you are awesome.
	Or we're awesome.
	She is.
	And I do miss that as well.
	Travis doesn't think I'm that funny, actually.
	But I want to talk a little bit about what is going on with the pharmaceutical stuff on this angle.
	RFK Jr.
	Now wants the CDC to stop recommending COVID shots for kids.
	Oh, isn't that nice?
	And that's good, you know.
	I mean, you shouldn't recommend them.
	You shouldn't push them.
	And they do have them on the childhood vaccine schedule, which is very important because that gives them a special kind of immunity.
	But this is the same type of thing, and I said this when it was done in Florida with Joseph Latipo, who's the Surgeon General in Florida under DeSantis.
	He stopped recommending the COVID shots.
	And yet, and it might have been just for a class of people.
	I can't remember if it was kids and the elderly or what it was.
	I think it was a caveat even for the age groups as well.
	And that's what he's saying here.
	Stop recommending it for kids.
	Stop recommending it for anybody, number one.
	Number two, this is a bioweapon injection.
	You ought to stop it.
	I'm glad that he's doing this, but I said that when it was Florida.
	You're the only people that are even saying, we don't recommend it.
	But how pathetic is that?
	And how does that show us what a chokehold this criminal industry has on our government?
	That even the ones who are giving us the most pushback, all they can do is say, well, I wouldn't recommend it for this group or that group.
	That's basically the stuff that I criticized Tucker Carlson for doing on Fox News.
	They would always bring that guy Mark Siegel on.
	He was a medical doctor.
	And, you know, he was push, push, push, push, push the vaccine.
	And they'd come back from, and they would put him on so that Tucker would throw to him or whatever.
	And people would cut it out.
	You know, they would cut out Tucker throwing to him, put it up on social media as well.
	And so they put it on there, and Tucker would kind of reluctantly throw to him.
	And then he would give his spiel about how, oh, everybody's got to have the vaccine.
	It's our only hope and all the rest of this stuff.
	And it's perfectly, it's 100% safe, 100% effective, yada, yada.
	And he would come back and Tucker would kind of do an eye roll and say, well, I'm not getting it.
	He said that once, at least.
	Maybe he said it more than once.
	I only saw him say it once.
	Well, it's the same type of thing here.
	Here's RFK Jr.
	Well, I wouldn't give it to my kids, you know.
	But I'm not going to stop them.
	And I'm not going to tell you why I wouldn't give it to my kids.
	I'm not going to tell you why I'm not going to take it.
	Because they've got control over me.
	They had control over Tucker because they were paying his, what, $25 million a year salary.
	Mostly coming from sponsors like them.
	And, you know, it just shows how controlled these people are.
	That the best you're going to get is say, well, I'm going to remove the recommendation to get it.
	It's a bioweapon.
	Do you really think that he's going to stop the bioweapon that Trump is so proud of as the father?
	I'm the father of the bioweapon, right?
	And then we have the other extreme in New York.
	In New York, they have, and this is not the first rodeo, they've done this several times.
	They put out a bill for mandatory vaccine reporting for adults in New York State.
	Mandatory vaccine reporting for adults, even.
	And it hasn't passed when they brought it up before.
	We don't know what's going to happen this time around.
	This time around, to help make it pass, he leans into the left-right divide.
	And he renames his bill the RFK Jr.
	Act.
	And he's got a nice little acronym there.
	It supposedly stands for Registry for Keeping Justified Records Act.
	Or the RFKJR Act.
	Yeah, and they write it with a space between the RFK and the J and lowercase r, just so you understand.
	So they're hoping that they can get it through now because they've added their left-right tribalism to it.
	But what is it actually?
	Health care providers will be required to report when they administer a vaccine to an adult unless a patient opts out.
	The database, what it does is you're tracking everyone who's gotten a shot.
	You can track anyone who hasn't gotten a shot, and you can use that to punish them.
	Now, I don't know in this particular bill if they have a box there that says refused.
	But you see, that was there under the Trump administration.
	The CDC put out the rules, and I remember they put them out in August of 2020, and I reported on it, and I showed the document that was leaked.
	They had it in a couple of states.
	They had sent it out.
	As a trial.
	And then in October, they sent out this form.
	Everybody was okay with it.
	I wasn't.
	And they sent the thing out in October of 2020.
	And I looked at it, and it's like, okay, it's got everybody's complete personal information on it.
	Name, address, Social Security, all of us.
	You name it.
	Everything there.
	And then it says the dates that you got the first shot and the booster.
	And who manufactured it and the lot number.
	And then the only other piece of information on there was a box that said refused.
	I said, look at that.
	Look at that.
	You could make an argument that tracking the lot number was to see if there was some kind of a medical issue with this or something.
	And of course, you know, obviously there was a medical issue with it, and they knew it, and they knew as Naomi Wolf went back and looked at the, collated the injuries to the lot numbers, because now they could get to that information, which is what they wanted to do.
	And she saw that the batches that were correlated to it was concentrated in just a few of them.
	And then went back and looked more.
	They found that the difference between different batches, the concentration of ingredients varied by a factor of 33. Some people got a 33 times stronger dose than other people did.
	That's why it wasn't across the board.
	And that was deliberate.
	And you were the lab rats for them.
	Because, you know, one of the things that they want to...
	To find out, even if it were a legitimate medication or something, they would want to know how much, what dosage was going to be effective and what dosage was going to be dangerous.
	And they probably want to know the same thing there, but they weren't trying to help anybody.
	And so, you know, but the key thing, too, was the fact refused.
	I said, why would they need to have that?
	Why would the CDC need to know if I had refused something?
	Well, they're saying, I don't know if it's on this form, when I read this article, I don't know if it's on the form, or they're saying that it could be inferred.
	In other words, if you're not in their database, then you're a refusenik, right?
	You're either with us, or you're against us, and our pharmaceutical masters.
	So, I don't know which it was, but I do know that under Trump, and in August 2020, the CDC put up a form that was going to track the people who had refused this.
	I know that's where they want to go.
	A mandatory database would, quote, lay the groundwork for digital vaccine passports, they said.
	That's exactly the point I made in August of 2020.
	What could be better for the vaccine industry than to have a government-mandated database?
	One person is basically free marketing for them.
	That's one of the beauties of the whole vaccine business.
	You don't have to advertise.
	You have government entities working to move your product.
	Yeah, the advertisement is not to get people to sign up for your pharmaceutical stuff.
	The advertising is there to pay off people like Tucker to keep quiet.
	That's why it's there.
	And then I saw this on Vaccine Impact.
	It was over in the corner, and I had missed this back in 2017.
	And it's there at VaccineImpact.com.
	It's a story.
	The headline is, German Supreme Court upholds biologists' claim.
	That measles virus does not exist.
	This is back in 2017.
	Eight years ago.
	Could there be something wrong with the germ theory?
	He says, yeah.
	A recent episode, and this is back in 2017, so it's not so recent now, recent when he put it up on the site.
	A recent episode in 2017 in Germany created a suppressed stir in the field of microbiology when microbiologist Dr. Stefan Lanka Claimed that he would award anyone 100,000 euros who could prove the existence of the measles virus.
	At first, it appeared that he had lost.
	But Dr. Lanka took his loss to a higher court with more experts.
	How in the world did I miss this?
	And it was in March of 2017.
	And I was really working more as a reporter.
	I wasn't doing a...
	Kind of a survey of all the news and everything I could do, you know, when I have my own show.
	My own show started in August, five months later.
	So I missed this.
	He had the backing of two independent laboratories.
	And so at first they said, well, I think we got you here.
	He said, no, that's not proof.
	And he took it to a court, and the court sided with him and said, no, that doesn't prove this.
	They've isolated measles.
	It turns out that so-called proof provided was a composite.
	Of several different electron microscope images.
	And the composite involved different components of damaged cells.
	And the composite could not be duplicated.
	You see, this is where the scientism comes in and science goes out the door.
	If you tell somebody you've got something, we've seen this happen over and over again with cold fusion, for example.
	Oh, look at this!
	I've got fusion at room temperature.
	Oh, yeah?
	Show us the data.
	Show us the thing, and we'll see if we can reproduce that.
	Sorry, we can't reproduce it.
	Nobody else can reproduce it.
	It didn't exist, right?
	They just throw it out.
	And that needs to be done with these types of claims as well.
	You need to show me your work.
	Show me your data.
	Can I duplicate it?
	If nobody can duplicate what you claim that you did, then we don't believe you.
	And the German Federal Supreme Court didn't believe this guy either.
	So he put up a 100,000 euro prize.
	If somebody could prove the existence of a measles virus.
	And nobody could.
	Nobody could.
	So why is all this panic out of the mainstream media?
	Oh, we got 600 cases.
	We got 700 cases of measles.
	It's like, okay, so what?
	Do you even have a virus?
	You've got people who had the rash, and the rash disappears, and unfortunately the child dies because something happened after they had the rash that was identified as measles, and because of what the parents say was alleged was malpractice,
	and yet the media is still pushing that out.
	Oh, we've had two kids who've died from this.
	No, you don't have one, if you look at the details.
	You have two children who died, but not from that.
	So how are they making MMR vaccines with attenuated measles viruses?
	That's what he wants to know, right?
	If the virus doesn't exist, how do you attenuate it?
	Well, you know, you just got these viruses and they're dead or weakened or attenuated and we just add some aluminum and mercury and all that kind of stuff.
	You can do that for Trump, can't you?
	You know, as Alex was saying.
	Yeah.
	Okay, so he and several other virologists have also challenged the HIV virus.
	Boy, that gets you purged.
	And it got a lot of people purged.
	They said, that's not a virus.
	And even if so, how could that cause AIDS?
	Some question how one virus could cause a myriad of diseases.
	They all question the fact that the virus is not isolated in diagnosis.
	Not in diagnosis.
	And again, this is the HIV stuff that goes back to Fauci's first rodeo with Kerry Mullis and the PCR.
	And Kerry Mullis said, well, you know, you can't prove HIV exists by using the PCR.
	It's not a diagnostic tool.
	You can find anything that you're looking for, and that's not isolating it at all.
	That's not how this thing works.
	But Fauci got away with it, and that's what he used in 2020.
	Instead, unreliable antibody tests were performed to put someone into life or death crisis over a virus that many claim doesn't even exist.
	Objectively examine the results of all the recent epidemic viral threats.
	And again, this is back in 2007.
	So what were they talking about then?
	Bird flu.
	First one on the list.
	Bird flu.
	Swine flu.
	Ebola.
	Zika.
	These certainly created a panic for more vaccines getting rushed into existence as well as getting more people vaccinated.
	The one germ, one disease theory certainly seems to be a great business model, though, for the medical-pharmaceutical-industrial complex because, hey, if we got one disease, one shot, that's how we get to 76 different shots for the kids, right?
	Of course, a lot of those are multiple boosters.
	Sometimes they hit the kids three or four times to get to that 76 for the same particular thing.
	Are the weapons creating chronic debilitating diseases in exchange for acute illnesses considered infectious that most manage to get over renewed resilience to the dreaded pathogenic microbes blamed for all illnesses?
	Are we actually destroying our immune system with our war on microbes?
	In other words, what they're saying is an acute illness.
	You might get a rash or something, and we call that measles, but it goes away.
	And is it really worth this short acute illness of a rash, maybe a fever, that type of thing?
	It's going to go away in a couple of days.
	Is it really worth that to have a debilitating disease that you're going to have for the rest of your life, like autism?
	Because you've been shot over and over again with the MMR and all the, you know, you can just take a little bit of aluminum and formaldehyde and all that kind of stuff in there.
	That's okay, right?
	Yeah.
	Do it for the pharmaceutical companies.
	Do it for Trump.
	Ever since Pasteur's claim to fame as the father of the germ theory, our overall health has decreased while lifespans have increased.
	Now there have been many scientists denouncing Pasteur's model of disease, even providing evidence that he was a plagiarist and a fraud, which I was surprised to see.
	Someone sent me a book with that, going over his diary.
	As early as the late 19th century, the 1800s, German biologist, Dr. Rudolf Virchow, known as the father of pathology, made this statement.
	He said, if I could live my life over again, I would devote it to proving, what?
	That germs seek their natural habitat, diseased tissue, rather than being the cause of the diseased tissue.
	This guy's a pathologist.
	He studies diseased tissue.
	And he thinks that it's not cause, but effect.
	That you have the bacteria there.
	The bacteria is not causing the diseased tissue.
	The bacteria is there because the tissue is diseased.
	He said, for example, mosquitoes seek stagnant water, but do not cause the pool to become stagnant.
	And there's also, of course, things coming up out of the water.
	I always think about Charles Darwin.
	When we took the kids to the British Museum, they have a shrine there to Charles Darwin, and you can see his desk and all the tools that he had.
	And he's got like a little magnifying glass that you would use if you're having trouble reading when you're elderly, you know, that type of thing.
	It's like, that's it?
	No wonder he got it so wrong.
	He would look at a glass of stagnant water, and he thought that the water was causing spontaneous generation of life.
	He didn't understand that there were microbes in there that were reproducing to such an extent that you could actually see them.
	It wasn't life coming from non-life.
	It was life that he couldn't see.
	It was getting large enough.
	That's basically what this guy was saying.
	You know, the mosquitoes are not...
	Mosquitoes seek out stagnant water.
	They don't cause the pool to become stagnant.
	And, you know, water does not give birth to life.
	We still have people doing that, though, don't they?
	I mean, you still have the astronomers who look through the telescope and they say, oh, that planet's got water, therefore there's life as we know it.
	Well, no, that's a necessary condition for that life.
	But it doesn't create it.
	It doesn't create it.
	Cause and effect.
	We're going to take a quick break.
	We'll be right back.
	Thank you.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	All right, welcome back.
	And on Rumble, DG8, thank you.
	He says, David, imagine Real ID during COVID.
	I warned people about it.
	And their shocking response is, Trump wouldn't do anything to harm Americans or our rights, except we have 2020.
	They're like his media.
	They question nothing.
	Yeah, that's right.
	It puts them to sleep.
	And, you know, he wasn't against Real ID.
	And, of course, They have created this problem.
	And it's a real problem.
	Bringing in millions of people, single, young adults, come on.
	This is not the Ellis Island experience or the Plymouth Rock experience at all.
	Those people, when they came here, they weren't coming here for welfare.
	That didn't exist.
	And they were going to have to be self-sufficient.
	And if they didn't have anything except the clothes on their back, they would come here for liberty and they worked hard.
	And that's why I say get rid of the welfare magnet.
	If there's no welfare magnet and people want to come in and work, we need people who want to work hard.
	And so, but yeah, this is a completely separate thing.
	And it was designed to create a problem because they had a solution in mind already.
	On Rumble, Mac Pool, thank you very much.
	I appreciate that.
	That's very kind.
	Thanks and good luck.
	And also on Rumble, Geese Busters, good to see you.
	Thank you so much for that.
	I appreciate that as well.
	Also left a tip on Rumble.
	And on Rumble, Honor Seeker, thank you.
	David, thank you for all you do.
	You guys are greatly appreciated.
	Well, thank you very much, and I really do appreciate the people who support us.
	We try to put it out there for free because I want people to get this information, but it is just voluntary, so we really do appreciate that.
	Let's talk a little bit about this article from the New York Times.
	I thought it was truly amazing.
	The New York Times asks, What do we owe this cluster of cells?
	Stop and think about it, right?
	And in this context, they're not talking about abortion necessarily, directly.
	They're talking about in vitro fertilization.
	Fertilization in the glass.
	That's what in vitro means.
	And this story is from AnswersInGenesis.org.
	By the way, I would highly recommend their curriculum for kids.
	It's what we used.
	Great stuff in it.
	They've got a great Creation Museum, as well as the Ark Experience.
	If you go up to, as a matter of fact, behind me over here, that's the thing from the Ark Experience.
	But the Creation Museum, what they'll do is they'll say, okay, here's the evidence that we've got.
	And the creationists will understand it this way, and the evolutionists will understand it this way.
	And here's another piece of evidence.
	Here's the interpretation of these two sides.
	That's a great way to train kids for critical thinking.
	And it's also important that they understand that the Bible is not a bunch of fairy tales at all.
	Anyway, so this is from the New York Times, a mother of one baby and a journalist.
	She conceived that baby via IVF.
	She still has six babies that are frozen.
	And so she said, what do I owe this cluster of cells?
	And you know, we've had so-called medical ethicists.
	Peter Singer, I think was the guy's name, and he said, you know, I mean, it's basically developmental.
	If, you know, by his definition, we could kill toddlers because they're not up to the level that he would arbitrarily set as a good quality of life.
	So we would kill people with Down syndrome.
	We'd kill toddlers.
	We'd kill all kinds of people, right?
	This is the path.
	And then at the end of life.
	The end of life, if you've lost mental capacities, it will kill you there too as well.
	It turns into a culture of death once you start to do that.
	And so when you just say, well, it's a cluster of cells, well, how many cells do you have to have?
	Because these things multiply very, very rapidly.
	So at what point are you going to recognize this as a human being?
	A worldview that views embryos as nothing more than a cluster of cells.
	It's a worldview that can be manipulated.
	And these cells can be discarded at the will of parents or doctors or embryologists or governments either, right?
	And so she shows a picture of the embryo.
	She says, this is the embryo that became my daughter.
	They said, notice the word became.
	That cluster of cells is a unique person.
	With a combination of DNA that has never been seen before, will never be seen again, DNA that codes for sex, for hair color, for eye color, skin shade, so much more.
	And she writes in the New York Times, she said, though, I'm now the parent of a toddler I love more than I could have ever imagined and in possession of six remaining embryos, frozen and waiting for my decision on their fate.
	She said, I have a complicated relationship with them.
	And I vacillate between wanting the finality of deciding and holding on to the possibility that they might one day, under circumstances yet unknown, come to life.
	And so Answers in Genesis comments and says, well, she knows she holds the power of life and death over these unborn children.
	She only has a, quote, complicated relationship with them because she refuses to recognize their humanity.
	You see, this is where it all begins.
	It's where all the eugenics and the mass murder and the wars, it's where it all begins.
	It's the ethics of mass murder.
	It's the ethics of slavery.
	That person's not fully human.
	You know, the slaves aren't fully human.
	That ethnic group is not fully human.
	That nationality is not fully human.
	And then on the basis of removing that humanity from them, now you're free to do to them whatever you wish.
	The article features interviews with a variety of scientists involved with experiments on embryos, some of whom struggle with the ethics of their work, others who see the destruction of life as a non-issue.
	One scientist was involved with the first embryos grown to 14 days, which is the current guideline for how long a baby can be grown in a lab, and the author describes the end of the so-called experiment.
	He says, these embryos, says the answers in Genesis, are unique people.
	Made in God's image.
	And they're just referred to as samples.
	That deserve nothing more than being photographed and then tossed as, quote, medical waste.
	This is the culture of death.
	Scientists who believe in this kind of research and are pushing to be allowed to grow embryos past 14 days believe they're helping humanity by doing so.
	You know, I mentioned earlier this week, Scott Schera.
	His trial is coming up for his daughter, Grace.
	I think it was ouramazinggrace.net.
	Double-check me on that, Travis.
	And anyway, he's telling people the trial is coming up so that you can follow the trial so that if you're in the area, you can go and support them and show support.
	But, you know, it was ouramazinggrace.net.
	Okay.
	And it's a tribute.
	To her life.
	She was dearly loved by her family, had a very rich and full life.
	She got sick during the COVID lockdown nonsense.
	They isolated her from her family and killed her.
	And it's not malpractice.
	The judge is going to allow the charge of wrongful death to be adjudicated.
	I don't know if that's exactly the charge that's there, but it's not malpractice.
	It's beyond that.
	But they put do not resuscitate on, and he believes that it was because she had Down syndrome.
	And, you know, when you look at these people who are eugenicists, and in this article, they go on and they talk about another article that is in the series, an opinion piece,
	Should Human Life Be Optimized?
	And it's a story of Noor Sadiqi.
	Who founded a genetic screening company.
	Her mother went blind in her 30s due to a spontaneous mutation in her DNA, which prompted the daughter to eventually found this company as a way of screening out people who might have that genetic defect.
	And as I point out, in other words, she screens embryos to ensure that children like her mother are never born.
	Rather, those embryos are destroyed and healthier.
	Better embryos are embraced instead, right?
	And so this is the eugenics that is there.
	And, you know, this is why when, you know, we were older, when we had our child and Whistler, and Whistler's mother refused the amniose and diseases because, you know,
	like any procedure has got a possibility of something.
	Harming, right?
	And we looked at it and it's like, well, we're not going to do an abortion even if it comes back positive.
	And Karen had a very dear friend who's now passed on, died of breast cancer.
	And she had twins and they did the test.
	She was a nurse and she'd do all the medical stuff.
	And it came back positive.
	And they were right.
	One of the children had Down syndrome.
	They would have killed both of them.
	And so they had a...
	perfectly normal child and the child who had down syndrome was a real blessing also a challenge no doubt about it but also dearly loved and a blessing as well and so you know this is the type of thing as a matter of fact this woman would have aborted her
	own mother she wouldn't even exist if people had had this kind of eugenics that is there so
	As Answers in Genesis says, potentially, potentially saving future babies does not justify the present killing of babies.
	The end and the good intentions towards an end do not justify a bad means.
	We talk about this when we talk about wars.
	The company also goes further, offering what is known as polygenic screening, which gives parents what is essentially a risk profile on each embryo's propensity for conditions such as heart disease.
	But guess what?
	We're all going to die.
	You know, sorry, your child is going to be human, which means that they're going to die of something.
	So maybe we should just abort them now.
	It is really kind of insane logic if you look at it.
	But it is also eugenics.
	The idea that you're going to have a perfect baby and everybody else gets thrown on the trash heap.
	The person who put this together, Nur Sadikwi, says, Sex is for fun and embryo screening is for babies.
	And it's going to become insane not to screen for these things.
	One person replied and said, Well, genetic testing is for eugenicists.
	And eugenics is for Nazis.
	Or let's just make it more contemporary.
	And let's just say eugenics is for totalitarian technocracies, like Brave New World.
	That's really what we're talking about here.
	That's a much better picture, much more comprehensive, much more indicative of where this is all headed.
	We're going to have the government doing the eugenics for everyone.
	And so Answers in Genesis says both of the articles were very long filled with ethical questions and quote-unquote answers from researchers who are desperately trying to justify their destruction of human life.
	But ultimately, it's only the biblical worldview that can give final and settled answers to these ethical questions, and it's really simple.
	We are not God.
	All these people who are doing this, you know, the scientists, the government people, they all think that they're God, but they're not.
	We don't have the authority to decide who lives and who dies.
	We don't have a justification to remove somebody's humanity from them because they're not as smart as we are or because they have some debilitating thing, whether it's physical or mental or whatever, or because they don't have a life expectancy that is very long.
	How long do you expect that you're going to live?
	None of us knows if we're going to live till tomorrow.
	So how in the world can you justify killing somebody because you don't expect them to live?
	So we don't get to create life.
	We can destroy it, however.
	Every life, no matter the age or the level of development or the location or the level of ability or the future health risks, everyone is made in God's image and therefore has sanctity and value.
	This, folks, is the key thing that stands in direct opposition to people like B.F. Skinner, And it's beyond freedom and dignity.
	He wants to treat you like an animal.
	And he thinks that he's God.
	So, again, all of that applies to different ethnicities, different nationalities as well.
	And you don't get a get-out-of-hell free card to do mass murder because you label somebody Amalekites or something, right?
	Because you've got a prophecy that you've interpreted.
	You don't get to do that.
	Look, God removed Israel out of the land once, and he used horrible people to do it, and he told them how horrible they were going to be.
	And then he judged the people who did it, even though he had ordained that.
	Do you want to be that person?
	Do you want to be the Babylonians or the Assyrians or whatever?
	Do you want to be the people that are removing people out of the land?
	And because God judged those people as well.
	Well, what we're talking about, Children and families in adoption, we had Boutier go on a broadcast.
	And he said when he and his pal, he calls his husband, same-sex mirage, he said when they adopted, he said he realized that they've got lists.
	You can get on a list and say, I only want a white kid.
	And he said, that takes longer and it costs more money.
	So I guess they went the cheap route, right?
	He says, we didn't have to pay a deposit on the fetus if you didn't want only white kids.
	And he says, that's really kind of racist.
	It's like, yeah, it is.
	And, you know, for him, the way he's talking about it, of course, probably is.
	Commercial transaction.
	You know, buying and selling.
	It's absolutely amazing.
	He points out there's a long line, and so, yeah, there is a long line for adopting kids.
	So why do you have two guys on that list when they are intact?
	Normal families.
	And I say normal because families are defined by God, not by the Supreme Court, not by booty gay, not by these leftist Marxists.
	God has defined what a family is.
	And unfortunately, it's difficult to keep that together in America.
	Divorce has become widely accepted.
	And it's a tragedy for everybody that's involved in it.
	But God has defined what a family is.
	And that should be what we aspire to, even if we can't achieve it in our life.
	In 2021, black children represented 14% of the nation's total population but accounted for 22% of all kids in foster care.
	A 2023 study found that white children were 1.27 times more likely to be adopted than black children.
	Well, I'll tell you what our experience was.
	I mean, before we adopted from China and before we did the open adoption with Travis, we had contacted North Carolina Children's Home.
	Karen contacted them, and she said, I'd like to know you do adoptions.
	We don't do adoptions.
	If we did adoptions, what would we do?
	I mean, we'd be out of business.
	That's what they told her on the phone.
	It's a business for them.
	Oh, so you're child traffickers.
	Okay, we got it.
	And then we go to another meeting, and it was about adoption.
	And we went in, and the place was standing room only.
	It was packed by the fire inspector would have given him a ticket.
	And they said, well, okay, you're all white, and we don't do interracial adoption, so we don't have any kids for you.
	If you're black, or if you know anybody who's black, we have lots of black kids that are up for adoption, but we don't have any white kids that are up for adoption.
	We're not going to allow you to adopt either.
	And that was a situation there.
	Now, they changed that in North Carolina.
	Subsequent years, we have some friends there, and they were able to adopt a sibling group.
	Where the parents are gone, and they were black, and the parents and the family that adopted them was white.
	So that's not there anymore.
	In 2015, a foster care newsletter reported that it cost approximately $35,000 to adopt a white child, but only $18,000 for a black child.
	And that's what Boutiguet was saying.
	Yeah, we got our child cheaper and faster.
	Actually, they adopted two.
	Two.
	Yeah.
	When interracial adoptions first began to take off in the 1970s, some organizations, including the National Association of Black Social Workers, advised against interracial adoption.
	Yeah, it goes both ways.
	There are a lot of people who didn't want that.
	Now, here's a positive story.
	I like to give positive stories, and there's so few of them, especially when we're talking about celebrities.
	This is Jay Leno talking about his wife.
	With dementia.
	It's really rare.
	Really rare that we see somebody who is wealthy and well-known, celebrity, and has character.
	So he's opening up about what life now looks like as he's caring for his wife, Mavis, following her dementia diagnosis.
	In January, he revealed that laughter has remained their lifeline.
	He said, and they've been married since 1980.
	He went public with her dementia diagnosis, and he's now been granted conservatorship to manage her care.
	And I thought, what's up with that?
	I mean, they've been married for 45 years.
	Has to go to a court to get conservatorship?
	I don't understand.
	Anyway, he explained that while the dynamic of their decades-long marriage has shifted, he says, in essence, it hasn't.
	He says, it's basically what we did before, except now I have to feed her.
	And do all those things.
	But I like it.
	I like taking care of her.
	She's a very independent woman.
	So I like that I'm needed.
	He said, when you get married, you take a vow.
	Will I live up to this?
	Or will I be like a sleazy guy if something happens to my wife?
	I'm banging the cashier at the mini-mart.
	No, I didn't.
	I enjoy the time with my wife.
	I go home.
	I cook dinner for her.
	We watch TV and it's okay.
	What a contrast to somebody I know named Donald Trump.
	Talk about a sleazy guy.
	What if instead of just abandoning her, what if you threw her to the wolves and publicly humiliated her, as he does his employees when he fires them as well?
	He says it's not easy.
	He said, He said,
	And I'm glad that I didn't run off with some woman half my age or any other silly nonsense.
	I would rather be with her than doing something else, he said.
	They spend...
	This is how I thought it was funny.
	They spent time watching The Tonight Show together, reruns on YouTube.
	He said, I still make her laugh every day.
	He said, she enjoyed watching his old headlines segments on YouTube.
	My wife enjoys those.
	And it's like she forgets that she just saw it.
	He says, so she laughs again at the same jokes.
	So for a comedian, that's great.
	He told her the same jokes and she thinks it's...
	Funny each time.
	He said, sticking with Mavis is not just about loyalty.
	It's about choosing love every day.
	That's it.
	So he's not doing this out of duty.
	He's not doing it out of stoicism.
	I made this oath.
	I've got to do it.
	No, he's doing it out of love.
	Isn't that amazing?
	And so what about our children?
	What about homeschooling them?
	A piece from the Mises.org by Lou Rockwell.
	And he gets it.
	He gets it.
	He says the title of this is The Menace of Public Education.
	And he emphasizes the public with air quotes, right?
	It's the public education.
	Like I said, it's public education.
	It's public health.
	It's public transportation.
	We've got to get the public out of our lives.
	They don't belong there.
	They're going to come in and start making demands that...
	Just ignore the individual.
	He says, parents are rightly concerned about what's happening in our so-called public schools.
	Crazed educators, and puts the educators in quote, are encouraging impressionable children to try to transition to another sex as if that was something possible.
	Students are taught sexual promiscuity is good.
	They're brainwashed to accept socialist attacks on our free enterprise system.
	Yeah, isn't that interesting?
	How thoroughly immersed we are in Brave New World.
	You know, I began by talking about eugenics.
	Test tube babies are going to lead to hatcheries and all the rest of this stuff.
	Full-on eugenics.
	And, you know, I've seen people have talked about it in the past.
	And, you know, do we live more in a Brave New World or do we live in 1984?
	Orwell's 1984.
	And I said, well, you know, my opinion is I think we live in both of them.
	I think they give us the Brave New World experience, and then if we're not content to live that world, then we get the 1984 experience, right?
	They go Orwellian on us.
	The Trump administration, he says, and governors like Ron DeSantis have tried to solve the problem by issuing directives to schools, but he doesn't think that's going to happen, just like I don't think it's going to happen.
	He says teachers who have been indoctrinating our children are well entrenched.
	And it will be extremely difficult to curb their baleful influence.
	And they have gone online saying, you know, in Texas, Abbott put in some reforms.
	And they said, well, I'm not going to teach that.
	I'll teach them what I want to teach.
	They're in my classroom.
	There's nobody watching.
	I can say anything that I want to.
	I can do anything I want to.
	I can show them anything I want to.
	That's the reality.
	And that was one of the things that woke up a lot of people.
	During the lockdown, when they saw what was happening in some of these classrooms.
	No matter how much good these efforts may accomplish, they failed to deal with the real problem, and that is the very existence of public education.
	Schools run by the state are inherently institutions that propagandize what the state wants school children to learn.
	And Lou Rockwell quotes Murray Rothbard.
	He said, Murray Rothbard said, the key issue is simply this.
	Or the state be the overseer of the child.
	An essential feature of human life is that for many years a child is relatively helpless.
	His powers are providing for himself mature late.
	And until these powers are fully developed, he cannot completely act for himself as a responsible individual.
	He must be under tutelage.
	And this tutelage is a complex and difficult task.
	From an infancy of complete dependency, And subjection to adults, the child must grow up gradually.
	The question is, under whose guidance and whose virtual ownership, quote-unquote, the child should be?
	His parents are the states.
	You know, we have Melissa Harris Perry say, you've got to get over this notion that parents own their children.
	Well, if they don't own their children, who does?
	It's a virtual ownership.
	Somebody's got to take responsibility for them.
	Oh, well, the state should be doing that.
	The community, the village.
	Now, the village doesn't act together, right?
	It's just like public health.
	So it's going to be some politician that's going to be setting the policy for what all this stuff is.
	And, you know, Murray Rothbard looks at this from an economic standpoint, looks at it from a philosophical standpoint, looks at it from a liberty standpoint.
	As I pointed out before, R.L. Dabney...
	In the 1870s, looked at it from a religious standpoint.
	And it's like, okay, this person's saying, well, who's going to be the parent?
	Somebody's got to be the parent.
	Is it going to be the state or is it going to be the person?
	R.L. Dabney said, well, religion's going to be taught one way or the other.
	The question is, whose religion?
	Is it going to be the religion of the state?
	Is it going to be somebody else's state religion?
	Well, then we get rid of the First Amendment, right?
	Because you will be establishing a religion.
	And our schools have established a religion.
	That's why everything is so bad.
	It's a bad religion.
	Anyway, the question is, under whose guidance?
	There is no third or middle ground.
	Some party will control.
	And no one suggests that some individual third party have authority to seize the child and to rear it.
	Well, that was when Murray Rothbard's time, but now they have.
	He said, the parents are the most intimate relationship to them.
	The parents have the ties of family affection to the child.
	The parents are interested in the child as an individual and are the most likely to be interested and familiar with his requirements and personality.
	The one who knows them best and who loves them the most.
	And yes, there are bad parents out there.
	But we don't make these rules based on exceptions.
	If the state takes over schooling, this is a clear violation of the parents' rights.
	The only logical alternative to parental ownership of the child is for the state to seize the infant from the parents and to rear it completely itself.
	Which is really where all this embryonic eugenics and everything is ultimately going to.
	It's ultimately going to Brave New World.
	And this is not a new idea.
	Plato had suggested that.
	And his republic.
	Yeah, we're going to have, you know, a couple of different classes of citizens.
	We'll have the elites and we'll have the guards and the strong police force and everything.
	And then we'll have the other people.
	We don't want them to even know who their parents are.
	We want them to see the state as their parents.
	And of course, Huxley just added some scientific manipulation to it to say we're going to force these kids into these different strata.
	So, but...
	Ultimately, and inevitably, this type of attitude is going to take us to eugenics.
	It's not just that the technology is doing it.
	It's that we're being prepared mentally, culturally, spiritually for this type of thing.
	What will the state teach?
	You might think that this would depend on the kind of state that it is, and to some extent that's true.
	Schools under Trump will differ from those under Biden, but there is nevertheless an underlying pressure that leads the state to impose uniformity and to teach obedience to the government.
	Rothbard said it is inevitable That the state would impose uniformity on the teaching of charges.
	Not only is uniformity more congenial to the bureaucratic temper and easier to enforce, this would be almost inevitable where collectivism has supplanted individualism.
	Have we gotten to that point yet?
	I think we have.
	Everybody sees themselves as part followers of some leader or part of a party or movement.
	It's very rare to see people stand apart from an organization, identify themselves as an individual.
	Like I said, it's one of the things I loved about Last of the Mohicans, you know, is that character that was so American at the time that James Fenimore Cooper wrote it, you know.
	I'm not with the British, and I'm not necessarily, you know, and I'm not with these other Indians, the French and Indian War.
	He wasn't with the French, he wasn't with the British, he wasn't with that Indian tribe, you know, he was there on his own.
	Above all, what would be taught is the doctrine of obedience to the state itself, for tyranny is not really congenial to the spirit of man who requires freedom for his full development.
	Therefore, techniques of inculcating reverence for despotism And other types of thought control are bound to emerge.
	Oh, well, they're here.
	He says, Lou Rockwell says, Rothbard was a great historian.
	His theoretical account aligns with what actually happened.
	Rothbard said, America began for the most part with a system of either completely private or with philanthropic schools.
	Then, in the 19th century, the concept of public education changed subtly until everybody was urged to go to public school.
	Private schools are accused of being divisive.
	Finally, the state imposed, and the echoes of that were always there, but what about socialism?
	They didn't say socialism.
	How do you socialize your kid?
	Or something like that, right?
	It's like, well, I don't want them to be socialist.
	But it's like, what are you doing?
	And then these are the same people who lock the kids up, who put masks on them, even if they weren't at school, they put them in their own little plastic bubble and all the rest of the stuff.
	It's like, oh, but what about getting to know other people?
	No, no, you're just talking about, how do we build a hive mind?
	You're going to raise kids that are outside of the hive mind.
	Finally, the state imposed compulsory education on people, either forcing children to go to public schools or setting up arbitrary standards for private schools.
	Parental instruction was frowned upon.
	Thus, the state has been warring with parents for control over their children.
	And so he anticipated what we see today.
	He said there's going to be a passion for equality in general and for equal results.
	Not for equality of opportunity, but for equality of outcome.
	The Harrison Bergeron attitude, as Kurt Vonnegut.
	The result has been a tendency to regard every child as unequal to every other child, as deserving equal treatment, to impose complete uniformity in the classroom.
	Since the state began to control education, its evident tendency has been more and more to act in such a manner as to promote repression and hindrance of education, rather than the true development of the individual.
	Its tendency has been for compulsion.
	For enforced equality at the lowest level, for the watering down of the subject, and even the abandonment of all formal teaching, for the inculcation of obedience to the state and to the group.
	And you see, this is why when we see the so-called reforms about the Department of Education, the Department of Education's function is not going away.
	Its primary function is to bribe people.
	And to blackmail people with money.
	And they're still going to do those grants.
	They're just going to reorganize it, and they're going to make you think for a while that it's gone away.
	But all the bribery and blackmail and the strings that are attached to it will all still be there.
	And it'll be used by one administration or the other to push their preferred religion, their preferred curriculum.
	So, yeah, it's the groupthink of both the left and the right.
	And their fantasy that if we have just the right president, all the problems will be solved.
	And quite frankly, that is the path to a civil war as well.
	Because as both the left and the right get so rapidly focused on, well, the only way we're going to solve these problems is by getting our guy in the White House.
	That's going to be the only outcome.
	On kick, a Syrian girl.
	Good to see you.
	Teachers are little Caesars in their classrooms.
	They like the power to warp little minds.
	I don't see things changing in the public cesspools.
	That's absolutely right.
	You know what?
	When I was growing up, there really wasn't a way to opt out.
	It was all compulsory.
	Now, Carl Hess, who was older than me, his mother, you know, kept moving and kept moving to stay one step out of the truancy officer who would have taken him away.
	But, you know, in general...
	You had to go to school.
	Homeschooling was not an option.
	And I remember you talking about Little Caesar, but I immediately go back to the advanced science teacher I had in 7th and 8th grade.
	And she turned me against science.
	It took about another 5 years, 6 years for me to get back into it.
	I was very much into it.
	And she was just unbelievable to bully the kids in her classroom.
	It really, really bothers me as an adult to think about how she ran things there.
	On Rumble, DG8 says, David, IVF is from the pits of hell.
	God creates life, not scientists in the lab.
	How many Christians can accept this is crazy?
	Trusting this Frankenstein science is insane.
	God help us.
	Yeah, I mean, that's it.
	It goes, we know where it's going to head.
	And not any question about that, where the general issue is going to head.
	We're going to take a quick break and we'll be right back.
	be right back.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Well, we were talking in the last segment about IVF, about eugenics, and all the rest of this stuff, and of course it is deciding what is a human being.
	And it's necessary for us to take away the humanity from human beings in order for us to kill them at the beginning of life or the end of life or after they've been injured.
	It's also necessary for us to do that if we're going to have a war.
	And it's kind of interesting.
	We saw Russia striking Kiev on Wednesday.
	Trump reacted yesterday.
	The defense ministry in Russia said that his forces carried out massive strikes on Ukraine, claiming that it targeted Ukrainian industries linked to its military.
	Well, they'll always say that, except that they hit a lot of civilians.
	The goal of the strike has been accomplished.
	All targets have been hit, they said.
	Zelensky said the Russians fired a total of 66 missiles, 145 drones.
	Ukrainian forces also fired drones at Russian territory, with the Russian Defense Ministry saying its forces downed 90 Ukrainian drones.
	I'm not sure how many were fired in total, but, you know, they're doing this exchange.
	And so, as Trump is trying to broker a peace between the two sides, and Zelensky says he doesn't want it, And then Russia fires these drones into, Putin fires these drones into the capital of Ukraine, Kiev.
	Trump puts out on social media.
	He says, Vladimir, stop!
	All uppercase, stop!
	5,000 soldiers a week are dying.
	Let's get the peace deal done, he said.
	He said, I'm not happy with the Russian strikes on Kiev.
	Well, good.
	I absolutely endorse that message.
	Vladimir, stop!
	Let's stop the war!
	At least five neighborhoods in the capital city were hit.
	Multiple residential buildings were heavily damaged.
	On top of the 12 people killed by the bombardment, at least 90 were wounded.
	However, Trump is very selective in terms of his concern about human life, isn't he?
	Because while he will tweet out, Vladimir, stop!
	People are being killed every day here.
	He doesn't do that with Bibi.
	He doesn't tweet out, Bibi, stop!
	And when we look at that, there were 12 people who were killed in this raid against Kiev.
	And yet, Israeli strikes, including the bombing of a school-turned-shelter, killed 13 just in that one location.
	And they also bombed a children's hospital.
	And in 24 hours, not 12, but 38 Palestinians were killed in 24 hours.
	Israeli attacks killed at least 38 Palestinians, wounded 105 over the previous 24 hours.
	As U.S.-backed Israeli strikes pound targets across the Strip.
	There are still a number of victims under the rubble and on the streets, an ambulance and civil defense.
	Crews cannot reach them, they said.
	We are sleeping, and suddenly something exploded, and we started looking and found the whole school on fire.
	The tents here and there were on fire.
	Everything was on fire.
	Travis, pull up the picture there in that article from Anti-War.
	It's a picture of two twin girls being held by their family, and let's see, is that the hill?
	Let's see.
	No, that's the next one.
	Israeli attacks kill 38 Palestinians.
	In this picture, two young girls dead and being held.
	People were shouting.
	Men were carrying children.
	Charred people.
	Yeah.
	Charred children.
	And they were walking and saying, Dear God, dear God, we have no one but you.
	What else can we say?
	Dear God only.
	And there's a picture of those.
	Those twin girls being held there.
	See, this is why we look at wars.
	We need to be stopping them, not just in Ukraine.
	We need to be stopping them in Gaza as well.
	And we need to stop focusing on killing civilians.
	And this, unfortunately, is something that really took a big turn for the worse in World War II and has been a hallmark of all of our wars since then.
	Since Israel started its genocidal war on March 18th, 1,928 Palestinians have been killed.
	5,055 have been injured.
	Since March 2nd, Israel has maintained a total blockade on Gaza.
	And they are starving children.
	And so, in the midst of all that, you have the Israeli Defense Minister, Ben Gavir, goes to Mar-a-Lago.
	And has a luxury decadent feast there as children being murdered and starved.
	And he says that the Republicans support his plan to bomb food in Gaza.
	Israeli National Security Minister Ben-Gvir.
	Said on Wednesday that during the meeting at Mar-a-Lago, he received support from Republican leadership for his plan to bomb food and aid warehouses in Gaza.
	They expressed support for my very clear position on how to act in Gaza and that the food and aid warehouses should be bombed in order to create military and political pressure to bring our hostages home safely, he said.
	The Trump administration has strongly backed Israel's blockade on aid and the collective punishment of the civilian population in Gaza.
	Which is a clear war crime under international law, writes antiwar.com.
	I see the reports about the debate over who should deliver quote-unquote humanitarian aid to Gaza, he said.
	Well, this is fundamentally foolish debate, because not a single gram of aid should ever enter the entire strip, as long as our hostages are being held there.
	And so stop and think about this.
	Let's pull this down because, you know, we talk about big abstractions and we talk about groups and nations and borders and tribes and ethnicities and all this other kind of stuff.
	We start to miss the humanity of this.
	So let's take it down to something that's simple.
	Let's say that you got some bank robbers who take over, they get caught in the midst of a robbery and they take the people inside the bank hostage.
	And they say, you're going to give us what we want, or we're going to start killing hostages.
	Right?
	And how do we view that?
	If they come out and they slit the throat of one hostage, and then they do another, well, that's a tragedy, isn't it?
	But if you slit the throats of 2,000 people, now, as Stalin said, it's a statistic, isn't it?
	No, it's still a tragedy.
	It's still a tragedy for the family that holds those twin girls in their arms, isn't it?
	And so it's okay for some people to kill civilians, but it's not okay for other people to kill civilians.
	And either way, we've got to keep the killing going.
	It's got to go.
	It's got to keep going.
	There's no other alternative.
	We've got to have our way.
	And those people are not real people.
	They're not the same level as us.
	That's also part of it.
	And so you give me what I want, I'm going to slit their throat.
	I've got these civilians, and I'm going to hold them hostage.
	I mean, is it any different, right?
	Gaza, Hamas is holding Israeli hostages, and Israel is holding Gazan hostages.
	Both sides are holding civilians hostage, saying, you give me what I want, or I'm going to kill them.
	Children in the Gaza Strip are the most severe stages of maltrition, and it's difficult to follow them up medically due to the shortage of therapeutic drugs and baby formula, said a physician at one of the hospitals.
	Dave DeCamp at antiwar.com says Ben Gavir is an outspoken proponent of the ethnic cleansing of Gaza.
	You see, that's what they really want.
	It's not even about an exchange of hostages.
	You know, it's...
	If it were like that, it would be if Hamas was holding the hostages, taking the hostages and say, okay, you stop bombing and starving people or we're going to start slitting the throats of the hostages that we hold.
	Well, they're not doing that.
	But, of course, they don't care about their own people either, right?
	Hamas doesn't care about the people in Gaza.
	Israel doesn't really care about the hostages, the Israeli hostages.
	They want the land.
	Both of these people are playing their particular game.
	And so we have the Secretary of HHS, RFK Jr., prohibiting NIH scientists from criticizing Israel.
	You know, it's interesting, isn't it, that while RFK Jr. is talking about healthy food, and he should, and nutrition, he's fully on board with the government that is starving children to death.
	Wow.
	Because...
	Of their ethnicity.
	Or because of their nationality.
	Or because they unfortunately live in an area that somebody else wants to own.
	So the NIH is underneath HHS.
	All underneath RFK Jr.
	Of course he has said that anti-Semitism is a disease.
	But I think so is government.
	So is tyranny a disease?
	Certainly is.
	Lee Fang says, the NIH has promised an era of free speech and free expression, but new rules are attempting to chill speech if it's related to Israel.
	And they pointed out that there have been recent boycotts of protesting corporations that did business in North Carolina.
	You know, that was over the bathroom issues.
	They said, we're going to boycott North Carolina.
	Well, that was okay to them.
	But, you know, or China, whatever.
	But that right no longer exists.
	When it comes to Israel.
	So researchers, university employees who engage in certain nonviolent protests or political expression over human rights conditions in Israel may risk civil and criminal penalties, according to a new policy from the National Institute of Health yesterday,
	the largest public funder of biomedical research in the world, and it touches virtually every corner of the scientific community.
	The blanket boycott suppression is a radical expansion of the so-called anti-BDS rules that restrict Americans from boycotting or from divestment from Israeli-related businesses.
	So that's where we are.
	I mean, these principles matter.
	Principles of free speech, the principles of the sanctity of human life, of not removing the humanity from people.
	So that you can kill them as a clump of cells or as a clump of people that I don't like, right?
	That's the reality.
	Well, we're going to take a quick break, and we're going to connect with our guest, who is...
	She's got a book, and I really liked her perspective.
	It was very positive.
	And she also talks about Bitcoin things, but mainly I wanted to talk to her about her book, Why the World Doesn't Make Sense.
	And she's got a lot of other things as well.
	Are we going to have an empire?
	Are we going to have freedom?
	So we're going to talk a little bit about that.
	But as an introduction, To Christine Monita, I wanted to play this little introduction that she's got to her book, and we'll be right back with her.
	Hey there!
	My name's Chris Monitas, and I wrote a book called Why the World Doesn't Make Sense, Reclaiming the Liberty You Didn't Know You Lost.
	For those of you who don't know me, I help folks at all stages of life learn to think more deeply, challenge the status quo, and find financial and personal freedom, independence, and sovereignty.
	A word that's not often fully understood.
	We're living in a time where it feels like the rules keep changing, where nothing in our secular society, politics, culture, the economy, adds up the way it should.
	Because we don't understand some pretty fundamental truths and have allowed words and their meanings to be inverted and used against us, we've sacrificed our inalienable rights.
	We've allowed our own government to be manipulated and turned against us, allowed the weapon of money to be used against us, allowed a bureaucratic state to develop and control us.
	We've been distracted from confronting the truths that matter most and have failed to have the words to stand up as truth and first principles thinking were banished from our schools and universities.
	I could go on and on.
	The good news is that while we've allowed this to happen, we hold the power to change it.
	The reality is we should never have to depend upon another person for our own success, for our own happiness.
	Elections are great, but if we really want to be free, if we really want it to last, it starts with us, the individual.
	Another concept, it's high time we understand.
	I believe it's time for an era of civic renewal.
	To propel us into the next great age of enlightenment.
	Something special is starting to bubble under the surface.
	Humanity is about to enter its next era.
	And we're the generation that gets to decide what that is.
	To bring it into reality.
	To make the next great leaps and advances.
	Not just in the sciences, but in thought.
	darkness, centralization, control, those will always be there in our fallen world.
	But what can exist in parallel and perhaps in our next era dominate and far outshine them are truth, decentralization, and liberty?
	Instead of asking questions that wise men answered thousands of years ago, we can choose to stand on the wisdom of the ages and from those heights look out to see and to build what's next.
	What I don't believe in,
	We're telling you what to think.
	Instead...
	I teach you how to think and arm you with knowledge and tools.
	I empower you as a free and sovereign individual so that you can decide what's right for you, your family, and your community.
	So, if you've ever wanted to better understand the major threads underlying our world, money, civics and politics, bureaucratic machine and censorship, words and their emergence, war, globalism, join me.
	Grab a copy of Why the World Doesn't Make Sense and start today.
	Wherever you are in life, whatever you have or don't have, you can do this.
	We can do this.
	We can do this.
	All right, and joining us now is Chris Manitas, and I think I mispronounced her name.
	I hope I got it right this time.
	And we wanted to talk to her about her book, Why the World Doesn't Make Sense.
	I've got some ideas about that, but I'd like to hear what she has to say about it.
	Thank you for joining us, Chris.
	It's a pleasure to be here.
	Thank you.
	Thanks for having me.
	This is a new book that you read, and you've written several different books, and you've got a YouTube channel.
	You've got some very interesting thoughts on the YouTube channel as well.
	But tell us a little bit about that.
	Tell us a little bit about the book.
	Why the world doesn't make sense?
	Why do you think it's crazy?
	Well, I have a feeling you're going to agree with me on this one.
	I think it's because it's no longer built on truth.
	We have replaced natural law with legal fictions.
	Virtue with identity, reason with control.
	We've stopped acknowledging that liberty comes from personal sovereignty and that it has to be about more than just rights.
	This basic premise that if we don't want the government to step in, then we the people have to step up.
	We have to remember that freedom often is the freedom to do what we should.
	I think it's also really critical that we recall that We should never ascribe more to government than it requires.
	It's not meant to be a recipe for our lives.
	It's merely our secular governance.
	And when this basic civic knowledge fades, we don't just get bad policy, but we can lose the ability to even talk about these foundational truths without triggering panic or polarization.
	The book is ultimately about pulling back the curtain, if you will, and showing not just how we got here, but why.
	Why would we as a free people allow this to happen in the world?
	As we sit on the precipice right now, I think you would probably agree of this collapsing post-World War II global order.
	How can we reclaim liberty by returning once again to truth and to moral order?
	I think it's really important because truth ultimately brings us to a fuller understanding of the individual.
	That's true.
	Yeah, you know, I've said in the past, when I was growing up, we'd say, well, don't make a federal case out of it.
	Now we want to make a federal case out of everything.
	Everything needs to be solved by government.
	Every problem needs to be solved by government, and it needs to be solved in Washington.
	And that's now true of conservatives, as it has been true of liberals for quite some time.
	Everybody's looking for a savior in Washington, aren't they?
	If you notice, in society, we even pose the question the wrong way.
	Oftentimes, the first thing people say is, well, what should the government do?
	And the answer is almost always, nothing.
	Get the heck out of the way.
	And I think we really need to start once again asking ourselves, what should we do?
	What can we be doing?
	Because ultimately, it starts with us.
	And I think a society that understands that and lives that truth...
	Of taking responsibility and understanding that our being as individuals really transcends our rights and our obligations and even opportunities has to reach a state of communion and voluntary self-sacrifice.
	And I think it's key not just to fulfillment of who we are as people, but it's key to making the whole system work.
	So you can't have liberty without virtue.
	And so I think this kind of timeless call to fix ourselves and our own hearts first is actually at the heart of really helping to fix our society to move forward as well.
	And that's really what the founders were talking about when they mentioned happiness, isn't it?
	You know, it wasn't hedonism necessarily.
	It was the freedom to pursue virtue, wasn't it?
	Oh, absolutely.
	It was integrity and there is a property element in there, I think, in pursuit of happiness since the initial wording was property.
	But a lot of it is integrity.
	It's this understanding of virtue and that happiness is not this ability to always do whatever we want.
	In fact, that's the exact opposite, right?
	I think that's actually slavery, not freedom, when you're a slave to your passions.
	And so I think really kind of understanding these timeless truths that have been around forever that society seems to have forgotten.
	We've become deeply uncomfortable talking about the entire concept of virtue somehow.
	It's almost as if we can sense how far we've drifted.
	And so we're afraid to have the discussion.
	It's only allowed to virtue signal on social media.
	We can't be didactic about the virtue.
	Of course, the inversion is always okay.
	That's right.
	So when you talk about this, What does it look like at a local level or a personal level when we look at this and we try to move society back in a direction that is more focused on the individual,
	more focused on virtue, and not so much a centralized solution?
	What does that look like on an individual basis?
	I think it starts with a couple of things.
	I think, obviously, it starts with us and it starts with our families.
	What is our connection to our Creator?
	What is our connection to our family?
	And then building up from there into our local communities.
	And I think a huge part of it for folks is education.
	I think not being afraid to go and connect with the entire Western canon, you know, to travel as, you know, it's often called that dusty path between Athens and Jerusalem and know from once you came and be able to connect with the long arc of history.
	I think is incredibly important to people.
	So I think reading certainly helps.
	I think being afraid or not being afraid to question.
	Somehow even our scientific method has gone away and it's become whatever is settled science or condoned by whoever's paying for the study.
	And our greatest discoveries in the world have always come from questioning.
	And so I think it's this idea that Within ourselves, challenging ourselves and within our families and our small, you know, local communities, how can we once again instill this basic idea of first principles thinking?
	And really being able to drill every issue down and build up from there.
	And it gets you to an interesting place because instead of falling politically into line with a lot of these ideologues or what the party's doing...
	You know, I caught the end of your last segment before joining.
	And what I heard was this idea that once you have a principle, that principle is a principle.
	And you don't get to be, you know, I'm going to apply it over here, but not really on Tuesdays and not to that group because it's not politically convenient.
	And I think we've lost that idea as a society.
	And we all have to decide.
	What are our principles and where are they grounding us?
	So perhaps for me in my personal life, that principle would be my faith.
	In my secular life, that principle is liberty.
	And I think what happens is a lot of us have chosen economic gains or dominance or, as I like to call it, empire as that principle.
	And so you tend to manipulate everything else around it.
	But when you come from...
	In that secular sense around liberty as the underlying guiding principle that I am going to put everything within the context of, self-sovereignty, all of a sudden you look at the world in a very different way.
	You understand everything differently from whether it's money to globalism to geopolitics to domestic politics, words and how they're used against us, war.
	And so I think it's really important that people challenge themselves and figure out...
	What are these principles and what are the lenses that you're going to do this and do you have this ability to reason and break things down and then build up again from there?
	And it gives you the strength then to be able to approach any worldview issue, any global issue that you come across with a foundation.
	And obviously then having a willingness to listen to other ideas because we don't know everything.
	But now we have a grounding to filter those ideas.
	So we can properly say, Which ones we want to allow to strengthen our resolve?
	Which ones can maybe broaden our understanding or add a little bit of depth or nuance?
	And, you know, I like to always say that we get a lot of that from reading, but the truth is we can get a lot of it from anywhere in society if we have the tools to be able to do it.
	I agree.
	Yeah, I remember Rod Dreher's book, Live Not by Lies, which is based on Solzhenitsyn's, he took the title from Solzhenitsyn's essay.
	But he was talking, in it he said that he had...
	I had a lot of friends who had family that had lived under totalitarian governments, whether it was in Russia or Germany or whatever.
	And they were very concerned because, and they started talking to their children, who were his age, and said, you know, I'm starting to see the same thing starting to happen here.
	And he said then he started seeing it himself.
	You know, people who would be talking in a cafeteria or something at a university, they would start to guard their speech and kind of sideways glance to see, is anybody listening to me?
	That type of thing.
	There's a fear there.
	There's a fear there that you're going to stick out, you know, and you're going to be hammered down.
	The old saying, the nail that sticks up is going to get hammered down.
	And so everybody is afraid of that, and they're ashamed of their convictions.
	And part of it, I think, as you're pointing out, they don't really have firm convictions.
	They haven't really thought about the meaning of life and where they stand on this stuff and why they stand on something.
	And so if you don't have firm convictions, I mean, you're just going to be pushed around with everything.
	And I think that's really where we are for most people.
	And I think that is a big part of why we have the kind of influence in these institutions, these public schools.
	I think that's been a big part of what they were trying to achieve, the fact that everybody just doesn't have any foundation, and they're afraid of the peer pressure, and they're afraid of the pressure from above, aren't they?
	They're very afraid of it.
	And I think you're right.
	it's because they haven't been taught how to think.
	And so what happens is instead we've trained entire generations on what to think.
	And it's an incredibly dangerous thing because it's not always the easiest skill to relearn later in life, to go back and actually have the strength of character to be able to break things down.
	Because you realize that you end up questioning yourself a
	It's something even that happened to me in the writing of the book.
	Really discovering when you're willing to look at facts, honestly, throughout history, what things are and how they might change your mind and really see what's happening across the board.
	So I think, to me, this is actually the broader discussion that we should really be having about education.
	We're kind of trapped, I think, in this parallel discussion right now in the country about who should get into higher education universities and then what we should be doing when they're there.
	And I think that's kind of missing the entire point.
	We're missing an entire underpinning of civics, of natural law, of understanding who we are as a people.
	And really starting with that foundation of first principles and not just understanding American first principles from a civics perspective, but first principles thinking on a broader basis across the board.
	And so I think we're seeing that right now.
	It's permeating our sciences.
	We're less productive.
	With the number of PhDs, I think it's dropped down to less than 1% in terms of productivity, even though the number of PhDs has gone through the roof.
	We're seeing it certainly in our thought and inquiry, in our social sciences.
	So it's across the board a problem that, to me, this is the discussion that we should be having.
	And it's not something that government can fix.
	It's only something that we can fix ourselves by having the strength of character and the willingness to take it on voluntarily.
	Yes, I agree.
	I agree.
	And, you know, I should have started with your credentials at the beginning because you have been able to build, you're an entrepreneur who has built a $200 million plus real estate portfolio.
	By applying sound money principles.
	So you have successfully been able to put these principles into play.
	And you've also gotten involved as an early Bitcoiner and other things like that.
	But you've taken personal sovereignty over your own life.
	And I think that's one of the key things that is there.
	And you've been very successful at that.
	And that's one of the reasons why you're writing books and why you have your YouTube channel and other things.
	Oh, by the way, I didn't mention...
	What is the...
	The YouTube channel where people can find you.
	It's Christine Manitas YT.
	Okay, YT.
	Okay.
	And your website is?
	My website is ChristineManitas.com Good, good.
	Okay, I wanted to get that out.
	And then from there, you can link out to all the social in YouTube.
	Okay, and she spells her last name M-E-N-E-D-I-S.
	That's Manitis.
	And that is the way you spell it.
	So that's excellent.
	Yeah, and so, you know, you're...
	You have a lot to say about financial things because, again, that is a key thing.
	If we're going to have liberty and if we're going to have independence, we need to be able to take care of ourselves.
	And you have done that and have been very, very successful at that as well.
	On your website, on your channel, and I guess it's also in this recent book, Why the World Doesn't Make Sense.
	And that is S-E-N-S-E.
	It's not C-E-N-T-S.
	We're not going to have sense anymore.
	We just got rid of the penny.
	Trump did that for us.
	So we're not going to have any more sense as well.
	The federal government is not going to make any sense.
	But it never did to me.
	But when you talk about that, talk a little bit about the financial aspect of it.
	About how we make sense of this world.
	Absolutely.
	Well, money is a weapon.
	And I think it needs to be understood that way because, in fact, it's probably the principal weapon throughout history that's been used to create poverty and dependency rather than eradicate them.
	So without an adequate understanding of financial principles, you can't really have sovereignty.
	And a lot of societal evils...
	Are allowed to continue to occur because a lot of naive people fail to grasp this role of money as a weapon.
	And it's worth saying that as with any weapon, I always point out, you can be on either side of it.
	It can be defensive or it can be used to defend.
	Exactly, it can be offensive or defensive.
	And so I think it's really important.
	These things are tools at the end of the day.
	I've never been someone who is a maxi with any particular point of view.
	To me, these things are tools and you have to understand them and bring them back to what are your principles that you want to use these tools in service of.
	But on a bigger basis, if you don't really understand how money works, then you can't understand the broader world around you.
	And it may sound kind of dramatic, but currency, payment systems.
	All of this is the hidden engine behind everything, right?
	From the price of eggs to the rise and fall of empires.
	Historically, as I'm sure your audience is well aware, we've managed this in many different ways.
	Over time, we've moved from commodity money into fiat or government money and all of its issues.
	I realize your audience is probably very well versed on this, so I won't get into that.
	But what I think is interesting is that...
	As we start to now layer in, and I talk a lot about this in the book, modern payment systems, digital banking, credit cards, digital currencies, CBDCs, suddenly it's not just about what money is, but how it moves, who gets to transact, what can be tracked,
	frozen, taxed, is it private, is it programmable?
	And very quickly you realize we're not talking about money anymore, we're talking about freedom.
	Yeah.
	And so all of this I think matters right now with an extreme urgency and it's one of the reasons that I really wanted to arm people with this information is because the time to understand it is now.
	I can tell you for a fact having seen it that The system is built.
	We just haven't turned the key yet to turn on a lot of this.
	And so one day very soon, everyone's going to wake up and whatever is in their bank account is going to have converted.
	And at that point, it's too late.
	We don't get to opt into systems after they're built.
	So I think there's good, there's bad, but we really, I think knowledge of that is probably one of the most important things that we can help our fellow citizens with right now.
	I agree.
	And, you know, they don't want us to own anything.
	They want to have universal basic income.
	We've had Democrats and Republicans have all talked about this in one form or the other.
	You know, we're not going to have jobs.
	I mean, we just had talked about it yesterday briefly.
	Some guy with an artificial intelligence company says, I'm going to replace all jobs everywhere, you know, everything.
	And it's going to be great, you know.
	Nobody will have a job but him, I guess.
	And I don't know who's going to buy his products.
	He'll be happy.
	Yeah, exactly.
	I don't know who's going to buy what he makes.
	But it's crazy.
	They don't think about that.
	And yet, at the same time, you know, we had when Bloomberg was running, he was talking about how, well, you know, we had the farmers and they're stupid and we had the people working in the factories and they're stupid and the smart ones of us like me, we just have to figure out how we're going to control these people so they don't try to kill us.
	And it's going to be universal basic income.
	And we saw Musk was heavily into that as well.
	How do we defend ourselves against this system that you point out is already built and they just got to flip the switch to put this thing out there?
	What is it that people need to do in order to protect themselves against this system?
	I think number one is awareness to understand how it works and the implications of the various aspects of the system.
	So that would be an understanding of Digital money, which a lot of people I've found tend to just shy away from because they say, I don't like it, I don't want it.
	And it says, well, that's great, but it's here, so let's understand it.
	So I think an understanding of what digital money is.
	And I think understanding things, you know, timeless commodity money is really key.
	So gold, Bitcoin.
	To me, they both serve their purpose.
	I'm a huge fan of both, have been a big believer in both for a long time.
	My dad was an old gold guy, so I'm well-versed in all that growing up.
	And obviously having its moment now as the world is going crazy.
	And I think understanding Bitcoin to me as a digital aspect of that.
	And so if you think about, you know...
	Gold and all of its properties in terms of privacy, but also as a bearer asset.
	I think bearer assets are incredibly important for people to understand, where you don't need that trusted third party to transact through them.
	And so to me, Bitcoin's acting as a bearer asset within the digital realm in the age of digital money is incredibly important for people to understand and to be able to take advantage of that.
	You know, God forbid you ever needed to move or to travel, it's a lot easier to travel with.
	Something like Bitcoin.
	It's just words in your head.
	So you can cross borders.
	And so to me, that's one of the most powerful aspects of understanding these things.
	So again, they're tools.
	So you have to look at your life and understand what is it that you're trying to do.
	Are you trying to grow wealth?
	Are you trying to preserve wealth?
	Are you trying to just have a little bit to opt out of the system?
	Or this is obviously in parallel with a lot of other non-financial aspects of your life as you're planning.
	And then I think also an understanding of what's happening in the world bigger picture is really important as people look at their finances.
	Because I think a lot of people, especially on the right, looked at what President Trump was doing going in with tariffs and said, this is great.
	He's opening the door.
	We can put the government back in a box of having to live within its means again.
	Of course, Congress hasn't stepped up to go down that path of actually making that the primary source of income.
	And instead, you get a lot of Republicans today who are saying, well, no, we're going to keep spending.
	These spending bills are absolutely insane going through Congress.
	And so when you look at this and you understand that America's broke, we're facing a debt spiral.
	And this whole thing about taking the markets down a notch really only has to do with one thing.
	It has to do with the tenure.
	Because we can't afford to finance our debt, and we can't afford to refinance all the debt that the Biden administration there put in short-term treasuries.
	That's also going to come due at the same time as we need to put out roughly another $3 trillion.
	And so we have no idea where this is going to come from.
	And if the 10-year creeps north of 5.5%, we hit a debt spiral.
	We're done.
	America is over.
	So if you hold gold, great.
	It's going to go through the roof with your Bitcoin.
	God forbid, in fiat or needing to just buy food and do things for your family, these are very serious issues.
	And so we have, I think, an opportunity right now that we have to be very realistic about this and understand that the problem may be at a point where, like so many other things, the government can't fix it anymore.
	And so it may be that point where I think a lot of people need to start to say, How can I take a little bit every month and start to protect myself?
	Get off zero in some of these ways of getting out of the government system.
	And not everybody can do everything, but everybody can get off zero.
	And you can start to do something, and you can create a community and be aware.
	Because what we're seeing happen in the world is extreme chaos is being created because instead of using tariffs to go down a path towards where the country started and to put us back...
	Or it's a path of non-extractive income tax.
	They've been weaponized.
	And so what's happening?
	The world is reacting to this because instead of tearing down the post-World War II global order and then instead restoring a republic, we seem to be wanting to rebuild it now with all the old Lego pieces.
	And it's not only confusing as hell to watch.
	But it's terrifying if you're in the markets.
	And I can tell you the markets, you add this in now with algorithmic bot trading.
	And it's a wild time in the markets right now.
	Oh, yeah.
	Nobody knows what's going to happen.
	Your stops better be tight.
	You have no idea what's coming.
	Oh, yeah.
	Everybody is frozen.
	They don't know what's going to happen, you know?
	And it's that uncertainty that is so fatal with it.
	And, you know, regardless of what's happening, regardless of, you know, we can all talk about tariffs or income taxes or whatever.
	However we raise taxes, but you need to have that stability so that people can make plans.
	Nobody can make plans.
	Nobody knows what's going on with it.
	And we're sitting here.
	As you're pointing out, we've got this exploding debt.
	We've got what's looking like now stagflation.
	Now that's pouring gasoline on the fire of the stagflation with this uncertainty and everything.
	And I'm old enough to remember when...
	Inflation got out of control, and you had all the king's horses and all the king's men couldn't put it back together again.
	They didn't know how to do any of that, right?
	And so they all wanted to pretend that they knew exactly what to do, and nobody could stop it.
	You know, it wasn't – we could get the whip inflation now buttons, and none of that worked, you know?
	And we couldn't just say no to inflation.
	And, of course, the Congress and the federal government can't say no to spending or to creating money.
	And so we've got this economic tidal wave that is, you know, kind of looming over everybody's head.
	And as you point out, you've got to do something.
	You know, Jack Lawson, who –
	I think that's it.
	I think so many people feel like, It's too much, and I can't do it.
	But you don't realize you can start small, and that small compounds.
	And honestly, the way these assets are moving, as the currency continues to be debased more and more, that little bit can actually be a lot.
	And I think it's a principle in general in life.
	Just start.
	Do something.
	Make a decision.
	Start.
	You feel better moving forward, and you're productive, and it's also along the way, because you're starting, now you're in that world.
	Now you're getting educated.
	Now you're paying attention to these things.
	Because we could very well be entering a time of continued chaos.
	There's no guarantees that any of this is going to get turned around.
	I think there is a guarantee that they're going to completely change the financial system.
	I mean, they've even said it as much.
	I mean, we had Besant say that, yeah, we're talking to the stakeholders, to the World Bank and the International Monetary Forum.
	And so it's like, oh, great, we're going to do another Bretton Woods, he says.
	And so it's like, okay, so it's going to be the same but different.
	The Mar-a-Lago Doctrine.
	Yeah, there you go.
	That's right.
	So, you know, when you look at this, And part of it, I've talked to people in the past about the hijacking of Bitcoin, because Bitcoin was really, Roger Ver, that was his book, said it was really set up as a transactional medium, and now it's become this big store of value.
	And I've also talked to Aaron Day, who is very much trying to...
	You know, have gold, silver, as well as some kind of a digital currency, but he's concerned about privacy issues and things like that, and he's, you know, he's focusing on it, and it's really changing very, very rapidly.
	It's hard to keep up with it, and so it's like a full-time job for him, so I have him on from time to time to talk about that.
	But, you know, that's the other issue about it, and I guess that's one of the things that concerns me about Bitcoin, even though it is now there and the institutions are accepting it, it's the lack of And that's one of the things that Aaron Day is looking at.
	How do I get digital currency that is also going to be private?
	So I'm sure, as he tells you when he comes on, one of the key things about Bitcoin, because I agree that it has been hijacked, and it is supposed to be both.
	It's not supposed to be one or the other.
	That's just human beings having the absurd fights that we like to as different groups want to take control.
	But it's supposed to ideally be both because these are different aspects of what money is.
	Money is not just a unit of account.
	It's a store of value and a method of transacting, and it has to be both.
	I think you're right to be concerned with it, especially...
	As the analytics on chain get better and better across the board, and it is certainly something where gold is naturally superior.
	But we do have the Lightning Network, and the entire point of the Lightning Network, other than the faster, cheaper transactions, is privacy.
	And so only your initial and your closing transactions are ever recorded on chain.
	So the thousands that you have in between...
	So you're talking about the on-ramps and the off-ramps, let's say, you know, getting into that system and getting at it.
	Exactly.
	Or when you open and close the portal on the Lightning Network to move from the Bitcoin onto the Layer 2. Now, to be fair, it is very much still what I would call a DIY system.
	So if you treat Lightning like a bank and you go and you use, you know, One of these guys who've set up the wallet system for you and now you're just back in Rustland and you're custodying with somebody else and you've lost the entire purpose of the Lightning Network.
	But if you do actually take advantage of what Lightning naturally can offer, the payments are happening off-chain in private channels and they're bouncing through several channels, in fact, who are not aware of where that's coming from.
	I think lightning is really the answer.
	And so one of my strong hopes is that as this continues down this path of digital money, that we get a lot more of the incredible talent that right now has been drawn into the crypto space because of, you know, the promise and the returns and the power that they actually find their way back over to the freedom space and put their minds to work on the lightning network.
	Because I think that does have the opportunity for privacy within the digital age.
	Well, that's interesting.
	Talk to us a little bit about stablecoin, because this is something that's being pushed a lot.
	Of course, that's where Howard Lutnik is.
	Lutnik or Lutnik?
	I can't remember.
	Anyway, that's where he's coming from, kind of that world.
	And, you know, as he's been focusing on treasury bonds, you know, part of the pushback...
	When Trump did the big tariffs, people, different countries started pushing back and saying, well, we're not going to buy the bonds anymore.
	And so this would be some place where they could offload the bonds.
	And I kind of look at that and think, are they going to use, you think they're setting this up to use stablecoin as kind of the place where they can stuff their bonds if they can't get other countries to buy these bonds?
	And is that something that they're going to try to replace the dollar with as some kind of a stablecoin?
	What do you think?
	Yeah, so a stablecoin is, just to kind of step back and define it, right?
	It's any type of digital currency that's backed by a reserve asset.
	And that can be treasuries, it can be physical cash, it can be gold, it can be Bitcoin, it can be anything.
	But some type of a reserve asset there.
	And hopefully, we're talking about not algorithmic, which are backed by math, but the traditional kind that governments are accepting.
	Hopefully the peg remains.
	But that's the idea, is that it's one-to-one.
	It's not going to fluctuate because it is backed.
	Now, Lutnick, as you mentioned, is very tied with Cantor Fitzgerald to Tether.
	They were their auditor for many years, and now they're actually partnering together to pull something, run very much of a micro-strategy-like play with Tether's balance sheet.
	And stablecoins, this is really how they were sold to the federal government, That they are the biggest opportunity in a world where less and less people want our dollar.
	Stablecoins not only expand dollar dominance, they allow people in Argentina, Hong Kong, India, anywhere in the world to access the US banking system with a smartphone and escape their own currencies, which currently are far worse off than ours are.
	So they can get around the politicians of the central banks in those countries that don't want to deal with it.
	Correct.
	They can trade on their phones.
	Right.
	Without the daily spikes in inflation that make it so difficult to plan out your life for basics like food and shelter and things of that nature that are recurring costs that you have.
	And so not only do stables help to expand dollar dominance because around the world there's a huge market for them for that reason.
	But it's also the case that as governments have wanted to legitimize these stablecoin companies, they're all turning to US Treasuries.
	So Tether is one of the largest holders.
	Tether is one of the major stablecoins, one of the largest holders of US Treasuries in the world.
	And the idea is that this could be, to your point, an increasing appetite for this as we grow the stablecoin market.
	And so as other countries, especially Asian countries, are beginning to dump our bonds openly, then we need something to replace this with.
	So the idea is that it can flow into stablecoins.
	Now, stablecoins, it should be pointed out, are private.
	So it's private in the sense that it's centralized.
	Whoever issues the stablecoin, they can flow through whatever policy they want.
	They can turn your right to transact on and off.
	Now, to date, it's never been done.
	But that capability is there.
	But the capability is there, and this is what I think is important for people to understand.
	Now, I personally believe that we're actually going to get a stablecoin as a CBDC, and I think that's coming very soon in America.
	That's what I was curious about, because I've been saying that as well.
	It checks all these boxes, it helps them with the dollar, helps them with the bond, and it has all the functions of being able to control whether you have access to it or not, and shut that down that they had with CBDC.
	So they can tell the public, we're not going to get a CBDC, they can bring this in the back door.
	Yeah, that's right.
	We won't call it that.
	And then what happens is they also preserve the two-tier banking system, so banks are happy, because otherwise...
	What's the role of banks in this world?
	And so now the banks are happy.
	They get their CBDC that they can work with the central bank.
	Our central bank is happy.
	They have one to transact with other central banks who are all moving to CBDCs.
	And we're just told we have these wonderful things called stablecoins and you should all have them.
	Yeah, I agree.
	That's what I wanted to know, if you saw it that way as well, because you're much more well-versed in this than I am, and that is really where I see this all happening.
	You're spot on.
	Just trying to get into something that is outside of their system as much as we can and to, you know, even if it's just baby steps, take the baby steps and start to do some preparation to get outside of that system.
	And so, you know, you would suggest that people start accumulating small amounts of gold and silver and, of course, you would do Bitcoin as well.
	Anything else that people can do to start to prepare and take baby steps?
	I think it goes down to...
	Education.
	That's the number one thing I would say that people can do to prepare.
	And I think a lot of times it gets overlooked because it's not tangible, right?
	I didn't buy it.
	I can't see it in the cupboard.
	But I think oftentimes it's the number one thing you can do to arm yourself for the future is to understand what's happening and to have the tools.
	It's one of the reasons I wanted to write the book.
	And also so that you can think through, you can process, you have...
	This skill that we talked about earlier of first principles thinking, well, now let me apply it to money.
	Let me understand what's the government doing and why and what's the likely response going to be so that I can position myself and protect myself.
	And maybe it means how much do I keep in my bank account?
	Maybe it means starting to do something else on the side or look at how I'm teaching my kids about what they might want to do in the future as they look to, you know.
	Education and their future earnings within the context of a broader, ever-changing global economy.
	Yeah, I guess that's the concern when we look at the debt.
	And we look at, you know, as everything is slowing down, there's also the issue that this is having on the supply chains.
	And I understand the goals.
	I had a guy on a couple of days ago, we were talking about rare earth minerals, and he's got an American company that's trying to do that.
	But as he's pointing out, we're like five years away from being able to do anything of this.
	So what happens in the meantime, right?
	What happens when, as part of this economic war, trade war, whatever, the Chinese cut off these We've got to learn how to do it.
	We've got to set up the factories.
	We've got to start the mining and all the rest of the stuff.
	And that takes a long time to do it.
	And you can go down with that with everything.
	Everything we have created.
	Over many decades, we have created a distributed supply chain that is global in nature, and everything is interwoven, and you can't decouple that instantly without just ripping everything apart.
	And I guess that's everybody's concern.
	Is everything going to be ripped apart?
	How do you see this playing out?
	Not well.
	Yeah.
	Nobody knows, of course.
	Nobody knows even in the Trump administration.
	They don't know what he's going to do the next day in terms of the numbers and stuff.
	To your point, it is interconnected at this point.
	We have built an interconnected world.
	And there's going to be pain no matter what happens.
	It's a matter of who feels the pain and why and what's on the other side.
	So kind of going back to this broader collapse that I believe we're living through of the post-World War II global order, this has been coming for a while.
	Those on both the left and the right have been well aware that we've kind of reached the end.
	We've played the game out as long as we could play it.
	And I believe that those on the side of globalism were kind of hoping that it would kind of imperceptibly collapse into Mm-hmm.
	Some stepped in and kind of just threw a grenade into all of that.
	And so what we're witnessing instead is a disintegration.
	But like I said earlier, we're not actually going back to freedom.
	And so what's awful to witness is.
	If we were tearing this down and he came out and said, let me have an honest conversation with you, America.
	We've got a $36 trillion debt in rising.
	We've got a deficit of over $2 trillion a year.
	This is approximately 7% of our GDP.
	We've got unfunded liabilities of over $73 trillion.
	Heck, we're paying over a trillion just in interest on our debt.
	It's not sustainable.
	We're going to fix the system and it's going to hurt.
	But here's what I'm doing and here's why and stick with me.
	He doesn't want to do that.
	He wants to win.
	And so the problem is you're hurting a lot of innocent people along the way who are trapped in this system.
	And what makes it really painful not just to live through but to watch is that I don't think there's freedom and liberty on the other side of it.
	No. So it's just going to be trade deals and actions that because Congress isn't stepping in can all be undone via the next guy in office.
	And it's an incredibly dangerous way to run the government.
	And so you're disrupting the only functioning global order that we have in terms of stability from an economic perspective.
	But you're not actually...
	I think the sad and scary part, if we're being really honest about it, is that a lot of the people who most need those short-term wins are the people who would have otherwise opted for liberty and freedom.
	But we've put them in such a terrible position that they're like, just give me anything, man.
	Just help.
	Let me know that it's going to get better.
	And they're so desperate for that message and because they're not grounded in an inner strength, we end up with this movement of populism, which is a symptom, not a cure.
	And liberty can only come from sovereignty, from us.
	I agree.
	I think all of this plays through into the economy.
	And so what I see ahead, honestly, is a lot of chaos.
	I see it for a time where we may get a period of short-term wins as trade deals are negotiated.
	But ultimately, I think we're going to see a lot of pain.
	And I think it's really going to come down to two things for me.
	One is, how does China respond to this?
	They are in a world of pain internally themselves.
	But then we're also looking at stats like their imports to the U.S. are estimated to go down by as much as 77%.
	And just this morning they came out and said, we're not in trade talks.
	That's going to have a huge impact on all of us and trade flows around the world.
	And the second is, we still have not settled this war between Russia and Ukraine.
	Or really Russia and us, if we're being honest about it.
	That inability to do so, I think, is filtering through to a lot of his actions and policies because he hasn't been able to clear the board and reset.
	So we still have dollars going there.
	We still have attention going there.
	We still have loyalties going there.
	And because of that, we can't cleanly negotiate even with Europe.
	And so I think those are the two big issues that I'm watching that I really want to see how this plays out that I think can have a huge impact on whether or not we're able to get a short-term reprieve.
	But long-term, I'm afraid we're creating chaos.
	And, you know, when you look at it...
	Like I said before, we've spent decades intertwining these things.
	I mean, just look at Trump's USMCA, right?
	He wanted to distribute automobile manufacturing between the three countries.
	Now, all of a sudden, we want to stop it, you know?
	And so everybody had that set up.
	And we as individuals are intertwined in this system, right?
	And we can't help being intertwined in it.
	And so I guess the real concern is that rather than gradually starting to build something else, whatever It's the uncertainty, but also the rapidity of which things can change in a massive way that is going to be so destructive,
	not just for global economies and everything, for each and every one of us, the way we're all tied into this system.
	And that's why it is so imperative for us to get some handle on what we're about, what we believe, what our principles are, and to start making some preparations on the outside as much as we can.
	Because we're tied into the system.
	We can't escape the system.
	But we can start to try to make some preparation.
	I think you're exactly right.
	And we are tied up in this.
	Every single person, look, this is the only system that any of us have ever actually lived in.
	So we may talk about and continue to be the remnant of society that pushes for freedom.
	And helps to keep things from going over the edge.
	But the reality is we've all lived within a system of control our entire lives.
	It has rules.
	It has referees.
	It's a game that's being played financially.
	And so what happens?
	You build your life within it.
	You build your company within it.
	You decide how to send your kids to school and what they should do within it.
	And all of it is being blown up right now.
	And so it's incredibly important that People do make preparations, that people do understand, and I think first and foremost, to your point, that we know who we are as a people, that we return to these underlying truths.
	Because at the end of the day, not only is it the only thing that can actually bring us back together as a society, but if we don't have that going through potentially whatever is coming in the world...
	We don't have anything to build what's on the other side and to have a say in building what's on the other side.
	And as I think we all know very well in history, if you don't have an idea of what you want that you can vocalize and that you can explain to others and help to build a consensus around, somebody else is going to do it for you and that's what the world's going to look like.
	That's a great way to put it, yeah.
	Yeah, I know, you know, what my foundation is, and I know as much as I identify with America, I identify with Christ and his kingdom, and so that's really where my foundation is.
	And if we have that foundation, you know, we understand that we're just passing through this world.
	It's a temporary situation.
	And we understand that God is ultimately in control.
	We do what we can.
	And there are things that we have been given and responsibilities and abilities that we have been given.
	And we do what we can with that to try to persuade people in the world.
	But, you know, that's really where our rock is.
	And that's really where our foundation is.
	And if we don't have that, we've actually lost a lot more.
	And just what's going to happen in this world.
	But I know that you agree with that as well.
	I do indeed.
	Again, tell the website, let's see, Christine Menidis, and it's M-E-N-E-D-I-S.
	And you have a YouTube channel, you have a website, The World.
	Why the World Doesn't Make Sense is the book, and people can find that, I guess, on Amazon, or they can also get it at your site, right?
	They can get it.
	Yeah, there's links from my site to Amazon.
	It's available anywhere books are sold.
	So whoever you want to support locally.
	But yeah, it is on Amazon, of course.
	Why the world doesn't make sense.
	And give us your website again.
	Is that Christine Medidas?
	ChristineMonidish.com.
	Good.
	And the last name again is spelled M-E-N-E-D-I-S.
	It's really been a pleasure talking to you.
	And it's time for us to be deliberate and to be serious and to understand and to take evaluation as we're getting into this massive generational change that we've got here.
	About every four generations we get this great fourth turning and we happen to be living in very interesting times, I think, that are coming up.
	They're getting very interesting very rapidly, I think.
	So thank you so much.
	The old Chinese curse.
	May you live in interesting times.
	That's right.
	That's right.
	And we're going to see some other Chinese curses coming our way, I think.
	They've already started.
	Thank you so much for joining us.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	Appreciate it.
	Thank you.
	All right, folks.
	We're going to take a quick break and we will be right back.
	be right back.
	While on kick, Knights of the Storm, thank you very much for gifting a subscription.
	I'm going to use the time that we've got left just to talk very quickly about the tariffs that are really kicking off this chaos in a big way.
	We have a Fox reporter.
	Now, this is Mediaite, which is a liberal anti-Trump site.
	And they're saying, Fox reporter says the Trump White House is giving Wall Street executives inside info.
	On tariff negotiations.
	That's the way they present it.
	Now, the Fox reporter Charles Gasparino pushed back and said, that's not what I'm doing.
	And you don't understand financial reporting whatsoever.
	They said the markets have taken sharp hits amid uncertainty surrounding Trump's tariffs and trade deals.
	And so, of course, there's always insider trading potential that is there.
	People inside the Trump White House are alerting Wall Street executives that they are nearing an agreement in principle on trade with India, according to my sources, who are senior Wall Street executives with ties to the White House, reported Gasparino.
	He said no details on timing, and recall that we've been here before with Japan, only to have the goalposts changed and the terms renegotiated.
	So again, if you don't have specifics and you don't have timing, is it really insider information?
	I don't really think so.
	But when they go through this, and when you look at a little bit more detail as to what Gasparino was saying, as he's defending it, he says, this is not insider trading.
	He says, where is the progressive mainstream media outrage over the constant drumbeat of national security stuff and so forth?
	So again, they'll come back with it.
	Yeah, but...
	What about what your guys did, you know, rather than explaining what it is?
	But in his actual article, which is also on the New York Post, they were reacting to his post on Twitter, how the Trump team is working overtime to close face-saving trade deals.
	That's his article at the New York Post.
	And he said, so they're looking for a face-saving off-ramp.
	Now, this is key.
	Hopefully, you know, there's some people not...
	It's going to be Peter Navarro, but there's some people in the Trump administration, he's just divided, some people in the Trump administration that understand that this is not working.
	We've got to back down off of this.
	How do we do it and look like we're winning?
	How do we back off of this and look like we're winning?
	How that manifests itself is unclear, but my sources are led to believe that actual deals, in other words, signed agreements, even with the most friendly of trading partners caught up in the Trump maelstrom, are probably not going to happen.
	Anytime soon.
	Well, that's really bad news.
	Bad news for everything except for the price of gold.
	What is more likely is a series of public announcements coming from Treasury Secretary Scott Besant, possibly the president himself, indicating broad outlines of trade pacts that both sides can live with, he says.
	First, he says, the box appears to be India.
	He said, my post on X on India that reported on this progress immediately reversed stock market losses at the open and turned the Dow green.
	Oh, okay, so wait a minute.
	First he's saying this is not insider trading.
	And then when they question him on social media, but then in his article he goes, yeah, but when I put this out on X that there was movement on India, he said that turned the stock market green for the rest of the day.
	So, even though there wasn't any information about details or timing or the rest of this stuff, if you knew that, if you're Wall Street executives who planned this stuff with him, or if you're Trump who tells that to them, you still have the ability to move the marketplace.
	And see, here's the fundamental issue.
	This is not even so much about whether or not it's insider trading, or whether or not these sources are...
	Genuine or whether it's a manipulation.
	It's not even about that.
	All of this is flowing from the fact that you've got, because we have an executive branch that can just arbitrarily set this, even though there's no consensus within the executive branch itself.
	They can, by declaration, by dictate, by fiat, they can set the rates or they can move them or they can do the deal or not do the deal.
	And when you have that kind of concentration of power, that in and of itself is the problem.
	And so people can go back and forth over this partisan stuff and over the actual policies themselves, but the core issue here is the thing that's causing the uncertainty, which is the concentration of power.
	And everybody in Congress, the Republicans who have the majority now, they're afraid to push back against Trump on this.
	They're afraid of him.
	That's the crux of the issue.
	The fact that all that has been taken so it can be done not by a deliberative process by Congress, but so that it can be done by one person, and it can be on and off, on and off, on and off, and of course it'll be done by the next president as well.
	They'll keep these so-called emergencies in place, and they'll continue to do this.
	And so when you have that kind of concentration of power, Part of it is that people are going to accuse you, and with some justification, of rigging the markets, because you are rigging the markets.
	The only question is, does anybody besides you know that you're going to rig the markets?
	Nobody at this point has talked about whether or not there's any insider trading going on with Eric and Don Jr., or Ivanka and Jared, or whatever, right?
	Or with Lutnik, or with Bessett, or whatever.
	You know, when you look at this type of stuff, of course, that's one of the reasons that Elon Musk wants to talk about why Congressmen get so wealthy and everything.
	You'll take a look at Pelosi and one of the obvious means of wealth, perhaps not the only one, but is the ability to do insider trading, having advanced knowledge as to whether or not there's going to be a deal or the details of that deal.
	Which industries are going to be affected?
	Which ones are not going to be affected?
	This is an argument against the existence of the Federal Reserve, by the way, and it is also an argument against the existence of government By emergency executive order, which is the only way that Trump likes to govern.
	So Charles Gasparino says, so what could disrupt the forward momentum?
	Trade partners are complaining to people on Wall Street that the U.S. negotiating team is often obtuse as to what it is asking.
	They sometimes don't really know exactly what the White House wants, sources said.
	Now, this is not...
	A left-wing reporter.
	This is a Fox News reporter who wants to be seen as friendly to Trump.
	And even he points out, as everybody can see with this vacillation of this uncertainty, that the people in the Trump White House don't even know what they want.
	Nobody knows because it's, I don't know, is it in the head of Donald Trump and he can't make up his mind?
	But the bottom line is that there is no strategy and there are no goals.
	And that's why this uncertainty, as he points out, the nebulousness of this, of the ask, is what has stalled the Japanese negotiations last month.
	And it may do the same thing with everybody else.
	But of course, the Chinese, they're not even trying to do anything about it.
	We need to prepare.
	We need to get out of this system.
	By the way, you know, go to davidknight.gold.
	Take it to Tony Arterman.
	Try to get out of it as much as you can because it's a maelstrom that's going to be coming from this temper tantrum of indecision that Trump is having.
	Have a good weekend.
	music
	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.
	The David Knight Show dot com.
	Thank you for listening.
	Thank you for sharing.

▲