All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 6, 2025 - The David Knight Show
37:44
Rigged by Both Sides: Gerrymandering, Lawfare, and the Great Election Scam
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi, I wanted to come on and talk a little bit about what is happening between the Republicans and Democrats in terms of gerrymandering, as if this is some new thing.
This has been going on forever.
Going back to 1812, of course, there was a governor, his last name was Jerry, and as they were redistricting the lines, people laughed at it and said, this district that you drew looks like a salamander, so they called it gerrymandering.
That was 1812.
Well, we're still fighting wars like 1812.
And this is not anything that has anything to do with you or me.
This is about the raw political ambition of these political parties, which if you look at them, they don't really stand for anything, right?
What they stand for is perpetual power.
And they block independence.
They block any other parties from coming in.
It's the kind of factionalism that our founders despised.
And it's not anything that helps us.
As I said throughout 2020 in the fight that culminated in January the 6th, I said, if you want to fix elections, start by opening up the ballot, then open up the debates.
And then you can talk about honestly counting the votes.
But the Democrats and Republicans are both equally guilty.
And we can see that in the kinds of things and games that they're playing with each other with this.
So what is happening in Texas is the Democrats have decided that they are going to block any redistricting done by the legislature by disappearing.
They're going to run to other states.
They've done this once before.
And so as a result, what the Republicans did was they loaded this up.
The aid to people that were harmed by the floods was not going to be voted on until after they voted on the redistricting.
And so they're kind of holding the help to people up, help that people need for the flood.
They're holding that up in order to do their redistricting.
But the Democrats, on the other hand, don't have a leg to stand on because they have done exactly the same kind of redistricting that the Republicans are doing forever.
And I had a lot of experience with this.
That's why I wanted to come on and talk about this because when I was in North Carolina, I saw this very clearly.
And I've mentioned it many times on programs in the past, that in 2008, North Carolina voted for Barack Obama.
And it was largely heavily Democrat most of the time I was there.
The Democrats had set up the congressional districts.
The next time they had an election, two years later, 2010, there was voter remorse after Obama was in office for two years.
And North Carolina got its first Republican legislature since the Civil War.
And as a result, there was also 2010 was also a census year where they take the census and then they can redraw these lines.
And so they redrew the lines after 2010.
But after the regret about getting Obama into office, Republicans swept everything.
All of the both the House and the Senate changed.
The governor changed.
Everything changed except for one thing, and that was the congressional seats, because those were fixed by the gerrymandering that goes on.
And as much as they have done this since 1812, what they've done now with computers, and I imagine it's even worse now with AI, is it's down to a fine science.
When we were looking at it at the time, they drew some congressional districts that were going right down a highway, and they would jump from the left side to the right side in order to get a political party together.
Because what they want to do is they want to put all of, if they've got the majority of Republicans, let's say, they want to make safe districts for Republicans, and they do that by trying to concentrate all the Democrats into a few districts, or vice versa.
Democrats did the same thing with the Republicans.
That way, you've got, they pick the voters rather than the voters picking them.
And they pick them by party.
And now we can see that the parties have pretty much abandoned their principles, abandoned what People think they're going to do.
You know, it was Ronald Reagan who said government is not the solution.
Government is a problem.
Well, let me tell you, these political parties are not a solution to anything.
They're part of the biggest problem with government.
And that's that kind of desperate manipulation and corruption to stay in power.
And they are desperate to do it.
So what is happening in Texas right now?
Democrats, and they had to have about 50 of them leave.
They've gone to various states.
They've gone to Illinois.
They've gone to Massachusetts to New York.
Stay there.
But they have fled the state of Texas.
And the governor is saying that he's going to have the Texas Highway Department of Safety or whatever.
I guess the Highway Patrol.
I don't know if it's the Texas Rangers.
I don't think that's what they're in.
But anyway, he wants them to arrest these legislators and bring them back, forcibly put them in so they have a quorum and they can vote on this because they have the votes to pass it if they get that there.
But he's also got an opinion from his attorney general who's running for another higher office.
And they have not only have they said, you've got to come back and do your job or we're going to kick you out.
That's what he's threatening to do.
But he's also threatening to arrest them and to charge them with bribery.
He said that they could not use their campaign expenses to flee and to stay in other states.
Anybody that helps them to do that, if they're not paying it out of their personal property, personal accounts, they will charge them with bribery.
Now, that's lawfare, and it shows the Republicans are not above using these kinds of tricks either.
So both of them, a pox on both of these factions, it's just disgusting to watch this.
Every aspect of this, when you look at it, is disgusting.
So the Supreme Court in Texas, because this happened once before, had already said that this falls under the umbrella of a division of powers.
And I think they're right.
You know, the legislature can decide what they want to do.
And of course, there's a fight within the legislature.
And interestingly enough, Newsom wants to put himself into this as well because it's getting a lot of press.
And so this is an opportunity for him to grandstand and get his picture out there.
How obnoxious these politicians are.
Anyway, so he has said that, because what they're looking to do, they think they can redistrict it and pick up by the manipulation that they can get five additional seats for Republicans in Congress out of Texas.
And that's a big deal, as small as the majority is right now.
And so Newsom says, well, that's fine.
We'll redraw our maps and we'll neutralize that by getting even more Democrats.
I didn't know there's any Republican congressmen really left out of California.
I know there have been some in the past, but I haven't really kept up with it.
So he's threatening to do that.
So now Schwarzenegger has come out of political retirement, I guess, to say that he's going to fight any redistricting plans in California that might be done by Newsom.
He says, gerrymandering is evil.
I've always opposed it.
We have that here.
And Newsom is saying, well, I'm going to do it to neutralize Texas.
So it's up to them.
If they do this, then I will neutralize that.
Well, as I said before, once you have said these congressional districts, just as we saw in North Carolina in 2010, everything flipped Republican except for the congressional seats.
And so that tells you that the votes don't really matter that much.
It's who's there.
And there's a tremendous discrepancy, especially in Illinois, where so many of them have fled.
They went there because Illinois Governor Pritzker, his family owns the Hyatt fortune, and he's the one who has, his family is also involved in heavily pushing transgenderism, and he's got a cousin who is a doppelganger for him, Who dresses up like a woman every time I see his picture?
I can't unsee the picture of the two of them next to each other.
Nevertheless, in Chicago, Illinois is a poster child for how you can manipulate things.
And as they point out, Democrats got 53% of the popular vote in Illinois House races, but they took 82% of the seats.
So 53% of the vote.
but 82% of the seats.
Because you can manipulate that by picking the voters and grouping them in certain areas, you have now pretty much determined what's going to happen.
So again, the Democrats do exactly the same thing.
And as we saw in North Carolina, they had a fit about that.
They went to the Supreme Court, I think, over that, saying you can't gerrymander when they have been doing it for centuries in North Carolina.
So they're going to try to run the clock out.
And Abbott is going to try to arrest them, charge them with bribery, and kick them out and replace them with other people.
Well, that's going to be a big legal fight.
And it has nothing to do with any of us.
It's simply about their power plays with each other.
That's all that's about.
Especially since the parties don't stick to really any, say the Republican Party doesn't stick to any conservative principles.
And the Democrats have just basically beclowned themselves with their obsession over LGBT, DEI, and CRT, and all the rest of this stuff.
But the interesting thing is what Abbott could do doesn't get the attention if he, you know, when he grandstands and says, I'm going to arrest them.
I'm going to throw them out of the legislature.
The one thing they could do is call another special session.
And, you know, of course, the whole thing started all over again.
But it'll be interesting to see how this thing operates just out of curiosity, but it's not going to make any real difference with us.
Look, the political parties have rigged this system.
This is just one aspect of how rigged this system is.
That's why I gave up on all this stuff when I looked at.
I ran against it once.
And it's kind of interesting because now you've got this loudmouth representative, Jasmine Crockett, out of Texas.
And she says, they're going to redistrict me out of my seat.
I won't be living in my district anymore.
Well, there is no federal requirement that you live in the district.
You have to be a resident of the state, but you don't have to be a resident of these gerrymandered districts.
And I know that from personal experience.
When I was involved with the Libertarian Party, they got ballot access, and so they wanted to run a full-side candidates, but there really wasn't anybody that really wanted to do that.
The last thing in the world I would want is to have to go to Washington and sit there with Robert's rules of order and the corruption of somebody like Mike Johnson and all the rest of the stuff.
What a nightmare that would be.
But they didn't have anybody to run in the Charlotte district.
And even though we lived over by Raleigh, I said, all right, I'll do it.
And because you don't have to live in that district.
Now, it makes it difficult because I had to commute to go there to do interviews.
And I was in a TV debate that was there.
But, you know, we even got signs.
I paid for it myself.
I didn't want to get into any issues of the Federal Election Commission.
And so I didn't want to take money from anybody.
And paid for the signs myself.
Karen drove the van.
We put the boys in car seats.
They were that young.
And I would jump out and stick the signs in places where they already had a bunch of political signs.
They won't let you put up private signs about anything.
But of course, politicians can violate all the rules about signs and do with every election, as you've noticed probably.
And then I went back and picked them all up again after the election was over.
And I was pretty much done with politics after that because I was fed up with it.
But she's saying, she said, they asked us about where we lived, and they've got our address and everything.
She said, in Congress, they confirmed our addresses.
She said, but I don't know how many of us actually still reside in the districts that we represent because they're constantly changing the districts.
And they act as if that somehow keeps them from running.
And there might be some states where the state rules say that you have to live in that district, but there's no federal rule for that.
And again, she's questioning whether or not people live in their districts or not.
And probably many of them don't.
They don't necessarily have to.
It makes it difficult.
But the real issue in Texas, and this is why I say they're not doing anything that helps us, there's a real issue in Texas, and it's been there for a long time.
I've talked to Mark Hall many times about his essay, Killing Ed.
In it, he focused on a worst-case example of schools of voucher schools, which is the Fatala Gulen schools.
Now, Fatala Gulen is a mystic cleric who began as an ally of Erdogan in Turkey.
And they both started to move Turkey in a more Islamic direction.
It had been a secular republic with a lot of Muslims that were there.
Then they became rivals, bitter rivals.
And there were a lot of Fatala Ghulen followers because he's a cleric, he's a mystic cleric, and he's got a lot of people who follow his brand of Islam.
And they have schools all over the world.
They had, at the time, I was talking to Mark Hall about eight years ago, I guess, they had over 1,000 madrasas throughout the world.
And yet in Texas, they were getting state money for these charter schools.
And they continued to increase it.
Last time I talked to him, it was about $750 million a year they're getting from the state of Texas for their schools, pretending that they had nothing to do with Islam or Turkey or Fatala Gulen, which was all a lie.
And there was a lot of corruption, other issues.
And you can see that.
It's an interesting documentary killing Ed.
And it was a bit difficult for Mark.
There was a lot of obstacles put in his way, a lot of threats were put in, and a lot of corruption.
And in Texas, there's a lot of corruption with not just the usual Democrats that we expect, but also with Republicans.
You've got the guy who's now lieutenant governor.
There's a very interesting section in the documentary, Killing Ed, where he interviews the Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick.
And Dan Patrick and me, these Republicans, had taken paid vacations to go to Turkey where they're whined and dined.
And they, you know, basically get them on their side.
And they do the same thing with some hand-picked students.
So the whole thing is about nudging them towards Turkey, towards Fatala Gulen, towards Islam, and all the rest of this stuff.
But they maintain this facade of it being strictly secular.
They call them schools of science and math.
And they're probably up to about a billion dollars at this point because they've continued to open up more and more schools.
There was a report on WND, an interview with one guy talking about Sharia law in Texas.
And if you remember, there was an entire community that Abbott said, you're not going to be allowed to create this community here because they know you're going to use it to create Sharia law and an Islamic community here.
And he had some statistics.
He said there's 450,000 Muslims in Texas.
There's over 330 mosques.
Entire Sharia-compliant neighborhoods are reshaping the state of Texas.
He said, right under Governor Abbott's nose.
Homeowners Association fees will fund mosques.
Islamic courts are operating in the shadows and public schools are bending to the pressure.
He doesn't even mention in this summary here what's going on with the charter schools of Fatala Gulen.
Politicians talk tough, but nothing changes.
If you think this is only Dearborn or Minneapolis, think again.
What happens in Texas is not going to stay in Texas.
There's a cultural takeover and no one in power is Stopping it.
Why?
Because they're only concerned about their career and staying in office perpetually and about their little faction, their little political party being dominant.
That's what they're concerned about.
They will let the state be taken over by radical Muslims, but they won't, and they won't do a thing about that.
They're not even talking about that.
Instead, it's all about the competition between their two private clubs.
And that's really what it boils down to.
The complete disconnect from what this country really needs.
Well, it's not just between Republicans and Democrats.
It's also Republicans versus Republicans and Democrats versus Democrats.
Biden handlers are ready to unleash a trove of embarrassing Kamala Harris stories because she's supposedly doing a tell-all book.
And they took Mark Halpern, who's been a longtime Democrat journalist.
They basically used this guy to send a warning to Lala Harris that they're going to just eviscerate her.
It shouldn't be too hard, actually.
We've all seen it.
And what she's capable of.
And he said they are going to, they're ready.
He said, wait till you hear the Palin-esque stories.
And I had to look at it.
What are they talking about?
Talking about Sarah Palin.
Remember how they made fun of her?
She said, you know, you can see Russia from Alaska and things like that.
Which, again, the argument that she never said that.
But that was the way they ridiculed her when she was picked by John McCain.
McCain needed a running mate, you know, McCain being an angry old white guy who wanted war with everybody.
When they put Obama in, he had to have some kind of a counter-DEI, so he had to get a woman to come in.
And they picked Sarah Palin, who exhibited a great deal of flakiness and a lot of different things that she was doing.
But anyway, they came up with Palin-esque stories about how much they tried to help her, but she was just beyond help.
And she was in no position to run or to govern.
So Mark Halpern says, oh, he was contacted by people in the Biden Party, so now he goes on TV and he fires this warning shot saying, if you're going to talk about how incompetent and senile Biden is, we're going to talk about how stupid Lala is joined the club.
I think we all saw that.
Anyway, he says, you'll hear stories about Lala as vice president that will not make her look good, said Halpern.
It's not like they're at war currently, but I'm telling you, if Joe Biden feels threatened, if his people feel threatened by her, this is going to escalate in a big way.
Isn't that interesting that they would take Mark Halpern, who has been a journalist and Democrat operative, and they would use him to send this warning publicly to Lala.
He further asserted that the Biden inner circle pulled out all the stops and trying to help her do the job of vice president.
They gave her every opportunity.
They did.
They found in some instances that she had some issues, he emphasized.
That's putting it mildly, isn't it?
Meanwhile, one of Biden's top aides, Mike Donnellin, has revealed that he made a whopping $4 million working for him in 2024 alone.
This came out as the House Oversight Committee was investigating the cover-up of Biden's mental condition.
And Sean Spice released it, said Top Biden aide was promised $8 million for a 2024 win.
$4 million to up and run, another $4 million if he won.
But he only got half of that.
Meanwhile, in the GOP, we're seeing angry fights with the influencers.
We saw last week, we saw Candace Owen and Tucker Carlson fighting with Nick Fuentes, and now Laura Loomer is fighting with Tucker Carlson.
And her beef with him is the fact that he opposed Trump on the wars.
Laura Loomer doesn't care whether we have World War III with nuclear weapons.
Don't say anything bad about Trump.
That's her calculus right there.
As they say in this article here, The Independent, they call her a vocal ally.
No, she's a vocal sycophant of Donald Trump.
That's where she gets her clout, and she is obsessed with that.
A very disturbed individual, quite frankly.
You remember when she got kicked off of Google, she couldn't handle it.
And she chained herself to one of Google's office buildings and basically had a public nervous breakdown over it, which was really sad that somebody is that connected.
She's as bad as Hillary Clinton, really, in terms of, you know, that's her entire life, her future, everything she lives for.
As Hillary Clinton says, the politics of meaning.
And I think what she means by that is that that's what gives meaning to her life.
And as I said many, many times, what a pathetic thing of all things.
I mean, we can all make our careers the meaning of our lives, and that is a sad thing if we do that.
But how sad to make something like politics something that's going to give you meaning in your life?
That is, anyway, she called Tucker Carlson a terrible person and a fraud.
He had said that she was like a child wielding a loaded firearm called Twitter.
I think that's pretty accurate, actually.
She said, I'm so glad that many people are starting to see what a terrible person Tucker Carlson is.
I'm glad people's eyes are opening to what a fraud this guy is.
And I got to say, when you go back, if you want to look to see what a fraud he is, go back and look at how he was one of the most vile liars in terms of 9-11.
There was not anybody any worse than Tucker Carlson.
He wouldn't let people even show videos and he just mocked them.
He said, I just get all these calls about, well, what is a melting temperature of steel?
He goes, what's up with these people?
What's their problem?
Pretended that he didn't know.
And then when he gets out, he says, well, you can't talk about that stuff or you'll get fired.
So you will talk about whatever is not, whatever will make you $25 million a year.
Is that right, Tucker?
And of course, Laura Lumer is no different either.
She just has her different set of goals here.
And so she followed up with a post asking, do you want to know something about Tucker Carlson that nobody knows except me?
She's just a mega gossiper with her Twitter account.
I mean, that's all that is.
It's just gossip.
She's a gossip gal.
She said, something that should be the nail in his coffin that makes everyone realize what a fraud he is.
And then she put out a 13-post thread saying that he tried to suppress a story about a compromising laptop supposedly belonging to Hunter Biden because, you know, they're friends.
I guess I didn't read the thread.
I'm not interested in anything that Lauren Lembert has to say.
She's completely sold out for access.
But Tucker had defended Hunter, which I think raised a lot of eyebrows.
It was like, you know, Hunter is got some really serious issues.
And it's not to say that you can't be friends with somebody because you disagree with them politically.
I have friends I disagree with politically, but he's got some real personal issues, obviously.
By the way, when you look at what the Bidens are willing to do, we've already seen that with Hunter.
He came out swinging last week as well against the people that he thinks pushed his father out of running for reelection.
But, you know, when we look at Tucker, it wasn't just 9-11 20 years ago.
It was also what he would not do with the lockdown, what he would not do with the vaccs, and that is he wouldn't tell people.
And people died.
You know, when we saw what happened with 9-11, it was over and done with, and we should have exposed it for what it was, because it was the first shoe to drop.
Lockdown and Warp Speed was the second shoe to drop.
It was all tied together from the very beginning with Dark Winter and the cover-ups with that.
But When he remained silent with this, this is a slow-moving crime scene.
And by not speaking out and not telling people about the dangers of the vaccine and not resisting this lockdown and masking and all the rest of this stuff, he allowed legal precedents to be set with the lockdown, the rest of the stuff.
And he allowed people to be injured and killed with these vaccines.
So I'm not a fan of Tucker either, just like I'm not a fan of the Republicans or the Democrats.
Tucker has not been shy about criticizing her in the past, calling her the world's creepiest human.
And one podcast in June, and he said, I don't even know where she came from or who she is exactly.
But she's running around saying, I'm Donald Trump's defender.
He says it's bizarre.
Well, we do know where Tucker Carlson came from.
He came from, his father worked for Voice of America.
He was CIA propaganda for the longest period of time.
The war of words between the two MAGA influencers, says the Independent, first erupted just prior to that when Carlson came out against Trump's decision to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities in support of Israel, opposing further American involvement in conflicts overseas.
And it went viral when he challenged Ted Cruz over his ignorance of Tehran.
Well, again, for that, he did the right thing.
And we need to take these issues one at a time.
I have a hard time overlooking Tucker Carlson's past.
But when he comes out and opposes wars that we are initiating, wars that could blow up, literally, in our faces, I think he did the right thing.
Loomer derided him over the claim last fall that he was mauled by a demon in his sleep.
I mean, she pointed out that she was nowhere near him at the time.
Anyway, but Trump was asked about Loomer by the Press Corps, of course, as she was traveling with him.
He says, she's very nice.
I mean, I know she's known as radical right, but I think Laura Loomer is a very nice person.
Notice that he is slightly moving himself to distance himself from the radical right, as he said they were going to have problems with what he was doing and with Epstein.
I know I'm going to get a lot of criticism from the radical right and so forth.
But he said, I've known her for a long time.
Personally, I think she's a patriot.
Well, this is coming from somebody who praised Jeffrey Epstein and hung out with him for about 15 years.
So that's kind of faint praise, I guess.
But as I look at this and I was thinking about all this gerrymandering and when I was involved in politics, I saw this op-ed from Newt Gingrich, who thanks the Republicans and win in November on their support for the budget bill.
Well, I guess maybe he has a better gauge on public opinion than I do.
But I tell you, when I ran, it was the term after 1992, if you remember, Newt Gingrich had his contract with America and he had 10 things on the Contract of America.
And I thought, well, that's fine.
I don't necessarily, some of them I didn't think were important, certainly not enough to run on.
But, you know, that kind of coalesced everybody around and people looked at it.
So when I ran for Congress, I created a flyer and I said, this is my contract with America.
It's called the Bill of Rights.
Have you ever heard of this?
And I talked about how every one of the Bill of Rights were being violated and the violation had been ignored by Newt Gingrich and the Republicans for the past two years that they were in power.
And so I guess he knows better than I do because he's been a lot more successful in terms of elections.
He's a very clever manipulator.
And things like the Contract of America said that.
But I just don't see how in the world the one big beautiful bill, I don't see how that's a winning issue.
It's going to bankrupt us as part of the great financial reset so they can change the way the financial system is structured.
They want to bankrupt us and it will.
You know, as Trump has been adding to the deficit by leaps And bounds.
And we have such a large deficit now that in a few years it's going to be the biggest item there.
And it's squeezing the credit markets.
Whether Trump is able to lower the interest rates or not, you're not going to see the interest rates lowered on home mortgages.
We've already seen this.
When the Federal Reserve lowered the rates, everybody looked at it and said, well, that's going to fuel inflation.
So I want more for the long-term interest rates.
I'm not going to pay for the government bonds.
And so, you know, he's looking at this and he's desperate as he keeps adding and adding and adding irresponsibly to the debt.
Irresponsible spending runs throughout this whole thing.
And so he thinks his salvation is going to be lowering the interest rates.
I don't think it's going to do that.
It'll help him, but it's not going to help America.
It's not going to get the interest rates down for us.
If they were really concerned about helping us, Trump would be focused on the userous interest rates, the situation that we have right now in the banks where they pay you zero if you put the money in a checking account or savings account, right?
They pay you a fraction of 1%.
But then they charge, on the other hand, they charge 20%, 30% for credit cards.
And I look at it and I would love to hear what my father would say about that.
He would absolutely be, could not believe the situation that they would pay you a tiny fraction of 1% for your savings account, and then they would charge you 20, 30, 40% on a credit card.
That is absolutely criminal.
It was called userous all through his lifetime and up until about 1980 when they got rid of the usury laws.
So it is so skewed, it's ridiculous.
But they're not going to do anything to reform that abusive power.
No, those are the people who give them money for their campaigns.
Instead, what they're going to do is continue to do the same thing over and over again, and that is continue to spend and kick the can down the road.
Newt Gingrich writes, every Republican incumbent and candidate should embrace debating the one big beautiful bill.
It is one of the most pro-worker, pro-family, and pro-small business laws in America.
No, it isn't.
If you're going to increase a deficit by many trillions of dollars at each pinstroke with this, which is what they've done repeatedly, that is not pro-family.
That is not pro-business.
That is not pro-America.
This policy of destroying us with a mountain of debt is disgusting.
And I'm disgusted with these politicians.
Again, as I said, my contract with America was the Bill of Rights, which these people are disgusted with.
They have absolutely no use for it.
Well, I just had to get that off my chest here.
But I'll say one thing that I think is good.
And I'm very happy to see it.
And I don't know how in the world it happened.
And that is the defunding of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and NPR.
I grew up with all that.
That's about, I guess I'm just slightly older than these propaganda outlets.
I used to always laugh about it being national propaganda radio.
And I listened to it a great deal because they were the station that carried classical music.
But then as I was listening to it, they encroached on it more and more and more with news and politics and radical leftist news, as we all know.
And it was quite annoying until it got to the point where you couldn't hear the classical music for all the rantings of the left.
So I watched this thing metastasize like a cancer.
And it truly is annoying that we have to pay for it.
So there was an article by Jonathan Turley.
His take on it was that they had a choice.
He said people wanted them to reform.
They wanted them to be less radical and more even-handed.
But they preferred death to reform, basically what he was saying.
He said they're going to stop operation by September 30th.
It's hard to believe.
I'm anxious to see that, but I still am skeptical whether or not that will happen.
But they went from classical music actually to classical Marxism and struggle sessions, which is what you would see here on there all the time.
As Ronald Reagan said, a government program is the video about NPR in the desktop.
Can you just play that?
What we have about that?
Go ahead and play that.
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 the DavidNightShow.com.
Thank you for listening.
Thank you for sharing.
If you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers.
▲
Export Selection