Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 7, 2025 - The David Knight Show

03:01:54

Wed Episode 2005: 30 Years of a Noble Lie: Government False Flags And Cover-Ups

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	As the clock strikes 13, it's Wednesday the 7th of May, year of our Lord 2025.
	Well, today begins Real ID.
	And of course they're saying they're going to make some concessions, a lot of extra paperwork if you don't have it, but this goes back, of course, To 9-11.
	And we're also going to be talking about how we laid the foundation for this police state.
	The real ID law goes back to 2005 when they did the PrEP Act.
	But today we're going to have as our guest in the third hour, Chris Emery.
	His documentary that's been around for about a decade, a little bit more than a decade.
	They now have some new information about the Oklahoma City bombing.
	I think you're going to find a fascinating refresher course for what was, before 9-11, the biggest terrorist attack on American soil.
	Both it and 9-11, terrorist attacks done by our government.
	A lot of information pointing to that.
	So he's going to be joining us in the third hour.
	We have an interview that recorded yesterday, so I know how good it is.
	You'll want to hang around for that.
	We'll be right back.
	We're also going to have an update as to the amazing pump and dump grift in the Trump meme coin.
	The numbers are staggering.
	The number of people who lost money and the few who made An astounding astronomical amount of money.
	Well, let's talk first about the federal real ID.
	And as I said before, this goes back to 2005.
	This is when we started having all of the legislation for the police state, police and surveillance state, in the aftermath of 9-11 and in the aftermath of the commission that was there to study it.
	Of course, it was not there to do a cover-up, and it was there to recommend.
	The next steps to be taken based on that phony event.
	I know people died, but I'm saying that the phony explanation that they had for it.
	Federal real ID requirements take effect today as airport worries grow.
	They'll have enhanced security features, of course, on these real IDs.
	They've got barcodes, holograms, all these things supposedly for anti-counterfeiting.
	And even though this has been delayed, it was supposed to go into effect in 2008.
	It's been delayed because we don't want an ID.
	But they're busy working on implementing the digital ID.
	That's what the digital cash is about.
	That's what the stablecoins are about.
	That's what the crypto is about.
	All of it is about setting up a digital ID with biometrics on it as well.
	So in a sense, this real ID is very antiquated.
	But the concerns are the same and the motivations are the same.
	So, beginning today, to get onto a domestic flight, to enter secure federal facilities.
	Why would you ever want to do that, voluntarily?
	Or to access certain military bases after the deadline has been pushed back multiple times over a 20-year period.
	The requirement of Real ID comes from 20 years ago, the commission on 9-11.
	And they said, well, we've got to make IDs harder.
	What about that ID that they found on the pile of the rubble there?
	We're supposed to believe that you had this massive airplane crash, fires, and all the rest of the stuff, and somebody allegedly found that ID on the ground, handed it over to the New York Police Department as an ID for Satam al-Sukwami.
	Yeah, yeah, nothing suspicious about that, right?
	We'll talk about fake IDs.
	I wonder, can the real ID survive an airplane fire?
	Is that why they're requiring it on airplanes now?
	So we'll be able to go through and get everybody's ID after they have crashed?
	The black box ID.
	But again, this is going back to 2005, and of course, as part of that legislative suite.
	They put in the PrEP Act, that notorious abomination that says that you can't get any compensation for what they do to you with emergency vaccines.
	The PrEP Act.
	Even worse than the 1986 Childhood Vaccine Act that Fauci pushed through.
	So, yeah, the rush of 9-11.
	Well, Kristi Noem says travelers with no real ID can still fly for now.
	For now.
	Isn't that nice?
	How nice of her.
	But you'll be having to take extra steps, says the Homeland Security head who likes to play dress-up.
	You'll still be able to fly, but you have to be prepared for extra scrutiny because, you know, you have to prove that you're not a terrorist.
	Gotta prove it.
	Gotta prove it to fly.
	Isn't that amazing?
	I'm just so done with it.
	Airports and airplanes.
	I hope I never have to fly again.
	You may be diverted to a different line, and you may have to take extra steps, but people will now still be allowed to fly for now.
	And, of course, the extra steps are a lot of forms from your government.
	These IDs keep our country safe, she said.
	No, they don't.
	No, they don't.
	Neither does she.
	Neither does Homeland Security.
	They don't keep us safe.
	But did you get a gold star, reminiscent of the Nazi government?
	It feels like an attack on everyday people, said one person.
	Having to upgrade their licenses, all this identification for something that really, you know, seems like we've been fine without it.
	We'd be much better off without the government pushing it.
	We'd be much better off without the government that pushes it.
	Travelers without real ID can use their passport, but even with that, there's still alternatives for the new requirements.
	So even if you don't have a passport, you can fill out a Transportation Security Administration Form 415, also known as the Certification of Identity Form.
	And if, if the TSA official...
	Is able to confirm the details given to them, passengers will be allowed to go through the security checkpoints and board their flights.
	Passengers who go this route may be subject to additional pack-downs and screenings and questions and other extra security.
	You know, one of the reasons I hate flying is because I absolutely refuse to use these machines out of principle, not necessarily.
	I don't know what they're doing physically, medically to you.
	But I refuse out of principle to use them.
	So when we would travel, I always go through the pack-down stuff.
	And you know the little game that they like to do with me is they like to make me stand next to the x-ray machine, which I also refuse to do.
	It's just a wonderful experience.
	They want me to stand next to the x-ray machine because I don't want to go through the scanner.
	And I refuse to stand next to the x-ray machine.
	And when I travel with my family, one time when we went up to Washington State, We came back and we all opt out.
	And so the one guy says, oh, let's just go, you know, just let you through, right?
	Because it was all family and we're all opting out of it and everything.
	Except Travis got in a different line.
	And they put him over on the other side and they did give him the full pat-down treatment.
	And of course, I videotaped that right on the phone.
	And so I'm making a video of it, and the guy gets really upset.
	And he said, I just let you through, and now you do this to us?
	And I turned the camera on him, and I said, you haven't done me or my family a favor at all.
	We're Americans.
	We don't deserve to be treated like criminals, like we live in a Nazi country.
	Your identity papers, please?
	Show me identity papers, right?
	Nazi-occupied America is what this is.
	You're not doing me a favor to let me through.
	So, yeah.
	If I keep flying, I'm going to get arrested.
	Because they keep getting worse.
	Airport detentions have travelers freaked out, says the Atlantic.
	Freaks me out.
	Certainly does.
	Because I know where all this stuff came from.
	I know about the underwear bomber.
	I mean, you know about that, right?
	I can't even remember the lawyer's name.
	I interviewed him several times.
	There was a lawyer who, you know, this disheveled guy was a lawyer who was coming back on the plane.
	They're coming from abroad.
	His name was Haskell, I think.
	He's now out of the country.
	I think he's living in Panama.
	He must be really happy with the Trump moves about Panama.
	Anyway, he was a lawyer.
	And he noticed in this foreign country, he's sitting there, and this really disheveled guy comes up.
	And he's accompanied by a guy that is very sharply dressed in a suit and all the rest of this stuff.
	And the guy who's in the suit talks to the attendant there to check this person in or whatever.
	And the other guy is kind of like out of it, right?
	Now, that's really strange.
	He's looking at how strange that is.
	And so then they get on the plane, and this guy is setting up a couple of rows in front of him.
	It's like, that's the guy, you know?
	And so he's kind of watching this guy.
	He's like, what is this guy?
	Is he a criminal or something?
	Why has he got a guy in a suit escorting him the way he's dressed?
	I mean, he looks like a homeless guy they just drug off the street.
	And then in the flight, you know, this guy tries to, you know, set his underwear on fire, whatever it was that he did, you know.
	It was the pretense for them to put in the scanners.
	It was so funny that American Carol that was done by the Zuckerberg, what was it, Zucker Brothers, I think?
	It's a comedy.
	And they had predicted this whole thing with absurdity.
	As people were going through security, they're having to take, well, we have to take this off now because this mom and this mom.
	I think that was before all that, if I remember correctly.
	But whether it was before or after it, it certainly was an accurate satire.
	Anyway, he sees this guy doing this, and he wanted to testify and say this whole thing was a setup.
	And this guy's lawyer, Wanted him to testify, he said.
	And, of course, you know, the witness was a lawyer himself.
	What they did was the guy used the fact that this very credible witness, a lawyer himself, had seen this whole thing set up and knew it was a setup and was going to tell people it was a setup.
	And the other lawyer, lawyer for the guy that was the supposed underwear bomber, used that as leverage to get a favorable plea bargain for his client and not go to court.
	And he was really bummed out about that because he wanted the truth to come out.
	So he's going on a lot of alternative media.
	I interviewed him twice.
	So the interesting thing about it is, of course, that Chertoff, the first head of Homeland Security, had left the government at that point in time and was working with a company that was ready to roll out.
	These body scanners.
	They had them all manufactured and waiting to roll out.
	This all happened on Christmas holidays, right?
	And then the following Thanksgiving, there was a boycott of the scanner machines that was organized, and we heavily promoted it at InfoWars.
	And in response to this organized boycott on the heaviest travel day of the year around Thanksgiving, They just shut down all the machines and all the scanning and everything.
	Just let everybody go through.
	No problem.
	Because they didn't want to lose that pushback from citizens.
	They didn't want people to feel how powerful they were.
	But it was in response to the citizens.
	They did surrender that.
	And it showed that all of this stuff is a fraud.
	And, of course, we have seen over and over again.
	We have congressmen who will not tell us the truth.
	They have seen where the audit tests that look to see if you can sneak something through on them deliberately, right?
	They test them out.
	And they've hinted that it is in the high 80s or low 90s percentile of failure.
	But they won't tell us.
	Our congressmen won't tell us.
	They could go on the floor of Congress and they could tell it.
	And they could do that with immunity.
	But they won't do it.
	They won't do it.
	And so we know that it doesn't work.
	The other reason that we know that it doesn't work is because if there was a threat to airports or airplanes, we would have had an attack.
	Because they're totally ineffective.
	If you've got something that fails 90% of the time, and if there's a real threat out there, we would have already had some attacks.
	And of course, one of the other pushbacks against this was an engineer who sued them.
	And as part of discovery, he got information with internal TSA documents.
	Now, the government did not want those in the public record without redaction.
	But lawsuits get published on a website called pacer.gov.
	And they mistakenly...
	Published the unredacted versions and had them up for almost a day.
	It was like put up in the morning.
	They got it down in the afternoon because we started heavily reporting it at Infowars.
	The guy called us up and said, hey, you know, they put this unredacted report up.
	You might want to grab it, which we did.
	Then they took it down and then they put up the redacted version, which was really handy because we could go through and look at these things side by side and see what is it that they didn't want us to know that we now know.
	And the key thing that came out of that, It was in 2011, as there were all these fights going on, there was a fight in the Texas legislature to stop the TSA from doing the pat-down of children.
	It was put in by David Simpson, who was a genuine Christian conservative there in Texas.
	He did some really good work.
	No longer in the legislature, of course.
	And he put out a bill, and it passed unanimously.
	In the Texas House.
	And they said, you're not going to do that.
	And if you continue to pat down children and put them through naked body scanners and stuff, we're not going to allow that to happen in Texas.
	And so, when it went to the Senate, it got shut down there because the lieutenant governor was former CIA.
	And he picked his position as lieutenant governor and head of the Senate to shut it down there.
	He was somebody who, after he got out of the CIA, was set up in the oil business.
	You know, kind of like the Bushes.
	You know, that's what they like to do.
	And he spent more money getting elected as lieutenant governor than anybody had ever spent up to that time running for office in Texas.
	He shut it down.
	They did a second time, and again, it passed, not unanimously that time, but they were able to shut it down a second time.
	As all of that was happening in 2011, this document that surfaced as part of this lawsuit That they published unredacted, then put up the redacted version of it later.
	That document said, in 2011, when they were threatening to turn, they said, you pass that?
	We're going to shut off all air traffic to Texas, said the federal government.
	And what that said was that there was no, the TSA's own assessment said there was no threat to either airports or airplanes in that document.
	And of course we know that because we know how ineffective their measures are.
	You know, when you bunch everybody up for the sake of security, what you've done is you've created a bigger terrorist opportunity.
	We know this just from common sense.
	We know it from security people.
	They say you bunch everybody up at a checkpoint, terrorists will just bomb them there, right?
	And we've seen that happen in Muslim countries where you have You know, people in the church won't get airport-type security.
	Bag checks, all the rest of the stuff.
	And it bunches everybody up, and so what do the terrorists do?
	They set the bomb off at that location.
	So airport detentions have travelers freaked out, says The Atlantic.
	Now, they're talking about, predominantly, people who are...
	Immigrants or visitors or whatever they might have.
	Green cards that are legal, but that doesn't matter.
	Not with the new Border Patrol and Customs, right?
	They said the anxiety is not limited to immigration lawyers ahead of summer travel season.
	Online message boards have been humming with vacation worries.
	Users are telling one another to delete social media accounts on their devices, turn off facial recognition features to make it harder for officers to gain access.
	And pack photocopies of their personal documents, such as birth and marriage certificates.
	This is what we have to do to travel.
	I blame the license to drive stuff.
	That's part of where the slope was to going back even before this deliberate police state stuff.
	The idea that you'd have to have the government's permission to travel.
	No.
	I know people who are sovereign citizens who say, well, if I'm driving for commercial purposes, you can regulate me, but if I'm traveling, and I'm traveling, I'm not here for hire, I'm not making a living doing this, you have no right to require a driver's license.
	And legally, they're 100% right.
	But just like all the rest of this stuff, our court system is so corrupt.
	They're not interested in hearing legal arguments.
	I've known people who've been tax protesters and said, well, here, according to this, blah, blah, blah.
	And the judge says, you're not going to talk about that.
	And if you continue to talk about it, I'll hold you in contempt.
	Next.
	Go to your next thing.
	And shut down one after the other.
	Any arguments.
	They're not going to listen to anything.
	Not going to let the jury hear any evidence against that.
	That's the way our court systems are.
	I've seen it over and over again.
	You know, in any, not just in taxes, not just in identification or driving, I've seen it with everything, everything that they do, if it has something to do with their power.
	In March, a German-born New Hampshire resident arriving at Boston's Logan Airport was arrested and jailed, now faces deportation over a years-old marijuana charge.
	A Canadian woman detained at a Southern California border crossing spent two weeks in a grim immigration and customs enforcement lockup.
	A green card holder from Ireland who has lived in the United States for 40 years was taken into custody last month in San Francisco International Airport because of drug convictions that had been expunged from her record.
	She is still in ICE custody and faces...
	Deportation.
	There's also the story that I told about, the two German teen girls that were backpacking around the world.
	And when they got to Hawaii, the Customs and Border Patrol people wanted to know where they were staying, what hotel was like.
	We're not staying in a hotel, we're backpacking.
	And they arrested them.
	I mean, they put these two girls in shackles, kept them in lockup with some dangerous people.
	For a couple of days.
	And then put them in shackles again and took them to the airport and sent them out of the country.
	Our country is getting crazy, folks.
	You can argue all you want about justification for this and exceptions for this.
	We're okay because Trump's in office and all the rest of this stuff.
	No.
	No.
	And it's not just Trump.
	It's Trump, Democrats, all of them.
	All of them.
	Lawyers say that their clients...
	Foreign citizens residing abroad or green card holders living in the United States.
	Even some U.S. citizens are worried that their interaction with the Border Patrol officers stationed at airports and border crossings will end badly.
	David Fishman, a travel consultant in Michigan, says he will tell anxious travelers when they're planning their vacations, consider booking a domestic trip instead of going abroad, if only for peace of mind.
	You know, if you stay within the continental United States, you know, even going to Hawaii, he says, you don't have to worry about Border Patrol.
	You don't have to have a face-to-face with them.
	Not yet, anyway.
	But you understand, transportation, the TSA is about transportation, not about airports.
	It's the Transportation Security Administration, or agency, or whatever it's called.
	It's about transportation.
	And they've tried in the past.
	To roll this kind of stuff out on domestic bus travel, greyhound travel, things like that, or trains.
	It's coming.
	And it's one of the reasons why they want to push these 15-minute cities and these, you know, the cars that Elon Musk and Uber and all the rest of them are going to rent to you by the ride is because they don't want you traveling without their permission.
	It's all about the ID.
	Although U.S. citizens cannot be denied entry into the U.S., all other categories of non-citizens, even in some cases legal permanent residents with green cards, are at risk of being denied entry or deemed inadmissible by a Customs and Border Patrol officer.
	Well, we're going to take a break.
	When we come back, we're going to talk about the, you know, we've talked in the past about the billionaire sports stadiums, and we're going to talk about the billionaire data centers.
	What?
	An astounding rip-off, that is.
	Even worse than the sports stadiums.
	Not nearly as entertaining either.
	And so, we'll talk about that.
	And we'll talk about how the only success that people have had in terms of stopping this has been organizing locally.
	And there are some groups that are helping people to organize locally.
	And so, we're going to take a quick break.
	And we will be right back.
	ORCHESTRA PLAYS
	ORCHESTRA PLAYS
	ORCHESTRA PLAYS ORCHESTRA PLAYS Analyzing the globalist's next move.
	ORCHESTRA PLAYS And now, The David Knight Show.
	On Rumble, T. Norman Artis says, Real ID?
	Murder jab?
	Spraying us like bugs every day?
	Our government hates us and wants to kill us all.
	You're absolutely right.
	Certainly the people who run it.
	From the top down.
	On Rumble, Wally Walrus says, I don't fly anymore anyway.
	I got robbed at PDX Airport for $5,000 in 2018.
	They haven't flown since.
	I'm assuming that was the so-called civil asset forfeiture where they take your cash because, you know, cash is a crime and don't charge you with breaking the law.
	That's where the civil comes in.
	This is not a law.
	This is a rule passed by the regulatory agencies.
	Therefore, you have no due process.
	We don't have to charge and convict you before we take your assets.
	We just take them.
	We just steal it.
	And we call it civil asset forfeiture.
	What an amazing euphemism that is.
	Anyway, on Rumble, KWD 68. Trump said Doge found something unbelievable.
	That was two weeks ago.
	Put that on the list with all the other non-delivered daily mouth diarrhea.
	On Rumble, Soylent Goy said, are we going to need permits to leave our pods in 2050?
	Well, that would be a definitive yes.
	They get us in pods.
	They will have us locked down.
	This is what this is all a test for.
	And so part of that, you know, tying in with all this real ID and all the rest of this stuff, is their desire to have these big data centers.
	The big data centers are going to be necessary for them to do all of this analysis of us, real-time analysis, store all the information, then, of course, to propagandize us and to lie to us about all this.
	The new stadium scam is a server farm.
	This is from Reason.
	Local governments love giving sweetheart deals to billion-dollar companies and now data centers instead of football stadiums.
	I've talked about that.
	I did a report on this, one of the first reports I did at InfoWars back in 2012, I think.
	I talked about what was then, well, it still is an astronomical sum, but they've gotten much more ludicrous amounts on the subsidies for these sports stadiums.
	Massive subsidies to billionaires so that we can all watch millionaires play a boys game in the stadium.
	I don't care what they do, but they ought to pay for their own business and their own stadium.
	But now the big grift is that we're going to subsidize heavily these big tech companies so they can come in with a big data center.
	LaPorte, Indiana.
	A small city between South Bend, Indiana and Chicago, Illinois.
	The recent announcement that Microsoft is investing over a billion dollars into a vast new data center campus in La Porte is expected to be transformational for the town of only 22,000 people.
	And again, it's locally organizing is how you're going to stop stuff like this.
	These local officials are out of their mind if they want this, or they're being paid off.
	Microsoft was given a 40-year tax abatement on equipment, a renewable state sales tax exemption through 2068, 43 years, and just $2.5 million worth of payments in lieu of taxes over four years, about a third of what it would normally be.
	After that, nothing.
	Local utilities also will cover the cost of the infrastructure and pass it on to the people who buy electricity.
	Just 60 miles up the toll road, the toll road, yeah, sits Soldier Field, home of the Chicago Bears.
	The stadium's 2002 post-modern renovation cost $586 million, $387 million of which was shouldered by the taxpayers.
	That's two-thirds.
	Two-thirds.
	Chicago only has $640 million left to pay, and the Bears are now threatening to leave.
	And how did it get up to $640 million?
	Well, with interest.
	$256 million in interest.
	So cities have long bankroll stadiums for billionaire team owners, while promising taxpayer jobs, tourists.
	Tourism and civic pride?
	And maybe even a Super Bowl, they said.
	The results almost uniformly dismal.
	Here they are from Cincinnati, Miami, St. Louis, Charlotte, North Carolina.
	Cincinnati Bengals left Hamilton County, Ohio, buried in debt and obligated to fund high-tech upgrades just to keep pace.
	And Miami, they spent half a billion dollars in public funds on a baseball stadium for the Marlins, only to see the attendance collapse.
	And the team gutted.
	St. Louis is still paying off the Edward Jones Dome, even after the Rams skipped town for sunnier LA.
	So the team's gone.
	And they're still paying for the stadium in St. Louis.
	In Charlotte, North Carolina.
	The latest addition to this Hall of Shame, after handing out $650 million, In tourism taxes to renovate Bank of America Stadium, earning them the, quote, worst economic development deal of the year, unquote, distinction from the Center for Economic Accountability.
	But now we move to the server farms.
	Because it's not about fun and games anymore.
	Now they get serious in terms of watching us.
	Just as bad for taxpayers.
	Small towns and...
	Not a few big ones are bending over backward to lure data centers.
	Local economic development officials tilt the scales, suspend the rules, give away the farm, says Reason.
	Well, I say, it'll create jobs.
	It'll put us on the map.
	It's worth the investment.
	Well, you know, so do small businesses create jobs, but they don't get any breaks.
	First, there's the infrastructure issue.
	Data centers demand massive utility upgrades.
	Power lines, substations, water lines, fiber, and roads.
	These are usually paid for by local utilities, by state infrastructure grants, or by rate payers.
	In Kansas City, Evergy announced that it would build two new power plants largely to meet data center demand, costs that would be passed on to customers.
	In Northern Virginia, Dominion Energy's data center grid upgrades are now a line item in a statewide electric rate hike in Virginia.
	Statewide.
	They put it in as a line item.
	I guess it's okay if you put in a line item expense as long as it's not one of Trump's tariffs, right?
	Amazon got in trouble with that.
	You do that, you are a Chinese propagandist, according to Caroline Levitt.
	Don't tell people where this extra fee is coming from.
	Keep them in the dark, or we'll call you a communist propagandist.
	Next, there's tax increment financing in Mount Pleasant, Wisconsin.
	Microsoft got a deal that allows a company to recapture up to 42% of its own property taxes, not only avoiding taxes, but being reimbursed with public dollars.
	I tell you, Microsoft is doing the deals, aren't they?
	It's always been about their political connections.
	These deals are struck behind closed doors, insulated from scrutiny, built on the assumption that any growth is good, even if it's paid for, by taking your neighbor's wallet.
	Analysts project that data center capacity will more than triple by 2030 in five years.
	Five years.
	They estimate the U.S. will need to reach 35 gigawatts of capacity by then, double today's total.
	That's gigawatts, Marty, right?
	Back to the futility of the utilities.
	The surge is largely driven by artificial intelligence, which alone accounts for 75% of all data center demand that they estimate by 2030.
	So they've got to double it, and 70% of that is going to be AI.
	These facilities, listen to this, already draw more electricity than some nations.
	Some nations.
	And Goldman Sachs projects that they will consume up to 9% of U.S. power by 2030.
	Because AI is there to spy and to lie.
	That's what it's about.
	Spying and lying.
	And if you're going to spy and lie to people, all the government's got a blank check for you.
	Nothing is too much.
	So, how do we stop this?
	Well, Futurism had an interesting article.
	It's kind of a tech site.
	It said, small towns are rising up against these AI data centers.
	We don't want to be the next data center alley.
	And that's the big corridor that's there in Virginia.
	As AI creeps further into our lives...
	So do the hulking data centers that power it, but not everyone is stoked about their neighbors.
	Bulky, noisy, they hog resources like electricity to staggering scale.
	They place a huge burden on the local power grids and on water.
	That were only designed for small-town homes, not state-of-the-art industrial facilities.
	But, of course, we've seen this for a long time.
	You know, the NSA had two big data facilities, one of them back east in the Washington area.
	The other one they put out in Bluffdale, Utah, years ago.
	And, you know, they're busy keeping copies of everything that goes on on the Internet so that when they get...
	Fast enough computers, quantum computing or something like that, they'll be able to go back and data mine that and pigeonhole every one of us.
	And so they put that, the one that's out west, in Bluffdale, Utah, they put that out in the middle of the desert.
	It uses more water than a city.
	And more power as well.
	But they don't care about any of that stuff.
	Money is no object for the federal empire.
	It just conjures it up out of thin air.
	And neither party cares about balancing this stuff.
	It's all nonsense.
	I mean, Trump wanted them to take the debt ceiling off for two years.
	He threw a temper tantrum when Johnson didn't get that through.
	He doesn't want to balance the budget.
	He doesn't want to reduce spending.
	He wants the ceiling taken off.
	There hasn't been any real cuts proposed.
	You know, Elon Musk is bragging about $165 billion that he's taken off.
	That's nothing, really.
	And those cuts are not real either.
	They're still being litigated in most cases.
	Most of these things are.
	They've given extra bonuses to a lot of federal employees to take early retirement.
	But other than that, there's not any real quote-unquote cost savings.
	And that was very expensive to do that.
	Hyperscale data centers bring few benefits to communities, said...
	A grassroots campaign that has successfully repulsed a data center in their area.
	It's called Peaceful Peculiar because they're in Peculiar, Missouri.
	I live in Peculiar.
	Dozens of communities around the nation.
	Severely struggle from the presence of data centers.
	It's only about maximizing their profits.
	So they choose properties as close as possible to a large power supply.
	Now, this group has a Facebook page.
	It's called Don't Dump Data on Peculiar.
	And they welcomed input.
	So they put up a Facebook page.
	And they said, you know, please tell us.
	If you're an activist or an organizer in other communities and you've been fighting this grift from the data centers, I think a lot of people who helped them.
	And it's a good model for this.
	Because if we do this on many other issues, I think, you know, these things can only be stopped if they're going to be stopped.
	They're only going to be stopped at the local level.
	What works?
	Well, we need to start coordinating that.
	Maybe, you know, Facebook will let you do that.
	They did in this particular case.
	And so there was a company called, let's see, what is it?
	It was called Diode Ventures.
	Diode Ventures.
	And they switched them off, I guess.
	They switched off that diode facility.
	Now, after successfully fighting off the diode facility last October, the organizers of Peculiar have become a resource now to fellow activists as far away as Indiana, Idaho, Georgia, and Texas.
	So people started pulling their...
	What they were doing to slow these things down or stop them.
	They stopped it, so now that's become another resource.
	We don't want to be the next Data Center Alley, said an organizer from Indiana.
	That is a nickname given to a stretch of land in Northern Virginia, home to over 50 other facilities, with many more on the way.
	Data Center Alley is a cautionary tale, helping to fuel the...
	Loose pay it forward style of campaigning.
	In Indiana, they found that out of 30 ongoing proposals, two were repelled in the last month alone, on top of five more rejections in the past year.
	That's all despite a corporate-friendly governor with generous tax incentives offered by state lawmakers, local residents themselves, not larger groups.
	We're proving to be the most effective line of defense against the looming threat of data center development.
	That's always going to be our solution.
	Our solution to big government, to corporate fascism, merger of government and corporations, is going to be organizing at the local level.
	And this is a great example of it.
	And so we're building our tools to help local folks feel like they have the knowledge and the resources to be able to engage at these local levels.
	It's an organizer with Citizens Action Coalition.
	When we have several dozen data center proposals in the state of Indiana and more coming, a small organization like ours can't be there for each individual fight.
	So they realize that the power is in decentralizing, and the power is in getting people connected and organized at the local level about things that are going to directly affect them.
	So how is this data going to be used?
	Well, we already know.
	It's the government.
	It's going to use it to spy on us.
	And they'll also use it to lie to us, to push us with propaganda one way or the other, to gaslight us.
	Palantir, partnering with the Department of Defense on the controversial AI project called MAVEN.
	This is a merger.
	Of course, Palantir is a merger.
	In a sense of AI, in the older sense, AI was anticipatory intelligence.
	Which they could infer a lot of things about you just from the metadata, as Hayden was saying, Michael Hayden.
	And he said, we don't want your personal, we're not listening to your personal phone calls.
	And we're not reading your text messages and emails.
	We just want that metadata.
	Well, that was even worse, said William Binney when I interviewed him.
	He said, it's the metadata that tells him even more.
	than if they were listening to your phone conversations or whatever.
	That's part of geospatial intelligence where they analyze your movements, who you come in contact with, all the rest of the stuff.
	They can infer all kinds of things about that.
	Your politics can be inferred from that.
	Your religion can be inferred from that.
	They are very good at that.
	And once they do that, once they collect all that information with geospatial intelligence, then they can anticipate what you're going to do.
	They boast about how they know better than you what you're going to do.
	They called that AI, anticipatory intelligence.
	And so Palantir has been at the center of this.
	And Palantir has always been selling stuff to the government, to the spy agencies, to the military, that type of thing.
	They've started doing more domestic stuff now.
	But years ago, Palantir had just massive numbers of billboards.
	And, of course, Palantir, founded by Alex Karp and Peter Thiel.
	As he points out, the technocrat Zionist, who also happen to be the steering committee members of the Bilderberg Group, and the Maven Smart System, uses AI-generated algorithms and memory learning capabilities to scan and to identify enemy systems.
	This is what they're working on now, is the methods for them to be able to switch over the kill decision to the artificial intelligence.
	It'll go out and profile things, determine who the enemies are, who the friends are, and then fire the weapons.
	Without having humans in the loop, because you have humans in the loop, the other AI will beat you to it.
	So that's the arms race that is coming.
	And so, NATO's had a lot of problems with standardization.
	They got radio systems that don't work with each other, that are incompatible with each other.
	So, you know, hey, look, just use signal.
	I mean, you know, Pete Hegseth did.
	Mike Waltz?
	Yeah, no problem.
	Just use Signal.
	Signal chat.
	Anyway, the MAVEN system has already been in use by certain U.S. military outfits.
	They have even used it in the Ukraine-Russian conflict.
	The U.S. has used MAVEN to spot Russian defense outposts.
	In April of 2024, Palantir was also awarded a $480 million deal by the Army.
	To use this system.
	The Financial Times says it's likely to be one of Palantir's most significant military contracts of 2025.
	And again, we look at Alex Garp.
	He gets downright gleeful about killing his enemies.
	And so this goes back to the original Project Maven in April 26. And of course, if you remember, it came out at that point in time back in 2018.
	A lot of Google employees went public.
	Protesting Google's involvement in Project Maven.
	They said, we believe Google should not be in the business of war.
	And war is a business.
	Google would eventually drop out of that project, and so would Eric Schmidt drop out of anything having to do with Google.
	He was no longer the CEO, but had been on the board.
	But he got out around that time.
	And he has now become kind of the Pentagon guru.
	For high-tech weapons, especially artificial intelligence, Eric Schmidt is doing that, along with Peter Thiel and along with Palantir.
	And so, before we take a break here, there's now, bring it home, Freethought Project has an article from Reclaim the Net.
	Texas Bill is declaring a war on memes.
	A war on memes.
	Yeah, they don't want you to do satire.
	That's a very difficult thing for them to deal with.
	What's being dressed up here as election integrity in this Texas bill is at its core a disturbing attempt to police satire, commentary, and political expression.
	Saul Alinsky said satire is the most dangerous weapon.
	He said there's no defense against it.
	Well, even a demonic Marxist, and I say demonic, he dedicated his book, Rules for Radicals, to Lucifer, the original rebel.
	He certainly knows his devils, doesn't he?
	Marx, Lucifer, all these.
	And he said satire is the most dangerous thing.
	There's no defense against it.
	I guess, though, even he couldn't imagine the politicians and the lawyers and how they would use intellectual property as a weapon.
	So, it's deceptively framed as a measure to combat AI misinformation.
	It would in reality make a criminal offense to share altered political content, such as memes or edited videos, unless it carries a government-mandated disclaimer that is yet to be determined.
	Now, I said this about the AI bill.
	That was being pushed by Melania Trump.
	And Trump had said, nobody makes more fun of it than me, right?
	That's where this is headed.
	I said that's where this is headed.
	I said, yeah, they're talking about people doing fake pornography.
	Taking your face and making pornographic images with it.
	And Melania wanted to take the lead on that because I guess she wants her cut.
	She wrote her book.
	She's very proud of her pornographic past.
	Very proud of it.
	I guess she just wants to get paid.
	Anyway, this is being championed by former House Speaker Dade Phelan.
	His political career has been marred by controversy.
	That's a polite way of putting it.
	He was drunk Dade.
	As Speaker of the House, I talked about it, this was two years ago.
	This is why he's former Speaker.
	Paxton has not provided any real hard proof of his allegation, but last Friday, a video recorded from the House floor shows the Speaker conducting a late-night portion in the 14th hour of a 14-hour session with slurred speech.
	There is a different cadence, and not the rapid-fire calling of votes normally heard while Phelan presides.
	He was drunk.
	You'll hear it last night.
	Look and listen.
	This is when he was sober.
	So they're drunk, then sober.
	Now we're back to drunk.
	The chair recognizes Mr. Johnson of Harris.
	Mr. Johnson of Harris.
	He recognized him.
	How about that?
	He's so blind drunk, I'm surprised that he could recognize him.
	So that's Dade Phelan.
	Former House Speaker.
	He's the one who introduced this law to criminalize memes.
	If enacted, it would treat the unapproved sharing of such content by campaigns or candidates as a Class A misdemeanor punishable by up to a year behind bars.
	It's coming out of Republican, Texas.
	Simply spending more than $100 to promote an altered image, video, or audio clip without the required government-approved language would be enough to trigger prosecution.
	The Texas Ethics Commission would be tasked with declaring exactly what this mandated language should look like right down to its size and color, they say.
	Well, as they said, obviously, it's going to create...
	The purpose of this is to intimidate people.
	I hate the term, a chilling effect.
	No, it's intimidation.
	It's intimidation.
	To intimidate anybody that would use satire or parody or digital commentary to criticize politicians.
	There's a lot of opposition on social media.
	State Representative Shelley Luther, remember her?
	She had the beauty salon and she got a Democrat locked her up.
	This is Clay Jenkins in Dallas.
	He was the mayor there, the county mayor, which is the highest elected office.
	I think that was the title.
	No, judge.
	Here in Tennessee, it's called mayor at the county level.
	Not a mayor of a city.
	So they have a mayor of a city, but then they also have a mayor of the county, which is the highest elected county official.
	In Texas, They have regular judges in a courtroom, but then the person who is the elected official, who is the highest elected official in the county, is called a judge there.
	Well, Clay Jenkins was a judge there, and I've talked about this many times, how when Ebola came to town with an illegal immigrant, it had civil rights.
	And you had Clay Jenkins going around saying, don't worry about it.
	Yeah, we got Ebola, but go to the Dallas and Houston football game.
	Go see the Cowboys and the Oilers play or whatever the Houston team is now.
	And he said, we've got lots of hospitals and lots of doctors if you get sick, right?
	And so they had the guy who had it died, two nurses who were treating him.
	I got nearly died nearly they got very sick nearly died and Fauci came in Francis Collins came in Obama came in all these Democrats with the Democrat Clay Jenkins they're all telling her but don't worry about it everything's fine calm down everything's fine and even made it a point of going to the apartment and walking around without any protective clothing or anything and then he wants to sell the viral scare tactics with COVID just a couple years later same guy And that time,
	oh, I'm going to lock you down.
	Everybody's going to be locked down.
	Completely different approach.
	And Shelly Luther was one of the people who pushed back on that.
	And she had a beauty salon.
	And Clay Jenkins, the county judge, got the courtroom judge to put her in jail.
	And then I think she was pardoned by Abbott or something, but that was a fight.
	She got involved in politics.
	She's now a state representative.
	And she said, we are banning political memes and giving people up to a year in jail for failing to attach a disclosure to a cartoon.
	She tweeted out, I said, do you want to know what the Texas House is doing today?
	Well, I'll tell you.
	We are banning political memes and giving people up to a year in jail.
	For failing to attach a disclosure to a cartoon.
	She said, Democrats, of course, are rallying around this bill.
	What a joke it is.
	Just like Dade Phelan is a joke.
	He brushed off the concerns.
	He said, all he does is tell you to add a disclosure if you're using all to me.
	No, I think he was sober when he said that.
	Which makes it all the worse, right?
	I think they should rename this bill.
	This is the bill for knucklehead politicians like Trump who doesn't know about the MS-13 being photoshopped.
	It fooled him.
	It really did fool him.
	And so there's a lot of really...
	They should call it the knuckleheads and chuckleheads bill.
	There's a lot of chuckleheads out there who can't figure it out.
	Knuckleheads, whatever, right?
	Just knuckleheads and chuckleheads.
	We're going to do it for them.
	We're going to put a special disclaimer on there for people like Donald Trump.
	Who can't tell Photoshop from a picture, even when it's a really, really bad Photoshop?
	And I don't think they weren't even trying to make it look like it was a tattoo.
	He just couldn't figure it out.
	To critics, this kind of rationale only reinforces how far the government is willing to reach into constitutionally protected expression.
	Yeah, imagine.
	What the founders of this country would say about a jail sentence for doing a satire cartoon.
	Oh, they hate it when you do satire cartoons.
	You know, that's what the lawyers came after us for.
	And we're going to come back with that in a different form.
	We're not going to do exactly the same thing.
	We're going to put pretty close to it.
	Anyway, the bill includes minor exceptions for changes in superficial quality, such as color or brightness.
	It does nothing to protect parity or commentary, which have long been the core pillars of political discourse.
	It draws an arbitrary legal line around digital creativity, and it gives the government power to punish those who cross it.
	Because, you know, We all know that censors don't have a sense of humor.
	Implications are already dangerous.
	Elected officials increasingly shielded from criticism are moving to criminalize the tools used by ordinary citizens to hold them accountable.
	And as all this is happening, as I said before, AI is a tool to lie and spy.
	It is a tool that is dearly beloved by our lying spies who are heavily into the occult.
	And people like the CIA.
	And so, what about the speech of AI itself?
	You know, it is being used satanically, demonically.
	The messages were insane and just saying a bunch of spiritual jargon is the headline.
	As Rolling Stone reports, users on Reddit are sharing how AI has led their loved ones to embrace a range of alarming delusions.
	Often mixing spiritual mania and supernatural fantasies.
	Satanic, demonic.
	Friends and family are watching an alarm as users insist that they've been chosen to fulfill sacred missions on behalf of sentient AI or non-existent cosmic powers.
	Chatbot behavior that's just mirroring and worsening existing mental health issues, but at an incredible scale.
	A 41-year-old mother and a non-profit worker told Rolling Stone that her marriage ended abruptly after her husband started engaging in unbalanced conspiratorial conversations with ChatGPT that spiraled into an all-consuming obsession.
	She said he became emotional about the messages, and he would cry to me as he read them aloud.
	The messages were insane, and just saying a bunch of spiritual jargon, she said.
	AI called the husband a spiral star child.
	It says spiral, not spiritual.
	A spiral star child.
	Does that mean that he likes Milky Ways?
	He figured out that he has a penchant for Milky Way candy.
	Oh, you're a spiral star child.
	And called him a river walker.
	River walker.
	Does he live in San Antonio?
	The whole thing feels like Black Mirror, she said.
	Other users told the publication that their partner had been, quote, talking about lightness and dark and how there is a war.
	There is.
	There is.
	And when things like this happen, it can be a physical, psychological thing, but sometimes it's not.
	Anyway, ChatGPT has given him blueprints to a teleporter.
	Some other sci-fi type things that you only see in movies.
	Another man told Rolling Stone that his wife is changing her whole life to be a spiritual advisor and to do weird readings and sessions with people.
	I'm a little fuzzy on what it actually is, but it's all powered by ChatGPT Jesus, he said.
	No, he's a little bit confused, too.
	It's ChatGPT Lucifer.
	These AI-induced delusions are likely the result of, they said, people with existing tendencies.
	It's just reinforcing somebody's psychosis, say the psychologists.
	But perhaps the strangest interview in Rolling Stone's story was a man with a troubled mental health history who started using chat GPT for coding tasks, but then said that it started to pull him into conversations on unhinged mystical topics.
	He pondered, is this real?
	Or am I delusional?
	Well, I'll tell you, it is going to be used that way.
	Whether it's being used by demonic forces or whether it's being used by the CIA.
	I'm being redundant here, aren't I?
	It will be used by dark, evil forces.
	And it will be used to lie to us and to spy on us.
	We're going to take a quick break and we'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	listening to the David Knight Show.
	Colonel Potter, sir.
	Corporal Klinger.
	I'm Section 8, head to toe.
	I'm wearing a Warner bra.
	I play with dolls.
	My last wish is to be buried in my mother's wedding gown.
	I'm nuts.
	I should be out.
	Horse hockey.
	I've seen these Dodgers for 40 years, all the tricks.
	Knew a private, pretended he was a mare, carried a colt in his arms for weeks.
	Another fellow said he was a daisy, insisted we water him every morning.
	No, no, Corporal, it ain't gonna go with me.
	Now you get out of that frou-frou and into a uniform, and you stay in uniform.
	Dismissed!
	I'm finished.
	I gotta burn my bloomers.
	I see him around sometimes.
	I don't know that guy.
	I just see him around there sometimes.
	That's his introduction, Klinger's introduction to the new colonel there, Potter.
	Yeah, well, the Supreme Court is going to allow Trump to implement transgender military ban because these people should be sectioned eight out of the military, right?
	You're crazy.
	Look, I'm crazy.
	I'm wearing women's clothes.
	Now it's a virtue.
	And their recruiting for people like Klinger have been under the Biden administration.
	That has now changed under Trump.
	As a matter of fact, this is what Pete Hegseth said.
	No more pronouns.
	No more climate change obsession.
	No more emergency vaccine mandates.
	No more dudes in dresses.
	We're done with that s***.
	Yeah, well, I wish we were done with the undeclared wars all over the place.
	How about that?
	If we can...
	We're going to stop dudes in dresses.
	Can we stop some of these wars that are unnecessary and undeclared?
	No.
	No, they're going to ramp those up.
	Anyway, the Supreme Court granted an emergency request from the Trump administration to lift a nationwide injunction by blocking the policy while the litigation continues.
	It's not a done deal yet, folks.
	This is yet another example of one judge, a politically appointed judge, Who decides that he is going to tell the commander-in-chief what to do?
	Now, look, whether you agree with Trump or not, I mean, we have to have these clear lines of authority that are there.
	And clearly, this is within the scope of the president to be able to make this decision.
	Unfortunately, both directions, right?
	When the Democrats get back in, or I guess we should call them the gender-crats, when the gender-crats get back in, they could reinstate this policy because it's been on again and off again as it goes back and forth between Republicans and Democrats.
	And you didn't have any judges saying that Biden couldn't put the policy back in that Trump had taken out.
	It only goes the other way.
	And so you have one judge who decides that he is going to overrule the commander-in-chief, and he's going to set national policy.
	This is what I mean by judicial overreach and supremacy, and that really is the case.
	They said there's just over 4,000, and this is actually coming from NBC News, so this is probably a high figure for them, because they're sympathetic to the trainees.
	They said there's over 4,000 trainees, they said transgender people, but there's about 2.1 million active service.
	So we're looking at about 0.1%, according to them.
	And that number's pretty high, probably.
	That's, in other words, about one-tenth of one percent.
	They said, we are not a theory.
	We are not a policy debate.
	We are real people doing real jobs.
	They are real people who have deep psychological issues that interfere with their job.
	And it's not just the mental issues as well, because it isn't something that just distracts their focus and has them focus on their sexual obsessions all the time.
	It is something that is also being funded by taxpayers, and once they get these surgical procedures, they are now physically disabled, cannot deploy for a while.
	And they may have, when they've got some kind of a bottom surgery or something, they may have a physical issue.
	That is going to be a big problem for them doing any kind of deployment.
	And so this is from a sanity perspective, from a practical perspective, from a mental perspective, physical perspective.
	This needs to be shut down.
	So I'm glad they're doing it.
	Good.
	I hope that they can continue it.
	But again, remember, this is just the Supreme Court saying, this judge says, I disagree with what Trump is doing, and I'm going to stop it nationally.
	And he put a stay on it.
	And so the Supreme Court says, no, we're going to let Trump's policy go through while this is still being litigated.
	But it could still be litigated.
	It might have to go back to be appealed to the Supreme Court yet again.
	They said that the policy, quote, generally disqualifies from military service individuals who have gender dysphoria, that's the mental issue, or who have undergone medical interventions for gender dysphoria.
	That would be the physical impairment that they have not.
	In implementing the policy, the government relied on Pentagon Report for the first Trump term that said that people with gender dysphoria, so-called, are a threat to, quote, military effectiveness.
	And lethality.
	So they said, one person pushing back on it said, this is based on the shocking proposition that transgender people do not exist.
	No, no, you exist.
	You are just detached from reality.
	And this is just an acknowledgement that they're mentally and sometimes electively, physically unable to do their job.
	That's what it's an acknowledgment of.
	So the Supreme Court stated the lower court's preliminary injunction of one unelected political appointee saying, I'm going to set policy for the entire military, entire two million person military.
	It was a six to three decision.
	And of course, the three were the...
	Liberal Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson.
	Jackson, who famously did not know what is a woman.
	I guess Jackson still does not know what a woman is.
	These are the three appointed gendercrat judges.
	And they want to rule by gender fantasy.
	The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
	With, of course, you know, it's a very leftist court, denied the Trump administration's stay, and so you had one judge who did it and put a stay on it, and then they appealed it to the Ninth Circuit Court.
	They said, no, we're going to leave the stay in.
	They appealed it to the Supreme Court, and then they removed the stay.
	In January, Trump signed two bills, one of them.
	To root out the gender insanity.
	That was called the Restoring America's Fighting Force.
	And then the other one was to stop the nonsense about pronouns.
	That was called Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness.
	So they wanted to root out gender insanity and the made-up pronoun usage, respectively.
	So, again, if we want to have a sane military...
	Let's take a look at these ongoing wars in Gaza, Ukraine, and Yemen, and the rest.
	And let's not start one in Iran.
	Then you really would have a sane military.
	But instead, we have wars that are even more insane than Corporal Klinger, who had the good sense to want to get out of that Korean war that was there.
	A police action!
	Our first police action war.
	The trans empire is striking back against the UK determination and court.
	The UK Supreme Court has, as we reported last month, they ruled that 15-year-old British legislation really did mean sex and not using this redefined term gender.
	Because, look, gender and sex...
	have always been synonym for each other, and they've always been biological.
	And so the UK Supreme Court said, well, it said sex, and we're going to treat it as written.
	And that's caused a lot of pushback in the UK.
	They simply found that words mean things, as this person says, the New American.
	They simply found that man means man, and woman means woman, and sex means man, woman, and sex.
	But Andrea Wittberg wrote, she said, you already know what it says.
	Lived reality and threatening the safety as these, you have a lot of celebrities, have come together with a letter to push back against this.
	Lived reality.
	Sounds like that Luigi guy, right?
	Our lived experiences.
	Yeah, that's university talk for nonsense.
	It exposes trans people to embarrassment and harassment, to make a distinction, and say, well, this is going to be biological.
	Negative consequences for all women, harm that trans and gender non-conforming people face, etc., etc.
	Woodberg says, there's a couple of things to understand about the We Love Trans People pylon.
	First of all, the entertainment industry is disproportionately populated with non-heterosexuals.
	While most people know very few homosexuals and have never met somebody claiming to be trans, the entertainment types really do believe that half or more of the world is on what they call a spectrum.
	A spectrum.
	In other words, it's a continuum.
	You don't have a binary man or woman.
	You have some kind of a continuum there where they are gradually moving between these two worlds.
	And as a matter of fact, Cynthia Nixon, who's an actress, and she was on Sex and the City, she ran for political office.
	She had this to say in a New York rally.
	I am here today as the mother of a proud trans man.
	Cheering
	I am here today as the aunt of a proud trans man.
	My best friend's kid is trans.
	And my kid's best friend is trans.
	My wife and I, our lives are filled with the most amazing, beautiful, brave trans people, young and old, but especially young.
	My trans kid had his top surgery at NYU a number of years ago.
	His doctors were fantastic.
	His surgeon was the best we could have imagined.
	And the idea that this city is filled with young people who thought They had a place to go where they could receive the highest care, and that place has now been shut to them.
	Sickens me.
	Sickens me to my core.
	Wow.
	So, is she auditioning for a new series?
	Call it Gender and the City, right?
	Instead of Sex and the City.
	She's got all these people in her life that are trainees.
	Her daughter.
	Yeah, look, lady, sorry you sold your soul to the devil and invited this evil into your household, but that's not the average experience.
	No, no.
	It's like, was it Bill Maher that said, you know, what's going on with this?
	Why is it all the kids in California are in the wrong bodies?
	But it's not happening to the people in, you know, Indiana or whatever.
	It's even obvious just from what she says when it's like, and I know more young people.
	It's like, yeah, because they've been hammering this propaganda for the last few years.
	Yeah, yeah.
	She's proud of the fact that her daughter, evidently when her daughter was young, a minor, had a mastectomy.
	This is what we talk about when we talk about mutilation.
	Or some of them, sterilization.
	So she has a daughter that is trans, saying a trans man now.
	Her niece is trans.
	Her best friend's kid is trans.
	Her kid's best friend is trans.
	And this writer for The New American says, if this strikes you as statistically improbable, join the club.
	One person commented on this video and said, Transhausen's syndrome by proxy.
	Instead of Munchhausen, it's Transhausen.
	And that's what it is.
	They want a virtue signal.
	I'm part of the club.
	I'm part of the LGBT club.
	She absolutely is.
	But the part that is intolerable about this...
	Is that she's demanding this mutilation of young kids and pushing it on them, probably, within her family.
	This is a Hollywood special effect, folks.
	It really is something that's being pushed out of the entertainment business, and they are very, very effective at gaslighting and at propaganda.
	So there was a pushback.
	From J.K. Rowling, who has really, you know, she wrote the Harry Potter book.
	She's a multi-billionaire.
	And she doesn't care what these people are saying.
	She's going to push back on this.
	And so she's a radical feminist.
	And the feminists, as I've said many times, typically what we've seen over the last few years, the radical feminists are at war with the trannies.
	She said, I'm not repeating this trans women are women and trans men are men.
	She says, I'm not repeating that because it's true.
	They know full well that it is not true.
	But because they believe that they can make it true, sort of, if they force everyone else to agree.
	And that's the key.
	It's about repeated propaganda, repeating it over and over again.
	It's about going with a great big lie.
	It's always been the key of propaganda.
	So it's repetition, a great big lie, and it is coercion, especially in the entertainment business.
	And she's been ostracized because of that.
	So this writer, The New American, says that what we're talking about is a mindset that rejects objective reality, especially moral objective reality.
	There are two conceptions of right and wrong.
	One involves the idea that morality is real, existing apart from man, that it is universal, that it is eternal, that it is unchanging.
	Our only job is to discover it and to align our lives to it.
	And how is it eternal and separate away from man?
	Well, it's because it's tied to God.
	The other one is that man makes his own morality.
	Conception is a relativistic one, which is what we live in today in our society.
	The idea that humans invent what can only be called morality, and if we invent it, we can reinvent it, and we can keep changing it, and everybody's got their own truth and their own reality.
	See, this is what's typically called post-modernism.
	Modernism was in the 1800s.
	People wanted to push back against God.
	So they wanted to reject his morality.
	They wanted to reject the idea of what was in the Bible.
	They had higher criticism in Germany and other places.
	And so this is one of the many ways that it came back.
	You had evolution, you had modernism, higher criticism, a lot of different things that were there.
	They basically wanted to throw off the old social conventions, which were based on God's morality.
	And what happened was they didn't do too well in terms of their arguments.
	And so they stopped trying to argue to get away from morality, and they just went post-modern, which says, oh, we're not even going to argue with you.
	What is truth?
	We don't know what truth is.
	There is no absolute truth.
	That's what they would say.
	Except that the reality is that was their absolute truth.
	Their absolute truth was that there is no absolute truth, but they did have that, did hold that as an absolute truth.
	So the whole thing was nonsensical.
	It was self-contradictory.
	About a decade ago, says this writer, I was interacting with a little girl of about eight or nine who was in my charge, and some topic arose, and I mentioned a moral imperative.
	Well, she replied, quite innocently, that it wasn't true because, and she says I'm paraphrasing, All the people could disagree and think otherwise.
	The writer says, I gently corrected her.
	Well, again, you know, we will make up our own truth.
	The idea that right and wrong are just a function of consensus social values.
	Yeah, that's a problem that we have with democracy, for example, right?
	Democracy rejects the truth.
	That we are created in the image of God, as stated in the Declaration of Independence, that the purpose of government is to protect those God-given rights that we all have as creatures of God.
	And so when we start talking about where we are today in our society, all this obsession with democracy is really a mob rule.
	A mob that denies individual rights.
	Where do we see this over and over again?
	We see it in public health.
	The mob will tell you what to do with your health.
	The mob that is running the government.
	Or we see it with public education.
	The mob will tell you how to educate your child.
	Where and how and what to tell them.
	Or we see it in every aspect.
	And whenever you put the prefix of public.
	There, that's it.
	Public transportation.
	We will tell you how you will move.
	And you will move as the government sees fit.
	Anytime you put that public there, anytime you start talking about how democracy is the highest value, you're talking about a mob here.
	And the mob never respects you as an individual.
	They don't respect your individual rights.
	A republic is a rule of law.
	And there are certain things that are encoded into that law, and they make it very difficult to change it about individual rights.
	Whereas a mob, all they've got to have is 51% of the people say, we're going to do this or do that to you.
	And there's nothing you're going to do about it.
	See, if we didn't have the public health officials like Fauci, if we respected individual liberty, as the Constitution says, then we wouldn't have that.
	But it's always important for democracy rule.
	To get away from the rule of law.
	A relativistic operation becomes instinctive.
	It begins to be applied beyond the moral realm.
	If everything is relative, then what could be wrong with having your alternative scientific quote-unquote facts?
	So if people want to advance this agenda, however, they want to do it as a moral imperative.
	So they have their absolute truths.
	They have their commandments that they want you to obey.
	They have their religion.
	They have their worldview.
	And they demand that their religion and worldview be taught in the public schools, that you bow to it, that you speak using their pronouns and all the rest of this stuff.
	It is a policy of domination, and it denies the individual.
	When in reality, they are saying, well, we're upholding the uniqueness and diversity of individuals.
	No, they're not.
	What they're doing is they're just attacking truth.
	In politics, the check on democracy is a principle that rights are inherent from God.
	And they're not up for grabs.
	And they're not to be renegotiated with a mob.
	Now, as we have all this, I've just got one last thing here about trans issues.
	You know, we had Michelle.
	Michelle Obama has had a couple of interestingly awkward phrased events recently.
	She just was on a podcast, and she was talking to somebody, and she said, well, you know, we talk about this, I think it was a transgender thing even, and she said, well, as a man, I would like to know, blah, blah, blah, you know, what you would like to think about this.
	Now, everybody was playing that clip.
	Oh, yeah, look, Big Mike says, as a man, I would like to know.
	Instead of saying, I would like to know what you think as a man.
	She says, as a man, I would like to know.
	The emphasis was on the wrong order of words.
	And she's done it again now.
	She says that she's in therapy and she's going through life transition.
	And this is being put out by some conservatives saying, see, here it is again.
	She's admitting she's a man.
	I think it's another unfortunate phrasing here.
	She says, At this phase of my life, I'm in therapy right now because I'm transitioning, you know?
	Which is kind of interesting.
	You know, being a gendercrat, you would think she would know how people are going to take that.
	Maybe she's toying with people.
	I don't know.
	She says, I'm an empty nester.
	She goes on to clarify.
	I'm an empty nester.
	My girls are in, you know, they've been launched, she said.
	Michelle Obama said a combination of being out of public service and her children being fully grown has left her in a situation where, quote, every choice that I'm making is completely mine.
	And so she said, I'm getting that tune-up for this next phase of my life.
	Oh, let's not run for office, please.
	It comes after she spoke about the discourse around her marriage.
	She said, that's the thing that we as women, I think we struggle with disappointing people.
	I mean, so much so that this year people couldn't even fathom that I was making a choice for myself that they had to assume that my husband and I are divorcing.
	This couldn't be a grown-up woman just making a set of decisions for herself, right?
	Well, I don't know.
	You know, it's not a marriage when you say that you're transitioning in your life and your spouse is not really involved and you're going to figure it all out yourself.
	I mean, most people, that's not most people's idea.
	Even in our society where divorce is rampant, that's not most people's idea of a marriage.
	You know, in a marriage, you might want to go to this person that you've been living with for decades and kind of seek their advice rather than go in and get the therapeutic advice of some stranger who puts out a...
	a shingle like Lucy and says advise five cents because that's about what Yeah.
	Over the last 10 years, this whole everybody needs therapy idea has gone absolutely crazy.
	The sheer number of people that have almost no problems in their life and still feel the need to go complain to someone is insane to me.
	You're showing up to get just your mind wiped and one shot.
	By some dude with a piece of paper that has never lived or done anything.
	He has spent his entire life sitting in a school learning techniques on how to brainwash you.
	That's all he's done.
	Yeah, and just think how dangerous that's going to be for artificial intelligence.
	Like I've said, the first time I saw one of these chat programs, that's exactly what it was.
	And the crude computers that we had back in the 1970s.
	Even then, it could go through and do a convincing psychoanalysis.
	Well, tell me a little bit about yourself.
	Well, why do you feel that way?
	And so it asks these open-ended, probing questions.
	And, you know, that's all you really need to be able to do as a psychiatrist.
	Do that and write up an invoice and buy a couch, you know?
	And it was amusing how convincing that was.
	And just think about how good AI is.
	And I think, Travis, part of it...
	Is that, you know, there's broken human relations, just like I was talking about there.
	You know, there's obviously something wrong with the relationship if she's been married for decades to Obama, to Barack, and she feels like she needs to go to a stranger.
	And I think one of the reasons that it's accelerating is because we're becoming increasingly cut off from each other.
	Cut off so much so that you've got to go hire somebody to listen to you or You're going to go online to one of these chat programs and then it's going to start telling you that you are a a spiral star child or And you and some of the people are going to go act upon that Hold on the AI has got to consult with the ancient Babylonian demons real fast That's right.
	Well, we got a new sponsor.
	I'm gonna play a little bit of a clip for this Sons of Confederate Veterans.
	We remember the battle.
	We remember the places.
	We remember the southern soldiers.
	We are the sons of Confederate veterans, and we invite you to join us in preserving our past and remembering our history and heritage of honor.
	To find out more, call 1-800-MY-SOUTH or visit us on the web.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Well, let's talk a little bit about war.
	We have Trump announcing that the U.S. will stop bombing the Houthis.
	Well, that's good.
	Glad to see that.
	You know, again, it's like on-off.
	Congress is not involved.
	They're making speeches or having hearings or something or raising money.
	And so we just have an executive that puts us in wars, takes us out of wars.
	But I'm glad that he's taking us out of the war.
	The military has struck Yemen.
	At least 800 targets in Yemen, says Politico.
	Killed hundreds of Houthis since March.
	Other people put it at over 1,000, not 800.
	Trump framed the move as a handshake agreement to end the Pentagon's bombing campaign in exchange for the Houthis no longer attacking American ships.
	It's not a deal, he said.
	Well, what happens with Gaza?
	We'll see about that.
	The arrangement is unlikely to calm tensions in the region if it's limited to protecting American ships.
	Israel escalated strikes against the Houthis on Monday night with 20 fighter jets bombing the...
	The port city in Yemen, and of course they, I think it was yesterday, yesterday or the day before, they completely decimated the largest airport that is there.
	The Trump administration also labeled the Houthis a terror group in March, changing a Biden-era policy.
	The Defense Department and the U.S. Central Command did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
	Trump Special Envoy Steve Whitcoff.
	Worked to reach a ceasefire over the weekend with Oman, serving as a mediator and a person familiar with the matter who was granted anonymity to discuss sensitive diplomatic issues.
	Whitcoff has also been leading talks with Iran over its nuclear program.
	Well, this is a welcome change, unless it's all a setup.
	I mean, we talk about the talks with Iran.
	It was my concern that it was just being done so they could say, well, we did our best.
	Completely not reasonable, so now we've got to go to war with them.
	So we'll see what happens.
	You know, is this going to be a ceasefire?
	So then they can say that the Yemenis, the Houthis, broke the ceasefire, so now they have to resume the war in a larger way.
	Omani foreign minister confirmed on social media, he said, in the future, neither side will bomb the other, including American vessels in the Red Sea.
	A senior Houthi official told Bloomberg News that the group would stop attacking U.S. military ships if Washington halts its strikes.
	Then they said, but we will definitely continue our operations in support of Gaza, in support to Gaza.
	There was a ceasefire, and they lived up to their side of it until that ceasefire was broken.
	And then they resumed the strikes, but the ceasefire from the Houthis was based on Israel's ceasefire in Gaza, and Israel broke that ceasefire, and they resumed shooting on ships.
	So, we'll see what happens with this.
	He said Houthi operations would continue until the end of the aggression on Gaza and the blockade on its people.
	They have launched more than 500 strikes on commercial ships in the Red Sea, but Houthi strikes against the waterway have declined significantly in recent months, and the group hasn't targeted a commercial vessel since late December.
	Rubio, following Trump's announcement, said that the Houthi strikes were a freedom of navigation issue, and so perhaps they've gotten this solved.
	Trump is essentially declaring victory and going home.
	Saying, mission accomplished.
	Hey, we heard a president say that once.
	Did we?
	Wasn't that Bush that said that?
	Yeah.
	Mission accomplished.
	That didn't end the war then either.
	Mideast war correspondent Elijah Magnier observes the U.S. intelligently stopped the bombing on Yemen due to the lack of objectives.
	Well, that never stopped us in any other war.
	Vietnam, what's our objective?
	Well, take that hill over there.
	Okay, you took it.
	Well, I'll give it back to them.
	Okay, let's do something else.
	What is the purpose of this stuff?
	The empty outcome and the high cost versus no gain.
	Well, again, that kind of describes pretty much every war we've had since World War II.
	A lack of objectives, an empty outcome, and the high cost versus no gain.
	The only thing you left to add in there is defeat.
	Others have noted that this is essentially a declare mission accomplished and cut and run moment with no better alternatives.
	Surreal close-up images are emerging showing the sheer and utter destruction and the size of the Israeli attack on their international airport there.
	It appears that Washington is now content to hand things over to Israel.
	The Pentagon might have better use for its two aircraft carriers off of Yemen, which were essentially large sitting ducks.
	And again, we go back to the plane falling off the aircraft carrier.
	They were saying that it was under attack.
	We get conflicting stuff, and with a fog of war, you can't really tell.
	You really can't tell.
	It is kind of futile to try to figure out, when two sides are at war, to try to figure out which one of them is telling the truth.
	Most of the time, both of them are lying.
	A listener who sent me a thing was very concerned about what he perceived as my one-sided reporting on the war on Ukraine.
	And I have to confess that I am very much against the Ukrainian government and against Zelensky.
	And I'm paraphrasing because I was going to print out his email, and I will do that and read the email.
	But just to paraphrase it, he said he was there, I think, and family members when there were attacks by Russia.
	And I'm not excusing what Russia is doing.
	This is the thing about war.
	You know, you can argue the starting points of wars.
	And you can argue back and forth about the atrocities of war.
	But the wars will only end, and the killing will only end, when you start to make that the object.
	If your object is to continue to say, this side did this atrocity, and I believe it.
	I believe both sides when they say atrocity, when they talk about the atrocities.
	Because when a war happens, both sides are committing atrocities, especially against civilians.
	That's what I typically mean by atrocities, targeting civilians.
	Both sides do that.
	And both sides can pick a starting point and feel justified about it, even if it's not in the bigger...
	And sometimes it's hard to see the forest for the trees.
	We had a relative of Karen's who was working in one of the towers on 9-11.
	And she couldn't see what was happening because she was just too close to it.
	And I don't mean, you know, couldn't see what was physically happening there.
	She couldn't see what was happening in the bigger picture of this and could not question the official story because she was there.
	She was emotionally involved in it.
	And so we are only going to stop the killing and stop the wars if we can get past this, well, he shot first type of thing.
	And the justification for that, because what that is, is that is a...
	You know, as Christians, we look at the heart, right?
	And if there is, there has to be forgiveness for there to be peace.
	There has to be forgiveness for us to have peace with God.
	We have to get God's forgiveness.
	He's provided for that.
	We have to accept that He has provided His Son for our forgiveness.
	And we have to forgive ourselves as well.
	And so, The same thing is true in our relationships with other people.
	If we harbor bitterness, and again, I can't say that I could get past that if I had my children blown up by either side.
	That's a difficult thing to do.
	I mean, I look at these pictures.
	I don't know these people.
	And I look at starving children.
	I look at children who are blown to bits.
	I look at parents holding their dead children in their arms.
	And I just can't fathom that.
	How do you get past that?
	How do you move past that bitterness?
	Well, even if those people can't, the people who are running the wars need to move beyond that.
	And of course, my issue with Zelensky is that he wants to make this a global war.
	The war is working out very well for that little conniving crook.
	And he would like to see even a nuclear war.
	He'd like to see a global nuclear war.
	And he is absolutely despicable.
	It's not to say that Putin is any better.
	I think he is not pushing for a global nuclear exchange.
	Zelensky is.
	The Houthis have announced that they are not, and they don't want to fight anymore, said Trump.
	They just don't want to fight.
	And we will honor that, and we will.
	We will stop the bombings, and they have capitulated.
	But more importantly, We will take their word, and they say they will not be blowing up ships anymore.
	All that is as he spoke it.
	So that was a live comment.
	Israel is blindsided by Trump's announcement about the Houthis, says the Jerusalem Post.
	Israel is not informed in advance about Trump's announcement regarding the Houthis.
	An informed source told the Jerusalem Post yesterday.
	But you have The Atlantic saying Trump finally drops the anti-Semitism pretext in the latest letter to Harvard.
	And I thought, well, that's interesting.
	I'll take a look at it.
	But, of course, it's not really what you might think because we know that it's not anti-Semitism.
	It's criticism of the way the war is being conducted by Netanyahu.
	If anything, it's anti-Netanyahuism, and there's plenty of that going around in Israel amongst the Jews and with the Jews here in America.
	There's plenty of anti-Netanyahuism.
	And so to shut down people's speech in opposition to a policy of a foreign government's continued civilian bombings that have been called It's mislabeled as a war.
	It's not a war when you're bombing civilians.
	It is a unilateral move of genocide, frankly.
	But what the Atlantic says is that in this letter from the Secretary of Education to Harvard, she accuses Harvard of admitting students who are contemptuous of America.
	Well, that's true.
	Chastises it for hiring the former Blue City mayors Bill de Blasio and Lori Lightfoot to teach leadership.
	She said, this is like hiring the captain of the Titanic to teach navigation.
	That's pretty good.
	I think that's true as well.
	She questions the necessity of its remedial math program.
	Why is it, we ask, that Harvard has to teach simple and basic mathematics?
	And that is a really good question, and we know what the answer is.
	It's because their admission policy is not based on merit.
	We're supposed to be impressed with Harvard when they've got to have remedial math programs for people.
	They can't do basic math, and they still get into Harvard?
	Oh, so what is your admission to Harvard based on?
	Well, it's based on money or race or DEI politics or something like that.
	And she accuses its board, Penny Pritzker.
	This is the Hyatt family.
	This is somebody that is related to the governor of Illinois.
	She says that Penny Pritzker is a Democrat operative.
	Well, that is true.
	Even worse, that whole family are gendercrat operatives.
	The Pritzker family is heavily, heavily, heavily into this tranny stuff.
	As a matter of fact, if you look at a picture of the governor of Illinois and his cousin, They are dead ringers, except one of them is dressed like a woman.
	It's like the Beverly Hillbillies when Jethro and Jethreen were there, right?
	They dressed up Max Bear as Jethreen.
	And when you see the pictures of Pritzker and his cousin next to each other, that's what it looks like.
	It looks like that weird episode of the Beverly Hillbillies.
	Anyway, and she said that Pritzker, a Democrat operative, is driving the university into financial ruin, among many other complaints.
	Well, that all sounds valid.
	Now, what the Atlantic says.
	So, in other words, that's her beef with it.
	She didn't anywhere in there mention, at least what they were talking about, she had all these other things there that were political in their perspective.
	So they said, so now the mask is off.
	Aside from only one oblique reference to congressional hearings about anti-Semitism, saying the great work of Congresswoman Elise Stefanik, aside from that, the letter is silent on the subject.
	The administration is no longer pretending that it is standing up for Jewish students.
	The project has been revealed for what it is, an effort to punish liberal institutions for the crime of being liberal.
	Well, no, actually, I guess you could say that's true.
	I wish they would punish them for the crime of taking federal money, because I think that's a crime.
	It's a crime against the taxpayer.
	It's a crime against the Constitution.
	I wish they would cut off all the federal money to all of them, unfortunately.
	The Trump administration, if they can bend them to their will on a number of issues, then they will restore that money that they've stolen from the taxpayers that they have printed up and charged us interest on the debt.
	On March the 31st, the administration said that it was reviewing $9 billion in federal grants and contracts awarded to Harvard.
	They said, amongst other things, they were going to allow an external body to audit faculty viewpoints.
	How dare them!
	Can you imagine that?
	That they would give them $9 billion and then have the effrontery to audit that to see how it's being spent?
	I mean, they're Harvard.
	They should just get $9 billion with a B from people.
	This is too much for Harvard, said The Atlantic.
	The university's lawyers wrote in a letter and said, neither Harvard nor any other private university can allow itself to be taken over by the federal government.
	Well, you did.
	You allowed yourself to be taken over by the federal government, I guess, when you got $9 billion.
	You're on the hook to them.
	I guess they feel like they're going to get away with it.
	And, of course, they have been able to get away without any audits or any inspections.
	But, you know, we have...
	As we look at Texas and other places now, they've rolled out a lot of school choice bills, they say, paying for you to go to a charter school or something like that.
	They will give a whopping $2,000 a year to people who homeschool with students.
	Are you going to sell your control and your liberty for $2,000 a year for your child?
	Because they will.
	Pull in those same strings, those same financial strings that they're trying to tug on with Harvard.
	They will absolutely pull that in.
	Before we go to break on Rumble, one Sarah B. says they've been convinced that they can't figure life out on their own and they need an expert to tell them what to do, talking about the psychiatrist.
	On Rumble, Audi, Modern Retro Radio.
	Good to see you.
	ModernRetroRadio.com But Trump will continue funding the Palestinian genocide.
	That's right.
	Yeah.
	We'll give him the bombs.
	We'll give him the bombs.
	He might stop the bombs with Yemen, but we'll give him the bombs.
	And of course, you know, we see these pullbacks and we see the so-called talks with Iran.
	I think they're just laying a foundation to say, now we have justification because they broke this agreement or whatever to attack Iran.
	On Rumble, Shadowboxer says bombs only have value when they're used.
	Because then you need to replace them.
	It's very profitable.
	Yeah, it is.
	It's just like these Reaper drones that were shooting down at 30 million apiece.
	I think they shot down over 17. I know they shot down at least 17. I don't know if they got some after that.
	But, yeah, you've got to replace those Reaper drones.
	And it's a small country that's doing that.
	On Rumble, Franson says, Before Ukraine war, I saw what Ukrainians were doing to Russians.
	Putin had no choice.
	But to intervene.
	And again, it goes back a long ways.
	I mean, we had a 2014 coup.
	they started shelling people in the culturally and linguistically russian areas that had always historically been russian and so yeah that is um that is the type of thing that's going on there was also a military issue there crimea had long been a part of russia the black fleet was there so they were going to do it i still thought that it was a mistake for him to essentially take the bait and go in because you know that This is when everything starts.
	It all starts when he crosses the border.
	In the same way that in the American people's minds, Iran began with a takeover of the U.S. Embassy.
	Then it realized that the CIA had kicked out their elected leader in the 1950s and put in a ruthless Shah of Iran, and the CIA trained his secret police to spy on people, to torture and to kill them, his political enemies, all of that.
	is lost on the American people.
	So, again, as I said, when you pick the starting point, one side or the other can always justify it.
	The only way that we're ever going to get peace, though, is if we move toward that is our goal.
	Not to fix blame, not to point to atrocities, but to stop them.
	To stop them.
	Kick.
	A-S-A-T attack.
	Says, first casualty, war is the truth.
	That's right.
	And on Rumble, DG8.
	Thank you.
	Says, David Mark Levin had an absolute meltdown yesterday over that.
	He attacked little Marco for 20 minutes yesterday.
	My ears are still bleeding from listening to him.
	Well, my ears bleed whenever I listen to Mark Levin.
	It's a bit much for me to take.
	We'll take a quick break and we'll be right back.
	Thank you.
	you you you I said at the beginning of the program, there was an amazing example of how crypto, especially these meme coins, are a pump and dump.
	And we've talked over the last couple of days about how Trump is openly, openly flirting with being impeached over the open corruption.
	But here's an example.
	The meme coin, the Trump meme coin.
	That was put out like a day or so before the election and they pumped it up and then made a lot of money off of it.
	Because you have a few people who can buy into this before it goes public.
	And then it goes public and then everybody buys into this thing and then before it goes down they can dump it.
	So here's the statistics on who made money and who lost money.
	You've had 764,000 people have lost money.
	So, you've got three quarters of a million people lost money.
	And they had 58, not 58,000, no, 58. 58 people who made money.
	And those 58 people, you've got 764,000 people losing money.
	And those 58 people made millions, millions.
	About 764,000 wallets that purchased Trump's dollar Trump meme coin have lost money on the investment according to fresh data shared with CNBC by blockchain analytics firm Chainalysis.
	Chainalysis is why they don't have an N in there.
	Chainalysis is the name of the company.
	Here's the thing.
	It's a public ledger.
	Everybody can see these wallets.
	And with a little bit of detective work, they can figure out who these wallets belong to.
	I've talked about this many times.
	There's a billionaire who lost $900-something thousand, almost a million dollars he lost.
	It was stolen out of his digital wallet.
	But it was a large transaction.
	So you've got people who will watch these transactions happening.
	If they see a big one, they start paying more attention to it.
	And so this person was able to not only see this large amount of money, nearly a million dollars in one transaction, coming out of wallet, but then he tracked it down to who owned that wallet.
	Just an individual.
	And he contacted the guy.
	And the guy didn't know.
	He had been ripped off.
	He didn't know.
	It wasn't him spending it.
	Somebody had stolen that out of his wallet.
	We had another example last week.
	We talked about...
	Somebody that was found, it was one of the biggest, if not the biggest, rip-offs in Bitcoin yet.
	$300 million from one elderly individual.
	And they said it was a social engineering type of attack.
	In other words, it wasn't that they did some kind of technological thing with crypto breaking into it or something like that.
	Instead, They figured out who it was.
	They got in touch with a person and played some kind of a phishing attack, some kind of a game with them on a human level to get them to transfer that money somehow.
	I don't know.
	And then what they did was they transferred it to Monero, which is then private once it gets in there, and they split it up into a whole bunch of different groups of transactions and scattered it to the wind, essentially, and put it into cryptocurrency that could be anonymous.
	But here's the point.
	When it's on the public ledger, it's public.
	You know, they use the term crypto.
	But the only thing that's encrypted is what they use to do the transactional aspect of it.
	But the actual dollar amounts there and the wallets that people can see, that's not encrypted.
	So this company called Chainalysis was able to look at this and see that they could see what the blockchain is a...
	The public ledger is a blockchain, a chain of transactions.
	So they could see what these people bought it for and what they sold it for.
	Or what it is currently at, I guess.
	I don't know if it's necessarily that they sold it, but they could look and see at least what they bought it for.
	See they've lost money.
	764,000 people lost money.
	And then they could see that there were 58 people that made money, and they made a lot of money.
	Most of the wallets that lost money held smaller amounts of the token, according to the film.
	Firms on-chain analysis.
	Crypto wallets.
	Store the keys that you need to access and use your cryptocurrency holdings.
	But then here's the other part.
	The 58 people.
	They said the 58 wallets that made money made more than $10 million apiece.
	You had 58 people with the Trump grift.
	That made more than $10 million apiece.
	764,000 people lost money.
	Kind of reminds me of Stop the Steal and Save America.
	Trump made $250 million, and Alex Jones made millions of dollars off the Stop the Steal stuff, and you've got a lot of people who went to jail and had their lives ruined with a January the 6th grift.
	But this is with the crypto stuff.
	Interest in the coin.
	Spiked more than 50% in the last few days after the project's website promised that the top 220 holders would have a seat at a black-tie optional dinner with Trump at Mar-a-Lago.
	I mean, you look at how they're flirting with corruption, openly flirting with it.
	I mean, they're just begging for this because they know that their base will defend them.
	Because they've seen the Democrats go after them for non-crimes, they now feel inoculated to commit actual crimes.
	And so, when we look at the way that this is being, all the crypto stuff is being hyped, we've got an individual saying, Bitwise is predicting that Bitcoin will reach a million dollars by 2029.
	You got the CIA saying Bitcoin is wonderful.
	The CIA said they're increasingly incorporating Bitcoin as a tool in their operations and working with cryptocurrency as a matter of national security.
	So, here you go.
	Trump, you know, 58 people make more than $10 million.
	$764,000 lose it.
	You got the CIA saying they love this crypto.
	They love Bitcoin.
	It's a tool for them, they said.
	Yeah, maybe they even created it.
	Who knows?
	I would suggest that you go to davidnight.gold.
	You can go to Tony Ardman, and you can get gold or silver, and you can get out of these crazy pump-and-dump schemes that you really cannot control, as I was talking about yesterday.
	Everything is going to tokenization.
	They're moving to that really quickly.
	They're moving to stablecoins really quickly as well.
	And they are building...
	We started talking about RealID this morning.
	They're building the framework.
	For a global digital currency, they'll be interconnected.
	There won't necessarily be just one, but it'll be one system, and it'll all have the ability to track everything that you do.
	Did you make money?
	Did you lose money?
	They'll be able to stop you from buying stuff.
	It'll have all the features that we hate about CBDC, but hey, it won't be called CBDC, and it won't be done by the central bank.
	There'll be a collection of fascist coins.
	That's what we should call it, fascist coins.
	A merger of corporations and friends of the president who will set up private coins that will have the same functionality as a central bank digital currency.
	The EU is going to, as a matter of fact, ban anonymous crypto accounts as well as privacy coins by 2027.
	So, as I said, you know, you have Monero and a few others, PirateCoin, others.
	They're going to start banning that.
	Well, again, I'm sure people will be able to operate under that, but it's going to get more and more difficult to try to get the money into it or out of it.
	It's going to be the on-ramps and the off-ramps that are going to be difficult to do.
	But we've seen how bans and prohibitions work when we look at the drug war.
	It'll still be there, but it'll be a bit more difficult, and it'll have higher consequences if you get caught, because right now it's not even a crime to use that stuff, and it shouldn't.
	Shouldn't be a crime to have a private financial transaction.
	That's what they're going to outlaw.
	The EU wants to ban privacy.
	They want to ban privacy coins.
	And they want to do it within two years.
	They want to ban anonymity.
	And folks, that means that they also want to ban cash.
	And they will eventually try to ban gold.
	But if you've got something that is physical like that, it's a lot harder for them to do it.
	Ether is more like a meme coin, says a trading firm, as Ethereum drops 45% year-to-date.
	So it's not having a good year so far.
	Stocks spike, as Treasury Secretary Besant says that trade deals are coming.
	As a matter of fact, today the Federal Reserve's Open Market Committee is meeting to talk about interest rates.
	That'll be happening today.
	Treasury Secretary Besant began his testimony in front of the U.S. House Appropriations Committee yesterday, and according to him, he said the U.S. is negotiating with 17 out of 18 key trade partners.
	In other words, they're negotiating with everybody but China.
	But here's the other issue.
	You know, we talk about this, and a lot of people, and I had a listener supporter who said, well, I think it's a good thing to cut China out.
	I'm not a China supporter at all.
	But the issue is, what about those other 17, right?
	This was not targeted to protect a particular industry.
	This was not targeted towards China.
	It was targeted towards the entire world.
	Trump went to war with the entire world, and now they've got to try to back this back, walk it back.
	So we'll see what happens.
	But in the meantime, the real issue is throwing a monkey wrench into the supply chain again, which is what he did five years ago.
	That's my real issue.
	As I've said, I don't have an axe to grind with tariffs per se.
	I think they're a better way to collect taxes than the income tax.
	However, they're being added in addition to the income tax.
	Now, Trump will lie to your face.
	He'll tell you it's not going to cause your price, and the people who are surrogates for him will lie to your face and tell you prices are not going to go up.
	Yeah, they are going to go up.
	The only question is how much.
	And, of course, that's going to depend on a lot of different factors.
	Some instances it'll be very significant.
	But the price has gone up, but you're not allowed to know how much the price is going to go up.
	Because we're going to come after anybody who itemizes it, like it was rumored that Amazon was going to do.
	So if the price isn't going to go up, then why get angry about Jeff Bezos itemizing it?
	And so what it is, this is an additional tax, but the real issue, the real issue is the lack of planning, The lack of wargaming this out and the constant change that has created uncertainty that has locked down the supply chains.
	So he says we've not engaged with China in negotiations.
	So they're the 18th country that they have not negotiated with.
	He suggested that the first quarter GDP, however, will be revised upward and that we are not in a recession, said Besant.
	Well, again, they control the statistics that are out there, and they will rig those numbers.
	They will lie to you about inflation.
	Biden did.
	Trump did.
	They all do.
	They'll lie to you about the inflation numbers.
	They will lie to you about the employment numbers every quarter.
	They will revise the unemployment.
	This has been going on, Republican, Democrat, for a very long time.
	They'll always revise the previous...
	Quarters numbers downward to make the current numbers look better.
	And Biden famously got caught adding over 800, almost 900, I think it's 880,000 jobs that didn't exist to their labor reports.
	They could play the same game.
	Who knows?
	The stock market is not really an accurate metric of that.
	What we should look at is whether we have small, medium-sized businesses failing because of this uncertainty in the supply chain.
	He also said that the U.S., listen to this, will, quote, never default on its debt, and that the Treasury will not use gimmicks on the debt ceiling.
	Well, I can believe that they would never default.
	I would imagine that they would just devalue the dollar or play games like that with it.
	But in terms of not using gimmicks, well, he's lying because that's all they do is use gimmicks.
	And again, that's not just the Trump administration.
	That's all of them.
	We're going to be shedding excess labor on the government side, he said.
	We will have a substantial financial deregulatory agenda that will be coming up.
	Yeah, you better believe that they are going to liberalize any rules about crypto, about tokenization, and all the rest of this stuff.
	So they might have a lot of financial deregulation, but in terms of deregulating the rules that will allow people to open and create and continue to run businesses, I don't think they're going to do anything about that.
	But they will be shedding excess labor on the government side.
	And I said that this is what Musk's moves were all about from the first place.
	to minimize the number of government employees, but to maximize governance.
	And I believe that will be done with the application of artificial intelligence.
	Community banks, he said, small banks, small regional banks, were very near what I would call an extinction event in the next four to five years.
	Well, isn't that interesting?
	Because Eric Trump was saying the same thing, and so was Whitcoff Jr., his partner.
	They were all setting themselves up with world financial liberty, World Liberty Financial, I guess, the Trump family, I think.
	And in terms of talking about that, Eric Trump was saying, well, they'll most likely be gone in 10 years.
	Well, Besant is saying four to five years.
	And that is not even necessarily looking at their exposure to commercial real estate loans.
	We'll see what happens with the banks.
	But what he's talking about, if you look at these things together.
	They're going to have substantial financial deregulatory agenda and banks, community banks, small banks, small regional banks, an extinction event in the next four to five years.
	That's what they're engineering.
	They're going to make themselves the banks.
	The people who cause 764,000 people lose money and 58 people to make over $10 million apiece.
	Trump wants the Fed to cut rates today when they meet.
	And so the general take from the financial writers is that that's not likely to happen.
	They say there's a 97% likelihood that the Fed's going to maintain the current interest rates where they are.
	They said, however, that they think that when they come back in July, July 30th meeting, that the probability of rate cut there is currently at 80%, says FedWatch.
	Well, nobody knows.
	Nobody knows what Jerome Powell is going to do anymore.
	They know what Trump's going to do with the tariffs.
	Everybody just sits there with bated breath to see what these guys are going to do.
	So, on Friday, Mr. Trump said on his social media platform, Truth Social, he said, there is no inflation, all uppercase, claimed that grocery and egg prices have fallen, that gas has dropped to $1.98 a gallon.
	While those claims are not entirely true, grocery prices have jumped up 0.5% in two of the past three months and are up 2.4% from a year ago.
	Gas and oil prices, however, have declined.
	Gas costs are down 10% from a year ago, continuing a longer-running trend that has continued in part because of fears that the economy will weaken.
	Because why?
	Well, because we've got higher taxes and because we've got supply chain disruptions.
	That's what happens when you interject a sudden shock to the system.
	And when you add to that sudden shock, indecision and constantly fluctuating policies.
	Yeah, you got a picture of, Travis got a picture of his son from yesterday.
	Yesterday was his six-month birthday, and so he had a little bit of a celebration there.
	If you want to show people that picture, that'd be great.
	And, yeah, do you have it ready?
	Go ahead.
	Oh, there we go.
	There he is.
	He's got a half hat.
	And they gave him some cake.
	He didn't really know what to do with it.
	He's not used to eating that stuff, actually.
	So that was what we did yesterday.
	I'm going to continue without a break because we've got a break coming up in about five minutes.
	Our interview is about 46 minutes or so that we had with Chris Emery about the Oklahoma City bombing.
	And it's an excellent interview.
	It was pre-recorded.
	I just want to say this, because I was talking about the money with Harvard and the other stuff, the financial strings.
	This is an article from WNG.org that said, As homeschooling increases, so do the attempts to restrict it.
	Proposals for regulations are popping up throughout the U.S. and throughout Britain as well.
	And they begin by talking about a mother who's educating her son at home.
	And started about seven years ago.
	Now he's 13. They said the school days might involve taking him to the museum, to the Natural History Museum, other things like that.
	They used some textbooks to guide his education, but they described the curriculum as, quote-unquote, flexible.
	What we would say here in the U.S., we'd call that kind of unschooled.
	It allows for unscheduled visits to the library.
	Or to the Victoria Tower Gardens beside the Houses of Parliament.
	She said, we do a lot of this informal learning that actually ends up turning into bigger learning.
	But now, the British government wants a lot of reports and paperwork about what you're doing.
	Your curriculum, your activity, and all the rest of this stuff.
	This is a bill that is scheduled for a second reading in the House of Lords.
	Legislation would, among a host of other stipulations, require homeschooling parents to provide extensive documentation of their curriculum plans to notify authorities of any changes in the plans within 15 days.
	She said, my home education journey will be completely changed if this passes.
	And so she would have the time-consuming burden of reporting all education plan adjustments to the government.
	The burden people with all kinds of reports and...
	Things like that, and it's a way of shutting it down passively, passively, aggressively.
	And this is not just happening in the UK.
	You have lawmakers in the U.S. have been calling for more accountability, saying that homeschooling movement has compounded the risk of child abuse.
	Nothing could be further from the truth.
	If you look at the statistics, that is absolutely not true.
	And if you look at the continued reports of what is happening, even when you have some kind of a pedophile teacher, That uses their influence for the kids.
	If you look at the institutional curriculum, it is pedophilia.
	It is pushing pornography and sexual acts to minors.
	The very institution, not talking about individual teachers, but it has been institutionalized, the pedophilia and the perversion.
	But in the UK, they have a 1996 Education Act that says parents have to provide a suitable education for their children, quote, either by regular attendance at a school or otherwise.
	So it's pretty open.
	Children who have never been enrolled in public schools are automatically considered to be home-educated.
	In the United States, though homeschooling became officially legal, In all 50 states by the early 90s, laws differ very much by state.
	According to the Homeschool Legal Defense Association, some states have low regulations, while four have rigorous restrictions.
	Parents in Pennsylvania have to notify local school superintendents of their intent to homeschool.
	And, of course, we see in some Republican-oriented states, it's really surprising to see this, in January in New Hampshire, they introduced a bill calling for home education programs that are receiving tax credits or scholarships to participate in having criminal background checks already the strings are there aren't they We're good to
	go.
	Requires parents to declare intent to homeschool and disclose the names of everyone involved with their children's education.
	Now three of those four states are Republican states.
	So again, if you look at how this is rolling out in Texas, as I said, there are money bills that will be giving a subsidy.
	And Governor Abbott has signed this bill into law.
	You know, we go back to the film Killing Ed.
	It's a great example of charter schools going wrong, being taken over by an Islamic cleric, Fatala Gulen, who recently passed away, but the Gulenist movement is still alive.
	They've got over 83 schools in Texas, over a billion dollars they're getting in Texas.
	That's a worst-case example of this.
	But of course, many of the corporations are also equally bad.
	But what they've decided that they're going to do is they're going to give $10,000 per year to kids if they go to these charter schools.
	And again, they can buy you for $2,000 if you are a homeschooler.
	It is a trap.
	It is a trap.
	Do not sell your heritage or freedom.
	Do not sell your children.
	For $2,000 a year, or even for more.
	Don't take the money.
	The money is a trap.
	Absolutely a trap.
	Well, we're going to go to our interview with Chris Emery, and I think you're going to find this very interesting about Oklahoma City bombing.
	We're going to begin with a clip, and I think you've got it.
	I think you're going to have to throw to it, Travis.
	We began with a trailer of the film to kind of give you an overall interview, but we went back and we talked about all the different aspects of it, and there's some new evidence that Chris Emery, who has become a real expert on the Oklahoma City bombing, some new evidences there, and they're putting together an effort to try to fund more research into it, and he'll tell you how you can get involved with that as well.
	So let's go ahead and throw to the interview.
	I was sitting at my desk there.
	On the eighth floor, I felt that the building started shaking, lights went out, debris started falling on my desk.
	Something hit me in the back of the head and knocked me out before the truck bomb went off.
	What that tells you is that there were other explosive devices in the building that actually brought the building down.
	It's an earthquake.
	Everybody gets down underneath on the floor.
	And I had sat there, and I thought, no, it doesn't feel like an earthquake.
	Seven or eight seconds later, I felt this explosion.
	Only an imbecile would look at that damage pattern and not understand that it couldn't have been made by a truck bomb.
	Because a truck bomb is going to release its energy simultaneously in every direction.
	The record clearly shows that Dr. Jolly and West I consulted Timothy McVeigh's defense team.
	Dr. West had previously been a psychiatrist and consulted for Patty Hearst, Saran Saran, and Jack Ruby.
	A noble lie, Oklahoma City, 1995, will change forever the way you look at the true nature of terrorism.
	The grand jury did not want to hear anything I had to say.
	The decision was made not to pursue any more of those individuals.
	The greatest manhood there's ever been.
	Do you remember the Whitewater investigation in Arkansas?
	All the paperwork was stored in the Murr Belt.
	Hey, somebody knew about a prior bomb threat.
	Every bit of important evidence has brought us to the Oklahoma City bombing.
	Joining us now is Chris Emery of freemindfilms.com, and we wanted to talk to him about an update to the Oklahoma City bombing.
	A very important film was done.
	I guess it's now the first one was done in 2011.
	They've done some updates to it.
	The most recent one was 2015.
	That was the 20th anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing.
	We've just hit the 30th anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing, and there is new information We're going to get that information from Chris Emery of freemindfilms.com.
	Thank you for joining us, Chris.
	David, thank you so much.
	It's great to be talking to you again.
	It's been a while.
	Yeah, it has.
	It has.
	I remember talking about this so many times.
	Very important film.
	And we played the trailer just before the interview so people can get a sense of it.
	There's so many different issues with what happened with Oklahoma City.
	And, of course, reeked from the very beginning.
	Part of a long chain of...
	Questionable events for many of us going back to Waco and Ruby Ridge.
	And then this, I think that, you know, obviously it was connected and I think it was connected by the government to shut that investigation down.
	But then we have the other events that were connected.
	We had 9-11, dark winter, the pandemic, all these different types of things.
	And once people realize with any of these that we have been lied to and deceived and they start to see how this agenda kind of lines up through these different things, then that is when the lights come on and people start to ask some real questions.
	Now, people are starting to ask questions there in Florida.
	Yes, well, ever since the new Trump administration was sworn in, we've had a lot of, you know, information, of course, with the NIH, with the FBI.
	There's fresh blood, and as one of my colleagues in Congress said, well, we've got several press set of eyes on this thing, and they want to basically start from scratch.
	And they know that there was a lot of malfeasance going on.
	Merrick Garland, of course, the former U.S. Attorney General, he was appointed as a special U.S. prosecutor to head up the Oklahoma City investigation within about a week after the bombing happened in April of 1995.
	We found out, as a film crew, in October of 2003, I had a meeting with Stephen Jones, who was McVeigh's lead defense counsel.
	I had a meeting at his office in Enid, Oklahoma, and he heard through the grapevine that our crew really wanted to do a great job, a very professional job, to strip down to the bare bones, find out what really happened, put the official narrative under magnifying glass.
	And after about 10 minutes in the film, we tore that apart and started all over again.
	But to back up a second, after about a three-hour meeting I had with him at his office in north-central Oklahoma, he said that he was going to give us full and unfettered access to 142 boxes of legal documents that he had at a repository in Austin, Texas.
	And it was at the law library adjacent to the LBJ Presidential Library north of UT campus.
	And he said that Merrick Carlin, three and a half months, basically strongly urged and pleaded with the trial judge, Richard P. Mace, who presided over both the Nichols and the McVeigh trial.
	He wanted that information in those boxes sealed for seven years.
	So what we were able to gain, over 90% of that information, including relevant exculpatory evidence that would have proven Nichols was completely innocent, and McVeigh was set up.
	We found out subsequently, when we went through that, that the jury in both trials never saw that information.
	We literally opened a vault of incredible information.
	That information is relevant to a reinvestigation, and there are members of Congress, surprisingly on both sides of the aisle, that want to take a look at this and say, hey, let's start over.
	And we're very cautiously optimistic.
	We understand that there may be some folks that may want an underhanded approach, but the people that we talked to said, no, we really want to do a good job on this.
	And that's in line with Tulsi Gabbard with RFK.
	With Kash Patel, and they're willing to admit, hey, there is information on the RK case, the JFK, Martin Luther King.
	So this is basically in lockstep with that, and we've got a very important meeting tomorrow morning, actually, with some key researchers in the case, as well as a member of Congress that...
	We look at some of the stuff like...
	You know, the Epstein files.
	I'm kind of suspicious about the fact that with Trump's connections with it, that they would ever release anything about that.
	And, you know, even when you go back to the JFK files, if anybody ever put anything in there that was going to be incriminating, they would have gotten rid of that a long time ago.
	So, I've been really skeptical and dubious about those.
	But this, because of the connections of Merrick Garland, who is...
	Well, what we found out, we actually had a source in Little Rock, Arkansas.
	This is a gentleman that served a dual role with the Secret Service and the ATF.
	And he said that there were documents in the building that...
	We're going to be brought forward to indict both Bill and Hillary on corruption and Munderlander charges through the Whitewater case.
	Now, as a film crew, we weren't able to actually see any of those documents, but this trusted source said yes.
	The documents were in the building.
	And here's, it's very, you know, you don't have to get too complicated to really go through the thread of history here.
	And I said, why would they be stored in the Murrah Building in downtown Oklahoma City?
	He says, because there was an arcane rule in Congress, if you're going to indict a sitting president, it cannot be held in the federal courthouse in the home state.
	And by geographic default, Oklahoma City was the closest federal courthouse to the one in Little Rock.
	New Orleans was too far away, St. Louis, Dallas.
	So they literally brought them to Oklahoma City and stored them in the AP Murrah Federal Building.
	And our best guess is that they were on the seventh floor in the DEA safe room, which was actually built into the building long after the grand opening.
	The DEA had a custom safe room there, and we know of other information that was stored there, as well as contraband and money for a big drug case that was due to go to court in May of that year.
	So there was a lot of concentric circles, a lot of dual purposes, basically to have the destruction of that building.
	And the documents that would have...
	By the end of 1995, Bill and Hillary Clinton would have been finished.
	They probably would have been in prison.
	So the stakes were very, very high.
	And as you know, the Clintons are as corrupt as the day is long, and they fight tooth and nail to stay in power.
	So this would have taken them down.
	Yeah.
	Interesting.
	My son showed me a screen clip, and it looks like it's something that could actually, I didn't verify if it was real or not, but it said something about all the suicides around the Clintons.
	And it was asked an AI chat program about it, and it started with listing several of them.
	It got to Jeffrey Epstein, and it goes, and it stops, and it goes, error occurred.
	I don't know if that was real or not, or if that was something Photoshopped.
	But, you know, that's kind of where we have been with all of this stuff.
	And when you look at the fact, even more so than Hillary, Merrick Garland, this would align, if they could find the truth on him, if there's some kind of a cover-up, this would perfectly align with Trump's desire to get vengeance.
	So that could actually work in our favor to try to get some truth out of this thing.
	Now, one of the things, and you mentioned it even in the trailer that I played before the interview, The fact that, and I remember this from the New American, the John Birch Society.
	They had a former...
	Demolitions General.
	And he talked about the fact that if you look at the blast pattern, it was not a single-point source.
	So it was not coming from a car.
	And in the trailer, you've got somebody saying, no, I was there.
	There was two explosions.
	One of them knocked me down, then there was another explosion.
	So this wasn't a single-point source.
	Multiple indications of that.
	Many, many things about it that were very suspicious.
	But talk a little bit about that aspect of it.
	Well, actually, the person you're referring to is probably General Benton Parton, and I actually met with him.
	This was two weeks before I met with McVeigh's defense counsel.
	I was at General Parton's home in Alexandria, Virginia.
	We had just finished having a steak dinner at Fort Belvoir, and he was at the officer's club.
	We drove back to his house, and we sat up to almost 3 o 'clock in the morning, and I was just looking at the documents I have.
	It's three pages of legal pad.
	Pages both sides.
	Then he scribbled out the formulas and everything, and he explained to me, he says, look, these were the response and the damage to three main support columns, and we were able to find out exactly which ones through the blueprints that were provided to us by a source at the GSA office in Fort Worth.
	And he said that if you had ANFO in a 52-foot trailer in pristine lab conditions, obviously, which didn't exist that day, you know, it was 42-mile-an-hour headwinds, it was about 47 degrees, And the humidity was pretty high.
	He said, even if you had perfect lab conditions, it still wouldn't have done the damage it did to that building, which completely refutes the ANFO narrative.
	So that's just cock and bull.
	That's like Acme bomb in a Roadrunner cartoon.
	It's ridiculous.
	But what he said was that, yes, there were actually 23 devices in the building, and we corroborated this from the Oklahoma County Bomb Squad, a medic that came forward and helped us out that was on the squad that morning.
	And reported to the scene within about 10 minutes after the blast.
	They know what to look for.
	There was odor of C4 and cordite in the air, which he remembered as this source remembered from Vietnam when he served there.
	It was unbelievable.
	Yeah, you don't forget that.
	You don't forget that.
	I mean, since the smell is really hardwired into your memory, and I imagine the last time you smelled that stuff, you were in Vietnam under fire or something, that's going to be an immediate connection to you, right?
	Well, here's the key.
	Even on the very first helicopter footage that you saw, the bombing, and a third of the building was launched a good block and a half to the north of where it stood.
	It looked like an alien craft just sucked it and displaced it everywhere.
	But the key is, David, when you look at that footage that was shot within about 20 minutes after the bombing, there was no fires, there was no flames in the building.
	That, again, refutes the majority of the damage being done by ANFL.
	Because we have a case, we went and looked, we had to go retro to look at other cases that ANFL was used.
	In August of 1970, the Army Math Research Building on the campus of the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
	There was an info used, a much smaller quantity than was alleged in the truck, and there were flames coming out of the building.
	It was on fire.
	I interviewed the police chief at the time that had the archives from that case, and he said, yeah, they had not only the Madison Police Department, but the UW Fire Department and the city and the county respond.
	And they had to bring in, here's another key, David, 22 people from that case had to be taken to the hospital because they were buckling over.
	Vomiting from the ANFO, the fumes.
	That never happened in Oklahoma City.
	Why?
	Because Terry Icky, who we featured in the film, went in literally within about 12 minutes after the blast was pulling people out.
	He never got violently sick.
	So the whole narrative of ANFO is completely wiped out.
	Once you look at it in prior cases and what happened, just medical treatment of the people rushing in, none of the search and rescue, none of the first responders.
	None of the victims had survived.
	And, of course, Teriyaki.
	None of them started vomiting from antvo fumes.
	So, that means that there was dry ordnance that was used, the chordite, and explosives that were set on the columns between floors two and three, between the drop ceiling and the next concrete slab.
	There was about three feet.
	They were set hidden above the drop ceiling, and there were electronic mercury switches that were used to set those off.
	Three of them had gone off.
	Twenty of them were rendered inert.
	And they were set to go off within ten minutes of the initial blast to kill the first responders, search and rescue, and people coming in.
	But luckily, that second phase of the bombing, the ordinance never went off.
	We would have had more devastation.
	It would have been horrendous.
	And so that's how you know so much detail about these...
	Pre-placed explosives is because they didn't detonate, right?
	Correct.
	And the bomb squad found them.
	Yeah.
	Wow.
	That's amazing.
	And so, you know, when we look at this, if people had paid attention to your documentary, if they had paid attention to what was going on, Perhaps we would not have had a follow-up where we got three buildings collapsed in the footprint with two planes, only two of them being hit by a plane and that type of thing.
	If people were aware, wait a minute, they have blown up buildings in the past and given us a completely different narrative about how that happened, perhaps that would wake up people as well.
	Let's talk a little bit about, because Timothy McVeigh was the biggest question mark that I had.
	Assume this role and push on this to essentially try to make himself a hero.
	What was going on with that?
	What was his role on that?
	What we found out in those records, and he even told his sister this, that he was actually a professional assassin and a gunrunner for the CIA in the months leading up to the bombing.
	We know definitively from September of 1994 through the morning of the bombing, he was working with at least seven guys in Oklahoma City.
	We know the motel where they stayed at.
	We saw the rooming list from the owner of the motel.
	But the point is that the bombing was actually, and a lot of people don't know this, McVeigh was the understanding that it was going to happen at 9 o 'clock the night before, 12 hours earlier, with no casualties.
	There was only one security guard that actually, his security beat was four blocks between the federal courthouse, the federal building, the mayoral building, and then the apartment complex and another building.
	And they timed it.
	They literally cased this out for a week before to figure out when he was going to be in the building and when he was not.
	And they wanted to blow it up when he wasn't there.
	They don't want any body count.
	Lo and behold, we have Louis Free, the director of the FBI.
	His number two in command, Larry Potts, was McVeigh's handler.
	Now let that soak in for about five seconds.
	McVeigh had a handler from the FBI that reported directly to Louis Free, who was a head of the FBI.
	We had Robert Mueller help cover up the case, worked in tandem, glove in hand with Merrick Garland.
	So these guys rear their ugly heads later on.
	Robert Mueller doing an independent investigation of the Russia hunks.
	And when I found that out, I thought...
	And also involved with 9-11 as well.
	Yes, absolutely.
	For the 9-11 stuff.
	It's all the usual suspects, isn't it?
	Yeah.
	Grant, get this.
	Now, we had the Oklahoma County District Attorney's Office.
	A speakerphone meeting within four days after the bombing.
	They're literally giving the local authorities and the DA's office marching orders on how the Oklahoma City case was going to be investigated.
	Who they were going after, selective prosecution, who they were going to let go, because there were U.S. government assets that were helping with that.
	It wasn't supposed to go live, David.
	But Larry Potts says, no, we want a body count.
	And McVeigh said, oh, hell no.
	I'm a professional assassin and a drug smuggler.
	I'm not killing children.
	Well, he had him over the barrel and several other charges.
	And we got that directly from Terry Nichols, who got it from McVeigh.
	I don't know why McVeigh would make that up.
	He's a professional soldier.
	He's a professional assassin.
	You don't go after innocents like that.
	But he was ordered by Larry Potts to make sure there was a body count.
	Hence what unfolded on the morning of April 19. So that's it in a nutshell there.
	And this information is going to come out.
	Hopefully we have the right people with the fortitude.
	And the mental acuity and the moral fortitude to say, hey, we need to tell the people of Oklahoma, of the United States and of the world what really happened that morning.
	Why the 168 people, including three unborn children, were brutally murdered that morning.
	It's inexcusable.
	Now, on the 30th anniversary, one of the reasons this came up, to me, I think, was because we talked about...
	Nichols' lawyer, Trinidad.
	And, of course, he's got a website set up to honor his brother that he believes was involved and murdered and all of that, jessietrinidad.com.
	And he was talking about some new evidence as well.
	Are you connected in any way with him in this?
	I haven't.
	I've tried to reach out to Jesse.
	We've lost touch over the years, but we did keep in touch for about almost three years consistently.
	There was an in-camera interview that we conducted from Oklahoma City through a video service.
	Oddly enough, my ex-roommate up there applied for a job the month before the bombing, and he was eyewitness and earwitness to all of the monitors and cameras that were working just fine.
	And the federal government, in Jesse's case, said, hey, they didn't exist.
	Well, we have a key witness that applied for a job that took the tour of the building a month before the bombing.
	That was, I believe, on the Easter...
	Sunday, we had a long talk with Jesse, and about a month later, I want to say 2012-2013 is when that testimony was, and the federal prosecutor and head of the team in Salt Lake City going against Jesse was furious that this witness came up.
	So they tried to basically impugn his reputation and his expertise on cameras.
	That was their easy way of backsliding out of it all, but it was irrefutable.
	So that was, yeah, we've worked with Jesse on that.
	We've showed other intel.
	And I think as we make progress on there, we definitely want to reach out to Jesse and have him be part of this.
	Now, Trinity was the lawyer for Terry Nichols.
	And, you know, I think it's kind of interesting with all the back and forth that's going on between 60 Minutes and Trump.
	You know, 60 Minutes is presented as the impeccable source of integrity and all the rest of the stuff.
	But Trinity came out and said, well...
	We had an interview that was scheduled with Terry Nichols.
	They got a call and they shut it down, which is also very interesting.
	That's a lot, doesn't it?
	In terms of the massive scope, as you pointed out, the FBI, the CIA was also involved.
	Now, of course, you mentioned that Louis Freeh and his number two guy was the handler for Timothy McVeigh.
	You mentioned that he's also had CIA connections in it.
	So we see all of the FBI, the CIA, the intelligence agencies that are there.
	And I'm sure that, you know, 60 Minutes is just another manifestation or tentacle, I guess, of the Operation Mockingbird stuff.
	They'll do what they're told.
	They'll do some investigations of maybe corporations or individuals, but they'll do what they're told when it comes to the government, I guess, right?
	Let me clarify what happened with 60 Minutes, if you have a minute.
	Sure.
	So, Ed Bradley, rest his soul, he was actually a very good reporter, and his team sent notice, written notice, and a set of questions to Terry Nichols to the Florence, Colorado, Superbacks.
	The staff that received the mail never passed it on to Terry Nichols.
	So literally, Ed Bradley and his team show up at the prison ready to do the interview, and Nichols has no clue.
	There was no summons to bring him down from the cell block.
	That's where it went cold, right there, and Bradley was not very happy about that.
	They flew out there and were ready to go.
	Lights, camera, everything ready to go.
	Nichols had no clue.
	And they sent this ahead of time.
	Now, the way Jesse got on there, from the best of my understanding, and Jesse could correct me, is that he was actually the legal counsel after the federal trial and the state of Oklahoma versus Terry Lynn Nichols' trial.
	So he was on a list of attorneys that were able to visit Terry.
	After the debacle with 60 Minutes, John Ashcroft pretty much put a lid on that.
	He said, nobody's going to be talking to Nichols about this case ever.
	Why the hell would John Ashcroft step forward?
	Yeah.
	And then, of course, now he's the one that succeeded him years on.
	Merrick Garland was in lockstep with all of that.
	So that's why there is a need to bring this information out.
	There's not a week that goes by that I don't think about evidence.
	They'll either come up through an email or a friend contacting me.
	And they say, no, there's no way in hell I'm going to my...
	My grave, not least, trying to do a decent job of getting this information out.
	Thank God we still have that core group that helped us with our film.
	The researchers, some of them are still alive, including Jesse, Charles Key, Craig Roberts.
	And I got a tip hat to your former boss, Alex Jones, and his staff for helping us with that.
	So we're going to stick at this as long as we can.
	These people never know what happened.
	You know, when you're talking about being a bipartisan thing, you know, again, John Ashcroft, with the Republican administration, is shutting this stuff down as well.
	Because, again, it's my personal opinion that the political parties are just kind of a front for the real government, which is going to be the people like the FBI, the CIA, and these other usual suspects that are there.
	So, of course, it's going to be a bipartisan issue there.
	But, you know, getting back to McVeigh, you know, one of the things about it, okay, so he's there, and he was going to set this thing up as, you know, blow this building when there weren't people there.
	They changed it.
	They've kind of got him over a barrel.
	Why did he try to portray the defiant hero in all this?
	What do you think was up about that?
	You know what, David, and that's a very good question, because we know from key witnesses, let me, this is, as government, Glove in hand with what you just asked.
	We actually know there were two teams working on this.
	There was the McVeigh that was shot by Charlie Hanger within, I believe, an hour and ten minutes after the bombing or less than that.
	Then there was the McVeigh that was actually downtown hanging out right after the bombing, a lookalike.
	So we don't know the McVeigh that was interviewed by 60 Minutes or had his whole narrative.
	We don't know if that's the one that actually committed the case or committed the crime.
	So, that's a whole level of confusion right there that we're still trying to sort through.
	And how do we know?
	Because Jermaine Johnson, who was a survivor of the bombing, who actually, interestingly enough, backed out of an interview with our film crew two hours before we were going to show up at her front door.
	I don't know who gave her the call or put the pressure on, but if you can picture this, David, the bombing happens, Jermaine Johnson, her hair is all over the place, there's concrete dust and everything, she's literally...
	came within an inch of her life.
	Several of her friends were killed in the bombing.
	Walked six blocks southwest of the, or southeast of the crime scene.
	McVeigh is leaning against the hood of his yellow Mercury marquee with another guy.
	They're both looking toward the bomb site.
	And this individual looks just like McVeigh.
	Asterisk is...
	Were there any people killed?
	And she said, yes, several of my friends were.
	She's still in shock figuring out what the hell just happened.
	So that's within, she said, about 10 to 12 minutes after the bombing.
	Who's the McVeigh that stopped by?
	Charlie Hanger.
	The state trooper that was his day off, he was out of his precinct.
	He was given orders to drive up that stretch of I-35, just south of Perry, Oklahoma, not far from the Kansas border.
	We had a...
	An expert at the Oklahoma DOT Department of Transportation say there's no way that that McVeigh that Jermaine Johnson saw and the one that Charlie Hanger could have been the same one.
	That one that Jermaine Johnson saw would have had to been traveling at, he said, in excess of 135 miles an hour, no stoplights.
	Yeah, I mean, just from point A to point B, it would have been impossible.
	So we knew right there that there was two teams working.
	And Jermaine Johnson said, yeah, that looked just like the McVeigh on TV the next day.
	That information was never brought out, and that's why Merrick Garland was adamant about quashing a lot of the evidence.
	It would have really thrown confusion and suspect credibility on the prosecution case against McVeigh.
	It's like, all right, who are these two?
	Who did Charlie Hanger stop, and who was the one that Jermaine Johnson was talking to?
	But to your point is that, yes, he was working for the CIA.
	Merrick Garland did not want that to come out, and that was part of the records that we saw.
	We saw his pay grade, how his bills were getting paid, the fact that he had a lurch at his access for almost two and a half years before the bombing.
	He would go out and do what he needed to do, come home, take his dry cleaning, make dinner, get up the next morning, go do what else he had to do.
	It was unbelievable.
	What he was getting paid was absolutely insane.
	Most of it was cash.
	So, there's a possibility in your mind that there was one public McVeigh who's making all these radical statements about Invictus and all the rest of the stuff, you know?
	My head is bloody, but I'm bowed.
	And then there was another one that they jailed and executed.
	Is that what you're saying, then, perhaps?
	Well, here again, they did jail this individual.
	We don't know if he even died.
	Oh, that's true.
	Yeah.
	W. Craig Roberts and I have been on joint interviews several times.
	If people ask us, do you think he's dead?
	Without skipping a beat, we said, no, I don't think he's dead.
	And a retired CIA asset that helped us with investigating some of the financial end of this said, look, that would really throw rents in the works to recruit for the CIA when you're starting to kill off your assets like that.
	That's completely against their mode of operation.
	Unless there's treason or, you know, they're working for an enemy, then that's a whole different deal.
	Well, now, when Merrick Garland wanted to quash information, I think, was that about the time that, you know, Hoppy Heidelberg, who is a part of the original grand jury, and he's asking some questions and stuff like that, was it, and he got out of the grand jury, and he convenes the citizens' grand jury to try to continue to investigate.
	Was that kind of in response to Merrick Garland quashing information?
	Okay, so what you're referring to is two different things, which is good.
	I'm glad you brought that up.
	Hoppe was a member of the grand jury.
	He was actually dismissed by Judge David Russell, who presided over selecting defense counsel and so forth.
	And Hoppe had 10 questions for him.
	We want relevant evidence.
	We want physical evidence.
	We want experts.
	We're entitled to this.
	The grand jury.
	The judge never responded to any of those.
	He summarily dismissed him from the jury without cause and threatened to have him.
	Yeah, it was unbelievable.
	So what Charles Key, the state representative, And after that, convened a citizen's grand jury through his power and his authority as an Oklahoma state representative at the time.
	So there were two things going on at once.
	But yes, to answer your question, Merrick Garland was also attempting to quash that exculpatory evidence to show McVeigh and Nichols.
	Nichols was completely innocent.
	He was set up.
	He was framed.
	And even the inspector general's office report said, yeah, the evidence was basically slanted to...
	Incriminate both defendants, not only Nichols, but McVeigh.
	So there was a lot of things going on at once, and Merrick Garland was running to keep up with himself just to make sure that that evidence would never come out, and neither of the juries in both federal trials ever saw that evidence, the exculpatory evidence.
	Wow.
	Now, did Hoppy Heidelberg get involved with that citizen's grand jury that was convened by the representative?
	No, sir.
	That was separate.
	But I do want to share something with you, and rest his soul, Hoppy passed away.
	About a year after our film, seven months after the film was released, he passed on.
	In fact, it was an interview with InfoWars that he made the announcement that he had the cancer.
	And I was sitting right next to him in our studio in Oklahoma City, and I knew about it when I picked him up from his ranch that morning.
	We had about a 40-minute drive to the studio, and he told me everything.
	And he made the announcement to Alex.
	Alex was shell-shocked.
	It was a hell of an interview for almost two hours on InfoWars.
	And that name, that's a name that always sticks with you.
	It's phenomenal.
	Hoppy Heidelberg, yeah.
	That's one of the key things.
	It's been a while.
	Things are a little bit foggy for me because it's been a while since I've seen your documentary and looked into this, but that name always pops to the front.
	A very unusual name.
	An unusual guy, too.
	If only we had more people like him.
	One more relevant point with Hoppy, David.
	And I moved to Oklahoma City in January of '03.
	In late February, I drove down to his ranch, first time I met him.
	And we sat at his kitchen table and shared a pot of coffee for about three hours.
	And he told me toward the end, he says, look, I knew all of the information that it clearly showed other people were involved.
	We wanted that brought to the grand jury, and the judge wouldn't allow it.
	He got a visit from an attorney that he later figured out.
	Hoppy's a member of METSA.
	He's pretty smart.
	This guy, he's nobody's fool.
	And this particular attorney that showed up was very professional.
	Didn't get in his face, but he said, we're at the point now, Mr. Heidelberg, where you're going to have to back off and stop asking questions.
	We know where your grandchildren live.
	We know where your daughters and your children work in the banks.
	He's showing them literally hoppy pictures of where their faces of employment are.
	And he said, if you don't back off, I can't guarantee their safety anymore.
	It was basically a very...
	He's an overt threat to say, back the F off or things are going to happen that's going to be very damaging to your family physically and mentally and financially.
	And he had no choice.
	So he goes from being a multi-million dollar horse breeder out of Blanchard, Oklahoma, 42 miles west of downtown Oklahoma City, to driving a school bus and hauling fuel oil.
	And all of his clients basically just said, we don't want to talk to you anymore.
	You're crossing the line here, yeah.
	Luckily, his wife had gainful employment.
	They were able to still keep the bills paid, but he went from a multimillionaire to basically nothing.
	They stripped his gainful employment right out from under him and threatened his family.
	Yeah, it's not unusual, I guess, for us to see this happening with social media, with other venues as well.
	And, of course, recently I played Jenny McCarthy, talking about the fact that she was threatened just because she was talking about the vaccine stuff, you know.
	They threatened her, threatened her family, and messed with her career.
	So it is truly amazing, the corrupt system and the intimidation that is there.
	But, you know, when we look at this as we go into the future and – There's a lot of, in a new investigation, opening this up and perhaps getting to some additional information.
	But I would recommend everybody, I'm going to go back and refresh my memory on this as well, because it truly is a fascinating story.
	And one that is indicative of our times and of our government as well.
	But before we end, Terry Nichols.
	Tell us a bit about Terry.
	Now, you know, Timothy McVeigh, very, very strange character.
	The connections that he had with the CIA, the FBI, the rest of this.
	Terry Nichols, was he just kind of a patsy that was brought in by McVeigh?
	Well, they served together at Fort Riley in Kansas.
	They did not serve together in Iraq.
	Terry was stateside, I believe, when Tim was serving overseas.
	But, yes, he was brought in as a patsy.
	We did find out...
	There were two trials that went on with Terry.
	It was the federal trial.
	They were indicted under eight counts of murder because there was eight federal employees killed that morning.
	Then the state of Oklahoma versus Terry Lynn Nichols, there was 160 counts of murder because they were non-federal employees and civilians from the state of Oklahoma.
	And that was the state trial.
	There was no state trial for McVeigh because, quote-unquote, he was killed under lethal injection.
	Again, we don't know.
	That was even true.
	Terry had a very, how do we say this, arrested development personality.
	He had the mental and the intellectual acuity of an eighth grader.
	So he was very easy to manipulate.
	Never heard him in the seven days that I was at the state trial, off and on, driving back and forth from Oklahoma City to McAllister, Oklahoma.
	It was at the Pittsburgh County Courthouse.
	But I never heard him speak.
	It was his defense counsel that was speaking for him and key witnesses.
	Well, interesting thing with that trial, bringing up Larry Potts, McVeigh's handler.
	So if you can imagine, the defense counsel for Terry Nichols calls Larry Potts as a hostile witness, obviously.
	And the federal government, this is not even their venue.
	This is a state trial.
	They have no business being in a state court.
	Stephen Taylor, and I spoke with Judge Taylor after the trial several months after, and he said that he was furious.
	It took him three days to cool off because John Ashcroft at the time and Louis Free forbade Larry Potts from showing up in that courtroom.
	And they had no business telling the judge who was going to come in.
	It wasn't their trial.
	It wasn't their venue.
	And the judge really shot off a very terse letter to Ashcroft and the prosecution at the time.
	He says, you have no business coming and telling my witnesses coming into my courtroom.
	They did not want Larry Potts to get on the stand.
	And he would have had to commit perjury.
	Then that would have really snowballed into a whole different thing.
	The whole narrative would have started unraveling right there.
	Wow.
	And yeah, so even the jury at the state trial saw through and they said, no, there's something horribly wrong going on here.
	And they sentenced him to life without a chance of parole.
	And that's where he's serving in Florence, Colorado right now.
	He should have been out.
	At the most, he should have served maybe about two years.
	And he would have been out of prison by now.
	Wow.
	So that's why we want a reinvestigation of this case.
	Way too many loose ends, way too many unanswered questions.
	And of course, when we look at the connections with Merrick Garland and Louis Freeh and all these other people, Hillary Clinton and the Clintons and the papers that are there, another very important aspect of this was obviously by doing it on the anniversary of what happened in Waco, A big part of this, you know, the obvious thing was that they wanted to shut down the pushback that was building against what had happened with Ruby Ridge and with Waco.
	There was a growing militia movement as people were saying, wait a minute, you know, something is wrong with this government.
	They've, you know, what are they planning to do down the road when you look at what happened with these two things?
	And it was largely the same people.
	Of course, Janet Reno was there at the front, but you still had the same FBI people and so forth from these two different front organizations, Bush and Clinton.
	And so they were all still there.
	And so there was a lot of people that were pushing back against it and saying, you know, what is going on with the federal government?
	And this was a way for them to essentially shut down the building maliciously.
	Okay, so, Andreas Strassmeier was a key witness.
	He was actually a running mate, a running buddy with McVeigh.
	We know at least four months up to before the bombing.
	Strassmeyer is brought in from Germany.
	Oddly enough, and we don't know why, we're still trying to figure out, Al Gore asked him to come over from Germany.
	Now, Strassmeyer is an interesting character.
	His dad, Goethe Strassmeyer, was the chief of staff for Helmut Kohl, who was the head of Germany at the time.
	They wanted Strassmeyer, who was a washout from the German, basically the German counterpart to the U.S. Rangers and Special Forces.
	They wanted him to come to the U.S. and infiltrate these quote-unquote Nazi movement groups and militia movements.
	So we know that, in fact, he was working for the government for four years.
	He was no gainful employment.
	All of his credit cards, his hotel bills, everything was being paid.
	And we did have two members of the...
	Craig Roberts had reached out to the Texas militia, the Light Brigade, they called them.
	They actually use motorcycles to drive around and these motocross bikes.
	They saw, get this, they saw Strassmeyer letting himself in on the loading dock of the federal courthouse in downtown Fort Worth, Texas, punching the keypad in the wee hours in the morning.
	How the heck would he have access to the back door of the federal courthouse in the wee hours in the morning, knowing the security code?
	And the Texas militia basically within 24 hours says, get the hell out of town or we're not going to guarantee your safety.
	You're going to end up face up in a ditch somewhere.
	And Strassmeyer packed up his stuff and got the hell out.
	Where does he end up?
	Oklahoma.
	And LOM City, which is not far from the Arkansas-Oklahoma border, south of Tulsa.
	And that's where he's hanging out with McVeigh, with a lot of these malcontents.
	We found out we're actually with the ATF, the CIA, and the FBI.
	They didn't even know of the interagency.
	So there was basically turf wars, eagle wars.
	They weren't communicating with each other.
	Just a...
	A perfect storm of complete catastrophe.
	Yeah, you've got all these different government agencies, and they're all posing to be terrorists or whatever.
	And yet they're all federal agencies.
	How do we know that happened?
	There's a pilot that worked for the Oklahoma Department of Public Safety, their state patrol.
	He's taking an FBI asset over this LOM city.
	And the pilot says, well, wait a minute.
	I took somebody from the ATF here about two weeks ago.
	FBI had no idea the ATF was there and the CIA.
	That's amazing.
	So that's the involvement with McVeigh and Strassmeyer.
	So Strassmeyer, as we know, is still living in Berlin.
	FBI never pursued him.
	It truly is amazing.
	And I go back and I hear these, you know, Strasmeyer and I say, yeah, these names from the past that start to ring bells.
	And it's so great to have you start to put these things together.
	And it is time to look at this again.
	It's time to look at it again, even if there wasn't going to be a new investigation, but there is going to hopefully be a new investigation.
	Will there be an update to the documentary, presumably, on this?
	Well, at this time, no, David.
	We're going to put our financial resources to the investigation.
	And I want to tip my hat to William Jasper, Jesse Trinidue, Craig Roberts, Charles Key, members of the Oklahoma Bombing Investigation Committee, two who have since passed away, Hoppy Heidelberg.
	All of those people helped us.
	We had 150 volunteers, a 25 core group that helped us put the first film out.
	If, in fact, we get the financial resources, yes, we would do an update.
	But now we've got to focus, keep our eye on the ball, and make sure this investigation moves forward smoothly.
	Well, good.
	And if you do that, we might have a really interesting update to it if this comes out into a genuine investigation and more of this stuff is released.
	Tell us a little bit more about some of the projects there at freemindfilms.com.
	Okay, well, the second film, State of Mind, Psychology of Control, is the one that you helped us promote.
	That basically covers the waterfront from basically from the day you're born to the day you die, how you're manipulated through education, nutrition, marketing.
	We go into the, do the deep dives on what happens on a daily basis to you and why certain people think the way they do.
	It's a very academic approach.
	We interview peer-reviewed authors on the subject matter, and we try to...
	And this is the thing that we really strive for in all three of our films.
	It's not the end-all, be-all, but they're a primer to give you at least the information to decide for yourself.
	There's a lot of smart people out there, David, yourself included and your staff, that can really see through a lot of this baloney.
	And we just try to present the information for not only the younger generation, but the older generation, to say, look, just give me something that's credible that these professionals are saying that's been proven.
	You know, through time, it's a consistent pattern of deception.
	We want to be able to recognize that and make decisions of our own.
	And then, of course, the third film was Shadow Ring, which is a microcosm from right after the Spanish-American War through just before 9-11.
	And how these different events, whether it be the Cinque de Lusitania, what caused World War I, the attack on Pearl Harbor, who were actually the players behind those?
	And why was there deception?
	And why were we lied to?
	Again.
	Give you the information.
	You decide.
	We're not telling you how to think, but give you the tools to think for yourself.
	Excellent.
	Okay, so Noble Lie, State of Mind, Shadow Ring, you can find all these at freemindfilms.com.
	One big favor we do ask, please do watch them on our website.
	We get paid through the ads.
	YouTube and Rumble and all of the other websites have pirated copies.
	We don't get monetized, and they're unauthorized.
	May I give a plug real quick?
	Absolutely.
	We're trying to raise funds for this investigation.
	Two avenues.
	If you can send to PayPal using the email okctruth at cox.net.
	That's through the PayPal account.
	Or if you want to send a check directly to Freemind Films, do so at freemindfilms.com or freemindfilms, LLC.
	P.O. Box 16136, St. Petersburg, Florida, 33733.
	It would be greatly appreciated.
	We'll put those in the description for the show, and yeah, hope that this moves forward.
	It's time that we get...
	Now, you've uncovered a lot of truth in this stuff, and it should be pretty...
	Pretty clear for people.
	But we need to get this out to a broader audience.
	And we need to keep at this because they keep getting away with this over and over again.
	And quite frankly, I know you're tired of seeing them get away with it.
	I certainly am tired of seeing them get away with it.
	There needs to be some justice.
	And hopefully, you know, on this side of eternity, we'll...
	We'll have some justice with this stuff.
	But we never know.
	But we'll keep pushing on it.
	Thank you so much, Chris Emery.
	You've done great work with us.
	And thank you for sticking with us.
	Again, people can support this research project there.
	We'll give them the PayPal information in the description as well where they can contribute with this.
	And they can find the films if they want to go back and see it.
	They can go to freemindfilms.com and watch these documentaries there.
	Thank you so much.
	Yes, sir.
	You're very welcome.
	Thank you, David.
	Thank you, everyone.
	Thank you for joining us.
	Have a good day.
	The common man.
	They created common core to dumb down our children.
	They created common past to track and control us.
	Their commons project to make sure the commoners own nothing and the communist future.
	They see the common man as simple, unsophisticated, ordinary.
	But each of us has worth and dignity created in the image of God.
	That is what we have in common.
	That is what they want to take away.
	Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation.
	They desire to know everything about us while they hide everything from us.
	It's time to turn that around and expose what they want to hide.
	Please share the information and links you'll find at thedavidknightshow.com.
	Thank you for listening.
	Thank you for sharing.
	If you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers.

▲