The David Knight Show - Thu Episode #2133: The Comrade Mayor

Nov. 7, 2025 - The David Knight Show

03:09:53

Thu Episode #2133: The Comrade Mayor

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	In a world of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
	It's the David Knight Show.
	As the clock strikes 13, it is Thursday, the 6th of November, year of our Lord 2025.
	And it's official.
	Zoram Amdani is mayor of New York now.
	What comes next for the big apple?
	And we have Kash Patel in hot water.
	People pointing out that an FBI director has already been fired for the same kind of behavior.
	So why isn't cash?
	A good question.
	We're going to take a look at that and more on today's show.
	So stay with us.
	We'll be right back with some even bigger news.
	Oh, and
	welcome to the show today.
	As I said, I've got bigger news.
	And the big news is, it's little man's birthday.
	He is one year old.
	He is one year old today.
	So say happy birthday, everyone, if you would.
	He is a handful.
	As you can tell, he's gotten a lot bigger and a lot more fun.
	But just want to say thank you all for all the kind words over the years.
	We really do appreciate it.
	And he appreciates it too, I'm sure.
	So that is the big news.
	I will now pass him off so we can get on to the real news.
	So thank you all for joining us today.
	As I said, we're going to start with Zoron Mamdani.
	I can't.
	It's hard to tell if this is just the logical progression for the politics of New York.
	And I want to apologize if I offended anyone the other day.
	I don't actually have any real dislike for New York.
	I just have simple beliefs.
	Not that I actually hate anyone from New York.
	I just like to be a little bit inflammatory.
	I find it more fun to be bombastic.
	So I apologize if you're from New York.
	I don't hate your city.
	I don't hate you.
	I'm sorry if that was a problem.
	But here we are.
	Socialist Zoran Momdani becomes first Muslim mayor of New York.
	And they're focusing on the fact he's Muslim instead of the fact he's socialist, it seems in this article.
	But they're both problems, aren't they?
	It's not simply a one or the other thing.
	Both of these are issues.
	Both of these are things you look at and you go, I don't think this is right for America.
	Socialist Zoram Momdani has been elected the first Muslim mayor of New York in a political earthquake that puts the far left in charge of America's largest, wealthiest city.
	So he's the first Muslim mayor.
	As though the far left hasn't been in charge of New York for a long, long time.
	Yeah, the conservative people of New York have been suffering.
	I know you have a friend that lives in New York State, not New York City, and he has long been apoplectic.
	Well, maybe not apoplectic, but unhappy with the governance of the state.
	Mamdani, who becomes the Big Apple's first Muslim mayor, defeated former New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo and Republican Curtis Sliwa in a race that became a massive flashpoint in national politics, taking over 50% of the vote.
	And people are not happy with Curtis Sliwa.
	They're very unhappy, in fact.
	People are railing at him on Twitter.
	Of course, some of this is to do with Israel's policies, in fact.
	A lot of people have become aware of what's going on in the Middle East over the last year or so.
	And they're looking at the subservience that a lot of politicians show to the state of Israel and going, why?
	Why in the world would you actually do that?
	What do they do for us?
	And this led to some actual backlash in the New York City race.
	We actually have that clip, I believe, of, yeah, here, let's take a look at this.
	This is a good indicator.
	The first foreign visit by a mayor of New York is always considered significant.
	Where would you go first?
	Where would you go?
	Left right in the South.
	First visit, I would visit the Holy Land.
	The Holy Land.
	Mr. Cuomo.
	Given the hostility and the anti-Semitism that has been shown in New York, I would go to Israel.
	Mr. Tilson, where would you go?
	Yeah, I'd make my fourth trip to Israel.
	My fourth trip.
	My fourth trip to Ukraine, two of our greatest allies fighting on the front lines of the global war on terror.
	Mr. Mamdani.
	I would stay in New York City.
	My plans are to address New Yorkers across the five boroughs and focus on that.
	Mr. Mamdani, can I just jump in?
	Would you visit Israel as mayor?
	I will be doing, as the mayor, I'll be standing up for Jewish New Yorkers and I'll be meeting them wherever they are across the five boroughs, whether that's in their synagogues and temples or at their homes or at the subway platform, because ultimately we need to focus on delivering on their concerns.
	And just yes or no, do you believe in it?
	Yeah, well.
	Look at how easy he had it.
	Look at how easy they made it for him.
	Where are you going to go?
	Oh, I'm going to the Holy Land.
	I'll be taking my fourth trip to the Holy Land.
	Then I'm going to Ukraine.
	He simply says, I'm going to speak to New Yorkers.
	I'm going to meet them here.
	I'm going to address their issues.
	I'm going to talk to them.
	And he wins.
	Not just wins, but wins handily.
	People are kind of sick of it.
	Whether it's the fact that they're mad at the subservience towards Israel, they're just sick of the fact that politicians don't care about them at all.
	At all.
	They made it too obvious.
	Where are you going?
	I'm taking my fourth trip to Israel and then my fifth trip to Ukraine.
	And if there's any time at all left over for the people who voted me into office, maybe.
	Maybe I'll do something about it.
	But you know, I've probably got other things on my mind.
	In his ferocious speech promising a new dawn for New York, he quoted late socialist politician Eugene Debs, bragged about toppling a political dynasty and launched into a blistering attack against President Donald Trump, who has called Mamdani, a communist.
	And I agree with Trump on this.
	He is.
	He is a communist.
	And if any city can show a nation how to stop Donald Trump, it is the city that gave rise to him, said Mom Donnie.
	He represents a district in the same borough of Queens where the president was raised.
	So, from the same stomping grounds as Donald Trump.
	They're both communists.
	And they're both Democrats from New York.
	He then directly addressed the president.
	Trump, since I know you're watching, I have four words for you.
	Turn the volume up.
	And of course, Mamdani is nothing but a demagogue.
	He's very, very good at being relatable, at getting people to think, oh man, he's one of us.
	But I don't believe it for the second.
	I don't believe it at all.
	I think being.
	If you're able to run a race for anything past dog catcher, chances are you have some kind of backing.
	I'm sure Mom Danny does.
	I don't trust him at all.
	But upside from this, at least, is we get to say goodbye and good riddance to Andrew Cuomo.
	You know, it's not all bad.
	Andrew Cuomo is out the door.
	So, the former governor had a bad record, a worse attitude, and zero vision.
	And this is by Christian Brischke.
	And over at Cuomo's election night party, independent journalist Michael Tracy captured one of the former governor's supporters engaging in some blunt analysis of the results.
	Hey, Curtis Sleewa, you're a scumbag, like I said all along, he says in the video.
	You split the vote.
	That's right.
	I told you people were mad at Curtis Sleewa.
	They're not happy.
	They're freaking out.
	They're saying that he split the vote, the remainder of the less than 50% that was left to be split.
	Yeah.
	What difference would that make if he wasn't there to take part of the 40-something percent?
	Yeah, even if Curtis Sleewa isn't there, Cuomo still loses to Mamdani.
	There's nothing.
	No one was excited for Cuomo.
	No one cared.
	No one in the world sat there thinking, I cannot wait to vote for Andrew Cuomo.
	Oh boy.
	Cuomo already lost in a direct election where there was no split vote when it was the Democrat primary.
	Yes.
	No one cares.
	Andrew Cuomo is old news.
	Not just old news, but unliked news.
	He's bad news.
	No one had any interest in voting for him at all.
	This unnamed Cuomosexual wasn't alone in expressing these sentiments.
	Here, for instance, former Republican congressman and pardoned fraudster George Santos saying something similar.
	George Santos, what a guy.
	And he says, screw you, Curtis Sliwa.
	I hate you, all caps, your dumb wife, that stupid beret of yours, and all your cats.
	That's George Santos.
	Of course, George Santos might be mad about Zoran Momdani winning because he's so Jewish and he's so pro-Israel.
	Of course, I don't know if he's either of those things.
	He's definitely not Jewish.
	To be sure, neither are official campaign spokesmen, but both, the level of their rage and their target for it, says a lot about the purely negative pitch of the Cuomo's mayoral campaign and why that proved so completely unconvincing for voters.
	Both the primary and the general election, Cuomo never seemed to be able to get beyond the idea that all he had to do to win was point at the other candidates and say, you're really going to vote for them?
	Which, you know, this might be a knock-on effect from the Trump elections.
	I don't have to.
	That video that you played really sums up where most of his support came from.
	It's that was the first thing I ever saw about Mom Donnie.
	It went viral because everyone at the end of it, you cut it before they all start berating him for not supporting Israel enough.
	Even though he's just going to be the mayor of a city in America.
	As the mayor of New York City, what are you going to do for Israel?
	It's important for us to know these things so that we can judge whether you're fit to govern an American city.
	Because if you're not rapidly pro-Israel, how could we let you govern us Americans?
	Isn't that funny how that works?
	Huh.
	It's almost like we're forced to put another country's interests before ours.
	It's almost like we're not.
	We're barely a second thought.
	But Cuomo couldn't convincingly do this.
	Given that he spent the last year or so of his governorship stumbling from one incompetent scandal after another before eventually resigning in response to sexual harassment.
	Yeah, when you, when you're Andrew Cuomo and you try to just go, you're going to vote for that guy, it's a lot easier for them to look back at you and go, you're going to vote for that guy?
	That's the guy that you're, really?
	What has he done?
	Look at what happened with COVID.
	Look at what happened with the allegations.
	There's more fingers pointing back at him.
	It was Cuomo's administration that forced nursing homes to accept COVID-positive patients and then tried to cover up the deaths that resulted from this deeply mistaken policy.
	It was under his governorship that New York had the worst administered emergency rental assistance program in the country.
	It's hard to argue that you are a steady, capable alternative to the starry-eyed socialist when your administration can't do something as simple as not recklessly endanger senior citizens or cut checks to people.
	Basically, he was no good at anything.
	There was not a single bright spot in his administration, and people were excited to see him go.
	Mom Donnie had this sewed up for months.
	It was all but concluded.
	Anyone that looked at the level of excitement there was for Mom Donnie could kind of tell.
	It's a excitement means a lot when it comes to a political campaign.
	It bears repeating after Cuomo, repeating that Cuomo also signed the 2019 rent law that has done so much to damage the financial position of New York City's housing.
	With no decent record to run on and no positive visions to pitch, Cuomo fell back on aristocratic entitlement.
	If you don't like Mom Donnie, you had to vote for him as the only realistic alternative.
	Sliwa voters weren't worth convincing.
	They simply owed loyalty to Cuomo.
	But that didn't end up playing out, did it?
	And of course, as we pointed out, Curtis Sleewa didn't get enough of the vote to matter.
	He could have taken.
	Cuomo could have gotten all Sleewa's votes, and Mom Donnie still wins.
	That's how disinterested people were in these two candidates.
	No, I don't think I'll vote for that guy.
	We've tried that before.
	It's not good to see.
	Trying to play up his socialism, and yes, he is a socialist, but is Cuomo really that much better or better at all?
	New York is already pretty close to as bad as it could possibly be in terms of politics.
	There's limits to what these governors can do when they're in power, and they're always pushing those limits already.
	This guy might push them a little bit harder, but I don't think it's going to make a fundamental difference.
	Yeah, it'll be interesting to see if him being an avowed, you know, socialist means he pushes harder and faster.
	I have to wait and see.
	That would be a downside if Mamdani's avowed socialism means he's not trying to hide anything, means he doesn't feel the need to try and pretend he's not what he is.
	I mean, sure, it could be worse than what it is now, but I also think that they're really just setting him up to succeed because they're establishing, oh, well, we're going to see New York fall into a communist regime and people are going to be starving in the streets or whatever.
	It's not going to be that bad.
	It's not going to turn into the Warsaw ghetto or something like that overnight.
	It's going to continue.
	Anything short of escape from New York will be declared a victory.
	Look, we didn't burn the entire thing down.
	And we're so proud of you, Mom Danny.
	It's not good to see Mamdani win, but as a consolation prize, it is good to see Cuomo lose.
	And that's about the size of it.
	There's no solace in Mamdani.
	There's no hope he's going to make New York City better, but we can at least enjoy the fact that Cuomo got thrown out.
	That people had enough.
	Whatever else one wants to say about them, their choices.
	New York voters were right to decide that they don't want a disgraced politician with a bad record, a worse attitude, and no vision running their city government.
	And I think that's fair.
	I think between the two choices, if someone put a gun to my head and said, you are going to have to vote for Andrew Cuomo or Zoron Momdani, I think I'd at least have to vote for Zoron Momdani because Andrew Cuomo, through his policies, has directly led to deaths during COVID-19.
	I hold him responsible for actual deaths.
	And while I'm sure Zoron might have done the exact same thing, he hasn't yet.
	I don't consider him to have blood on his hands at this exact moment.
	Which means he is someone, in my opinion, at least in this case, the lesser of two evils for now.
	Mamdani tells MSNBC he supports BDS after claiming he will be mayor for every Jewish New Yorker.
	During an appearance on MSNBC's Morning Joe, Mamdani was asked about his support for BDS, the boycott movement against Israel.
	Boycott, divest, whatever the last one is.
	Mamdani said sanctions.
	That's what it was.
	This article is phrasing it as though that's an absolutely contradictory thing, but this is sending.
	This is the nation of Israel, not Jewish New Yorkers.
	That's the exact thing.
	It's just he's the mayor of the New Yorkers.
	If they're Jewish and they're in New York, he could still support them, give them the time and attention that they need from the mayor without him ever having to do anything for Israel.
	But it's just this continual conflation.
	If you don't support the political state of Israel in the Middle East, you hate every single Jew on the planet.
	You want them all gone, in fact.
	You're a Nazi.
	Mamdani was asked about his support for BDS, the boycott movement against Israel.
	Mamdani said he supports it as a way to pressure Israel to comply with international law.
	That's all he wants.
	Just to comply with the international law, please.
	Now, we'll see if that's all he wants in future, but he's being very, very moderate in his condemnations of Israel.
	He's been very mild, at least as far as I've seen.
	Maybe there's some other videos where he's ranting and raving and screaming.
	But I haven't seen a Morning Joe co-host Willie Geist asked Mom Donnie how he could square support for Jewish New Yorkers while promoting the BDS movement, noting that many in the city's Jewish community worry, he harbors animosity towards them.
	How can you support this one thing that's unrelated to this other?
	I don't care.
	Again, it's this utter conflation of the political state of Israel with every single Jewish individual on the planet.
	If you have a singular issue with the way Netanyahu runs the government of Israel, then you are evil.
	The candidate argued that his criticism of Israel lies with its government, not the Jewish people.
	Same as it is here on the show.
	Same as it is with y'all in the audience.
	I think critiques of the state of Israel are critiques of a government as opposed to critiques of a people and of a faith, he said.
	And my job, his job, is to be the mayor of New York, not the mayor of Israel.
	Zoran Momdani, boosted by opposition to Israel, wins NYC mayoral race.
	People have had enough.
	We've seen enough clips.
	We've seen the footage.
	It's hard to get away from the footage of what's going on in Palestine.
	People are not simply going to take it.
	They'll do what they can.
	As little as that is, if that means electing a socialist, probably communist, to be the mayor of New York, to stop the bombing of children, stop the horrors they see on their social media feed.
	That just might be what they do.
	Well, let's not forget that the purpose of socialism is to institute communism.
	Yeah.
	That is the ultimate end goal.
	I think it was Vladimir Lenin or one of the guys that said that.
	All right, let's read some comments for a bit.
	Mr. Palm 1011.
	Oh my gosh.
	God's blessing.
	Yes, yes, he is little David.
	Or you could call him squire, whatever you want.
	He's a blessing.
	He's wonderful.
	He makes our lives so much better.
	Spectro626 says he's adorable.
	And Spectro626 says, happy first birthday.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	He appreciates it.
	He's going to be having all kinds of treats today.
	We're going to make sure that he gets a good day.
	Nad Lander, he's got your hair, dude.
	Yeah, he kind of does.
	He has the same kind of curls that I used to get when I was a baby when it got long.
	It's about time for him to get his second haircut.
	The real Octo, spoot, cute little boy, wife, asks, where is David?
	David's not feeling too good today.
	He had to take the day off, but I'm still here, at least for the first hour.
	Second hour, we're playing a best of compilation.
	It'll be the Anthony Frida interview, where they talk about culture and why it's important, why art is important.
	And we're also going to play a Eric Peters interview and one more surprise.
	About 15 minutes extra of just solo David.
	So stick around.
	The second hour will be more David Knight show with David Knight.
	Best of interviews.
	I want to say that it's not his heart that's a problem.
	He's just feeling sick.
	He's under the weather.
	Usual regular sickness.
	Yeah, it's just a regular cold fever sort of thing.
	He's not in any danger.
	He's just feeling bad, like we all do sometimes.
	We have Pezzo Novante 1776 says, missed the start.
	Where is DK?
	So hopefully that answers your question, Pezo Novante.
	So go 68G, the first Muslim mayor of Lundinistan, sure worked out great, didn't it?
	That's right.
	It sure did.
	Londonistan always makes me laugh.
	I've said for years that if we wanted to invade another Muslim country, it might as well be the UK.
	Give them a taste of their own medicine for once.
	Jim 7, he'll do plenty for Israel.
	The guy will reveal his true identity soon.
	I think you have to play politics to some degree in order to get into positions, high positions, as well as mayoral positions if it's a city like New York.
	And that typically includes sending some money to Israel.
	Yeah.
	Apparently, in American politics, you don't get to play unless you at least partially support Israel.
	They're able to win.
	I don't know how much support the city of New York actually sends to them, but I guess we'll see.
	Yeah.
	It's truly amazing.
	Just the Jewish population of New York is incredibly large comparatively to, you know, other plays in the country.
	Jim's seven, already read that.
	Patty Wax, it's scary that life has become the latest, greatest, bigger, and better novelty.
	And that is what Zoron is.
	That is what Trump was.
	That is what LGBT nutteries are.
	Nuttery.
	Yeah, it's all just this continual push for more, more, more.
	Well, this didn't satisfy me.
	What can I do next?
	This is old news.
	I need something else.
	It's not satisfying like it did.
	Maybe a bigger dose will help.
	It's because society is completely and utterly divorced from Christ.
	We've thrown him out, and as such, we are desperate for something to take his place, but nothing can.
	What if I try drugs?
	What if I substitute political action?
	What if I'm gay or trans or something?
	Surely that will give my life meaning.
	It doesn't.
	What you need is Christ.
	Without Christ, you have no meaning and no salvation.
	So I encourage you to turn to him.
	Read the gospel.
	Believe it.
	Omid Malik, the technocrat Muslim billionaire inside MAGA.
	Oh no, we're infiltrated on all sides.
	Omid Malik, a Muslim, also got involved with Rockbridge Network, a conservative donor group started by Jay Devance and Chris Buskirk, a co-founder of 1789 Capital.
	How did all these former left-wing billionaires show up on the Trump train?
	Isn't that the question of the day?
	How did it happen?
	How'd they get here?
	How did all these left-wing, or they say former left-wing, but really left-wing billionaires get onto the train of the former left-wing billionaire president?
	It's truly a question worth asking, Lance.
	I, for one, am baffled.
	I've got no idea how this could have happened.
	Do you perhaps have some insights, Lance?
	Could you explain this mystery?
	How did he end up here?
	You understand the tech.
	If you understand technocracy, you will know the agenda is not political, but economic.
	It is also aligned with asset-based Islamic finance, which is infiltrating all levels in the investment banking world.
	Patrick Wood, the editor, said that.
	Patrick Wood does a lot of good work.
	USA, USA, USA, the familiar chant of another MAGA triumph filled the New York Stock Exchange last month as Omid Malik and Donald Trump Jr. rang the opening bell to mark the trading debut of firearms retailer Grab a Gun.
	You could also call the company the culmination of their close personal business relationship, the Amazon of guns, or a middle finger to anyone who's horrified that Grab a Gun stock symbol is P E W, the sound of a bullet.
	You see, I don't think we're going far enough.
	What we need is Uber Eats for guns.
	I should be able to pull up my phone, look at a gun, and have somebody deliver it to my house within the next 25 to 30 minutes.
	That is the only future worth having.
	I demand to be able to order Glocks to my front door non-stop whenever I want.
	That is the only thing that will satisfy me.
	They're talking about this pretty cool-sounding gun service as though that's somehow Trump's creation.
	I'm assuming they're trying to imply that Trump is the reason.
	He created the economic climate and the political climate where they could be allowed to succeed and thrive, which there was no such thing as the Second Amendment before there was Trump.
	That's right.
	Donald Trump was the first pro-Second Amendment president.
	No one else before him has ever been pro-Second Amendment.
	Not like Donnie is going to take the guns and do the due process later.
	There should be flashing red lights, Steve Bannon, on Mom Donny's when Steve Bannon is saying it's time to panic.
	It's time to freak out.
	More than a few Republicans are celebrating Zora Momdani's victory, seeing a 34-year-old Democratic socialist as a political gift, an albatross, the party.
	Steve Bannon is not among them.
	That's right.
	Steve Bannon, despite being a allegedly drunken criminal, might have more common sense than all the others in gravitating towards Trump, which is a horrifying thought to have.
	It is horrifying that Steve Bannon might be the most politically savvy, the most sagacious, the most circumspect member of the team.
	Not even a member.
	He's on the outside looking in.
	Bannon seemed impressed by Momdani's companion ability to turn out low-propensity voters.
	Yeah.
	He got all these dweebs that have been disenchanted with politics to believe that he's something different.
	That's what you get when you're a new fresh face without much history in politics.
	You get people that have been burnt out.
	They look at you and they say, there's a chance.
	You know, he's the devil I don't know, so maybe he's not a devil.
	Whereas any time you're dealing with known quantities, you're going to have a certain, at least a portion of the population goes, I know that guy.
	I will never vote for him.
	He has a history that I can look at and I'm sick of.
	And you'll never win them over.
	Well, MAGA Icon, an ex-Tucker Carlson favorite, denounces his old ally in the new anti-Semitism.
	Well, it seems like they're getting a bit nervous when it comes to anti-Semitism.
	The support for Israel is not as clamorous and all-consuming as it used to be among the American people.
	With the advent of social media and the ability to see the outcomes of Israel's war, what they're doing, bombing women and children, some people are looking at it and going, why are we supporting this?
	How can we support this?
	They've got to stop.
	If they want our continued support, they need to stop.
	And if you say that, I'm sorry, I've got bad news.
	You're an anti-Semite.
	That's just how it happens.
	It sneaks up on you.
	One day you're thinking about how you really wish women and children would stop being murdered.
	And the next thing you know, you're wearing an armband with a swastika on it.
	That's how it happens.
	It's that easy.
	The slide is unnoticeable.
	All of a sudden, you're an anti-Semite.
	Victor Davis Hansen denounced his old ally in a long essay about the new anti-Semitism for the free press.
	While Hansen had submitted that Fox News wouldn't be able to replace Tucker Carlson after the network ousted him back in 2023, he did not mince words about the far-right commentator in his latest essay, blogger Darryl Cooper, implausibly proclaimed by Tucker Carlson as perhaps the best and most honest popular historian in the United States, claimed on a Carlson podcast that Adolf Hitler's armies in 1941 did not really intend either to starve or murder hundreds of thousands of Jews, Ukrainians, and Russian prisoners.
	Excuse me, even though there is a trove of documents that showed premeditated Nazi assumptions of and plans for precisely such mass death, observed Hansen.
	Why would Nick Fuentes, who at times in the past has praised both Hitler and Joseph Stalin, call for a holy war against Jews and deny the Holocaust, remain unchallenged by Carlson on this same venue?
	Of course, I find the funniest thing about Fuentes is the fact that he's declared himself Hitler 2, 3, and 4.
	So we've got the next three Hitlers sorted out.
	So unless you're planning on being Hitler 5, don't even bother.
	We've already got him.
	Hansen argued that right-wing anti-Semitism manifests itself in the form of America firsters who fought both America past and present and much of Trump's America First movement.
	Well, yeah, if you don't put Israel first, you're anti-Semitic.
	It's simply that.
	And of course, you have people like Nick Fuentes who make these absurd inflammatory statements.
	I'm going to be Hitler 2, 3, and 4, he says, as he wants to be taken seriously.
	As he is one of the main voices that criticize Israel, who point out APAC's control, and he links this directly to that kind of ridiculous absurdism.
	That insanity.
	Hansen is a longtime supporter of President Donald Trump, who Carlson turned to often during his days at Fox.
	Wow, isn't that wonderful?
	We're going to take a quick break.
	And then, when we come back, I think we're going to look at what's going on with Kash Patel.
	As I said, he is in hot water.
	People are not happy.
	And there's good reason for that.
	But we'll talk about that when we come back.
	So stay with us, and we will be right back.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Hear news now at APS Radio News.com or get the APS Radio app and never miss another story.
	Welcome back, folks.
	Thank you for joining us here on this wonderful Thursday.
	I see we have Jason Barker in chat.
	Good to see you, Jason.
	Hope you're doing well.
	Yes, David is sick today.
	I am filling in.
	It's nothing serious.
	He's just feeling under the weather.
	So you've got me for the next 25 minutes.
	And then we will be turning it over to a rebroadcast.
	Because who can do the David Knight show better than David Knight?
	That's the real question.
	Not just a rebroadcast, but a best of.
	That is right.
	Best of interviews and a segment.
	But as I said, we're going to look at what's going on with.
	Sorry to interrupt, but on the topic of David Knight, he sent me a comment saying Trump isn't a populist.
	He is a globalist who's just like the Democrats in that debate.
	We played the debate of the Democrat New York mayoral candidates.
	And they're all talking about how much they support Israel, Ukraine, etc.
	And these are all Trump's positions.
	See, he's jetting around the world while the people can't even jet across the country because he doesn't care.
	Yeah.
	None of our politicians care about us.
	And at this point, their disinterest is a large part of what keeps things running.
	They also things.
	He also says, Victor David Hansen is a historian who's loved by conservatives, yet he supported Trump in spite of what happened in 2020.
	Why would anyone care about what a quote historian thinks who doesn't even know what happened in his own time and can't understand the time that he lived through?
	See, this is why anytime you read history, you need to question what the book is telling you.
	Given how biased and uninformed and stupid most of the current news is and the current historians are and the books that they write are, you have to wonder, has it always been like this?
	Has every historical work been written by some scumbag hack with an agenda to push?
	How much of this is simply fabrication to make somebody of the time look good?
	There's always revisionists.
	You just have to look at everything with a critical eye and compare it to other sources, especially sources from the time.
	Unless I'm telling you it.
	Then you can believe it uncritically.
	Just accept it and move along.
	Please don't do that.
	Sometimes I worry that people are going to take me seriously.
	I like to be sarcastic.
	I like to be unserious.
	I worry people are going to take it seriously and think I actually mean it.
	Let's look at what's going on with Kash Patel.
	As I said, he's in hot water and he's not used to that.
	Kash Patel wouldn't be the first FBI boss to go down by turning his official plane into a private jet.
	We've got precedent for it.
	It's already happened.
	And some people are now wondering, well, why hasn't happened?
	Why hasn't it happened to Kash Patel?
	In the early 1990s, veteran investigative reporter Ronald Kessler cut an unusual deal with the FBI.
	It was blessed at the very top by its then director, William Sessions.
	Kessler would be given unfettered access to the J. Edgar Hoover Building for a planned book that would provide an exclusive behind-the-scenes look at how the FBI really operates.
	Isn't that fun?
	Isn't that nifty?
	In the course of his reporting, Kessler told me this week he was shocked to learn, thanks to tips from agents on sessions on security detail, about alleged ethical abuses by the director himself.
	On multiple occasions, sessions, a former federal judge had used an FBI jet for personal trips, including Johns to San Francisco to see his daughter, and flying with his wife to Atlantic City to attend a performance of the Bolshoi Ballet at the Sands Hotel and Casino.
	Oh, you know, at least I suppose he's higher class than Kash Patel flying his girlfriend to a wrestling event.
	He's at least going to the ballet.
	The theta.
	The theta.
	What a man of taste.
	How refined.
	Which comped him the tickets.
	So the casino even comps him the tickets, I guess.
	That's something.
	Sure, he's not using the American money to buy Bolshoi ballet tickets.
	They're simply being given to him because of who he is, because of his position.
	Kessler's discoveries produced an uproar.
	It was a simpler time.
	People actually cared more.
	When he wrote a letter to the FBI seeking comment for his book, the Public Affairs Office dutifully turned it over to the Justice Department Inspector General for review.
	Months later, after an IG report documented Sessions' misuse of the FBI jet and other questionable actions, including the installation of a security fence around his home, the director got a call from President Bill Clinton telling him he was fired, making the first FBI chief ever to be cashiered.
	I'm sure Bill Clinton told him, I feel your pain.
	I'm doing stuff they wouldn't like either.
	I just didn't get caught.
	Trump, Trump's handpicked director, Kash Patel, 45, last week used an FBI jet to fly to State College in Pennsylvania to attend a wrestling match where his girlfriend, country singer Alexis Wilkins, 26, was singing the national anthem.
	That's a good use of time and money, isn't it?
	Our FBI director has nothing better to do than to use the private FBI jet to fly up to spend time with his girlfriend, who's basically half his age as she sings the national anthem at a wrestling event.
	Remember, I'm told, it's alleged to me, it's been revealed in a dream that we were once a serious country.
	I've heard tell of it.
	People used to actually take their jobs seriously.
	There was some kind of pride in them.
	Not anymore.
	We've got Kash Patel using his FBI jet to fly to see his girlfriend.
	Well, you got to do that.
	How much money are these guys making and yet they're completely and utterly unwilling to pay for a plane flight?
	No, no, no.
	I'm going to take the FBI private jet.
	Sure, pass that on to the taxpayer.
	That's their job.
	I'm a big deal.
	Wherever I want to go, I get to go, and it's the American people's duty to support that.
	They should feel honored that their tax dollars are going so that I can go visit my girlfriend.
	Patel fired the senior official in charge of planes, Stephen Palmer, a 27-year FBI veteran, when reports about the trip started to surface on social media.
	That's right.
	He threw a bit of a hissy fit.
	This is, how'd this get out?
	Did you leak it?
	You leaked that I was using the FBI's private plane to go visit my girlfriend?
	Well, you're fired.
	You might actually care about your job.
	Nor was this the first time that Patel's use of FBI aircraft has been questioned.
	In April, Patel, an avid hockey fan, used an FBI 757 jet to fly to New York to attend an NHL game where he watched Washington Capitol star Alex Ovechkin break the league's all-time scoring record.
	Good for him, I guess.
	Congratulations, Alex Ovechkin.
	I hope, you know, means something to you.
	Then in August, Patel and four or five of his friends hopped aboard an FBI jet to fly to Scotland for a golfing trip.
	Isn't that wonderful for him?
	Just getting to hop in the FBI jet.
	You know what?
	I feel like going to Scotland for golf.
	Wouldn't that be fun?
	Lifestyles of the rich and corrupt.
	Exactly.
	Just how disconnected this man is from the average American.
	Just, oh, I think I want to play golf, but not just regular golf.
	How about we go where it was invented?
	This is like getting a craving for pizza, and instead of going to your local restaurant, you decide you're going to fly to Italy.
	I better not give him any ideas.
	This may this may happen.
	In August, Patel and four or five of his friends hopped aboard an FBI jet to fly to Scotland for a golfing trip, according to Chris O'Leary, a former senior FBI counter-terrorism official, who's been tracking the use of the Bureau's aircraft.
	Inside the Bureau, there is a cross-the-board outrage over Patel's use of FBI aircraft for fun and pleasure, said O'Leary.
	At the end of the day, it's theft of government resources.
	I mean, people have been thrown out of the Bureau for this.
	And he's speaking literally.
	Do you have any idea how much fuel these jets consume?
	It is gallons upon gallons.
	Like, in one minute, they'll go through several gallons.
	It is quite expensive to fly these things around.
	These are not regular planes either.
	They are generally outfitted with all kinds of different things, and they are more expensive to fly because of it.
	They take more fuel.
	They're heavier.
	Even more striking, however, are the parallels with Sessions' misuse of the FBI aircraft.
	And as I was pointing out, he's not speaking metaphorically.
	He's not speaking in generalities.
	He's not speaking in, you know, oh, well, something like this has happened.
	Something almost identical has happened.
	There's precedent.
	Someone was already fired for it.
	So why isn't Kash Patel being fired?
	Could it be because Donald Trump prioritizes loyalty to himself over loyalty to the Constitution, over ability and willingness to uphold the law?
	Could it be that Donald Trump simply cares that Kash Patel is a dutiful little toady that does what he's told?
	It's a measure of the corruption.
	Last time this exact thing happened, the FBI director was fired.
	This time, the guy that exposed it was fired.
	Let's remember, it was Bill Clinton that fired that FBI director.
	It's as I've said before and will not elaborate on, Bill Clinton was the last Republican president.
	There won't be another one.
	And I will not be taking questions.
	There's more than parallels between Patel's and Sessions' travels, Gerson told me.
	It's congruency.
	It's the same thing.
	Under normal circumstances, the IG Inspector General should investigate this.
	It looks like on its face, like an emolument.
	Spy talk.
	I've got to take a brief aside.
	I know I take too many rabbit, I go down too many rabbit holes, but spy talk.
	Just the idea that there's a magazine for spies or a newspaper for them where they put all their little spy details.
	You think this substack.
	Yes, but just reached out to the FBI Public Affairs Office with a series of questions, including how often Patel has used FBI aircraft for personal purposes, whether his trips were approved by any FBI lawyer or ethics official, and how much Patel has compensated the Bureau for his trips.
	The office responded with a terse email saying that due to the government shutdown, FBI operations are directed toward national security.
	But Patel's chief spokesman, Ben Williamson, posted on X that Patel, like all directors, is required to use FBI aircraft for all travel because of security issues and for personal travel.
	The director pays a reimbursement in advance, strictly following OMB rules.
	He did not, however, specify which trips and how many times Patel has compensated the government for his trips to see his girlfriend, watch a hockey game, go golfing, or for other personal purposes.
	He also spends a lot of time at a second home in Las Vegas, according to reports.
	So he's all over the place.
	They're still not sure how many trips he's taken.
	It seems like, well, you know, he's just gotta fly.
	He works far more full weekends than he does otherwise.
	And maybe most importantly, ask anyone who works for him.
	He's on duty 24-7.
	I'm really curious as to what the director of the FBI actually does.
	He's not out there with a magnifying glass hunting down clues.
	He's not Sherlock Holmesing it.
	Obviously, he's more of a policy sort of guy.
	He's more about what kind of personnel they hire.
	What does the FBI director do on a daily basis?
	What is Kash Patel devoting all of his time to?
	Isn't that something I'd be interested in knowing?
	I imagine he's more of a bureaucrat than anything else.
	I imagine he doesn't do all that much at all, actually.
	Probably fires off an email every now and then.
	There's zero time for people who peddle trash because they have nothing better to do, or even better, because the Russian collusion hoax they spent years writing about failed in their end goal.
	A real shame.
	That's right.
	This is all because of Democrats.
	This is all Democrats trying to smear our good little boy, Kash Patel.
	He would never do anything bad.
	Yeah, what does this have to do with the Russia hoax?
	I don't know.
	You know, it's just as absurd to blame Russia.
	I don't blame the media that's blaming Russia for everything.
	It's unrelated.
	It seems like anytime one of the Trump crew gets in trouble, they trot out the fact: hey, look, remember they tried to smear him with this Russian host thing, hoax thing.
	They made up a whole bunch of stuff.
	You can't believe, you can't trust them.
	Remember, remember this?
	This was absurd to try to make you tie it into that and go, okay, so there's nothing to see here either, then, I guess.
	Yeah, as I was saying, it's the inoculation of Trump by the media with all of their constant going over the top for years.
	And now he's immune to criticism.
	But Patel himself also responded mainly by praising his girlfriend, the country singer.
	You know, that's a bit of an obfuscation, I assume.
	I'm not going to address anything.
	What if I were to simply just talk about how much I love my girlfriend?
	Hate corruption?
	Love me, girlfriend.
	Simple as.
	Patel himself also responded mainly praising his girlfriend, the country singer.
	The disgustingly baseless attacks against Alexis, a true patriot, and the woman I'm proud to call my partner in life, are beyond pathetic, he wrote on X.
	She is a rock sold.
	He probably means solid, but it says sold here, conservative, and a country music sensation who has done more for this national than most will in ten lifetimes.
	I'm so blessed in my life.
	Attacking her isn't just wrong, it's cowardly and jeopardizes our safety.
	Wow, the spin that he is putting on this.
	They aren't criticizing my girlfriend.
	If you're asking him, if you're asking about what I'm doing at the FBI jet, you're attacking my girlfriend.
	You're attacking my girlfriend and making her unsafe.
	How do you feel about that, big man?
	You feel big attacking a woman?
	Please, please don't fire me for corruption.
	That's what Kash Patel is doing.
	He's obfuscating.
	He's changing what this is about.
	This is not about his girlfriend, who I'm sure is probably a nice lady.
	I'm sure she's fine.
	I don't care to listen to any of her music.
	And I hope she lives a great life.
	I hope she's safe and sound.
	But I do, however, think Kash Patel should be fired for misuse of FBI property.
	It's that simple.
	In fact, none of the main media stories about Patel's trip to watch his girlfriend sing the national anthem in state college included personal attacks on her.
	This is, again, this is just changing the narrative.
	This isn't about me and my misuse of FBI property.
	This isn't about me taking trips to Scotland to play golf.
	This is about them hating my girlfriend.
	They hate her because she's such a patriot, folks.
	She's such a patriot.
	The left-wing media are trying to discredit her by saying I use the private jet to go golfing in Scotland.
	That's how devious these people are.
	It's a real roundabout attack, but you're not going to fall for it.
	Because I'm going to tell you.
	You're misusing the private jet.
	Wow, these people are coming after my girlfriend with the Russia hoax.
	This is truly an insane workaround.
	Kash Patel truly does live up to his nickname that I've seen people call him, Crooked Cash.
	There is nothing that I've seen from this man that is even remotely honest.
	Another parallel.
	By the way, this is actually a spy talk magazine.
	It just looks exactly like a substack, so I thought it was one.
	That's what I'm saying.
	It's like, just the idea.
	They've got their own little spy talk where they send in letters to the editor.
	Dear Abby, this week I adopted a third world regime for their resources.
	Many people died.
	Much lithium was secured.
	You're welcome.
	Another parallel between Patel and his long-ago predecessor?
	Oof, long ago.
	Bill Clinton was apparently long ago back in the ether.
	The reaches of time.
	We all grow old.
	When Kessler finally confronted Sessions about his findings, he got a half-hour tongue-lashing from the director.
	Sessions told the reporter he was offended and disappointed that he had delved into personal matters rather than the great work the FBI was doing.
	Great work the FBI was doing on what?
	You guys?
	Personal matters like your corruption?
	I'm also curious, what are they working on?
	Have they given us any new facts about the Charlie Kirk shooting?
	Anything?
	How about Epstein?
	Yeah.
	Epstein, Kirk, Las Vegas shooting, really any high-profile crime that they've been involved in investigating over the last, well, forever, as far as I'm concerned, my entire lifetime.
	Have they actually given us anything?
	When was the last time the FBI came out with something and said, we've solved it, and you were confident you could believe them?
	We have a black screen.
	There we go.
	It was just studio mode.
	Sessions told the reporter he was offended and disappointed that he had delved into personal matters rather than the great work the FBI was doing, and then launched into a vigorous defense of his wife, who he had taken on many of his trips aboard the FBI jet, who he said occupied a special and important place in the Bureau.
	I love my wife more than anything.
	I think she is beautiful, amazing, talented, smart, funny.
	But I wouldn't, if I was the FBI director, assume that she holds a special place for all the FBI agents.
	Well, as the director, she is my wife, and therefore, she's like a mom to these guys.
	I think, perhaps, she was...
	First lady of the FBI?
	Yeah.
	Yeah, just.
	I don't think you immediately become a special individual because you're married to the FBI director.
	You're not immediately inducted into their halls and made one of their own.
	That Patel, too, would respond with the defense of his girlfriend was telling, Kessler said.
	That's right.
	As the FBI director, if you get criticized, if you have a woman in your life, you must immediately claim they're attacking her.
	I can't believe these people are attacking my wife, my girlfriend, the country singer, the solid conservative.
	That Patel would respond with the defense of his wife is telling.
	He goes on about what a wonderful person she is, he said.
	The show of total blindness to the ethical issues involved.
	He's not blind.
	He's just trying to deflect.
	No, no, no.
	No ethical violations to see here.
	Have you considered my country singing patriotic American girlfriend?
	Yes, Cash.
	We're very happy for you.
	Please answer the question.
	Well, that's what's going on with Kash Patel.
	We're going to see how it plays out.
	I'm personally not expecting anything.
	He's a good little toady to Donald Trump.
	He really does whatever Trump says, and he does it without question.
	So I'm assuming everything will be fine for him.
	But let's move on.
	We've only got a little bit of time left before I turn it over to the best stuff.
	Sandwich thrown by protester exploded and left mustard stain on border agent court here.
	That's right.
	It was an improvised, I don't know, edible device, I guess.
	IED still works.
	A U.S. immigration agent has testified he could feel through his ballistic vest the impact of a sandwich hurled at him by a Washington DC protester who has gone on trial for assault.
	You could not pay me enough money to be this guy to show up and be like, this sandwich will we hook, guys.
	This sandwich hooked my feelings and my body.
	Customs and Border Patrol agent Gregory Larimore told the jury the snack exploded all over of him.
	He could smell the onions and the mustard on his uniform.
	This poor man.
	No one has ever suffered like he has.
	The funny thing is, I'm playing the video.
	It's wrapped in paper and it doesn't appear to come unwrapped when he throws it.
	This video is truly one of the funniest things I have seen.
	Just the way the guy runs away and they all chase after him.
	It is like a cartoon moment.
	I mean, I guess it just slips apart a little bit on one end, but for the most part, stays together.
	Even that doesn't matter.
	Whether the sandwich is intact or not, you can't see any mustard on the guy's vest, whatever.
	But just look at the way this man is running.
	He is obviously drunk.
	He just, it is almost, it is cartoon-esque.
	It is absurdist.
	We have.
	I don't even know if I have the words.
	What?
	How would you describe that?
	It's something.
	It's truly something.
	He could smell the onions and the mustard on his uniform.
	He could smell them.
	The improvised edible device.
	Neither side disputes that Sean Dunn, 37, did in fact lob obscenities and a deli-style sandwich at officers deployed by President Donald Trump to patrol the nation's capital in August.
	But Mr. Dunn's lawyer argues it was not a criminal act.
	What is the charge?
	Assaulting an officer with a meal, a succulent sandwich meal.
	The incident was captured on video and went viral, making Mr. Dunn a symbol of opposition in Washington, D.C. to Trump.
	Government prosecutors initially tried to secure felony charges against Mr. Dunn, but a grand jury declined to indict him.
	This is the level of absurdity we are at.
	They need to specify this was a club sandwich.
	That makes it far more dangerous.
	Kev, it has to be taken seriously.
	This was a threat.
	What if he had a wheat allergy?
	You don't know.
	He could be gluten intolerant and you just throw a sandwich at that man?
	That's obviously a life-threatening scenario.
	We can't have that.
	And as such, it's a felony charge, but they said no.
	The grand jury said, ah, I don't think so.
	According to the charging documents, Mr. Dunn approached a group of officers at about 2,300 on the 10th of August, calling them fascists and shouting, why are you here?
	I don't want you in my city.
	What a waste of a sandwich, though.
	I would never.
	I would never.
	The court witnessed a reenactment from Mr. Larimore on Tuesday as he took to the stage to testify against Mr. Dunn.
	That's right.
	We're going to reenact the sandwich throwing debacle.
	You're going to have to.
	Did they get him another hoagie?
	Did he actually get to throw it at somebody else?
	Mr. Dunn, I'm going to need you to throw the sandwich in the exact same manner you did, please.
	The bailiff will play the part.
	Hit him as hard as you feel necessary.
	Mr. Dunn's lawyer, Julia Gato, said in her opening statement that hurling the sandwich was a harmless gesture that did not and could not cause injury, no matter who you are.
	You can't just go around throwing stuff at people because you're mad, Mr. Perrin said, according to the New York Times.
	Again, I'm not arguing that he should have thrown the sandwich at the guy.
	I'm simply arguing that it's not harmful.
	It didn't do anything.
	You don't get hit by a sandwich and die.
	Unless it's maybe one of those old Subway six-foot subs.
	Maybe then.
	Who knows?
	But this you would have had to drag me into court.
	If I was the guy that got hit with the sandwich, you would have had to have the KGB work me over in a black sight before I would agree to testify against somebody because he hit me with the sandwich and it wee-wee wee wee hurt.
	I would die first.
	I would never.
	I'm like, no, that didn't hurt.
	No, it's ass.
	What?
	You think that would hurt me?
	No, come on.
	I would die before admitting the sandwich hurt me and I need compensation for it.
	This man is a criminal.
	He broke my body.
	I am bruised and battered.
	They're coming after him for a salt and pepper.
	All right.
	Well, folks, it has been fun.
	I hope I wasn't too flippant.
	David will be back soon, probably Monday, given how he's feeling.
	But I will be here tomorrow to cover the dues and then give you more best of David Knight.
	Really do appreciate you guys.
	We thank you all for tuning in.
	Here is the best of David Knight, and I will see you tomorrow.
	All right, welcome back.
	And joining us now is Anthony Frida.
	He's got a new book that's coming out.
	We're going to talk to him about that: The Thought Crimes of Anthony Frida.
	And he's been very successful as an artist, and his art is full of very important critiques of what we see politically.
	He's actually had his art put on display at the 9-11 Museum and Memorial in New York City.
	And he's on the same page as we are, I think, about 9-11.
	His tenure with Infowars as an illustrator and writer fully submitted his place in the world of controversial alternative news.
	And he's been very vocal about his role in that space.
	And so that's where I got to know Anthony, as well as his work with Charles Salinti and Trent's Journal.
	So thank you for joining us, Anthony.
	Good to see you again.
	Great to see you, David, and thanks for having me.
	Beautiful set.
	Well, thank you.
	Thank you.
	Yeah, I always wanted to talk to you about your background here.
	And there's a whole other aspect of your background that I wasn't aware of now that you're getting into Christian art.
	And you've got a project with that as well.
	And a GoFundMe to help realize that project.
	But let's talk about your personal journey here.
	You began doing copy stuff for the advertising industry, and you began helping them to sell Joe Campbell.
	Talk a little bit about that and how you got from there to where you are now.
	Yeah, so it's quite a journey.
	I've been doing it for 40 years, so I'll give you the condensed version.
	But yeah, I got out of art school.
	I had this dream of becoming this famous, prosperous, thriving artist.
	And I just wasn't prepared.
	I mean, I went to Pratt.
	I had four years of training in art and painting and drawing.
	And I was pretty proficient, and I was pretty confident.
	But they really didn't train you how to make a living as an artist.
	So I sort of figured it out on my own.
	Oh, now I have to make a living doing this.
	So crossing that threshold from academia into the professional world for any artist is a scary time.
	I mean, I teach seniors now at FIT, and it's my way of giving back because I know how scared they are.
	So I try to sort of pivot that.
	And I think it's a scarier time right now than ever has been.
	I mean, we look at AI, and a lot of people are just content to throw a prompt at AI and take whatever it gives them.
	What do you think about that?
	How is that going to affect art?
	Well, I think it's going to be not just art.
	I mean, I think it's designed to create a post-human future where the robots do all the work and they work 24 hours a day.
	And I mean, the transhumanist elevator pitch or elevator to the hell pitch is that the robots do everything for us and we have the freedom to do whatever we want and they'll give us a basic unit of income.
	I don't think it's going to work out that way, but that's their utopian post-human, transhumanist future.
	Yeah, I had my class yesterday.
	The kids were crying.
	They were literally crying because they just went to school for four years to learn how to be an artist.
	And now anyone who has an AI program can do what they do.
	So it's very demoralizing to the creatives.
	But I mean, the same thing goes for the guys who remember they said to learn to code?
	Like, not anymore.
	Yeah, they're putting themselves out of a job.
	That's right.
	Well, the other part of it is, though, and I think we'll get to this when we get to where you are right now.
	The machine has no soul.
	It's going to put things together statistically.
	And it can copy and paste and throw things against the wall.
	And in a sense, it's a sophisticated version of a chimpanzee doing painting, right?
	And so there is still going to be a niche there, I think, for the human soul communicating truth and beauty.
	I think that's really the issue there.
	And that's what we have to focus on.
	And I think that that's going to be pretty obvious to people.
	You know, there's a lot of things that AI can do, especially, I think, in the art aspect, because it can hallucinate.
	And it looks like it's having a drug trip or whatever.
	And that can be useful in art or even in music to some degree.
	But when you look at the kind of, when I look at it for music, for example, the thing about AI is that you can't precisely get it to do what you want.
	You know, you can get like 80% there or 85% there, which is not good enough for art.
	As many people have said, art is never finished.
	It's simply abandoned.
	At some point, you've got to stop tweaking it and just go do something different, the next project or whatever.
	And I think that's the problem with AI.
	It just throws this stuff out there and people say, ah, that's good enough.
	I think there's going to be a qualitative difference that people will be able to tell that last 15 or 20% that is there.
	Yeah, I agree with you.
	Yeah, that's my hope.
	But I think you're right.
	Listen, our advantage moving forward is the robots don't laugh.
	They don't cry.
	They don't love.
	That's right.
	They're not connected to God.
	In fact, I think it's the opposite.
	I have this idea that just as the Holy Spirit is this unifying force and universal force of good and God, the obverse, the yin to that yang, is this unifying force of darkness, which informs and which has basically a cauldron for this AI to be created.
	And we're incarnating it by giving it prompts and giving it life.
	But that spirit is a dark spirit.
	And I sense that and I feel that.
	It's an anti-human spirit.
	I agree.
	So does Elon Musk agrees with you as well.
	He said, we're summoning the demon.
	Yeah, maybe we should pay attention to what he's saying about that.
	He knows that.
	Some of these guys who are atheists say there's something here that mathematics doesn't describe or define.
	So it's something beyond mathematics.
	So what's going on?
	They don't even know.
	The guys who created it don't even know how these systems arrive at the decisions that they make.
	To a certain point, it's called black box technology, right?
	It's opaque.
	But robots understand it.
	But they understand us, though.
	That's the problem.
	We don't understand how they do what they do, but they understand us.
	I mean, they have so much big data about humanity and what moves us and that influence us that it's a lopsided relationship.
	That's why it's such a good fit for the government because the government knows everything about us, but the government itself is, by design, a black box.
	That black box is labeled national security.
	We can't tell you.
	We'd have to kill you, right?
	Exactly.
	Yeah, so, I mean, I could talk about AI for hours, but let's go back to your story.
	You started working at an ad agency as you got out.
	Yeah, I was a young man, you know, young man.
	I lusted after money and woman, and I was in my 20s, and I became very successful working for Fortune 500 companies.
	And I was in advertising about 10 years, and I started to learn and see all the psychological tricks and manipulations, you know, informed by the ideas of Edward Bernays and his book, Papa Ganda.
	He was a master of mass psychological manipulation, right?
	And that was employed.
	He was contracted by the government and by aid agencies.
	It's a long story, but those ideas work because people respond positively to certain stimuli, negatively to other stimuli.
	We're pretty predictable animals.
	And once you break that code, you're trying to sell something and you're smart and clever, you can figure out a way to do it.
	But I got really turned off.
	I was working on the Joe Campbell ad campaign.
	And in those days, they were paying us a lot of money to do this stuff.
	And I was just enamored with the money.
	And I bought a condo in Manhattan.
	And I thought I was on top of the world.
	And then so I kind of got lost in that world of money and success.
	And then the FTC determined that our campaign was illegal because we were using cartoon camels.
	They said we were marketing cigarettes to children.
	So I sort of had a moral crisis.
	And I didn't become an artist to sell cigarettes to kids, right?
	And I said, you know.
	Maybe you can get a job for Pfizer because they sell poison to kids all the time.
	Well, that's later on in the story.
	So I had this moral crisis.
	It's come to Jesus moment.
	I said, that's it.
	I'm done with advertising.
	I'm not going to sell my soul to the devil.
	So I was still, you know, now I'm a young man in my 30s.
	I was pretty naive politically at that time.
	And I said, I'm going to work for the good guys, right?
	I'm going to work for the New York Times and The New Yorker.
	And I started working for all these mainstream publications as an editorial illustrator.
	And I worked for the op-ed page of the New York Times, which is like a premiere showcase for thinkers and for kind of like where the elite speak to each other.
	Sure.
	And I was, again, I was on top of the world.
	I'm working like the best place for an illustrator to be.
	And I was doing articles for them on a regular basis.
	And then I got to see how the sausage is made there.
	And the art director and the editor told me that every single word that goes through here has to be vetted by the State Department.
	And I said, I thought, you know, you're the fourth word.
	They said, that's like Pravda.
	What do you mean every word has to be by the State Department?
	They said, that's how it is.
	So my naivete started to, you know, unravel at that point.
	I started to become a little more educated by how the world really works.
	And I feel silly now saying that, but I thought the New York Times was this like beacon of truth and objectivity.
	I mean, I couldn't be more wrong.
	But so I got an assignment to do, it was an op-ed piece right before the Iraq war, penned by then Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
	And it was outlining all the lies that we know now that took us to that war.
	And I illustrated the piece.
	And then I had another moral crisis because I said to myself, my God, I went from selling cigarettes to kids to selling war.
	This is I didn't think I could do worse than that, but I did.
	So I had another time to question what am I doing with my life?
	What are my life choices?
	What do I really want to do with my skills and whatever gift God's given me and my passions?
	And I mean, I love to create imagery.
	It's like the only thing I'm good at.
	So I wanted to stay in that lane.
	So right then was about the time that these seminal alternative news sites started coming out, like InfoWars, and there was a few others and Trends Journal.
	And I reached out to them because I figured these guys are exposing the lies of the mainstream media that I used to work for and of the advertising agencies I used to work for.
	So I wanted to bite the hand that fed me.
	So I started working for people in the health freedom movement, people in the liberty movement, people in all these different movements, you know, people like you included.
	And I've been there ever since because I do think there are good people out there who are trying to get to the truth of the matter about all these issues and journalists and activists and filmmakers and writers.
	And I worked for a lot of them and they're my heroes.
	So and then politically, I was under contract for the RFK campaign when he was running for president because I believed in what he was doing and his work to expose vaccines and the dangers of pharmaceuticals.
	So I still have a hand in the political realm, but I'm basically working for people who I think are the good guys.
	I can sleep well at night now, David, because I think I'm working for people who are at least trying to tell the truth.
	It's not equivalent when people get fined for like the way they went after alex for what he said like the new york times and cnn tell lies of much greater magnitude every day and they're nobody gets sued and and by the way their lies lead to wars that kill millions of people their lies sell products that kill millions of people like and they're never held accountable and then um and they're not the difference between them and say what independent
	journalists do is that They're purposely trying to lie to you.
	They know they're lying to you.
	You know, it's one thing to make a mistake in the search for the truth.
	We're not always going to be perfect, but there's a big difference to somebody who's purposely knowing to lie to you, to hurt you and your children, than somebody who's just trying to figure out in real time what the hell is going on because it's very confusing.
	I agree.
	We've been lied to so much about everything that people become so skeptical that, you know, I think unfortunately it fosters this environment where nobody believes anything.
	And that's where we're at now.
	Nobody believes anything.
	So they come up with a hundred different theories of how Charlie Kirk was killed, right?
	Because nobody believes the official story.
	That's right.
	And we can never get to the bottom of anything because everybody has their own theory about what happened.
	And there's no universal truth anymore.
	We're in the post-truth age.
	And I think that's what truth is going to be the greatest, most valuable commodity in the future.
	Here's what you need.
	Here's the fundamental truth.
	Government lies.
	It always has, always will for its own interest.
	So if you understand that and come to whatever the government says or the official press says with a healthy dose of skepticism, I think that's the most important thing.
	You know, you mentioned the fact that you realize that they had to get the approval of the State Department for what they were saying at the New York Times.
	And of course, we know about Operation Mockingbird and the rest of this stuff.
	I thought it was really amazing, the disingenuous astonishment at the fact that Hegset openly said, well, you're going to have to get approval for anything that you release.
	I don't like that, but that's not anything that's really different.
	The only thing that's different about that is that they're going to own it and say it out loud rather than doing it behind closed doors.
	I had a friend who worked at the Pentagon and he worked for the side that was vetting movie scripts.
	If they liked your movie script, if it was complimentary of them and their agenda, they would give you access to military equipment that you could use to film your movie.
	If they didn't like it, you didn't get that equipment.
	And that might sink your movie because of the expense of trying to get that equipment.
	Otherwise, they'd provide it at a reduced cost or for free.
	So that kind of thing has been going along for a very long time.
	Yeah.
	I mean, I'm still surprised.
	I'm old enough to remember Frank Church, the church committee hearings.
	He had the receipts.
	He proved it back in the 70s.
	And nobody cared.
	It's like it did nothing.
	They just went back to business as usual.
	That's right.
	I mean, thank God for him and his work, but I mean, it really didn't do anything in the big picture.
	And all the stuff about the heart attack gun, as I've said before, that was really a distraction because the whole thing began because from their inception, the CIA and the NSA were spying on Americans without a search warrant, which, you know, takes us, we've been fighting that thing going up to 2012, 2013, Ed Snowden and all the rest of the stuff.
	So the result of that was still the result of the church committee hearings was the FISA Act, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which they then used to give themselves legal cover to do what they'd been doing from their inception, which was to spy on Americans without a search warrant, as Rand Paul says, spying on Mr. and Mrs. Verizon.
	You go to one judge in a secret court that nobody knows about, and you get legal cover to violate the Constitution.
	So they always turn this stuff to their own advantage.
	Well, yeah, and I was speaking to that subject.
	I worked, one of my heroes is William Binney, and I had the pleasure of working on a documentary about William.
	I met him, just a great guy.
	And I mean, he quit because he said the systems he designed to spy on potential terrorists would be being used to spy on everybody.
	Yeah.
	And that's against the oath he took, and that's illegal.
	And he said he's not going to do it.
	So what did they do?
	The FBI raided his house and arrested him under false pretenses and false charges.
	But yeah, so just get back to my journey.
	Yeah.
	So I'm going to lose track.
	After the RFK thing, I worked for him for a year, and it was a great experience.
	And I got to see just how dirty the Democrats are.
	I mean, the Republicans basically left him alone.
	You know, Trump would make some, you know, nasty comments now and then, but the Democrats actively tried to destroy him with lawsuits and moles and people doing dirty tricks.
	And it was a constant, relentless assault on him that it really opened my eyes again.
	I mean, I was naive again.
	Like, whenever I underestimate how evil these people are and how willing they are to be corrupt and to use the power they have or abuse any power they have in the courts, in the media, in academia, in tech, I mean, which they control those institutions, unfortunately.
	And it just, it sickened me.
	It sickened me the way they smeared him and lied about him and sued him and tried to play dirty tricks with ballots and just on and on and on.
	So then I got that made me realize that the battle isn't political.
	This battle is spiritual.
	So I wanted to move from the temporal plane into the spiritual plane of my work and come back to my Christian roots.
	I was raised a Catholic.
	And I had a personal experience with my fiancé started having seizures one night.
	We were watching, actually, it was the Obama movie.
	It was an apocalyptic Obama movie, Leave the World Behind, which turned out to be a foreboding title because my girlfriends were watching this.
	She says, my heart hurts, and I don't feel right.
	And I said, maybe it's anxiety from this Obama show.
	You know, screw Obama.
	Let's not watch this.
	It's upsetting you.
	And then she just went into seizures.
	And she was extremely healthy.
	She was extremely, there was nothing, no pre-existing condition.
	She just started convulsing and seizing and just went thousand yards stare and stopped breathing.
	And I'm not a doctor, but I think breathing is pretty important.
	And I didn't know what to do, David.
	I felt so inadequate and helpless.
	I had no idea what to do.
	Should I do chest compression or I'm looking?
	I didn't know.
	I didn't know what to do except to call 911.
	And I just held her.
	And she was in this state of a comatose state.
	I don't know if she was dying.
	I thought she was dying.
	And then she came out of it for a brief moment from this look of just terror and fear to this calm and this peace came over her.
	And she started laughing.
	And I thought, was this all a joke?
	But she's not that, she's not that kind of person.
	And she and she was laughing and her whole face, just in her whole body was just relaxed, and she was at a place of peace.
	And then she clinched back and went back into this convulsive state.
	Wow.
	And I believe, like, she went to the other side.
	I believe she was at peace with God for a brief period and that it just wasn't her time, or she just got sent back.
	I don't know, obviously, what happened, but it was extraordinary.
	Does she have any recollection of that?
	None, none of any of it.
	Your brain doesn't remember that stuff.
	Probably to protect you.
	But it was extraordinary.
	And it reawakened my faith.
	And that was a year and a half ago.
	And thank God she's healthy now.
	75% of the people who go through when she went through, it was a brain bleed.
	75% of the people die that happens to.
	So she was in coma.
	She had a long convalescence.
	But thank God she's healthy now.
	And it brought both of us closer to God.
	And it made me want to dedicate my work to the Lord.
	And every piece I do now is a devotion to God.
	Every stroke of my pen is a meditation, a prayer.
	And I want to lean into that as much as I possibly can.
	That's great.
	You know, before you came on, we were talking about what's going on in Canterbury Cathedral.
	And that used to be the basis for why people would make these elaborate cathedrals, was out of a devotion to God and wanting to honor Him.
	And of course, depending on what gifts He has given us, we can all have different ways that we can do that.
	And, you know, whatever your job is, you can always do it in a way that you try to honor God.
	And yet, what do you think about it?
	Did you see that story where they paid somebody to do graffiti on the interior walls of Canterbury Cathedral?
	Did you see that?
	Yeah, to me, it's worse than graffiti.
	It's like it's vandalism.
	But, you know, it's like, it's so funny because these things that were created in the so-called dark ages, they couldn't make those today.
	And it's because of what you said.
	It's because they weren't doing it for the profit motive, right?
	They were doing it for the prophet motive, you know, spelled differently.
	And that's the only way humans can create something like that.
	Your heart and soul has to be in it.
	I mean, you go into those cathedrals and you feel the presence of God.
	You feel the presence of the highest achievement humanity is capable of.
	And they did it in the so-called dark ages, like with none of the tools, none of technology we have.
	That's right.
	It's astonishing.
	And just the amount of time and human labor and life force and sacrifice and artistry and craftsmanship and skill that went into those things, just that alone is enough to uplift your spirit.
	They're uplifting edifices and monuments.
	And today we have monuments like the 9-11 monument, which is a black box.
	It's a hole.
	It's like a giant urinal.
	And you go to that black box memorial, and it's just like a spinning, sucking hole to hell.
	No light escapes.
	And it's just, there's nothing uplifting about it.
	I've had to say, you want to jump in and kill yourself and be sucked into hell.
	So that's the feeling I get when I go there.
	And I think in some ways it's appropriate considering that we know what happened there.
	But it's just the answer to everything, I think, is just we got to try to live like saints.
	I mean, if everybody lived to the better angels, the whole world would overnight become a better place.
	Everybody's trying to fix it.
	We're going to all these marches and protests and all this nonsense.
	And it's like, fix yourself first.
	That's right.
	If you fix yourself and you just be a good person, that's it.
	Don't lie, don't cheat, don't steal, don't hurt your neighbor.
	That alone, there'll be no more crime, right?
	Why would there be crime?
	Crime is based on the human doing something that he knows is sinful and knows is illegal and knows is wrong.
	So instead of trying to fix the world from the outside, you got to fix it inwardly.
	You know, get closer to God and understand that the infinite power and glory of God is not a separate thing from you.
	It's within you.
	That light is within you.
	And you just need to accept it and let that connection grow and become stronger with everything you do.
	And every good thing you do makes it stronger.
	You feel closer to God from every good thing you do, every good work you make.
	I agree.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, it's a very powerful sermon that they actually wound up doing as a lecture as to what is wrong with our society, I think.
	Because when you look at the graffiti, not only did they go into a place that was beautiful and uplifting, and they essentially tear it down with their ugly stuff that they put on it.
	And the ugliest thing about what they were putting on there with their graffiti was what it actually said.
	It was a rage against God and his creation, every bit of it.
	And that really kind of shows us where our society is.
	So the Church of England is still setting the foundation for England.
	It's just setting a satanic foundation that is there.
	Oh, absolutely.
	That's satanic.
	I mean, that's a purposeful defilement.
	It's like putting the cross upside down.
	Everything they do is an inversion.
	Like the pentagram, the original five-pointed star was supposed to represent the five wounds of Christ.
	And so the Satanists inverted it and turned it into the pentagram.
	So those symbols are very important and imagery is important.
	And they know that.
	And they use it to their satanic purposes.
	Yes.
	And the defilement of God and the dishonoring of God.
	And we see the result.
	Just look around you.
	I mean, it's like there's demons everywhere.
	And there's demons in high places and low places.
	And a society rots from the top down.
	I think it starts with these people who just who designed these so-called utopias for us, like the AI post-human utopia.
	I think they hate themselves, the misanthropes, and they project their hatred, self-hatred onto humanity.
	And then if they can destroy humanity, they can somehow destroy the parts of themselves that they hate, like in a Jungian shadow sort of.
	I agree, yeah.
	Especially when you look at the transgender stuff.
	The purpose of that is to take very young, impressionable people, or maybe even somebody who's an adult and that's very impressionable, like Christopher Beck, who was a Navy SEAL that they pushed into becoming a training.
	But it's to train them to hate their body, to hate themselves, and then to engage in self-mutilation.
	And so I think that is truly the satanic aspect of it.
	Tell us a little bit about your project, Jesus Park, that you're working on.
	You've got a GoFundMe attached to that as well.
	But tell us about that.
	I think we've got a picture, Lance, that you can show the audience of that.
	Freefunders, I just started.
	Yeah, I had this dream, this vision, David, of this park in this beautiful sort of pastoral natural setting with trees and rocks.
	And I've done a lot of imagery of Christ, and I wanted to create the face of Christ out of all natural materials, like his crown of thorns would be actual trees.
	So the scale would be enormous.
	His face might take up a half acre or more.
	But it'll be a place of contemplation, a place of prayer, a place of peace.
	And for me, it'll be a labor of love and a devotion to God.
	And they say it came to me in a dream, a download, and I just feel like I have to make this thing.
	And well, I'm still young enough, which might not be my money.
	So that's what I'm working on right now.
	And I do need some funds to realize it.
	Talking to some churches that have land and trying to find the right spot for it.
	But I think it would be an incredible, lasting monument and shrine, really, that I hope that people can enjoy.
	And so you'd be able to see the picture that we got.
	That'd be like an aerial view that people would be able to see.
	Yeah, so large scale.
	In my vision, I've done models of it.
	And it's, I mean, if it's on a slight slope, you should be able to make out his face from the ground.
	But you won't be able to get the full picture until maybe from a drone shot or something like that.
	But you'll be able to see what it is.
	And it looks great in my dream.
	I just have to make it.
	You haven't got a site for it yet, but are you angling for any particular geographical area that would have been a matter of time?
	Yeah, I live on Long Island, and there's this beautiful shrine out on the east end of Long Island called Our Lady of the Island.
	And they have, I think, about 100 acres of land, and there's a beautiful 20-foot marble sculpture of Mary.
	There's an outdoor church that I go to there.
	And it overlooks the Great South Bay.
	It's just an incredible spot.
	And they have a lot of land there.
	So I reached out to them.
	I don't know if it's going to work out, but there's a lot of logistics involved.
	So it's going to take some planning and a little time.
	But I'm determined.
	So if I have to, at some point, just buy a small piece of land, maybe upstate New York, you can get inexpensive land.
	Whatever I have to do, I'm going to make this happen.
	Yeah, that's great.
	Well, you know, in Tennessee, land is fairly cheap, and they have a lot of unusual sites for people to come see.
	So you might get a lot of traffic there if you put it further south.
	But that's a good idea.
	I don't know much about it, but I'll take it right down to Tennessee.
	Why not?
	Yeah.
	Instead of people going to see Rock City, they can see the Jesus Park that's there.
	Where can people find the GoFundMe?
	How do they find that?
	You can find all of my thought crimes on it.
	If you go, just AnthonyFrida.com, Anthony F-R-E-D-A.com.
	There's links to all my projects there.
	Okay, good.
	And your book is not out yet.
	Is it?
	Thought crimes of Anthony Frida?
	Is that out yet?
	No, that's not, but that was the title was inspired by an actual crime that happened because of my artwork.
	I did a book cover for C.J. Hopkins, who wrote this book, The Rise and Fall of the New Normal.
	And I did a takeoff of The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, that cover, and I put the COVID mask with the little with a swastika barely visible behind the mask, the COVID mask.
	And they decided to charge him for disseminating Nazi propaganda in Germany.
	And he was facing like a years in prison.
	Yeah, I remember that.
	Yeah, so that was my book cover.
	And all he did was tweet that cover to get to get indicted.
	So that's a literal crime that I've been involved with as an accessory.
	So you can't use the symbols of the Nazi regime, but you can act like Nazis, and that's okay, right?
	No, right.
	No, but it's selectively enforced because, you know, there's Stern and magazines in Germany, they'll show Trump in full Hitler regalia all the time.
	That's just, that's fine.
	And if it's used for the purposes of the left, they get a pass.
	And CJ is not even a right-wing guy.
	He's just one of these guys who is a skeptic.
	He questions everything.
	So it's kind of ironic that they're using this illegal subversion of their own laws, which is something the Nazis would do to prove that they're not Nazis.
	There's a lot of ironies there.
	But anyway, he has this ongoing legal battle with them.
	And in Germany, they don't have double jeopardy like we do.
	So they charged him and he went to trial and he was acquitted.
	And now they're going to charge him again with the same crime.
	Just kidding.
	They can keep coming until they get the verdict they want.
	Wow.
	Wow.
	And it's not a new incident of anything.
	It's for the same exact thing, right?
	Well, we just had somebody that was arrested here in Tennessee for a meme that he put up.
	And they got him in a $2 million bond to get him out of jail.
	And again, it was because, and we see this kind of censorship is going on both the left and the right.
	This was about the fact that this guy didn't like Charlie Kirk or conservatives.
	And so there was a school that was going to have an event to honor Charlie Kirk.
	And he put up a meme that he didn't even create, that other people had created.
	It was a picture of Trump, and it was a quote about what Trump had said about a school shooting.
	And it said, we got to get over this and move on.
	And so he put that up as his comment about the Charlie Kirk shooting.
	And because the place that he did it was something like Perry, Idaho or something was where the high school was, where the shooting had been.
	And this was in Perry County.
	And they said, well, you were trying to intimidate people here in Perry County by using this meme that you didn't even create.
	And so the sheriff arrested him for that.
	$2 million bail.
	We're seeing free speech attacked everywhere.
	Every country, every political philosophy is coming for speech because especially when we're looking at memes or political commentary like you do, it's very, very powerful.
	They wouldn't be coming after it otherwise.
	Yeah, definitely.
	Well, I'm pretty certain he's going to win that lawsuit because that's outrageous.
	I'm used to censorship and I've been, I mean, I know you've been through it too, just constantly de-platformed and demonetized and D this and D that.
	And by the way, everything that I was censored for, turns out I was right about.
	That's right.
	I was right about all of it.
	Every single thing I said was mostly about COVID.
	And then I'm also fairly certain I was put on a domestic terror list because Biden had a list of anyone who questioned the COVID narrative was put on a list.
	And I would high profile about that.
	So, I mean, I'm considered a potential violent, they use the word violent, potential violent domestic extremist terrorist if you were questioning COVID.
	That's right.
	Yeah, because they say that, you know, speech is violence.
	And I say, no, censorship is violence.
	And the people who use and enforce censorship are the ones who usually do resort to violence one shape or the other, you know, like arresting this guy.
	The sad thing is, is that you see that both sides of the political spectrum, and I'm talking about not just the politicians, but I'm talking about the grassroot people, are cheering this kind of censorship if they don't like what you have to say.
	We have lost the understanding of the importance of free speech in our society, and that includes America.
	It's not just in Europe, but it's in America as well.
	People don't realize that these tools of tyranny will be used against them eventually and have already been used against them in many cases.
	And they still are cheering this on.
	It's truly amazing.
	I don't know how to get around it.
	Yeah.
	I don't know.
	I've never seen the country so divided.
	There's no room.
	That's why, you know, the Charlie Kirk thing was so symbolic because if you're not going to talk, you're going to kill each other.
	And people were that, it's like because they don't want to talk.
	They want to kill.
	And what is that?
	I mean, if you, I know you're a great student of history.
	Like, where does this go?
	It goes one place.
	It's called civil war.
	That's where it goes.
	This is nothing new.
	We've seen it thousands of times before, all throughout history.
	When there's a divide of this extreme nature where there's no communication, you're either good or evil.
	You're either with me or against me, it leads to civil war.
	I mean, I don't know how close we are to it, but unless something radically changes, which I don't see any evidence of, we're in some perilous times here.
	I agree.
	I agree.
	Yeah, we've lost our foundation.
	We've lost our foundation in terms of the principles that made the West great.
	And we've lost our foundation because we turn our back on God.
	That's what we were talking about earlier.
	And that truly is the foundation as the Lord Jesus Christ.
	And once we turn away from that, we are adrift as a society.
	And so even though we used to have guns everywhere, now the guns are being turned on each other and being used on us.
	And there's a lot of different aspects to it.
	I think the heavy use of drugs is a part of that.
	I think that even plays a role, actually, in the technocrats.
	I had been told years ago that when these guys would go hang out at the Burning Man thing, that they were dropping LSD and they were also taking, what was that, DMT or something, where they come in contact with machine elves.
	And the interesting thing about this is that you hear from the same people who are in different geographical areas.
	They start talking about how they had the same types of encounters.
	And they're channeling technology from these entities that they're coming in contact with.
	And you can have people in radically different places that have the same experiences that are there.
	They even call them psycho-knots, not nuts, but nuts, like an astronaut or something.
	So that's interdimensional travel, I think.
	I mean, they're opening a portal to hell, for lack of a better word.
	I mean, this hell's another dimension.
	Heaven's a dimension.
	Our plane is a dimension.
	And those drugs somehow, I don't know how it works.
	I can't even come close to explaining it.
	But It makes the veil between the dimensions permeable.
	Yeah.
	And they're able to permeate it with these substances.
	And it's a dark energy.
	And we're seeing it.
	And that's connected to the whole AI thing we were talking about before.
	Yes.
	And these drugs are facilitating it.
	And you're totally right.
	But the other thing is, when you turn away from God, I mean, Deepak Chopra said you leave a God-shaped hole.
	So what do you fill that hole with?
	You're going to fill it with drugs or porn or woke is something or Satan.
	You know, it's like it has to be filled because that's part of our human makeup that we have to have something to believe in.
	So if you don't fill it with God, the alternatives are anti-human and they're satanic and they're dark.
	You're taking something that should be filled with light and you're filling it with darkness.
	That's right.
	Absolutely.
	Well, you know, it is kind of interesting.
	I use this quite a bit to attack the pharmaceutical companies.
	I'd call them pharmakia because that's the Greek term that's used in the New Testament.
	Frequently was transferred, translated as sorcery.
	Because people would include these lucinogenic drugs as part of their spiritual experience and that type of thing.
	That's a very old thing.
	But also, it talks about how the pharmakia and the great men of the world would not repent of their murders.
	That's how I was using it for the pharmaceutical companies.
	And I thought it really fit.
	But that really is what we're seeing.
	And with all the technology that we've got and all of this idea about how we are so scientific and materialistic and we don't believe anything unless we can measure it, well, that we have seen over and over again is simply not true.
	The people that we disagree with are more than willing to pursue by faith a lot of different things, whether you're talking about the climate change agenda or the pandemic.
	They accept a lot of stuff on the basis of faith.
	It's just what they have faith in.
	They have faith in these institutions.
	They have faith in people who have credentials that say that they're a scientist or an authority in something.
	So it's just a difference in what they have faith in.
	But I think it's very important what you're doing in terms of artwork.
	That gets to people on a different level than just talking to them straight about the facts.
	You know, whenever we can engage the emotions, and art does that, and movies do that, and Christians are starting to learn to use the tools of movie making.
	And so I think there's going to be some very important work that is done there.
	But gradually the Christian movie industry is picking up.
	But I think there's so much that's been lost in terms of artwork that would move people.
	I think that what you're doing is very important.
	Well, thank you, David.
	Yeah, and speaking of film, I started working with a film production company.
	I think you're right.
	The answer is to create a parallel ME economy that is in accordance with our values and the values of Western civilization and Christendom, and things that we have faith in, things that we believe in.
	And a lot of it's been sort of kind of hokey, kitschy stuff up to this point.
	But we're trying to create with Man Alive Media Group, this group I'm working with.
	Right now we're working on a film about World War I. We're going to do a film about Joan of Arc.
	And we're trying to make them very high-minded and to the best of our ability, great pieces of art.
	Because you're right, art speaks on a different level than just it's a conversation, different kind of conversation.
	It's like, you know, poetry or prose.
	It's like it's something that engages our mind in a different way and hopefully opens up our mind to this conversation.
	But we have to be able to talk and censorship is the enemy of all of us because Then we're not talking.
	And if we're not talking, we're probably shooting each other.
	Because we make peaceful change impossible.
	We make violent change inevitable, as Kennedy said.
	That's right.
	And I think it's very important.
	You know, for the longest time, Christians have retreated from the arts, and they feel like the best way to engage people is with a didactic aspect.
	And of course, there's value in that, but there's another way to reach people, and that is by showing them, you know, and portraying as a narrative.
	I just talked to the author of Flags of Our Fathers, who's just done a book on Vietnam.
	He spent 10 years in Vietnam talking to people there.
	And his name is James, was it James Bradley?
	I think it was Bradley Radley.
	I'm sorry, I can't remember his last name, but very interesting guy.
	And when he did this book, you know, his previous books were non-fiction.
	But he wanted to do a fictional book because he said there were so many facets and so many different things that he had to use fictional characters to bring them together.
	And so not only does it engage our emotions more so if we have a narrative story, but it also allows us to pull together the relevant things in a way that we couldn't if we had to stick to exactly what the true story was.
	And Hollywood knows that for the longest time.
	He'd go see something based on a true event.
	They always change it, always begin.
	This is based on a true story, but the actual characters are fictionalized and so forth.
	They always do that.
	And so I think it's good, the kind of projects that you mentioned there, we're talking about people living their life according to Christian principles.
	I think that's probably the best way that that can be done rather than going in to the Bible and then fictionalizing that.
	That always kind of rubs me the wrong way.
	Trying to rewrite it.
	Yeah.
	It doesn't have to be didactic or so blatant.
	Like, I mean, there was great Christian authors, you know, Tolkien and C.S. Lewis, and they were coming up with their own mythology to sort of mirror Christian themes without, you know, saying literally this is Jesus and this is what happened.
	That's right.
	So, you know, Christianity to me is the myth that's true.
	Yes.
	But we need to create alternative myths to reinforce that myth to bring people to us because it's just so boring to just tell the same story, even in brilliant filmmakers' hands, like it's been done, and it's just going to turn a lot of people off.
	But if you do it in a way that's creative and original and interesting and unexpected and entertaining and edifying, now it's something different.
	Now it's a work of art on its own, not just pastiche and not just biblical scripture translated into film.
	That's right.
	I remember the film critic Brian Gadawa, and he actually was able to do a film.
	I think it was called To End All Wars.
	I'm not sure about that, but it took place American Soldiers and Japanese prison camp during World War II.
	But his whole idea is that very much like, you know, I think it was C.S. Lewis who said that the Christian myth is the greatest myth and it's real.
	He doesn't mean that it's fictional.
	He just means by myth, he means an epic story.
	And so that was kind of Brian Gadawa's take on it.
	He said, you know, every one of our really the stories that really resonate with people always have a redemptive arc in the story.
	And he did a really good job with that.
	And he also would kind of draw that out in his film reviews that he did.
	But that, I think, is something that, you know, we're not going to be able to fight a culture war if we don't have culture, someone said.
	I think that's exactly true, right?
	We're going to steal that line, David.
	We're going in unarmed, right?
	I mean, yeah, it's stating the obvious, but yeah, I mean, we got to make, listen, you know, it's on us, you know.
	Yeah.
	I think it's incumbent upon Christians, people who are means, people who are creative, people who have talent or something to give, like, put it towards the cause because the other side certainly is, you know, the Satanists and the demons and the war lunatics and the Islamicists and the Marxists, like, they're all on board.
	You know, you just watch Netflix and there's messaging in every single thing they do.
	Oh, yeah.
	It's all anti-Christian, anti-male, anti-white, anti-American, and it's just, I mean, it's so ham-fisted, but they shoehorn it into everything.
	A story that has nothing to do with what they're talking about.
	They'll shoehorn it.
	You know, white people are bad.
	What does that have to do with the comedy I was watching?
	So, you know, we could do it more artfully.
	There's so many great artists and writers out there that are Christian, and we need to come together and build these teams.
	And that's what I'm trying to do in my own little way.
	That's great.
	So best place for people to find out how they can get your book when it's available and also to find out about the Jesus Park, if they want to get involved in the GoFundMe, would be to go to your website, AnthonyFrieda, and that is F-R-E-D-A.com, right?
	Is that the best way for them to find you?
	Anthony, it's always been great talking to you.
	I only had a chance to meet you once, and that was up at Gerald's event four years ago and his Occupy Peace thing.
	And so when I saw that you had a book out there, I was like, oh, yeah, I'd definitely love to talk to Anthony about that.
	You've got a great story to tell.
	And it's been a great journey that you've been on.
	I really want to thank you for the work that you have done.
	It's been very important.
	And look forward to a lot more to come from you in the future.
	Thank you so much for joining us.
	Thank you, David.
	All right.
	Thank you.
	Before we run out of time, let me get to some of the comments that are up here.
	And as Lance, my producer, said, Jesus used parables and analogies.
	That's right.
	So we're following in the right way when we use those type of things as well.
	It's one of his favorite ways to get a point across was to use a parable, a story about something.
	And in most cases, I think there was at least one or two that were not fictional, but they were all giving a story there.
	And so Crash and Splash 75 says average lifespan of lithium miner 30 years.
	So enjoy your battery.
	I said, like a lot of these things, cobalt as well.
	Cobalts are being cobalt is being dug out of the mines by young children operating at slave wages and a situation that kills them.
	So yeah, that is we have to understand that's behind a lot of this stuff.
	Car insurance is now higher to pay for than battery burns, says Jolson's.
	And Guard Goldsmith, good to see you, Guard.
	Liberty Conspiracy says last year, the very U.S. Government Bureau tasked with promoting EV travel banned EV bikes and scooters from being brought into their Colorado building for fear of fire.
	That's right.
	Jason Barker, nice to storm.
	Good to see you.
	He says AI is good for memes, but not for real art.
	Meme, images, and music.
	And that's really what it does.
	I mean, a meme just kind of picks up on a theme and imitates it.
	And that's precisely what AI is.
	But the real danger of AI is not that it's going to become some self-aware skynet thing.
	I think the real danger is that it is a very effective tool for pulling together data and for doing searches and surveillance that can be used to control us.
	That's really where the devil is in that detail.
	Thank you so much for joining us.
	Have a good day.
	Making sense. Common again.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	This is an article from RT, and it kind of goes into the philosophy of Alexander Dugan, if you remember him.
	The guy that they say is Putin's Rasputin, or Putin's brain.
	He is a philosopher.
	His daughter was assassinated.
	They were trying to get him.
	And I had the opportunity to interview him when I was at Infowars, which is kind of a strange interview.
	I wasn't quite sure where the guy was coming from.
	This was at the beginning of the Trump administration.
	And at that point, there was a lot of enthusiasm amongst general Russians thinking that, well, this is great.
	We're not going to have the Russia, Russia, Russia fear anymore.
	We're going to normalize relations with Trump.
	He even had, if you remember, a small town named a street after Trump temporarily until Trump showed that he was on the same team with these people.
	But as part of that, there was a guy who used to work for Fox News, and he contacted InfoWars because he was now working with a TV network in Russia.
	And he said they'd like to get Dugan on.
	I was the one that they had interview him.
	And unfortunately, I wish I had had the time to read his book.
	I didn't know about his book.
	I didn't understand that.
	I was looking at some other articles about it.
	It just came up very quickly.
	But he wrote a book talking about the fourth approach.
	And when I interviewed him, it was kind of strange because I perceived this guy as coming from a more traditionalist, almost a czarist nationality because a lot of stuff they talks about is very nostalgic for that period of time and that type of thing.
	So I thought, this is a guy who's anti-communist, and maybe this is why they want us to interview him.
	And so when I asked him, there was some talk at the time.
	Some of the people were saying, we've got to get Lenin out of Red Square.
	You know, they've had his decaying body there in Red Square since he died.
	I don't know, maybe we're getting close to a century ago.
	And so there's some people who wanted to move his body out there.
	And so I asked him about that.
	He goes, oh, no, no.
	That's part of our history and we honor it.
	And it's like, okay, where's this guy coming from?
	He likes Lenin and he likes the czars.
	He's all about culture and history.
	And so he sees all that as playing into a cultural history.
	And his view is that instead of having a philosophy, a political philosophy, an economic philosophy that can be used for world domination, we need to have the world set up with multiple cultural and ethnic diversity, really.
	It's real diversity that we're talking about, real multiculturalism, where you have national, cultural, ethnic identities, and people are operating in their own interests.
	In other words, what we had before this kind of globalism.
	And when you look at the three philosophies, communism, fascism, liberalism, liberalism, meaning what we have in the West, you know, and I guess really that kind of liberalism, which is not really about liberty, but that's how they try to sell it.
	And so in all of these, they have all resulted in governments who seek to have global domination because we understand that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
	And they can never have enough.
	These people who are in political power are just like the billionaires.
	You could be a billionaire, you could be a trillionaire, and it still won't be enough of these people.
	They always want more.
	And so you can be the leader of the world's largest country, richest country, most powerful country, and you're always going to want more.
	You're going to want to be the leader of a region or a leader of the entire world.
	And we see this play out.
	It's just human nature.
	And so this is an interview that RT had with a guy who is co-founder of Austria's identitarian movement that believes that liberal Europe has lost its way.
	So what is the identitarian movement?
	Well, it's about nationalist preservation, cultural, ethnic, national identities.
	And so this guy was inspired by Alexander Dugan and his fourth political theory.
	And it is, again, like I said, liberalism, communism, fascism.
	But then he puts out a he envisions a world of multipolarity, a world of distinct civilizations with their own culture values that rejects universal ideologies.
	But key to all this is that he sees it as being led by Russia.
	He thinks that only Russia can lead this.
	Also, when I talked to him, it was kind of interesting, his view of America as just being a successor to Great Britain and its sea power.
	And so he saw a continuity of sea power versus land power.
	Russia, of course, being land power, China as well being land power.
	But the American and British tradition was one of sea power, which led them especially to being able to do global domination economically.
	And so he sees Russia as the only counterweight to this kind of Western globalization.
	Markovic is the guy that they interviewed.
	He's moved, he said, beyond a single focus issue on immigration, turning instead to a broader philosophical program that champions Eurasian unity, a sovereign European civilization, and resistance to the West's rule of deceit.
	Today he serves as a Secretary General and press spokesman for an institute that was named after a famous Russian military commander.
	So this is a Vienna-based organization founded in 2014 to promote Austrian-Russian dialogue and to safeguard Europe's cultural heritage, he says, from liberal globalist erosion.
	So you can imagine he's got a big target on his back here with the Austrian government.
	And we have seen that the Austrian Nationalist Party, even though they won the election, the last election, all the other parties got together because a multi-party election, nobody's going to get past 50%.
	So you've always got to have a coalition.
	Well, as we saw in France and with the Nationalist Party that's there, all of the other parties set aside all of their differences over everything else.
	And the communists, the socialists, the liberals over there, they all united against the Nationalist Party to make sure that it didn't form a government.
	So it's in opposition.
	Which also went to show you just how little difference there is from the liberals, the socialists, and the communists.
	They're all interchangeable.
	They're all for the exact same thing.
	France is the same as it was before that happened.
	That's right.
	That's right.
	He's been branded as a Russian agent because he is working for a Russian institute that is there.
	You probably take that as a compliment.
	He is a devotee of Alexander Dugan's fourth political theory.
	And for him, the struggle is existential, a battle for Europe's soul in the face of unipolar collapse.
	He envisions a continent that is reborn through faith, tradition, multipolar solidarity with Russia.
	In his view, Austria can either remain a compliant satellite of Brussels and Washington, in other words, the EU or the U.S., or reclaim its historic role as a bridge between East and West.
	The choice, he warns, will determine whether future generations inherit a sovereign European civilization or a museum piece.
	I would describe it more as a cut flower.
	The problem with Europe is far more fundamental than any kind of political or philosophical issue.
	It is a cut flower because these people have cut themselves off from the vine, the vine of the Lord Jesus Christ.
	They want the fruit of a Christian society, but they don't want Christ.
	That is the fundamental issue.
	And it is not about political theory, the fundamental issue.
	Culture and politics, all that stuff is downstream from your relationship with God.
	And it's not something that you can even operate yourself.
	If you shake your fist against God, he's going to shake your country back.
	And this is, I think, what we're seeing here.
	Western media often labels you as far-right and as a Russian agent.
	Is this just a smear campaign to discredit multipolar voices?
	He says, yes, without question.
	In Austria today, any Christian who openly declares belief in God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit is branded far-right.
	Anyone questioning NATO's expansion since 1991 or calling for an end to arms deliveries to Kiev is accused of being a Russian agent.
	Even communists and socialists are smeared with the same labels if they criticize fascism in Ukraine or Western involvement in the Maiden coup.
	Conservatives who affirm biological reality, that there's only two sexes, are attacked just as fiercely.
	If advocating peace and a multipolar world order makes one a fascist, then half of Austria would qualify under these absurd definitions.
	He says that they asked him, do you believe the West's unipolar dominance is collapsing?
	Yes.
	Since the so-called war on terror began in 2001, the West has been in a permanent state of crisis.
	And this is by design.
	It was an inside job to create a permanent state of crisis.
	COVID was the other shoe to drop, as I've said many times.
	The migration crisis, the financial crisis, now the war against Russia have all accelerated the breakdown of Western unipolarity.
	He left out COVID, which I think is really huge.
	That was a massive global strike against us.
	9-11 was targeted towards America.
	But COVID was really a global agenda, same type of thing.
	This collapse, though, he said, offers hope.
	The end of liberal totalitarianism.
	Think about that.
	It looks at first like it is a contradiction in terms because, you know, if you think liberal, I think classical liberal.
	But I think that truly is liberal totalitarianism is what we're really seeing here.
	Yet it also brings danger as governments may adopt ever harsher measures to cling to power.
	The fall of the West is inevitable.
	The only uncertainty is how and when it will conclude.
	So they asked him, is the conflict between Russia and the West really about Ukraine or the clash of civilizations?
	He said, it is a class of civilizations.
	As Samuel Huntington predicted, the West is fighting the rest of the world to preserve its dominance.
	On the opposing side stands the BRICS nation.
	And this multipolar order and what we see them trying to do with BRICS really flows out of Alexander Dugan's philosophy here.
	He said, our goal is not a global 1984, but the great awakening of all people.
	Now, look, this all sounds wonderful, doesn't it?
	Just remember, we're talking about politicians here.
	They always come up with some grand scheme that sounds wonderful.
	The communists had a great marketing plan as well.
	Austria has fallen victim to a globalist enforced conformity.
	They even have a German word for it.
	And they have abandoned their sovereignty.
	Restoring that sovereignty is essential if Europe is to exist as an independent pole in a peaceful, multipolar world.
	Europe is in the midst of cultural suicide, ruled by decadent, liberal, globalist elite that despises God and worships wealth.
	This elite promotes gender confusion, endless wars, and mass migration while ignoring collapsing birth rates.
	He says, Russia must be willing to aid in Europe's re-Christianization.
	I just don't think that they are the model that we need to see.
	And again, he talks about the Freedom Party that's there in Austria, how they were blocked after they won the election.
	And as we said before, in France, even as Le Pen's party trashed them in the European elections, and then the first round of the French elections, they gained even more votes.
	And in the second and final round of the French elections, they picked up even more support.
	So how was it that they crashed from first place to third place?
	It's because Macron and all these other political parties, regardless of what their stated political philosophy was, they agreed that they would look to see who, in every region, they would say, which of our parties has the strongest candidate?
	And we will have all the other parties drop out and throw their support behind that candidate in order to oppose the National Party.
	That's the game that they played.
	Here in America, we've only got two parties to start with.
	And these guys are playing the game of gerrymandering.
	So it operates a little bit differently here.
	And you're always going to have a winner in a two-party thing.
	So we form our coalitions before the elections instead of after the elections.
	It is the political parties that are going to determine who the candidates are.
	That's why it was such a big deal when Mike Johnson went to this meeting with Jewish elites and said, we're going to police out people who are opposed to you out of the party.
	They can make sure that you don't win.
	And even if you run in a primary, they can utilize their forces to run everything against you.
	And that's the way it's done in the U.S. instead of done after the election with the coalition.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Welcome back, and joining us now is Eric Peters of EricPetersAutos.com.
	Always great to have Eric on.
	He is focused on liberty and mobility because you can't have one without the other.
	It's kind of what Jefferson said about life and liberty.
	He said the hand of force can destroy life or liberty, but cannot separate them.
	Of course, he said disjoin them, but that's a little bit stilted bar language.
	But it definitely is true.
	And you cannot disjoin liberty and mobility either.
	So I always enjoy Eric's take on things.
	Eric, I was sad to see that you're, we were just talking about this over the break.
	You wrote a piece three days ago.
	You said, our Charlie, what happened in your family?
	Well, yeah, it's a tough thing to talk about.
	I hope I'll be able to do this well enough.
	But we had a had about a two and a half year old mixed-breed German Shepherd Lab.
	And, you know, he's been my companion for that whole time and just a very big presence in our life.
	Anyway, he got hit by, I guess, a car or truck.
	I'm not sure exactly which.
	And it was really jarring because as anybody who's been through having a pet die knows, it's one thing when your pet is elderly and old or sick, and you, you know, you understand that it's going to happen and you have time to prepare for it.
	But, you know, with a young pet like that, to just be gone instantly, just like that, is what happened.
	Really difficult.
	And, you know, boy, for the last several days, this happened on Friday.
	I've been having deja vu, you know, at certain times of the day, like, oh, I better put water in Pace's bowl, or, oh, it's time for us to go for our run.
	I went for a run on Monday.
	And, you know, one of his things that he would do, he would carry around, he was a strong dog, a big log in his mouth, and he would keep it in his mouth for a mile or more on our run.
	You know, it was just one of his things.
	And as I'm running by myself, which was strange, I saw one of the logs that he dropped off on the trail, and it just really, I'm sorry, kind of really, I'm being overly emotional about it.
	So I apologize.
	No, no, I understand.
	Absolutely.
	I understand.
	It's, like you said, it's the suddenness of this.
	And I think that's one of the things that really magnified what happened to Charlie Kirk.
	But I think, you know, when we look at it and how they have taken his legacy and they have flipped it completely opposite of what he was known for, what he ought to be remembered for, they're doing everything they can to make a saint, a celebrity, whatever they're.
	And in Oklahoma, they want to put a Charlie Kirk statue on every university campus.
	I think the right way to honor him is to support free speech.
	But it seems like the people who agreed with him and who followed him want to do just the opposite of that.
	They want to attack free speech, and they think this gives them an opportunity to do what they know the left was doing to them before.
	What do you think about that?
	Particularly Trump.
	Did you happen to catch the interview?
	It was a couple of days after Kirk's assassination, and I wish I could remember who the journalist was.
	It was a woman.
	And, you know, she was asking Trump about the calls to suppress what they called hate speech.
	Now, it's interesting that Trump, all people on the right, is now doing exactly what they excoriated the left for doing during the 2024 campaign season.
	And it was one of the reasons why people voted for Trump, because they were tired of having their differing opinions framed as hate.
	That's right.
	Hey, I've got a question.
	Oh, you're hateful.
	We can't discuss that because clearly you're a Cretan and you're motivated by malicious motives rather than, hey, I just have a question.
	Anyway, this female reporter asked Trump about that.
	And Trump had the egregious, vulgar gall to say something like, well, Charlie Kirk doesn't, he may not think that way anymore.
	I can't remember the expression.
	Yeah, that's exactly what he said.
	We played that clip.
	Yeah.
	She said Charlie Kirk said there's no such thing as hate speech.
	Well, he probably wouldn't say that now.
	You know, that's basically despicable.
	Because again, everything that whether you agree with what Kirk had to say or not, I think the one thing that has to be universally acknowledged is that he was willing to debate.
	He was willing to discuss practically any topic, including even Israel lately and the influence of the Israeli government over the American government.
	And I think that's ultimately what got him into trouble.
	Trump demands lockstep adherence and even worship of himself and his policies.
	And he does it in a manner that's just so abrasive and insulting to the people who support him.
	This latest business of doing the Parking Break 180 on Ukraine.
	Again, it's another example.
	If people had been aware that he was going to do that in 2024, I doubt many people would have voted for him.
	One of the reasons, strong reasons people voted for him was we are sick of all these wars.
	We're sick of being forced to finance it through our taxes and thereby be complicit in it.
	The mass murder in Gaza, we want no part of this stuff.
	It's got to stop.
	That's one of the reasons why people voted for him.
	And now this brazen guy just says, well, we're going to back Ukraine.
	And not only that, he's saying that Ukraine has a right to not only seize back every territory that it's lost, but potentially even more than that.
	Yeah, take some back from Russia.
	Exactly.
	It's madness.
	How do they think that this is going to be received by Putin?
	What do you think Putin's response to this is going to be?
	I wouldn't be surprised if he amps things up because he believes that he's got a narrow window of opportunity now to finish this situation before boots go on the ground, potentially American boots.
	That's right.
	Yeah, he's taunting Putin, saying he doesn't have much of a military.
	He could have finished this off in a couple of weeks.
	You know, like we finished off Afghanistan, right?
	In a couple of weeks.
	I was having a conversation with a friend of mine who stopped by yesterday about this, and we got to talking about Putin versus Trump and the difference between a serious person and a clown.
	Now, whatever you may think of Putin, you don't have to say that you like him.
	That's a childish argument.
	It's not about whether you think he's a nice man or a bad man.
	He's a serious man.
	He's a serious person with serious credentials who is not an idiot and who understands history.
	And look at Trump.
	What do we have?
	We literally have a clown going up against a serious person, a dangerous clown.
	I believe he was installed for that very reason.
	He even had his first Commerce Secretary, William Wilbur Ross, who said that it was the Rothschild Bank that he was working for.
	And he said, when Trump was going bankrupt, he showed up and he saw this big crowd around him.
	He said, I contacted the Rothschild people and said, hey, this is somebody I think we could use.
	I think that's exactly what they're doing.
	They're using him as a clown.
	They're using him to divide people.
	They're using him to create chaos.
	I think that's his role.
	And also a distraction and maybe the worst kind of distraction imaginable.
	As everything falls apart internally and potentially, let's say the Epstein thing percolates up again, or we find new details about what may have been involved in Kirk's murder that could have incredibly damaging repercussions.
	What would be a perfect thing to get people's mind off of that?
	Well, perhaps a big war in Eastern Europe would do just that.
	That's right.
	And that's what I have this creepy feeling may be in the works.
	And I think he's absolutely capable of it.
	You know, you look at what he's doing with the, trying to make an excuse that he can blow up ships off of Venezuela without even stopping them or verifying that they're running drugs.
	And as I pointed out, at the same time that he's saying this is an appropriate response and JD Vance is saying it's appropriate.
	Marco Rubio and Pete Hegseth are all saying, oh, this is what our military is for.
	No, it's not.
	We had our military was stopping ships, inspecting them.
	If they find drugs, they would take the drugs.
	They would arrest the people.
	They didn't line them up on the side of the boat and machine gun them.
	And so this is an extrajudicial killing.
	I told the audience earlier on the program, I said, Dutarte did this in the Philippines.
	He said, you know, if you think it's a drug dealer, shoot to kill.
	And he's now in the International Criminal Court, and they're looking at him for those extrajudicial killings.
	It's a crime.
	It's a war crime that he's doing.
	So he's perfectly capable.
	It's a psychopathic elaboration of that old, if you see something, say something.
	Now, if you see something, kill something.
	These are acts of war, and they're also the acts of a coward bully in that Venezuela.
	It's just another example of big old Uncle Sam throwing his weight around and extrajudicially killing foreign nationals outside of the United States with impunity because we can do it.
	What's Venezuela going to do about it?
	That's right.
	I think at some point, Trump is going to whack the wrong guy.
	And Putin could be just the guy who's the wrong guy to whack.
	That's right.
	That's right.
	Yeah, it's very concerning.
	He even escalated saying, yeah, we should shoot down Russian jets if they get anywhere close to the borders and things like that as well.
	It's a dangerous time that we live in.
	Of course, it's very much like the Chinese curse, isn't it?
	May you live in interesting times.
	There's never a shortage of things to report on.
	It's like, and now for something completely different from Trump than he said yesterday.
	You know, it's like Monty Python.
	I'm glad you brought up China.
	I needed a break the other day, and so I was just watching some random YouTube videos, and I was watching some videos of depicting scenes in China around, for example, their train stations and their airports, their infrastructure, which is immaculate and modern.
	I looked at their bullet trains and I compared it with what's going on in this country.
	You know, China is actually concerned with China and trying to build up its own internal society and improve itself where it seems that the U.S. is deindustrializing and rapidly descending from second to third world status, you know, to the extent that we can actually see the change from day to day.
	Yeah, and it's by design, and it's by the same people that are running Trump, even though he pushes back against the climate MacGuffin that I call it.
	Still, it's the deliberate deindustrialization of the West.
	And there's two sides of that.
	They want to deindustrialize the West while they give China the advantage in terms of manufacturing.
	And the huge advantage that they have is in terms of energy cost.
	But as Gerald Slinty has said many times on this show, he said the business of China is business.
	The business of America is war.
	And that's not serving us well.
	Yeah, destructiveness.
	I saw something also related to China that talked, it was a person talking about how in China the oligarchs, the really rich people, kind of do what American oligarchs did in the late part of the 19th and early 20th century when they did things like the Carnegie Library.
	They funded these vast things that were good for Americans.
	Leaving aside the question of corporate oligarchs, at least they put back into the country.
	Whereas now the oligarch class in this country just flaunts its gratuitous, egregious theft wealth, with one $20,000 McMansion after the next and yachts and lavish lifestyles thumbing their nose and rubbing our faces in it.
	Yeah, yeah.
	And they make it clear, you know, when you look at somebody like Henry Ford, who had his issues, he wanted to make sure that his workers could afford to buy the product that he has.
	Who's going to buy these products when they replace all of us with robots?
	That's what their goal is.
	They will replace everybody with robots.
	And I said when Trump did his tax cut in 2017, because it was all targeted towards corporations and he was going to incentivize them to bring to onshore manufacturing, I said, that's not going to happen until they've got the robots to replace the workers.
	I said, that's why they've got the open border immigration.
	And once they have robots to that point, they'll get tough on immigration.
	And they will pay these oligarchs a lot of money to bring factories back, but it's not going to bring back any jobs.
	They're just going to be incentivized to build the factories.
	And they'll brag about the fact that they've got manufacturing in the United States, but they won't be using it to raise the standard of living of anybody.
	And I think that's really what is happening and what is going to happen.
	I think so too.
	And I'd like to focus in on something that you mentioned, which has to do with that word about owning things.
	You know, they're not concerned about that.
	It's not that they're, you know, oh, well, how are people going to be able to afford these $50,000 vehicles that they're pushing out right now?
	They know that the end goal is for you to not own the vehicle.
	Exactly.
	The end goal is for you to rent the ride, to rent everything, sort of the way that you pay for a streaming service so that you can watch TV.
	That's what they want, serial debt.
	They want to completely disconnect us, the typical average American, from owning anything in order to control everything.
	It isn't like they didn't tell us.
	They constantly say, you will own nothing, right?
	Yes.
	And I thought about you this way.
	That's why I wanted to get you back on because I thought, yeah, I haven't talked to Eric for a while.
	I saw that Porsche was having problems.
	And Porsche, of course, owned by VW.
	And the two of them are having to pull back because they can't sell their EVs.
	And I remember I said, and I talked to the audience, I said, yeah, Eric's been saying this for the longest time.
	They should have hired him as CEO of Porsche.
	They wouldn't have had this issue because you knew, and of course, common sense would tell us that they have a huge advantage, these companies that have been making internal combustion engines for a long time.
	They had a huge advantage to China or to other potential competitors.
	That had to be destroyed by saying, no, now we can't use internal combustion engines.
	We're going to have to do the skates of the EVs.
	And China's got the advantage with the battery technology.
	They've also got now a manufacturing advantage in terms of cheap available energy.
	Energy is so expensive.
	In the UK, they're shutting down all their manufacturing.
	And in Germany, it's very expensive.
	They can't be cost competitive with it.
	But now they're saying, hey, we're going to have to pull back a little bit.
	We've malinvested billions of dollars in the EV industry.
	Nobody wants these things.
	Nobody's buying it.
	So now we're going to have to pull back and try to have a cottage industry of maybe being allowed to sell some internal combustion engines.
	But it's going to break the back if it's even allowed of these, if they even allow them to sell a few boutique things to the rich.
	It's still going to break their back.
	It will.
	And this is a general problem.
	Stellantis, which is the parent company of the Dodge, Ram, Jeep, and Chrysler brands, announced about a week ago that they were not going to produce the electric version of the Ram 1500 pickup that they had planned to bring out in 2026 because they understand that it would be a disaster, that nobody's going to buy it.
	And so rather than just build these things and then shipping them to dealers where they're just going to sit and then having to give them away at fire sale prices, which is what Forbes had to do with planning, they figured his smart thing to do is to cut bait.
	They've practically destroyed the Dodge brand already by getting rid of the engine in the charger and getting rid of the Challenger altogether and replacing it with this electric charger, which has been an epic flop.
	I mean, it is even worse than the Edstock disaster back in the 50s.
	It hasn't been remarked on, but I mean, it's that bad.
	They can't sell these things.
	I have yet to see one in the wild.
	I have yet to see one on the road.
	They haven't even sent me one to review yet.
	Because it's not just that they're short range and all the other problems that electric vehicles have.
	It's not well made.
	It's a problematic, problem-prone vehicle that suffers endless glitches, such as bricking, to the point where they have to send out a technician to try to figure out why it won't move.
	Now, the other thing is that you brought up, I find this endlessly fascinating with regard to Porsche and these other manufacturers that are no longer run by car people, because any car guy would tell you that a Porsche, there are intangibles when it comes to a car like that.
	It's not just about how quickly it goes to zero to 60.
	That's right.
	They fatal error in thinking, well, we'll just basically produce a Tesla that looks like a Porsche, essentially, and somehow we'll sell that, failing to understand that one of the big reasons that people buy Porsches is because they love that six-cylinder boxer engine and they love the sound that it makes and the emotional visceral feeling that you get that is lost entirely.
	Electric vehicles are fundamentally homogenous.
	Say what you will about, you know, oh, well, they're quiet and this and that, but they're fundamentally, when you drive one, you've driven them all.
	Yeah.
	You know, some quicker than others.
	And don't they, does Porsche and some of these other sports car companies, when they make their EVs, do they take the Tesla approach in terms of instrumentation?
	Because that's one of the things that is also a part of the feel.
	You know, how do the controls feel?
	Does it feel solid or chintzy?
	I hate the idea that I've got to use a touch screen while I'm driving.
	How is that safe?
	You know, you're not supposed to use hands off of your phone or we'll give you a ticket.
	But hey, it's a wonderful thing if we take all the controls, even on a Tesla, you can't even adjust the direction of the air vents without using the touchpad that is attached to the dashboard.
	Yep, and they're all doing it now.
	Right now in the driveway, I have a brand new 2026 Kia Sportage, which is a nothing special little crossover that stickers for about $28,000.
	And it's got a full-width single-sheet L C D screen for everything.
	You know, the main instrument cluster.
	And then off to its right is the thing that you have to tap and swipe through in order to operate functions such as changing the station that you're listening to.
	And you're right.
	And it's just an illustration of how disingenuous the government is.
	Because on the one hand, they say to people, oh, you can't use your cell phone while you're driving because it's dangerous to be looking at your phone and swiping and tapping a screen while you're trying to drive.
	You can't keep your eyes on the road.
	But it's no problem if you build the thing into the car.
	It's okay.
	We need to have some controls that I have to take my seatbelt off in order to use, right?
	Yeah, so one of the, you know, to get back to circle back to what we were talking about, the great disaster, in my opinion, and it's another one, is that this homogeneity of appearance in the interior of cars that has been bequeathed to us by this obsession with reproducing the smartphone in your car, the look of a smartphone.
	So now you've lost that individuality too.
	Instead of having this kind of neat array of gauges, a really good example of this.
	A couple of weeks ago, I had the latest Mini Cooper.
	And it used to be that one of the cool things about the Mini Cooper, which is owned by the Germans, it's owned by BMW, but nonetheless, was that they replicated the feel, the look, and the function of the 60s minis.
	You know, if you've ever been in one of the models, they had the cool little chrome toggle switches, you know, and it had that vibe to it, that feel.
	And it was like no other car.
	Well, they did what everybody else is doing, and they got rid of essentially all of the physical tactile controls, the switches and knobs.
	And in lieu of that, they put one gigantic pie plate touchscreen in the middle, in the center of the, and it looks cheap.
	It looks homogenous.
	And it's also, in a way, in my opinion, it's anti-human.
	It's antiseptic.
	It's cold.
	I think they shut down the last UK factory for the mini BMW did.
	Am I correct?
	I think they just shut it down.
	I'm not sure I'd have to look, but I wouldn't be surprised.
	I saw something because, again, you can't do manufacturing in the U.S. because Herr Starmer, the Nazi, doesn't want you to have any energy.
	So they shut it down.
	I don't think, you know, it was an article out of the UK.
	And they were saying, you know, this is something that was fundamentally British, as you pointed about, very idiosyncratic.
	And now it's not going to be made anymore in Britain because of the cost of energy that's there.
	Yeah, nothing survives any longer except the brand.
	You know, that's what you get.
	You get the label.
	But it's inside the box all the same.
	When you talk about the design of these cars and how we've lost so much of this, around this area, we're not too far away from Pigeon Forge.
	And last week, they just had a big classic car show.
	And that's when it really hits home.
	You know, when you see one of these cars, which you never really valued, I mean, it might have just been like a family sedan or something, you know, 50 years ago.
	But you look at it, it's like, wow, that's really quirky.
	That's kind of interesting looking.
	Look at those colors, you know, and all the rest of the stuff.
	Look at the colors.
	Look at the chrome.
	It really is entertaining to see cars that were just ordinary cars or ordinary trucks half a century ago, to see them and to see how different they were and how unique they all were.
	And so it really kind of drives it home here in the Pigeon Forge area.
	They have these car shows that happen frequently.
	The big one was last weekend.
	They had that.
	But you got some articles at EricPetersAutos.com about some of the difficulties of keeping these older cars running.
	Talk about ethanol blues.
	What's that about?
	Yeah, I have to, as the saying goes in the hood, cop to something, which is embarrassing for me because I shouldn't, of all people, this should not have happened to me.
	But I was lazy one day, and this is several months back, probably about eight months ago, when I was out driving my old muscle car.
	I have a 76 Trans Am.
	And rather than go all the way into town where they have a station that sells unadulterated pure gasoline, which is normally what I use to fill the car up with because it sits sometimes for, you know, I get preoccupied with work and other things.
	Sometimes the car, unfortunately, will sit for several months before I have time to drive it.
	Anyway, I filled it up with E10, which is only 90% gas and 10% ethanol.
	And I left it to sit.
	And it sat for about three months.
	God help me.
	I deserve to be beaten for that.
	Anyway, I went to start it.
	And boy, I barely got it to run and it was going smoke pouring out of it.
	And long story short, I ended up having to take the carburetor off the engine and completely disassemble it and clean out the ethanol gunk inside the carburetor because the fuel had gone bad over the time that I kept it in storage, basically.
	And this is a problem with these older vehicles because my car was made in 1976.
	And in 1976, when you bought gas, you actually got gas for your money, 100% gasoline.
	Most people don't understand that most pump gas is 10% ethanol alcohol.
	And if you own a vehicle that was made before that came into being, that vehicle was not designed for alcohol.
	Alcohol is a different fuel than gasoline.
	It has different properties.
	It attracts water, among other things.
	It's corrosive.
	Does it degrade faster than pure gasoline then, I guess?
	It does.
	That's what you're saying.
	But pure gasoline will degrade as well, right?
	But a much longer period of time.
	Yeah, anybody who has outdoor power equipment knows that the real problem is if you put ethanol in a gas jug, let's say, and you put it in your shed and leave it, it'll tend to accumulate water much more rapidly than regular gasoline.
	And you can also look at the color, the change in the color, you know, as it starts to go from almost translucent to sort of a yellow and then a darker yellow color, and that's a clue not to use it, by the way.
	Well, that's interesting.
	You also talk about oil and additives in the oil that are different now for the older cars.
	Oh, yeah, it's not just the additives.
	Again, to get circling back to the Trans Am, after I cleaned out the gunk from the carburetor and got it running well again, I recognized, oh boy, it's time to change the oil.
	So I went down to the auto parts store and I looked at the rack of oil.
	And the rack of oil is, you know, it's the whole width of the store.
	They have all kinds of different oil.
	But they didn't have any 1040 anymore.
	You know, and my car, when it was made, was designed to have 1040 oil.
	So that's what's specified, and that's what I use.
	There's a reason why there's a specification.
	And generally speaking, it's sound policy to follow what the specification is.
	Read the manual, yeah.
	Yeah, but you know, if you've been to it, if you've been to a car parts store lately and looked at the oil rack, you'll see all these exotic formulations, you know, zero W50, this and that, because they thinned out the oil because it helps with compliance.
	You know, this is, again, it offers the manufacturers this incremental friction reduction, which translates into slightly higher gas miles.
	Not anything you would notice as a vehicle owner, but when you factor it out over, say, half a million vehicles that you build, then it helps with corporate average fuel economy with the compliance with that federal requirement.
	And it also helps with emissions.
	And, you know, this is the obsession now that the manufacturers have.
	It's compliance.
	Their primary customer now is the government, not you.
	You know, you're sort of an instrumental person who comes along to buy what the government says you're allowed to have.
	That's right.
	That's right.
	Because the government will put them out of business if they don't please the government.
	And so that is their primary customer.
	In many cases, the only customer that they care about is the government.
	That's really what's going on with social media and with YouTube, I think, isn't it?
	It is.
	And so long story short, I ended up having to go online to find a good, high-quality 1040 for my old muscle car.
	Now, previously, I'd also had to go online to get, there's an additive.
	It generally is, it goes by the acronym ZDDP, and it's essentially a zinc manganese additive.
	And it used to be present in all the store-bought motor oils, but they began to take it out.
	And now there's much less of that additive in store-bought motor oil.
	If you have a new or late model vehicle, it doesn't matter.
	The engine was designed for that.
	But if you have an older vehicle, particularly an older American vehicle with what's called a flat-tappet camshaft, so essentially an American car made before the early 80s with a V8 engine typically, it's important that you use that additive.
	If you're going to be somebody to go, if you're going to go out and buy one of those classic cars from that era, it's something to be aware of.
	Because if you don't use that additive, you risk valve train failure.
	The camshaft and lifters in those engines were designed to have that anti-friction additive in it.
	And if you use regular oil, you're very likely to have a problem that you don't want to have.
	What about in the aftermarket?
	Let's say that you have some problems because you didn't have the right oil and fuel and things like that.
	How difficult is it to get parts for these things?
	I'm sure it varies depending on how rare your car is.
	But just something that's kind of in the middle or something, maybe like a 50s Chevy or something like that.
	Is it really different?
	Do they have much of an aftermarket for parts with that?
	Yeah, particularly with mechanical things.
	One of the great pluses of owning, say, a General Motors product or a Ford product from that era is that they shared mechanical things, engines.
	An engine, like a small block Chevy, was used in practically every model vehicle that Chevrolet made from the 50s through the 60s, 70s, and 80s.
	And so there is a robust and abundant aftermarket as well as used market for those kinds of parts.
	You'll have sometimes difficulty finding trim pieces for an oddball make.
	Say it was a one-year vehicle where they only had that grill for that one year.
	I have that issue because my 76 has a unique front end for that for that year.
	So, yeah, sometimes these cosmetic parts will be more difficult to find.
	But generally, if you pick a popular vehicle that was made in large numbers from that era, you're not going to have any difficulty finding the necessary parts that you have to have in order to keep the vehicle serviceable and running.
	That's interesting, yeah.
	Because, like I said, I certainly do see a lot of classic cars around here.
	Yeah, I guess if you had an Edsel and you got your horse collar grilled.
	So, you can keep that going.
	One of the great examples, a Volkswagen Beetle, you know, to this day, you can easily find any part that you need to keep a Beetle running.
	So, you know, that's a great choice if you just want a very basic, simple, completely analog, non-digital, non-data mining, non-connected car that anybody can service if they're willing to turn a screwdriver or a wrench and have basic hand tools.
	That's a great choice.
	Yeah, yeah.
	I know there's a huge aftermarket for the Mazdas, especially the first generation of Mazda that's out there.
	They're even doing full restorations, or at least were for a short period of time.
	I don't know if they are still doing it now.
	It's a couple of years ago.
	They were doing full factory spec restorations in Japan.
	They would do it in Japan.
	And the factory itself was doing it.
	Mazda was doing it.
	I don't know if they're still doing that or not.
	You got an article, and I'm reaching back now the beginning of August.
	Pontiacs were cool.
	I thought they were as well.
	I was just so amazed that when they decided they're going to get rid of an entire make that they kept Buick and got rid of Pontiac.
	I thought that was really strange because Buick was always perceived as kind of an older person's car or it was a family car, something like that, whereas Pontiacs had kind of a sporty panache to them, right?
	Yep.
	Well, there's a reason for that.
	For whatever reason, Buicks are immensely popular in China, and that's where they're built.
	Believe it or not, GM sells a ton of Buicks in China where it's considered kind of a status vehicle to have.
	And all the Buicks that they sell here are made in China.
	Is that right?
	Yeah, we used to use Buick.
	We used that as an euphemism for throwing up.
	Someone says in the bathroom selling Buicks.
	Now, what's really sad, though, with regard to Pontiac, and Pontiac's just one example of many, is that you had a once distinctive brand.
	In effect, Pontiac actually was literally a car company at one time.
	It wasn't a marketing company.
	It actually had an engineering staff and they engineered their engines, which were different than Chevy engines.
	So when you bought a Pontiac, you weren't just buying a rebadged Chevy.
	There may have been commonality of the underlying platform, but it was a fundamentally different car.
	I'll again refer to my own car.
	A 76 Pontiac Transam is a very different car than a 76 Camaro.
	Even though they share a common under thing, their drivetrains are different, and that makes it worth buying the Pontiac.
	You know, it's not that one's better or worse, it's simply that it is different.
	And GM actually allowed Pontiac for a great deal of time to be sort of the raucous, you know, go-get them brand, you know, that had performance and style and attitude.
	Kind of like what Dodge was before Stellantis ruined everything.
	They just had this great reputation for not just crude muscle cars, but cool muscle cars that had some panache to them, like Catalinas and Grand Prix and, of course, GTOs and everything, which were a little bit more refined than, say, something like a Chevelle SS, which is a great car, but it's not the same thing as a GTO.
	Right, right, yeah, yeah.
	And they just hollowed all of this out.
	And this was, by the way, I think the first wave of casualties from compliance.
	The reason that Pontiac ended up dying was because General Motors was under enormous pressure to try to figure out how to get these different brands, Pontiac, Buick, Oldsmobile, all their different divisions that had different engines.
	Each one of those engines had to be certified independently by the federal government as being in compliance with the stuff.
	That costs a lot of money.
	So, General Motors made the decision: well, what we're going to do is corporatize.
	We're going to just put Chevrolet-built engines in pretty much everything that we sell.
	They did this beginning in the 80s.
	And that way, they only had to certify the Chevrolet engine, which they could put in a Pontiac and a Buick and an Oldsmobile, which is what they did.
	But by doing that, they just gutted any reason for having a Pontiac or an Oldsmobile or even a Buick.
	All you're getting is a reskin Chevy with the identical drivetrain.
	Over and over again, I tell people: you know, the real problem with industry and manufacturing and innovation in the United States is the government.
	They are the biggest obstacle.
	They are far more destructive of jobs and manufacturing than any company abroad or any country abroad.
	All this stuff about tariffs is a misdirection away from the true source of the problem, which is government regulation.
	And even when they're talking about the housing crisis, some people are talking about how expensive houses have become because of government regulation.
	But the government's not talking about doing anything of that.
	They're talking about playing some financialization games in terms of interest rates or subsidies or this or that.
	But they're not going to do anything about the over-regulation and all the green mandates that are there.
	Trump will go to the UN.
	He'll say, you're destroying your country with all this green stuff and everything, but he won't take those regulations off of cars or homes so we can't have nice things anymore.
	That's correct.
	We have become, as a culture, so habituated to the government being involved in these things.
	And really, I think that's the bone of the matter.
	Why is the government involved in car design?
	A good example of this is the whole, I wrote an article about Ralph Nader a couple of weeks ago and the Corvair and his allegations about the Corps of Air being unsafe.
	This is a matter for the courts.
	If the car is unsafe, it's defective in some way.
	That can be handled in tort claims.
	That's the way these things ought to be handled.
	Instead of this broad brush, one size fits all of the federal government decreeing, you will have this particular safety standard.
	And it doesn't matter what side effects that safety standard has, even if it ends up being less safe.
	Good example of that being in the mid-70s, they imposed a roof crush standard on the industry.
	The vehicle had to be able to support the weight of the vehicle if it got turned upside down.
	So as a result of that, you've got these gigantic A, B, and C pillars.
	Those are the things that support the roof, the A pillars at the base of the shield, B in the middle, and C in the back.
	Instead of being, you know, these thin and graceful things that you could easily look around and you had this expansive view of the outside world around you, now you're essentially in a tank.
	You know, I drive new cars all the time.
	It feels like you're in a tank.
	You have essentially no visibility often to the right and to the left because of this enormous B pillar that's there to support the weight of the vehicle if you roll it over.
	But the problem is now when you pull out from a side street, you're likely to get T-boned because that thing creates that blind spot.
	You didn't see the car that was coming at you from the side.
	That's right.
	Yeah, I agree.
	You know, how did we wind up still being able to keep convertibles with that?
	I know I've got all my convertibles.
	I've got some really huge A-pillars on them.
	Very cleverly.
	Like, you know, with regard to some of them, you know, with Mazda, the Miati, as you know, they built a roll bar into the backs of the seats, basically.
	That was one way that they did it.
	And some of the manufacturers took that a step farther with pop-up roll bars.
	You know, Mercedes did that with some of their high-end convertibles.
	And they also managed to reinforce the structure of the windshield in a way that made it supportive of the vehicle if it were to roll over.
	But, you know, it's just the point is the government's involvement in this stuff is just so insufferably obnoxious.
	And to put a finer point on it, you know, we talk about the government as if it's sort of this entity out there.
	And I like to point out to people, what you're really talking about is a relative handful of micromanaging bureaucrats who are the weevils within these regulatory bodies.
	Go to the DOT or NHTSA, how many people work there?
	A few thousand.
	So you've got a few thousand people in these regulatory bodies who are dictating to 330 million people, you know, the design of the cars that they're allowed to have.
	Yeah, exactly right.
	And we have spineless politicians who let the bureaucrats rule over us and never do anything to push back against them.
	And that's by design.
	You know, they've offloaded this.
	They'll say, Congress in particular, they'll say, well, I can't do anything about it because the bureaucracy is responsible for this.
	That's right.
	But they're the ones that offloaded their responsibility under the Constitution to legislate.
	There's legislation and there's regulation.
	And regulation has the force and effect of law, yet it's not voted for, which means there's no accountability.
	You can't vote out of office an EPA apparatus.
	And they claim that they're not responsible for it, even though, as you point out, they delegate this to them.
	Then, you know, if something gets really bad and there's a huge outroar, uproar about that, then they can come in and say, okay, we're going to save you from these bad guys, the regulators.
	So it's a very calculated political ploy, isn't it?
	And I think we got, do we have a couple of comments or questions for him?
	Hey, Eric, good to talk to you.
	Travis here.
	We've got Citizen Cock says, Eric, he'd like you to speak on the fact they're trying to pass legislation so you're going to be able to insure a car that's over 25 years old, which is just utterly ridiculous.
	Because, of course, we know that 25 years ago, all cars were death traps.
	People were dying left and right.
	It's only within the past few years that the cars have become safe at all, and people can drive them without living in constant fear.
	Yeah.
	And along that same line, Eric, California just, you know, they wanted to, it's emissions, I think, that they had there, and it was like a 35-year moving average, and they were trying to adjust that a little bit, and they shut it down.
	It was a huge blow.
	It was Jay Leno's law.
	Maybe you heard about that.
	Purely, purely punitive and vindictive.
	Leno, I think, learned a valuable lesson.
	I think he, in his innocence, might have believed that rational considerations and reasonable considerations might cause the California legislature and regulatory APRAT to agree that, yeah, vehicles that are 35 years old constitute a very small minority of the vehicles that are in use as daily transportation.
	And so, yeah, we'll exempt them, as most states do, from having to go in from emissions testing.
	This is purely punitive because they want to push these cars out off the road.
	And it's particularly egregious in California because it's not even a matter of whether you pass the tailpipe sniffer test, you know, when you bring your car into the inspection station and they put the probe in the tailplate.
	And in most states, if it passes that, you pass and you get your sticker.
	In California, it doesn't matter whether you pass the tailpipe sniffer test, if any of the factory original emissions equipment has been tampered with, altered, or removed.
	Now, what that means, you're talking about the 35-year-old car, or how about a 50-year-old car?
	And maybe the original smog pump or EGR system had to be replaced because it's a 35-year-old vehicle, 35-year-old vehicle.
	Well, what if there is no aftermarket replacement?
	And more finally, in California, every aftermarket replacement has to have a California Air Resources Board number, a certification that it's been approved by CARB.
	So if it doesn't have that, even if everything works and even if the emissions are within spec, they will still fail the vehicle on the basis of failing the visual and not having the carb-approved replacement part.
	So this is purely, purely punitive and vindictive.
	And I do see this sort of thing expanding.
	They're going to start targeting smaller cars and they're going to say, we can't permit vehicles that don't have the latest advanced driver assistance technology to be on the road because of the threat that they present.
	And people are going to die.
	That's the sort of thing that I foresee that they're going to start doing in the next few years.
	Oh, yeah.
	Yeah, and it's kind of interesting too, because when I was doing modifications to Mamiata about seven years ago, the companies I was getting the aftermarket parts on, which were taking those parts that you just mentioned and pitching them completely.
	But they were based in California.
	And I thought, you know, this is kind of interesting.
	They can't sell their own product even at that time.
	Many of their things were not carb compliant and they couldn't sell them to people who lived in California, only to people who lived outside of California.
	But it's getting much, much worse.
	You know, you know, the common thread that runs through all of this is that there's no requirement that tangible harm be produced.
	In other words, a victim.
	A really fine example of this is the crucification of Volkswagen.
	And I revisited that issue recently in a column.
	It's been about 10 years now since Volkswagen got raked over the coals for cheating on federal emissions certification tests.
	And, you know, at the time, and even to this day, I continue to ask, well, who was hurt by any of this?
	The only thing that happened was that the government was affronted.
	You know, Volkswagen, like every other vehicle manufacturer, programmed its vehicles to pass the test.
	That's the whole point.
	They made it so they would pass it.
	And not only this is an important point, not just the federal emissions certification tests, nobody ever disputed these vehicles when they were bought and put into service and in states where people had to go to get emissions testing, you know, at the state level and get the tailpipe probe put in, they all passed.
	The only kerfluffle happened after this independent lab subjected the cars to an entirely different test that found that under certain operating conditions, oh my gosh, the vehicle will emit slightly higher, fractionally higher amounts of oxides of nitrogen, which is a regulated emission per EPA.
	And the amount was minuscule.
	It was literally a fraction of a fraction.
	In other words, something that was meaningless in terms of whether it was hurting anybody.
	It didn't matter.
	It was so draconian.
	You and I talked about this many times.
	It was so draconian that it was clear that it wasn't about what they said it was about.
	It was really about, as we said, getting rid of diesel.
	I mean, they had criminal charges against executives.
	It was something like $4 billion, if I remember correctly.
	It was outrageous what they were doing.
	We talked about that, how you didn't see anything at all like that with the Takata airbags that were blowing up spontaneously and killing people, or with the Pento, you know, and the deliberate exclusion of some devices that would keep that explosion from happening.
	So it was something that we'd never seen before, even when human lives were at stake.
	And there was nobody that was harmed by any of this stuff.
	Well, the reason why they did it, though, it wasn't just that it was diesel.
	It was that Volkswagen uniquely was selling a lineup of very affordable diesels as recently as 2015.
	You know, it's 10 years ago, not even.
	You could have bought a brand new Volkswagen Jetta with a TDI engine for about $22,000.
	Now, that little car had a 700-mile driving range and would get 50-plus miles per gallon on the highway and could probably be counted on to go for 300,000 miles or more.
	Now, it's a curious coincidence, isn't it, that around the same time the Volkswagen started getting raked over the coals over this emissions cheating thing, that's when the big push for EVs began, right around that time, 2015.
	And I think the reason that they went after Volkswagen was because they could not abide the comparison.
	You know, on the one hand, $22,000 Jetta TDI, 700-mile range, refill it in three minutes, keep it for 20 years, drive it for 300,000 miles.
	On the other hand, Tesla Model 3, $50,000 car that goes maybe 270 miles and is going to need a new $15,000 battery after eight years.
	It just would have been a harder sell.
	So they had to go after Volkswagen.
	I think, you know, if Volkswagen had continued making engines like that, other manufacturers would have started to do the same.
	In fact, Chevy did.
	Chevrolet, you could get a Malibu diesel for a little while there.
	And other manufacturers would have done it because it's appealing.
	I mean, I like the idea of a brand new $22,000 car that gets 50-something miles per gallon, 700 miles.
	Diesel is great.
	It's a wonderful option for people who want a durable, long-legged, long-lived vehicle.
	So naturally, they had to take that away from us.
	Yeah, it checked all the boxes in terms of competition with the electric vehicles, as you point out.
	It's like durability, reliability, affordability, range.
	It was all there.
	So it had to go.
	It really had to go.
	They've got an agenda.
	And they don't want you to have something that you can afford.
	They don't want you to have a long range because they want to keep you on a short rope with their smart city and their probably geo-fencing to make sure that you can't buy anything outside of your approved city and that type of thing.
	It's just amazing.
	It's a really important thing for people to understand.
	And it's a difficult thing to understand because the undercurrent of malevolence that's there is difficult for most people to come to grips with.
	But it's almost axiomatic that you cannot have an authoritarian system in which people are still free to move about as they like on their own initiative in their own vehicle, unsupervised, unmonitored, and uncontrolled.
	In order for them to impose a truly authoritarian system on Americans, they have got to get control over transportation and particularly personal transportation.
	And when you filter everything that's going on through that, everything becomes comprehensible.
	That's right.
	I tell people all the time, the TSA is a transportation security agency, right?
	It's not the airport security agency.
	And they want to eliminate the private vehicles so that everything becomes like the airport.
	If you like that, certainly you'll be able to keep that authoritarian government.
	If you like the authoritarian government, you can keep it or they'll keep it for you.
	With something like geofencing and the Teslas, they can just simply section you off.
	Say, oh, no, your car just simply will not go there.
	You try turning that way.
	No, we're going to autopilot you back into your safe zone.
	That's right.
	You're not allowed over here.
	You're not allowed to go this far.
	And you won't have enough range really to get out of there anyway.
	You know, it's a 15-minute city.
	That's about how they're going to be.
	I'm going to tell you how creepy it is.
	And it's incredible how blasé so many Americans are.
	They think, even if they're aware of it, they will say, oh, well, that would never happen.
	They would never do that to us.
	Yeah.
	You know, Eric, about 10 years ago, I went to an auto show in Texas.
	Long star roundup.
	Yeah, a long star roundup.
	It's a real big classic show.
	And I think it's got to be an American-made car, and it's got to be, they don't include the, it's got to be older than the Mustangs, older than 64, 65.
	There's a cutoff, right?
	So they didn't want to take it at that point.
	But there's a lot of modification to them and a lot of rat rods that are out there, you know, really grungy cars that people kept going and modified.
	I went around and I talked to all these people and they were all different ages.
	You know, people had cars that were 17 or 18 years old that they had fixed up up to people who were retirees.
	And I asked them all, do you think the government is going to make private cars go away and gasoline cars go away?
	Oh, yeah, they all said.
	And to a man, they pretty much all said, including like 17, 8-year-olds, it'll never happen in my lifetime.
	It's like, man, the disconnect that was there at that time was just, that was the most, you know, the cars are interesting, but the most interesting thing was how these people had lied to themselves about the government's intentions and its abilities to rob them of their mobility.
	It truly is amazing.
	The intentions were always there.
	I think the technology has made it much more feasible to fast-track things.
	They would not have been able to do what they had wanted to do for 50 years, back in the 80s, 90s, or even the early 2000s.
	But now, particularly within the last 10 years, they have now got the ability to utterly and completely control vehicles to a degree that most people would not believe until they have to deal with it.
	You know, I give various examples.
	One is the illusion that you have in a modern car that you're controlling how fast you drive.
	You're not.
	When you push down on the accelerator pedal, all you're doing is feeding data to the computer.
	You're not connected to the engine to a cable system and a throttle any longer.
	You're sending data to a computer.
	And the computer then is telling the engine, okay, increase the RPMs to a certain amount to give you the illusion that you're the one who's controlling the car.
	I had a Ford expedition a couple of weeks ago, and this is a big vehicle, big SUV, and I'm trying to back the thing up in my driveway.
	Now, I've lived where I live for 20 years.
	I know my driveway.
	There's a big bush at one side of my driveway.
	And I know, because, again, I've been doing it for 20 years exactly how far I can back up before I hit that bush.
	But the Ford slams on the brakes a couple of feet before I get anywhere near the bush because, again, safety.
	But, you know, dig down and to think about what that means.
	The vehicle can decide that it's going to stop.
	You know, contrary to your will, it's going to exercise control.
	And bit by bit, they're doing this.
	I had an article up the other day about this speed limit assistance technology.
	I love how they call it assistance technology.
	Like, you didn't know you were driving faster than the speed limit.
	And now the car is told, oh, thank you so much, car, for telling me that I'm driving faster than the speed limit.
	And, you know, first they try to shame you.
	There's a little icon that pops up in the dashboard that shows us a speed limit sign, and it goes red.
	You know, you're driving faster than the speed limit.
	And sometimes there's a chime that accompanies it.
	And this is weirdly standard now on all the vehicles.
	Why is that?
	You know, it's not optional for people who need assistance.
	If I need assistance, oh, I'd love that.
	I'll buy some assistance.
	No, they're making it standard because what they're doing is in classic Fabian socialist style, slowly bit by bit, you know, getting people used to this stuff.
	And the next step will be not just assisting you to know that you're driving faster than the speed limit, it will be preventing you from driving any faster than the speed limit by using the drive-by-wire throttle, by using the electrically controlled braking system to prevent you from doing it.
	And what they're doing with that is making driving such a, it's no longer fun.
	You feel like you're parented.
	You feel like you're a kindergartner again.
	And that's deliberate.
	They want you to just say, you know, the heck with it, why am I signing up for a $700 a month loan for the next six years?
	I don't even control the car.
	The car nags me and pesters me all the time.
	It tells me what to do.
	The heck with it.
	I'm just going to get my app on my phone and I'll tap it and I'll get my ride.
	That's right.
	Yeah, the comedian, British comedian Rowan Atkinson, who plays Mr. Bean, okay, he was an engineer before he became a comedian.
	And he's got a lot, he loves cars, and he's got a lot of very expensive hypercars.
	And he said, well, you don't really drive these so much as you manage them because there's so much drive-by-wire stuff in it.
	And I remember when Michael Hastings was killed, and I think he was killed.
	I don't think it was an accident.
	And he had rented a late model Mercedes when that happened.
	And he thought that people were after him with the government because of what he was reporting on.
	He'd had a lot of death threats from the government.
	And so he went out to his car.
	His landlady said he'd go out to the car and he'd look underneath it and all this other kind of stuff to see if there was some kind of a bomb on it.
	But when the computer is able to control your acceleration, your braking, your steering, and all these other things, it's very, very easy to assassinate somebody that way.
	And they have illustrated over and over again at the Black Hat conference in Vegas how easy it is to hack one of these cars as well because they're also online.
	So everything's under computer control, and it's also online.
	So any bad actor, especially the government, can jump into this thing and do whatever they wish.
	They can shut you down, or if they want to, they can try to make it look like it was an accident.
	This is the type of thing we've been seeing for a long time.
	Yeah, you had your article when you're talking about the insurance.
	When will people decide to stop paying?
	And you talked about the fact that you've got an antique car, you drive it 300 miles a year and you stay within about a 10-mile radius of your home in rural Virginia.
	And why should you have to pay insurance for that?
	That should be your decision for that.
	But of course, it is this corporate government fascism that we see over and over again, where they force you to buy their product, isn't it?
	It is.
	And now they are using insurance to price people out of vehicle ownership.
	Everybody, you probably have had this happen to you as well, has had their premium increase by, on average, 25 to 30%, and in some cases, 50% or more, for absolutely no reason having to do with anything they did in terms of having an accident, filing a claim, anything, or even a speeding ticket.
	You get the notice in the mail, and all of a sudden, your premium is double what it was the year prior.
	Why?
	Because they can.
	Because you don't have the option to say no.
	Imagine what a cup of coffee would cost if the government said, you have to go to Starbucks.
	You must buy a cup of Starbucks coffee at least once a week.
	We'd be paying $10 for a cup of coffee at Starbucks.
	That's exactly where we are, isn't it?
	That's essentially where we are with this.
	And I think we are getting to a point.
	I have my ear to the ground about things like this, and it's also my own personal opinion that everybody's feeling pinched because of the cost of everything.
	Everything is going up, and they don't include it in the evaluation of inflation either, do they?
	And so, you know, when it comes down to a choice between, you know, obeying the law and handing a check over to these insurance mobsters for a large sum of money that could be used to pay your electric bill or, you know, food for your family, what's the choice?
	Well, you know, probably a lot of people are going to say, you know what, I'm going to buy food for my family instead of sending this check to Allstate or Geico.
	Yeah.
	And so what?
	You know, I mean, the illegal aliens can, with impunity, because they can't get blood out of a stone, can they?
	You know, they don't have any assets to seize.
	So, and I'm not, I'm really, I'm not disparaging people who are in that category because I understand people are trying to improve their lives and all of that.
	I'm just trying to make the point that there are no consequences for those people.
	If they want to go out and drive without insurance and hit you and wreck you, they'll walk away from it and the state will do nothing about it.
	But you and I, we don't hit anybody.
	You know, we haven't caused any problems for anybody.
	But we didn't hand over the money to the mobsters.
	They'll cancel your driver's license.
	They'll cancel your registration.
	And if they catch you driving, they'll impound your vehicle and potentially arrest you for it.
	That's absolutely right.
	Yeah, you're absolutely right.
	That's the way it works.
	It's a two-tier standard already in many different areas that we got in this country.
	Well, we're at a time.
	It's always great having you on, Eric.
	Anything you want to tell us about what's happening with your website?
	Oh, well, nothing more than what's on there.
	You know, I posted an article this morning that's more of a thought piece about how we're all kind of in this bad marriage situation in this country.
	Yeah, Trump is the guy who has bad marriages.
	He specializes in that, doesn't he?
	Well, isn't it interesting that for the most part, most people will say, okay, if you have a situation where a couple just can't work it out, they're at odds.
	Nobody would say, well, they have to stay married and be miserable for the rest of their lives.
	People accept that sometimes marriages don't work and there's a divorce.
	It's not a happy thing, but it's better than forcing people who can't live together to live together.
	Well, politically, somehow, that seems to be off the table.
	Why is that?
	You know, we're at a point in this country with the left, right, and just people who want to be left alone chiefly versus those who won't leave people alone.
	Why can't we just figure out a way to peacefully separate ourselves and that way end this fractiousness?
	And just instead of going to blows with each other, and that includes blows at the ballot box and trying to constantly figure out a way to elect our guy to impose our will on the other side.
	How about we just figure out a way to go our own way and live and let live?
	The problem is that probably half the country doesn't want to live and let live.
	Yeah, I've talked about that.
	You know, if you look at the Scandinavian countries, they have split apart and joined together in various combinations many times.
	And, you know, they would peacefully join together, peacefully break apart, and there was never war over it.
	We don't have a government like that.
	You know, when Marjorie Taylor Green started talking about having a national divorce, I said, yeah, the problem is, is that we're married to an abusive spouse who, once he finds out that we want to divorce him, he's going to come kill us.
	I've got a picture that I recurrently use because I think it's very pithy and it says it all.
	And it's a picture of Abraham Lincoln.
	And the caption reads, if you try to leave me, I'll kill you.
	That's right.
	You know, the ultimate abusive head of the household.
	That's exactly the case.
	Especially in a country that was formed over the right of secession and self-government.
	That was the basis of America's existence from the very beginning.
	How could you deny that to somebody?
	I'm always all about secession.
	And I would say, if at first you don't secede, try, try again.
	That'd be my motto for everybody.
	It's a safety valve, and everybody should be on board with that.
	And of course, there is one other thing we can do.
	And people at 10th Amendment Center have talked about this a lot.
	There is another avenue of this, and that is nullification.
	That is kind of the middle point.
	You know, we say, well, we're just going to ignore what you have to say.
	So there is nullification and non-commandeering and short of, and that effectively can allow you to secede issue by issue if you've got people at the state level who have the backbone to do that type of thing.
	And that's the big if we don't, because they're all on the take.
	I don't think that we're going to get this country back until we have a catastrophic economic system that's going to destroy the ability of our government with U.S. dollars or reserve currency to just print money out of thin air.
	Until that disappears, we're going to have the same type of situation.
	We do have one power under our control, and it is to simply not participate, to opt out on our own.
	You know, with regard to new cars, if you don't want to be data mined and controlled, well, don't buy a new car.
	You know, eat the older car that you have, get an older car, fix it up.
	You know, during the pandemic, don't wear a mask.
	Don't go along.
	Don't comply.
	If enough of us as individuals, you don't have to join an organization.
	Just abide by and your own moral compass.
	And, you know, if this is wrong, I don't like this.
	I'm not going along with it.
	That's it.
	I'm just taking my stand.
	I'm not going to be a cattle and go along mooing with the herd just because that's what the herd does.
	Yeah, I've been thrown out of so many different places and restaurants in Texas.
	I had to move to Tennessee because I had promised these people I would never be back because of the way that they insisted that I wear a mask.
	And so I left then.
	I said, and I won't be back.
	And I kept my word by moving to another state.
	That's the only way I could do it.
	It's always great to have you on, Eric.
	EricPetersAutos.com, folks, a great site for liberty and mobility and a little bit of nostalgia now as well, because that's how the only way we're going to be able to keep our mobility is with classic cars.
	Thank you, Eric.
	Always great talking to you.
	Thank you, Travis.
	Thank you, Eric.
	Always a pleasure speaking to you.
	And before we go, ACSAB, thank you so much for that.
	We really do appreciate it.
	It says so awesome, DK and family.
	Thanks for everything.
	I wish I could do so much more.
	Well, thank you all for so much, ACSAP.
	Thank you.
	It really is because of your support that we're able to continue to do this, and we really cannot thank you enough.
	Thank you very much, folks.
	Thank you all very much.
	God bless you all.
	Have a wonderful rest of your day.
	Yes. 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.

▲