The David Knight Show - Wed Episode #2141: Blackmailed Government: Trump, Mossad & the GOP’s Epstein Panic

All Episodes

Previous Next

Nov. 19, 2025 - The David Knight Show

03:01:15

Wed Episode #2141: Blackmailed Government: Trump, Mossad & the GOP’s Epstein Panic

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's Wednesday the 19th of November, year of our Lord 2025.
	Well, yesterday there was a big vote, what people have been looking for for quite a while.
	And after they got the vote pushed through to have a vote, then it was overwhelmingly, nearly unanimous.
	Only one person did not vote to release the Epstein documents.
	What would be the point of that?
	And why did Trump flip-flop on all this?
	We'll take a look at that.
	We'll take a look at the reactions that are there.
	And we'll also take a look at the economic, the plans that the Trump administration has for fixing air traffic control, health care, and unaffordable mortgages.
	Just joking.
	There is no plan.
	There's nobody coming to help.
	You're on your own.
	We'll be right back.
	Stay with us.
	Well, it was a huge fight to get past the gatekeeper, House Speaker Johnson.
	And once they got past that and just narrowly squeaked past that, then they finally got to the vote.
	And people said, well, I think there's going to be a lot of people going to be crossing the aisle to vote with this.
	And it turned out it was 427 to 1.
	One guy does not, I would not want to be him when he runs for re-election.
	I don't know what's the matter with him.
	Clay Higgins, he's from Louisiana, another one of these crazy Louisiana politicians.
	No offense if you're in Louisiana.
	I know you probably didn't vote for these people, but still, how did we get Bill Cassidy, this handmade for Big Pharma, Mike Johnson, the handmaid for Trump and anybody in power, and this guy, Clay Higgins, who voted to keep the Epstein documents quiet.
	Well, this is what Massey had to say about it.
	I want to thank the generosity of Jim McGovern, Representative McGovern, for granting us this time.
	I'm embarrassed for my own party today.
	I'm embarrassed we withhold, withheld, signing in, swearing in, a duly representative of the people for 49 days just to avoid this vote that's finally going to happen today.
	I'm embarrassed that my own party isn't going to yield me time to debate this, even though they say they support it and I authored it.
	They don't even want to yield me time to debate this during the bill debate.
	But I'm thankful.
	Let me tell you who I'm thankful to.
	These three brave women, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Nancy Mace, and Lauren Boebert.
	They have been threatened.
	They have been intimidated physically, politically.
	It's disgusting.
	And not by the far left.
	They have been intimidated by people in our own party.
	And for what?
	Say it.
	We're seeking justice for these victims.
	So my hat's off.
	I congratulate them for standing strong.
	I've always wondered where were the Republican men during this battle.
	We've taken five months.
	These three women and I have had to drag our party to this floor today to even vote on this.
	And Roe Conna is the most to be thanked here in an extraordinary display of bipartisanship.
	He did not hesitate when I asked if we wanted to bring this bill to the floor together, if he would stand in the trenches with me.
	He said yes.
	And so the Trump and bot armies that are on social media attacking Thomas Massey.
	Oh, he's a grandstander.
	Oh, he's another Liz Cheney.
	No, he's not.
	As a matter of fact, I didn't put it in, but it's a great clip that somebody posted up, saw on Twitter, where it goes back to that encounter that he had with Jamal, I can't remember the name of the guy.
	He was rapidly pushing gun control, and it was a great shouting match, debate, if you will, but more of a shouting match in the halls of Congress.
	And Massey is very strongly for the Constitution for Liberty and other issues like that.
	Not Liz Cheney, not the Cheneys.
	But he also had something to say about Mike Johnson.
	This bill.
	He says that it was poorly drafted.
	It does not protect the victims as well.
	What do you say to him?
	Well, he's trying to say that rich and powerful men who were on the plane to Epstein Island are now victims, that they would be victims because their names would get disclosed.
	Like, look at his PowerPoint presentation today.
	He's creating a new category of victims.
	So I think that's how a Christian man can stand up there and say a lie like that, is he's got something in the back of his head that makes it okay.
	But if he had real concerns, he could have introduced his own legislation.
	Look.
	That's right.
	Yeah.
	Mike Johnson is just unbelievable.
	Anybody who is a Christian and identifies as a Republican ought to be embarrassed because of Mike Johnson.
	I have to put a caveat there.
	Okay, but Mike Johnson is not really what I consider when I talk about a conservative or a Christian.
	And then he was asked about the personal attacks on him by Trump, because it wasn't just Marjorie Taylor Greene.
	It wasn't just Lauren Boebert being summoned in and browbeaten by all of these people in the Trump administration, FBI, Department of Justice, and the Attorney General and the President all at once intimidating her, and she was not intimidated.
	What would you say?
	Just a personal nature of this.
	I mean, again, he goes after you, your wife, calls Marjorie Taylor Greene a traitor.
	He went after my late wife and my current wife.
	What do you think about that?
	I think it's a new low for him, but again, we laughed it off.
	It's more to his detriment than mine that he put something like that out.
	But I think it was beyond the pale.
	Absolutely.
	Yeah.
	That's the thing about Trump.
	He just keeps hitting newer and newer, lower and lower hits with all this stuff.
	And so one of the things I'm going to talk about once we get finished with this is the fact that it's another week, another terrorist.
	We got Mohammed Ben Salman, the clown prince, as Gerald Selenzee calls him.
	He's now fedding another Muslim terrorist, another head chopper that is out there.
	Of course, MBS didn't just stop at chopping heads.
	He chopped Khashoggi into all these little tiny pieces there.
	And Trump is fine.
	He says, well, a lot of people didn't like that guy.
	And, you know, things happen, whatever.
	How many times do we different data points do we need for Donald Trump to figure out what kind of a person, what kind of a quote-unquote leader he is?
	Congress overwhelmingly votes to release the Epstein files, sending the bill to Trump.
	It was Clay Higgins out of Louisiana, the only one in the House that opposed the measure.
	As soon as it head to the Senate, where Chuck Schumer requested unanimous consent to pass the bill, not a senator objected.
	So it was unanimous in the Senate, and it was nearly unanimous except for one person in the House.
	And again, wouldn't you think that would be the case?
	Aren't these people concerned about optics?
	Everybody understands how this looks if they try to hide this stuff, except for Trump and Mike Johnson and Clay Higgins, I guess.
	Why would they object?
	It's a lose-lose proposition.
	So it's almost like Trump is being blackmailed by Massad or something.
	As a matter of fact, when we look at this and whether or not the information is going to come out, I think that we're going to see that they put in a clause there.
	And that clause is going to keep any information from being released.
	And it is very interesting to see why that clause is there.
	We'll talk about that coming up here.
	It's time to put the political agenda and the party affiliations on the side, said an Epstein survivor, Haley Robson.
	This is a human issue.
	This is about children.
	But, you know, what Trump is going to do now is he's going to play the partisan card.
	And the other aspect of this, a lot of people say, why is Trump, you know, he was for releasing the files, then he was against releasing the files.
	Now he's for releasing the files again.
	Is it that they've sanitized it of all Republican stuff and he's going to focus on the partisan issue?
	That may be it.
	But I think it is definitely the fact that he didn't want to be on the losing side of the vote.
	I mean, he's been on the losing side of the issue and blind and deaf to that now for several months.
	But I think he finally realized that, you know, the thing that mattered to him was if the Senate was going to unanimously, by voice vote, push this through, and if it was going to lose in the House 427 to 1, I think Trump does not want to be on the losing side.
	One thing he's got to have, and that is clout.
	And he thinks that his clout comes from clobbering people.
	So Mike Johnson sought to spend his reversal on the bill as a push for transparency.
	He told GOP lawmakers to vote their conscience in closed-door meetings, and he accused the proponents of the bill of rejecting his offer of talks to tweak the measure, negotiations that they mocked as another obstruction tactic.
	The bill demands that the Justice Department release its case files on Epstein.
	A separate investigation conducted by the House Oversight Committee has released thousands of pages of emails and other documents from Epstein's estate showing connections to global leaders, Wall Street power brokers, influential political figures, and Trump himself.
	You know, the usual group of victims, as Trump would put it.
	After campaigning at, sorry, as Mike Johnson would put it, right?
	After campaigning on a vow to release all the Epstein files, Trump dramatically changed his tune last spring when Attorney General Bondi reportedly told him that his name featured prominently in the documents.
	Well, do we really need to know that?
	I mean, he was obviously publicly partying with the guy for 15 years, our best friends for 15 years, and wingman.
	The stonewalling campaign sparked widespread discontent within the MAGA movement.
	Trump unsuccessfully sought to keep a lid on the rebellion for months, and Johnson assisted by blocking efforts to force a vote on the measure.
	Again, they were losers bigly, right?
	Loser.
	They should all hold up that hand sign.
	This does permit the Justice Department to withhold materials in an ongoing investigation, a loophole.
	that could prove significant now that Trump has also ordered a new probe of Democrats that he claims had ties to Epstein.
	So there you go.
	If he says, but actually there's another aspect of it as well, that they can hide this information.
	They're not done yet.
	But he could, if he starts an investigation, he could investigate, of course, Democrats.
	And if it's an active investigation, we can't allow that to be released.
	See how that works?
	So it can be both partisan and a cover-up at the same time.
	Even as Johnson prepared for a massive vote in favor of the bill, he said the Senate should fix the measure, but he didn't specify how.
	Massey countered that he wouldn't accept any further manipulation.
	And he warned the Senate before it went to them not to mess with it.
	That is wrong.
	Do not let the Senate muck this bill up.
	And if you are, if you're a party to that in the Senate, you are part of this cover-up that we are trying to expose.
	I am sorry if one of your billionaire donors is going to get embarrassed because he went to Rape Island.
	That is what they have coming.
	In fact, they need to be on the other side of bars, a lot of them.
	Some of them will be embarrassed, but some of them need to go to prison.
	And the survivors know that.
	So how will we know if this bill has been successful?
	We will know when there are men, rich men in handcuffs being perp walked to the jail.
	And until then, this is still a cover-up.
	Yeah, so in other words, it's not going to succeed.
	You're not going to see the rich men in handcuffs being perp walked to jail.
	You're also not going to have any reform of the intelligence agencies.
	And I think that is the most important thing.
	That is the wellspring of all this kind of evil.
	And so I want to get under that, the national security angle that is there.
	They have basically admitted the fact that this is really the intelligence agencies.
	Like Alex Acosta said, beginning when, remember when he was in his confirmation hearings for Department of Labor head?
	And again, why would Trump pick this guy?
	Did he have any experience in labor issues?
	No.
	As an employer?
	No.
	As a union guy?
	No.
	He had nothing that you would see in his resume that would recommend him for the Department of Labor.
	Of course, there's nothing in the Constitution that there's nothing in the Constitution's resume that would allow a Department of Labor either.
	Let's just say that.
	But anyway, typically you would have somebody that there's some rationale as to why you put this guy in this unconstitutional department.
	But there was nothing, no connection.
	He'd been a lawyer all of his life.
	He was one of 92 federal prosecutors.
	And he gave this sweetheart deal to Epstein.
	And when he was asked about it, he said, well, I was told he was intelligence.
	And I was told to lay off.
	Well, Massey had more about the redactions.
	He said, these documents need to be released.
	And don't try to redact them because now we've got a law and that would be illegal.
	He said.
	They have to explain to Congress.
	And we have a list of reasons they can't use to redact material.
	And so, for instance, there's been a lot of discussion about trying to protect men who might be embarrassed.
	Let's say because they went to the island.
	They can't redact it for those reasons.
	And if they do, they're breaking the law because this is passing the House, the Senate, and being signed by the President.
	How long will follow the law?
	We've got another conversation.
	Marjorie answered that question perfectly.
	We're done with words.
	We're just Congressman Massachusetts.
	You think you'll see your colleagues arrested?
	Well, Congressman Massey.
	Hang on, cover it.
	I don't think so.
	And then he had this to say about Trump when he's asked.
	Well, he got tired of me winning, so he joined our side.
	I have no animosity toward him.
	I regret that it got personal for some folks, but it never has for me.
	It's always been about the survivors of reversal.
	I mean, after months of fighting you.
	Well, the Speaker, the Attorney General, the FBI director, the President, and the Vice President could have saved us all this time and embarrassment, frankly, for our own party if they'd just done the right thing four months ago.
	Do you believe him, Congressman?
	I mean, for weeks he's been pushing against this.
	Now he said he supports it.
	Do you buy it?
	He's only supporting it because President told him to support it.
	That's what Mike Johnson does.
	No, I'm talking about do you buy President Trump saying that he wants the House to pass this resolution?
	Well, I'm concerned that now he's opening a flurry of investigations, and I believe they may be trying to use those investigations as a predicate for not releasing the files.
	And that's my concern.
	Do you think they'll try to block him?
	Well, they will, I'm afraid they're going to try to use a provision of the law that allows you not to release these materials if they're the subject of an ongoing investigation and would harm, and the release of which would harm the ongoing investigation.
	So what do you think this is all about for President Trump?
	First, he was blocking this, pushing Republicans to block this for so long.
	Now he's reversing course, and he has the power to release the full files anyway.
	Well, it's pretty simple.
	For four months, he thought the best thing for him was to keep the files secret, and somebody convinced him that the best thing for him was to release the files.
	And if they're serious about it, they should release them right now.
	It's that simple.
	Why do you think he is working so hard not to get them released for so many months?
	What do you think the real reason is?
	These files implicate billionaires and friends of him and of his and political donors that he's trying to protect.
	And Epstein also had close ties to our own intelligence agencies and Israel's intelligence agencies.
	That's why there's so much effort in trying to stop this.
	And I do believe they'll try to stop it somewhere else.
	And that's going to backfire on them, too.
	So the president's saying he'll sign it.
	You don't buy that?
	No, I think he'll sign it.
	I want to be there at the signing party.
	I've never seen somebody not get invited to sign their own bill.
	But what would you say?
	Just a personal nature of this movement.
	We'll just wait.
	He goes after you, your wife, caused Marjorie Taylor Greene a traitor.
	Let's be clear.
	He went after my late wife and my current wife.
	What do you think about that?
	I think it's a new low for him.
	Well, we already played that part of it in another clip.
	But yeah, as a matter of fact, you know, they've got a couple of different ways to stop this.
	One of them is to open up investigation.
	Of course, open up investigation to Democrats.
	And then you can keep it hidden.
	The other, of course, is the intelligence agency angle.
	And that's the key one.
	He almost talked about it, but not quite.
	And so that's why this is really not going to happen.
	Because that is at the essence of this.
	I don't think that even Trump is that tone deaf and that blind to the optics of what's going on that he would stretch this thing out as long as he did.
	Everybody would see that he was for it, then he was against it, now he's for it, and so forth.
	I don't think he would have done that if he wasn't covering up for Mossad and the CIA.
	Let's understand the CIA is the real government here.
	And I'm going to explain that to you when we come back after the break.
	I'm going to talk about where he's going to go with the partisan stuff, but also the bill itself has got a carve-out there if the intelligence agencies don't like it.
	So if they start the prosecution and they say, we've got an active investigation, so you can't talk about this.
	They can shut it down that way.
	But they can also shut it down with the national security special password that they have there.
	Before we take a break, I'm going to cover the comments that are here.
	Defy Tyrant 1776.
	I still say this is all just more political theater.
	Nothing will come from any of this.
	That's true.
	If you're looking at this from the standpoint that we're going to get more information or documents about what we already know is true.
	I mean, I look at this as very much like the commissions that were done to investigate whatever, whether it's Benghazi or the commissions in the UK to investigate the COVID nonsense, which are always a cover-up, just like the Warren Commission was a cover-up of the JFK assassination.
	These commissions are always a cover-up.
	They're an opportunity, a career-making opportunity for grandstanding for the people who run these things.
	I mean, you go back to the Warren Commission.
	Arlen Specter became senator for life because of his magic bullet invention that he came up with, and he sold that.
	So it's like, you're good.
	You're our guy.
	We're going to keep you there.
	We can use somebody like you.
	But I think that the real issue, which is what's going to come out of this, is the politics that are involved.
	And I think that that is really consequential.
	I mean, this has started to drive a little bit of a wedge into the mind of the MAGA people who mindlessly support Trump, regardless of what the man does.
	And this is the significance of it.
	What it is doing is showing his character yet again.
	We've seen it over and over and over again.
	But there's indications that perhaps this is the first time that many people in MAGA will admit to the obvious and not indulge in doublethink.
	You know, when you talk about TDS, you know, Trump derangement syndrome, as I like to talk about, I talk about it as Trump delusion.
	And the other D is Trump doublethink.
	You may hate the lockdown and the masks, and you may hate the vaccine, but the guy who did it, the guy who boasts about it, even, it's not even that they don't understand the mechanism of how the federal government gets around the 10th Amendment by showering money, by bribing and blackmailing people, but even brags about it.
	And they are capable of doublethink.
	And so TDS is really Trump doublethink syndrome, which we see happening with these people.
	And perhaps, and I'm thinking that if anything comes of this, it'll be that.
	But we already know Epstein, and we already know that he's connected with Mossad, and we already know that Mossad controls Trump and the CIA controls Trump, and these criminal agencies are working together all the time.
	So if we can get some more exposure of that, that'll be worthwhile.
	So Travis has joined us now.
	Good to see you, Travis.
	How's it going?
	What do you think about all this stuff?
	It's going well.
	It's more of the same.
	This is business as usual.
	It's the exact same thing we've been dealing with for the past year.
	But it is interesting to see how Trump maneuvers this.
	First of all, they've got a couple of escape clauses in this thing to keep any real information from coming out there.
	But then publicly, he reverses himself.
	And this is the second time in a week that we've seen him do massive reversals.
	It hasn't gotten much exposure.
	I've mentioned it briefly on this show.
	But the fact that he was adamant against all economic reality that tariffs do not raise prices, of course they do.
	They're a tax.
	They're either going to raise the price or the business is going to go out of business.
	So he's either going to drive people out of business or they're going to raise the price.
	It's just like minimum wage or something.
	And Republicans before Trump used to always understand that minimum wage increases doesn't make anybody wealthier.
	What it does, it fuels inflation, raises costs and price.
	And if you tax corporations, any way that you tax corporations, well, there's an income tax or there's a tariff.
	Those taxes are always passed on, or the business will pass on and pass away.
	So this week, what he did was he's been telling everybody tariffs don't raise prices, and he's been telling everybody that food is cheaper, right?
	So what did he do this week?
	He said, well, I've got to lower the price of food, so I'm going to lower the tariffs.
	So right there, he admitted he was lying about the inflation of food, and he admitted that the tariffs were increasing the price of all this stuff.
	So he's not having a good week if anybody's keeping track of this, but I guess they really don't keep track of it.
	Yeah, when nobody is paying attention, when nobody knows what's actually going on, it doesn't matter what you say.
	It doesn't matter what you do.
	You can say one thing and do the exact opposite.
	And just so long as they only listen to what you say, they'll believe you.
	And that's the problem: they are tracking what's going on, but they won't make the connection ever to Trump.
	It truly is amazing.
	Go ahead and cover the rest of these comments here.
	We have Pezanovante 1776 says Trump will never allow any actually damaging info on himself to be made public.
	That's right.
	Which I agree with.
	And the damaging information about Trump has already been made public.
	He was out there parading around with this guy for the longest time.
	I mean, you're not necessarily going to find any documents that said, you know, I killed her with a knife with Colonel Mustard in the library or something.
	But, you know, we've got a clue.
	We don't need to actually have the signed confession.
	Yes, I did it.
	Here it is.
	You know, we don't have to have the email that actually confesses to all of it.
	We have seen it and we can piece it together.
	But it's the way that he's going to use this.
	I think it's interesting to watch how this weasel is going to try to weasel out of it.
	I think he probably will, but it has awakened a lot of people in MAGA, I think.
	I hope so.
	We can hope at least.
	Nibiru 2029 says Bondi Battelle have used the shutdown time to sanitize the Epstein files to Galigila Trump's satisfaction.
	And now the rewrites can be released for the sheeple's distraction.
	You know, the interesting thing is they may sanitize the files, but their cover-up has dirtied them so much they can never sanitize their public image again.
	The public image of Bondi, of Kash Patel, of Dan Bongino, I don't think can be sanitized at this point.
	I think that's an interesting outcome.
	No, they've completely tied themselves to Donald Trump.
	Yeah.
	A second term president who is going to be on the way out.
	They've done everything they can to maintain his image, to do his bidding, despite the fact that it's the exact opposite of what the American people want.
	They cannot function in any other administration.
	As soon as Donald Trump is gone, these people are out the door.
	Everyone is already sick of them.
	I think Kash Patel's tenure is probably record time for someone being the most hated FBI director.
	Everyone is looking at him saying, something is wrong here.
	This is your fault.
	And it stops there.
	It stops with Bondi and Patel and anyone else this touches.
	But for some reason, the guy at the center of it all, Donald Trump, is free and clear to do whatever he wants.
	We're sick of the sycophants.
	And, you know, that's that trio there.
	And you can also throw in Mike Johnson as well.
	It is absolutely sickening to watch these people who will just do anything no matter.
	They think that we don't see it, but we do.
	We absolutely do.
	Mike Johnson benefits a little bit from the fact that he's such a non-entity.
	He barely exists as a person.
	He's there, but he's kind of just like the guy in the background.
	He's the guy that would be extra number 250 in a scene.
	Kash Patel, he's very unique looking.
	He's kind of, it's very different.
	Pam Bondi, woman, so that gives her a little bit of something.
	Mike Johnson, he's just a stereotypical bureaucrat.
	I couldn't pick him out of a crowd if I were to walk past him, despite the fact I know exactly what he looks like.
	I would breeze past Mike Johnson and never once think it was him.
	But if he went past Kash Patel, he's like, what's he looking at?
	What's up with the eyes?
	Which looks like a possum that you shine a flashlight into in the middle of the night.
	He's stunned at all times.
	And unbelievably corrupt when you look at what he's doing with the Jets and his girlfriend and the security details for her, all the rest of the stuff.
	Just another example of how these people have got a place at the table and they are going to feast and wallow in this corruption.
	That's what I'm seeing with the Trump administration.
	So that's why I think it's important to talk about this.
	We need to understand the nature and the character of these people.
	Yeah, I keep saying Kash Patel is as crooked as his nose.
	Pizzanovante 1776 says Mike Johnson, a Christian LOL.
	That's about my sentiments on it.
	Defy Tyrant 1776.
	Massey isn't on our side because if he was, he would have told the truth about the warp speed poison.
	He's never once come out against it.
	And that's something.
	Well, I agree.
	I agree about that.
	But he is more on our side on some other key issues.
	As a farmer himself, he has come out to say that he's got the Prime Act, which says that if you raise the cattle yourself, you should be able to butcher it yourself and to get around the USDA.
	So he has some very good legislation on some very key issues.
	I'd put him in the same category as Rand Paul, who I think was horrific on the warp speed stuff and still is.
	Rand Paul is the guy who is still trying to sell this lab leak theory, which is a big cover-up.
	Massey has just kind of set it out.
	However, on some other issues, he's been very good.
	And I can't say that about too many people in Congress.
	And he's willing to take on Trump.
	So those are some important things.
	If he's going to take on Trump, if he's going to take on the USDA to fight for our food freedom, those are some important things.
	So we'll applaud him on the issues.
	As I said before, let's not have any of this stuff where we create some magic holy person who is up there.
	If you start doing that and you don't realize that there's flaws with everybody, then you're going to wind up worshiping him like MAGA worships Trump.
	Take a look at Massey.
	Understand that he's wrong on some issues, but not many of them.
	And when he's taking the lead on some very important issues, support him on that.
	That's the way I think we ought to look at this.
	No man is going to be perfect, especially in politics.
	You're going to have your disagreements with people.
	And of course, that is a huge, huge issue.
	But I think that he can still be on our side on a lot of different issues.
	And I think it's also important to see that he's got the integrity to stand up to Trump.
	He's not part of the hive mind, which is really, really unusual in Washington.
	Highly unusual.
	Someone had a comment the other day.
	Yeah.
	Hang on.
	Charlie H. What were you saying, Lance?
	So someone had a comment the other day that I thought summed that up pretty well.
	Said good or bad politicians is always an issue-by-issue matter.
	That's right.
	That's right.
	Absolutely.
	You know, it's kind of the thing, you know, we talk about outlets, you know, news outlets, you know, don't just take in everything that a news outlet says.
	They can occasionally make a mistake or something, right?
	And but if they are misleading you on issue after issue after issue, at some point you got to say, well, you know, I used to look at this site covering conservative issues, and I'd include in that WND, Breitbart, and of course, InfoWars.
	But, you know, they've become such cheerleaders for Trump that they're no longer honest brokers of what they're doing.
	And so you can have an honest disagreement with somebody, or he can have a blind spot.
	You know, his blind spot to the tech stuff, you know, look, I didn't understand about vaccines all my life either.
	And he's coming from a tech background.
	And so a lot of that stuff may be, you know, just kind of that kind of mentality.
	I don't know.
	I'm not making excuses for him.
	He's wrong on that issue.
	I'm just saying he's right on many other things.
	And it is issue by issue.
	And so I think it's very important to stand up against this high mind that has taken over Washington.
	And I'm glad that he did that.
	Go ahead.
	Yeah.
	It's important to remember that not everyone believes the exact same thing you do.
	You can be right and they can be wrong, but they can be honestly wrong.
	They may just actually believe something different.
	They may not be trying to scam you.
	And perhaps that is Thomas Massey.
	Charlie H.S. says, interesting that Speaker Mouse just rose up out of the swamp to become Speaker.
	I wonder who orchestrated that.
	I said that at the time.
	I thought, you know, remember they went through several different votes and they couldn't figure out who was going to be the speaker.
	And then all of a sudden, this guy you've never heard of before comes out.
	It's like, how did that happen?
	Well, he found out right away when he started reversing everything that he'd always said as a member of Congress once he became Speaker of the House.
	He started jumping in right away.
	Yeah, we're going to send more money to Ukraine, more money to Israel for their wars and all the rest of this stuff.
	It's like, uh-oh, yeah, he is a swamp creature.
	Now we know how this guy became Speaker of the House.
	Absolutely.
	Yeah, you ain't never had a sellout like me is what Mike Johnson was singing as he danced his way up the steps.
	That's right.
	That's right.
	Go ahead.
	That's what the comments I have so far.
	And of course, you know, we talk about people who are sellouts.
	I just couldn't believe it.
	This is Eric Adams, the current mayor of New York.
	And so he's not going to be mayor anymore.
	But he went to Israel to tell them how much he loved him.
	And I'm thinking, you know, that I thought was a seminal moment for Mamdani when they asked him, you know, which foreign country are you going to go to?
	And he says, I'm not going to go to any foreign country.
	I'm going to stay here.
	Mayor of New York.
	I'm going to focus on the local issues here.
	They said, well, you don't want to go to Israel?
	Because everybody else is saying they're going to go to Israel.
	And Eric Adams, listen to what he had to say.
	My mail chief here in Israel.
	And as I finish, I wanted to come back here to Israel and let you know that I serve you as the mayor, but I want to continue to have the title that's more important to me than anything.
	I'm your brother.
	Thank you.
	There you go.
	So he was the mayor of Israel?
	I didn't know that.
	Did you guys know that?
	No, he just said he served them as the mayor.
	That's right.
	That's right.
	He was serving.
	He was serving them as mayor of New York.
	He was serving Israel.
	How about that?
	We don't realize just how far down the tentacle stretch do we.
	It's absolutely amazing to me how everybody has to kow-tow to Trump, kow-tow to Israel, kow-tow to the CIA or whatever.
	Well, you really know who controls you, don't you?
	We're going to take a quick break, folks, and we'll be right back, and we're going to talk about what is next with this.
	We'll be right back.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Elvis.
	Ladies and gentlemen, the Beatles, and the sweet sounds of Motown.
	Find them on the Oldies channel at APSRadio.com.
	Well, as Trump has been at war with the GOP to keep the Epstein stuff tamped down, now he's going to go to war with the Democrats, which is exactly what you would expect.
	And I think that will tamp it down completely.
	Interestingly, you have Anna Polina Luna, who's on the House Oversight Committee, said that Bill and Hillary Clinton are refusing to appear before Congress to testify in connection with the Jeffrey Epstein issue.
	And I've got to say, this is kind of amazing.
	It's kind of the arrogance of Steve Bannon, who refused to testify.
	They got him for contempt of Congress, right?
	All you have to do is show up and take the fifth.
	But that's the arrogance of a lot of these people in politics.
	They won't even do that.
	Notice how the House Democrats suddenly have nothing to say about it, said Anna Polina Luna.
	Well, again, these are the partisan games that you would expect, and this is their new strategy.
	It's a smarter strategy than going to war with your own people, but this is the next stage of this.
	And Trump had this to say about it.
	Let's see.
	Something you posted on Truth Social last night.
	You urged House Republicans to vote in favor of this Epstein release bill they're going to vote on tomorrow.
	I just want to be super clear on your position.
	Do you want to see that pass the Senate?
	Would you sign that bill if it gets to your desk?
	I do want to say, here's what I want.
	We have nothing to do with Epstein.
	The Democrats do.
	All of his friends are Democrats.
	You look at this region and you look at Larry Sutton.
	Like Trump.
	Bill Clinton, they went to his island all the time, and many others are all Democrats.
	All I want is I want for people to recognize the great job that I've done on pricing, on affordability, because we brought prices way down, but they're going way lower on energy.
	Yeah, he's lying about that as well.
	Hate wars and another one coming pretty soon, I believe.
	Also, a lie.
	We've done a great job.
	And I hate to see that deflect from the great job we've done.
	So I'm all for it.
	You know, we've already given 50,000 pages.
	You do know that.
	Yeah, it's all Democrats, you know, except that, yeah, Epstein is a Democrat.
	Here he is with all Democrats.
	You know, Bill and Hillary and all these people, they're all Democrats.
	It's a club.
	And Trump was always a Democrat until he decided that he wanted to pretend, reinvent himself, and pretend to be something that he really wasn't.
	So after initially calling people using the release, the files on convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, calling him stupid, calling them foolish, he has now pulled a 180 and is now making a fresh call to make all the files public.
	Because now the partisan thing not only allows him to consolidate and try to reunify his base of politicians there in Washington, but it also allows him to do a cover-up through Pam Bondi if he prosecutes some of them.
	They should vote to release the Epstein files because we have nothing to hide.
	Well, here's the issue, right?
	Trump could have ordered the release of the Epstein files himself.
	He didn't have to wait for a vote in Congress.
	And he got called out about that by a reporter.
	It made him absolutely furious.
	So he said, so let's start talking about the Republican record, which, by the way, in 2025 has been really awful, really awful on the issues.
	And again, when you look at Trump and Jeffrey Epstein, it's such a public record.
	It's amazing that this guy can reinvent himself and pretend that he is not a Democrat, that he's not a Jeffrey Epstein pal.
	So Ghelain Maxwell's petition to the Supreme Court was not denied until this year.
	So under Trump's Department of Justice's own current guidelines, which were extensively revised by Bill Barr during Trump's first term, the Epstein files should not have been released while Biden was in office.
	It's all Trump.
	And that's the thing to remember.
	They say, well, why didn't Biden release them?
	Well, because they changed the rules on that under Bill Barr.
	And so it really is something that Trump could do, should do, still not doing.
	And you had Epstein's brother went on with Cuomo, said he thinks that they're sanitizing the files.
	You know, I think Epstein's brother is sanitizing what his brother has done.
	It truly is amazing that this guy has become a source for people like Cuomo.
	What I do want to talk about is I've been recently told the reason they're going to be releasing these things and the reason for the flip is that they're sanitizing these files.
	There's a facility in Winchester, Virginia, where they're scrubbing the files to take Republican names out.
	That's what I was told by a pretty good source.
	Yeah, well, that's an FBI tradition.
	And, you know, it's important to talk about this because we need to understand that the FBI has always been involved in lies, cover up, and blackmail.
	This is a Jager Hoover tradition.
	And we've seen it in things like Flight 800.
	It was the FBI who went around and confiscated evidence that you had people who had air traffic control records that saw the missile that shot down Flight 800.
	They went around and confiscated this.
	This is what the FBI does.
	It lies, it covers up, it keeps information about people, it blackmails them.
	And of course, you have the same kind of corruption under Kash Patel that you had under Christopher Wray in terms of private use of the jet that he criticized when he was out of power.
	But now that he's in power, he's enjoying all the perks of power.
	So the latest files show a lot of emails between the Epstein brothers, some of them that said something, made some allegations about Trump having some kind of a sexual interaction with Bubba.
	And he was very adamant that Bubba did not refer to the nickname of Bill Clinton.
	And so I guess we can trust the brother of Jeffrey Epstein, whatever he has to say, right?
	I'm sure that, and when he was pushed on it, he said, well, that's all I've got to say.
	It has nothing to do with Bill Clinton.
	And that's my last word on that email.
	So there you go.
	Well, thanks for clearing that.
	Yeah, it certainly is amazing that this guy has become a go-to.
	So, oh, well, you know, his brother said this and that about it.
	Well, consider the source.
	Mark Epstein.
	That's who I trust.
	The brothers of multi-billionaire, you know, predator pedophiles.
	That's who I go to for my news.
	My trusted source is Jeffrey Epstein's brother.
	This is the world we're living in.
	Yeah, Jeffrey Epstein's brother wants us to believe that he knows everything about all the people connected to Epstein, but didn't have any idea about Epstein's business or what he was doing.
	And wasn't connected with any of it either.
	He was looking at all he knows everything about it, but he's looking at it from a distance.
	I mean, it's just like, I don't know, there's something wrong about that whole story here.
	Yeah, you've got all the inside details on all of this.
	You know exactly who these emails were referring to, but you weren't involved.
	Or at minimum, you knew what was happening because you have the context for this.
	And you didn't say anything to anyone.
	You didn't go to the FBI and say, hey, I know he's my brother, but he's involved in some really dark things.
	You need to be able to do that.
	We've had a lot of family relatives that have turned in people like Ted Kaczynski, the Unibomber's family.
	Brother turned him in when he figured out that's what he was doing.
	It was actually his wife that was like, it's your brother.
	And he's like, no, it's not my brother.
	And she's like, it's definitely your brother.
	And then he read the specific phrase, cool-headed logician, which is a phrase Ted Kaczynski often used, or often enough that he knew it.
	It was like, oh, it is him.
	It's him.
	He was right.
	Yeah, and they turned him in, right?
	But not Mark Epstein.
	He did not turn in his brother, even though all this stuff was happening.
	And even after he was convicted and continued to do this.
	And so there was an interaction on Air Force One between a reporter and Donald Trump where he told her, quiet piggy.
	And again, it made him angry that she was persistent in terms of asking him questions that he was not clearly answering.
	And we see reporters who are persistent in their questioning because we see politicians who always dodge it.
	And so he just points a finger at her and tells her, quiet piggy.
	There's nothing incriminating in the box.
	Quiet, quiet piggy.
	Yeah, there you go, quiet piggy.
	Now, Now, a lot of people thought that was kind of inappropriate and beneath the office of presidency.
	I would be one of those people who thinks that.
	I was kind of interested to see that InfoWars take on it was, that was epic.
	No, it was juvenile, and it was the kind of personality that we have seen from Donald Trump, which is not the kind of personality that we ever want to have in as a political leader.
	Pointing a finger at the female reporter's face and saying, quiet, quiet piggy.
	Trump raised some eyebrows during several tense exchanges with members of the press over the weekend.
	Of course, he had another one with an ABC reporter who questioned his corruption and his involvement with Saudi Arabia and also questioned the clown prince of Saudi Arabia, MBS, and about the heinous murder of Khashoggi, and Trump really lost it with her.
	The off-camera, the female reporter, who was later identified as a Bloomberg reporter, began to ask if there was anything incriminating in the Epstein emails.
	And Trump pointed a finger in her face and said, quiet, quiet, Piggy.
	Piggy has reportedly been a favored insult of the president in the past.
	In his 2016 presidential campaign, former Miss Universe Alicia Machado, who won the title at the age of 19 while Trump was co-owner of the organization, claimed that Trump threatened to take away her title after she gained weight.
	He'd yell at me all the time.
	He'd tell me, you look ugly, you look fat.
	Sometimes he'd say, hello, Miss Piggy.
	Hello, Miss Housekeeping.
	And so Trump snapped at another reporter who was asking about Tucker Carlson's recent interview with Fuentes.
	He said, well, I found him to be good.
	I mean, he's said things about me over the years.
	I think he's good, referring to Carlson.
	We've had some good interviews.
	I did an interview with him where we had 300 million hits.
	See, that's the yardstick that Trump uses, is how much attention he gets.
	And that's why he does the things that he does.
	When the reporter began to ask a follow-up, as Trump was still talking, he responded, will you let me finish my statement?
	You are the worst.
	You're at Bloomberg, right?
	You are the worst.
	I don't even know why they have you here.
	And so the interaction that he had with this reporter, as I said, InfoWars thought it was epic.
	Epic.
	Again, they love the low-life, low-class professional wrestling aspect of this.
	The legacy media circulated.
	I can understand part of it.
	Journalists, this class that has set themselves apart from the average person, that deign themselves the arbiters of truth, and they are going to deliver to you the news, and you're going to believe it because they said it.
	It's easy to sit there, and anytime someone does anything to them, go, yeah, these people are the worst.
	They have lied to us.
	But there comes a point where you have to look at the office of the president and say, this is beneath that station.
	It is.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	Whereas, you know, maybe somebody, it would be okay for somebody to do this.
	Well, there's other ways that you can do that.
	You know, there's other ways that you can do that.
	They can shut it down without calling people names.
	But of course, it's that kind of juvenile third-grade rhetoric that they love.
	And Maggie loves it.
	At least done a Kermit the Frog voice, made it a little funny.
	Yeah.
	Quiet, Miss Piggy.
	Or he could have done Babe, right?
	That'll be enough, Piggy.
	That'll do, Piggy.
	That'll do, Pig.
	That'll do, Pig.
	So anyway, the way they refer to it, they said the nagging reporter.
	Look, yeah, reporters can sometimes look like they're nagging because politicians are always deflecting.
	They will always either change the subject or they will not directly answer the question and they will spin it.
	That's the whole art of the politician.
	And so as they are evading it, a good reporter is going to press on.
	And that can be characterized as nagging, but that's just doing her job.
	Yeah, nagging reporters, as Chas was saying, do exist, and there are plenty of them.
	But she's nagging him about why haven't you released the Epstein files, which you could have done at any time.
	That's the key thing.
	I think more important than him calling her piggy is that he's calling her piggy so that he doesn't have to answer while he's not releasing the Epstein files as he could have done at any time.
	That's right.
	And even his critics are out there saying, look, he called her piggy, instead of saying, look, he doesn't answer the question about releasing the Epstein files.
	And so it is disgusting to see the way that he interacts with people.
	But anyway, in the White House, we see that when we're talking about people that are disgusting and people who are pigs, the White House intervened on behalf of a real pig.
	This is Andrew Tate.
	And I think it's yet another example of birds of a feather.
	When you look at Trump hanging around for 15 years with Jeffrey Epstein, his wingman, his best friend, and then you look at what he's doing for Andrew Tate, look at what he's doing for P. Diddy.
	A lot of talk about the fact that he's going to get him off.
	It truly is amazing.
	And I'm not even talking about the massive corruption in terms of the white-collar criminals that he pardoned on behalf of the Kushner crime family, one of whom, after he got pardoned by Trump at the end of his first term, big white-collar criminal.
	Now he's out there literally beating people, even hitting a child.
	He's got an assault battery charge against him, I think, for a child.
	But, you know, going into a synagogue and berating the other people that are there.
	It truly is.
	Trump is drawn to people like this.
	Again, it's birds of a feather.
	You look at that guy that he pardoned who has just been, you know, he was doing drugs, but since he's been out, he's not being retried for doing more drugs.
	Instead, he's turned to other things in terms of abuse, physical abuse, and again, just flaunting the toll roads with his Lamborghinis and Ferraris.
	He just drives right through the tolls.
	He doesn't stop.
	And so this is the kind of people, and it's that kind of arrogance and even violence that characterizes, I think, Andrew Tate as well.
	Federal authorities were chided for seizing electronic devices from Tate and his brother and were told to return them by the White House.
	These are records and interviews that show this.
	Experts say this intervention was highly unusual as well as inappropriate.
	So Andrew Tate, the self-described misogynist facing allegations of sex trafficking women in three countries, when he and his brother left their home in Romania to visit the United States, Tate posted on X said that Tates will be free.
	Trump is the president.
	The good old days are back.
	That's right.
	Yeah, all of these people, Trump is just like Andrew Tate.
	He's just like Jeffrey Epstein.
	One thing is, I'll see a lot of people say, it's like, well, these women aren't angels.
	They're old enough to know what they're getting into.
	They're freely choosing to go to this man who they know is an abusive, this, that, and the other.
	You have to protect the gullible and the stupid.
	Yeah, yeah.
	That doesn't excuse what he did.
	I mean, this is.
	He's a monster.
	These women are obviously, you know, the women that show up to this are obviously kind of dumb.
	You know, it's sad.
	And you can't let people like this prey on the stupid.
	It's just, you can't.
	You have to do something about it.
	When there are monsters among you, you need to remove them.
	Andrew Tate is a monster.
	Well, I've never been one to try to justify the violence and sexual assault and other things that are done by an individual by blaming the victim.
	That's really what we're talking about here.
	She shouldn't have dressed that way.
	You shouldn't have been jogging in Central Park and all the rest of this stuff.
	And it's like, why would you go there?
	Why would you feel it necessary to try to excuse the behavior of this guy?
	His behavior is what it is, regardless of the other person who is essentially the victim.
	But again, I guess, you know, this is the pedophile pimp vote that Trump is out there for.
	What?
	Certain jobs are just inherently dirty.
	I mean, obviously, pimp, but things like casino owner or a drug dealer, things that are taking advantage of stupid people, providing vice for people.
	You know, even if they're choosing that, you're still a scumbag for providing that.
	I agree.
	Yeah.
	And I think that's really the issue.
	You know, Trump is not so much a real estate guy as he is a vice guy, isn't he?
	We kind of see that in his friends that are there.
	So the official who delivered the message was Paul Ingracia, trying to ingratiate himself, I guess, a lawyer who previously represented the Tate brothers before joining the White House, where he was working as a Department of Homeland Security liaison.
	So you take somebody who is working for these pimps and women abusers, and you make him a liaison for Homeland Security.
	That's the Trump administration.
	The incident is the latest in a string of law enforcement matters where the Trump White House has inserted itself to help friends and to target foes.
	Trump has urged the Justice Department to go after the elected officials who investigated him and his businesses, and he pardoned a string of political allies.
	And Andrew Tate is one of the most prominent members of the so-called Manosphere, a collection of influencers, podcasters, and content creators who helped to deliver young male voters to Trump.
	And that is why I oppose Andrew Tate.
	I think he is poison.
	I think people like Andrew Tate and Nick Fuentes are poison in a whole new dimension.
	In a mental and spiritual dimension, they are absolute poison.
	They are the fentanyl to our morality, I think.
	I know I say this every time these guys come up, but it's important to understand why they appeal to people.
	If you don't understand why someone appeals to someone else, it's very hard to counteract their message.
	Andrew Tate appeals to men who have been scorned, have been looked down on, who have been told they're worthless.
	Third wave feminism has been a blight on the country, and it has run men out of a lot of areas.
	It has made them feel useless and uncared for.
	And then someone comes along and says, no, actually, you have value.
	You're the one that builds society.
	You are important.
	And that kind of validation is incredibly powerful when all you've been told your entire life is you are the source of all the world's problems.
	I agree.
	I agree.
	And that's what Tate does.
	Yeah.
	It is basically a reaction to something else that is bad.
	And people don't have any absolute standard of where that should be.
	And so they overreact.
	The pendulum swings back too far the other way.
	It's important to realize that feminism is bad, but also maybe realize that perhaps we shouldn't keep women in a Romanian sex slavery operation.
	You know, we can find a happy middle ground between these two areas, perhaps.
	Yeah, people should ask themselves, why is he in Romania of all places, right?
	I guess he's kind of latching onto that Vlad the Impaler vibe that's out there.
	I don't know.
	I wonder why he'd go to notoriously lawless and corrupt Eastern Europe.
	I wonder what's going on there.
	It's strange.
	Well, it's unclear why law enforcement went to examine these devices, what their analysis found, or whether Ngracia's intervention hindered any investigation.
	The White House and DHS declined to answer any questions about the incident.
	Well surprise.
	Law enforcement experts said it's highly unusual for the White House to get involved in border seizures or to demand authorities give up custody of potential evidence in an investigation.
	A retired assistant director for Homeland Security Investigations said, I've never heard of anything like that in my 30 years of doing this.
	His job was to analyze contents of electronic devices after they'd been seized by Custom and Border Patrol.
	For anyone to say this request is from the White House, he said that feels like an intimidation tactic.
	So again, why is he weighing in on the side of Andrew Tate?
	Well, because he's telling you who he is.
	And who he is is a guy whose entire life has been profiting from vice.
	And surprise reversal, Trump now supports the GOP release of the Epstein files.
	However, as I said before, he's going to do that because now the next wave of defense is to say that we're going to prosecute some of these Democrats over there.
	So now this is an active investigation.
	You can't have that information.
	But there is another very important caveat here in this bill to release the information.
	People are not buying that Trump didn't know what Jeffrey Epstein was up to.
	A poll shows that only 15% believe that, which is pretty bad.
	You know, you've got an 80-20 rule.
	That's bad enough.
	This is 85-15.
	Trump has long insisted he had no involvement or knowledge of Epstein's crimes in spite of the massive evidence, public evidence to the contrary.
	But the poll conducted mid-November with registered voters suggests those denials are increasingly falling flat.
	60% of Americans think Trump knew what Epstein was up to.
	Only 15% said he did not.
	4 to 1.
	4 to 1.
	38% of voters said they believe that Trump not only knew, but participated in it.
	That would be my opinion.
	I would be in that 38%.
	So even Fox's Brett Baer is asking, why did it take so long for Trump to support releasing these Epstein files?
	And why is he still waiting for this procedure through Congress to happen when he could do it on his own and he could just release this stuff?
	And you have Howard Kunsler said, come on, just spill the beans already.
	Just let this out.
	Why have this psycho-drama that is there?
	He said, the never-ending game of political hide the salami and the stonewalling.
	He said, it developed into a soap opera over the weekend between Trump and Marjorie Taylor Greene, acting out their lovers' quarrel on every public channel of news and gossip until finally Trump pulled one of his trademark jiu-jitsu moves and said, well, now we're going to release the files.
	What the public really wants to find out is which celebrities, politicians otherwise, were having sex with underage girls, and so that said celebrities can be frog-marched out of public life.
	Only tertiarily do they care that Jeffrey Epstein was some kind of an agent or a go-between for the U.S.-UK-Israeli spy services.
	I agree, and I think it's too bad, because that is what will continue to run this fountain of evil in our society, the intelligence agencies, and in every society.
	It's not just American society, but it's also in Israel, as well as you point out, in UK.
	On Sunday night, Trump stepped out of the way in one of his customary truth social blurts.
	Wouldn't it be better if he just went on air with an Oval Office speech to level with the American people, telling all that he knows and what the people need to know about this drawn-out Epstein business?
	Trump has had many years to familiarize himself with all the details of Epstein, and he knows because he was there.
	He must know exactly what the guy was up to, who he catered to as global finance figure and a trafficker of girls to the political elite.
	What could possibly shock anyone at this point?
	Trump should give that speech whether the House and the Senate vote to release the DOJ files or not.
	Above all, I'm sure you realize the country can't stand any more lying, most particularly from Trump and his entourage.
	The institutional damage is just too grave.
	As I look at this, it reminds me the way this has unfolded and built up and the stupid way the presidency has responded to it.
	It reminds me very much of the Richard Nixon thing or the Watergate burglary.
	And it was all about the cover-up.
	It wasn't even really about the substance of it so much.
	So is our long national nightmare over?
	That was what Gerald Ford said when he pardoned Richard Nixon.
	But we moved on from a third-rate burglary to these pedophile billionaires.
	But here's the key thing that I've been building up to for a long time.
	Ken Klippenstein said that the issue of national security is going to block the Epstein files release.
	And I believe that is the case as well.
	Whether or not it is, I think it's very telling that this escape clause was incorporated into the bill.
	And it was incorporated in the bill.
	Massey knew it, even addressed it when he put it in there.
	It says, not the kind of national security that has anything to do with national defense or harm to the nation, but the self-serving kind that protects the system from the people by depriving them of information.
	And that is the key thing.
	You know, the guy who created this whole thing about national security and the national security state was Truman.
	And of course, he also created the CIA, and he created the NSA by executive order.
	And so, you know, setting up the American Empire to be the world's policeman, to have the police action of the Korean War, to create the CIA, the NSA, and this whole thing of national security, that had nothing to do with the defense of the nation.
	But they've used it to cover up everything that they do.
	With 89% of Americans in agreement that the Justice Department should release all information about Epstein, the image is clear.
	National security is more important than democracy.
	Take a look at Congress's long-shot attempt to force the release.
	The seemingly innocuous word appears in the resolution.
	That one word is unclassified.
	And you've got to ask yourself, why would they say, well, we're going to release all the information that is unclassified?
	Why would any of this stuff, folks, be classified if they were telling us the truth that didn't involve Mossad and the CIA?
	If this is some other country's national security secrets, who cares?
	That's on them.
	That's on them to keep their secrets secret.
	If it's that important to them, they should have done a better job.
	If this involves another country, release it.
	I don't care if it burns every last Israeli intelligence agent to the ground, if they have to abandon every operation they're running.
	That's not our business.
	They're not a military.
	Congress cares.
	Congress cares because they're owned by the Israeli government.
	That was my comment on it.
	They aren't releasing this for national security issues.
	Did they say which nation's security?
	Yeah, that's right.
	Somehow, the word unclassified made its way into the Epstein Files Transparency Act.
	It is the wrong word, says Ken Klippenstein.
	Said no record, he's quoting from it.
	Okay, here's what it says.
	Here's the escape clause that's been why they're not going to release any information, regardless of what happens with the investigations.
	That's just another way that they can do it.
	But it says in the document itself, no record shall be withheld, delayed, or redacted on the basis of embarrassment, reputational harm, or political sensitivity, including to any government official, public figure, or foreign dignitary.
	And then it goes on to undermine all that.
	The bill says that if the Attorney General makes a determination that covered information may not be declassified and made available in a manner that protects the national security of the U.S., including methods or sources related to national security, the Attorney General shall release an unclassified summary for each of the redacted or withheld classified information.
	In other words, the Attorney General gets to decide what to release and how to characterize it.
	And that's true whether this is an ongoing investigation or she can just waive the, it's classified.
	If I release it, I have to kill you type of thing.
	This is the way Washington works.
	And this is, I think, the key takeaway from all of this.
	Massey even said, well, you have to put that in there if you're going to get them to sign it.
	It's not something I would sit and say, let's put that in there.
	It's something that when you run the bill past other colleagues and you say, can you sign this?
	In fact, we can get every Democrat to sign it.
	He says it's one of the things that we felt was necessary to put in there.
	So again, the resolution consequently falls prey to the national security doctrine that is infecting every corner of American life.
	You know, national security, folks, it's basically this whole national security mechanism.
	The CIA, the NSA, Mossad, MI5, MI6, all this.
	That is what gave us the people like Epstein.
	They routinely run these honey traps, honeypot traps, to set somebody up and blackmail them.
	I mean, just take a look.
	Jared Kushner's father did that to his brother-in-law because they were going to testify against him.
	This is, and he's not an intelligence.
	I mean, this is just criminal, evil activity.
	But the evil activity that people like Jared Kushner's father did has been institutionalized by the intelligence agencies.
	Asked by independent journalist Michael Tracy about a similar carve-out for national defense information and other legislation in September, that was what Massey had said at that point in time.
	He said, yeah, we put that in all the bills because you've got to understand that no matter what happens, we're not going to release any information that the national security creeps want to have secret.
	And so we know who the real government is, right?
	Because you're not allowed to criticize them.
	We know who the real government is because you're not even allowed to say the name Voldemort, right?
	You shall not be named as the CIA, the NSA, the intelligence agencies.
	So you will not do anything that reveals anything about them.
	And they always hide behind national security because they are national security.
	They are the power that is there.
	And it has infected everything.
	It is a cancer that is metastasized throughout our entire society.
	And when you look at drugs and you look at sex and all the rest of this stuff, this has all been driven not just the blackmailing stuff, but even the campaigns by the CIA to sell feminism and pornography and all that.
	It's coming from the usual people.
	They're always doing that.
	The 50-year-old Freedom of Information Act states that the federal government cannot withhold data from public merely because it's embarrassing.
	In a 2021 lawsuit still pending, Attorney Dan Novak sued for the Epstein records.
	The FBI rattled off a long list of information it says it cannot disclose, which includes names that are under an implied assurance of confidentiality, names that are under express assurance of confidentiality, names who provided information, names of third parties of investigative interest, names and identities of FBI special agents and so forth.
	Foreign government agency information under implied confidentiality, implied confidentiality.
	So it goes on.
	They have all these different categories.
	So you can't get anything of any importance from any of these people about any subject.
	So of course we're not going to see any Epstein documents because everything that we need to know about our government is prohibited from us knowing about from our government.
	Ken Klipenstein said the absurd lack of transparency by government is a big reason for the prevalence of conspiracy theories.
	He doesn't mention the fact that it was the FBI that coined that term to keep you from looking at their lies about the Kennedy assassination.
	When the government is hiding something, people are naturally going to assume the worst.
	Well, I would look at it from a different aspect.
	You know, these things are conspiracy facts, most of them.
	Secondly, if you give these people the ability to operate in secret, without any transparency, and you give them access to unlimited amounts of money and so forth, what do you think that's, given human nature, what do you think that's going to do to people given time?
	What do you think it's going to do to institutions that are comprised of people?
	It's going to corrupt them.
	And since these things have been around now for like 60 years, 80 years, I guess, this is why the intelligence agencies are so thoroughly and completely corrupted.
	They have been moving in this awful direction for the longest amount of time.
	You give them the power to hide from public scrutiny.
	You give them access to unlimited amounts of power and money.
	You tell them they can do anything.
	They can kill anybody that they wish, and nobody can talk about it.
	Well, what do you think you're going to wind up with?
	That, folks, is the real essence of this story.
	The rest of the stuff, whether people wake up to what Trump really is, whether or not they do some kind of a document dump, there's not going to be any smoking guns, any of that stuff.
	All of it will be sanitized one way or the other.
	But the reality is, is to see who it is that's doing this and the nature of what our true government really is.
	In 1991, Congress passed a law that gave up its power to oversee things relating to national security.
	Very interesting.
	We had an oversight committee that was founded in 1927 for the purpose of overseeing the executive branch, but then in 1991, they said, no, we don't want to have that responsibility anymore.
	We don't want to look.
	We don't want to be responsible for letting this thing go through.
	Commonly cited statutory restrictions on oversight relate to foreign intelligence activities.
	We have our own star chamber, the FISA court.
	Though Congress has generally interpreted executive privilege very narrowly, national security is the big exception to that.
	It's as if Trump or any president for that matter has a panic button that is labeled national security.
	Pam Bondi explained back in March why the Epstein files will be released, asked by Fox News host Sean Hannity, if anything besides victims' information might need to be redacted.
	She replied, well, of course, national security.
	Again, if Alex Acosta in his initial hearings where they were interviewing him for labor secretary, why did you give him such a sweetheart deal?
	Well, I was told to lay off of him because he was with the intelligence agencies.
	He's now, in subsequent testimony, he has now completely reversed himself.
	So under oath, talking to Congress, Alex Acosta lied either then or now.
	And of course, they're not going to do anything to come after him.
	James Clapper lied to Congress as well.
	They never came after him.
	But the reality is, is that this is really, he was telling the truth the first time.
	This really is about the spy agencies, which is not about national security, except for the extent that it is the government keeping itself secure.
	It's not about protecting you and me.
	It's not about keeping us out of war.
	It's about putting us into wars.
	As a matter of fact, this huge scandal that has broken in Ukraine, and guess what?
	Mike Pompey is now going to be an advisor to the company that's at the heart of that Ukrainian scandal.
	He's like a Dick Cheney, right?
	He's going to get right in there and be an advisor to them.
	I guess since he bragged about the fact, he said when I was at West Point, we were told we don't lie, cheat, or steal, and we don't tolerate people who do.
	But he said when I went to the CIA, we had classes on all those things.
	And the thing that amazed me about all that was that I don't think that's a funny joke.
	It is actually what is happening.
	But the people at Texas A ⁇ M, a conservative university, if ever there was one, laughed and applauded with that.
	And I always think, shame on those people for laughing and applauding for that.
	But I guess that's what his role is going to be there in Ukraine.
	He's going to teach them how to lie, steal, and cheat.
	Maybe he'll also teach them how to do assassinations and coups, because that's the reason that we have the Ukrainian government that's there in the first place.
	But this is why this is important.
	Yeah, the depravity of the elites and the fact that they can do it with immunity, that is important.
	People need to understand that.
	But understand that the most elite of the elite are the intelligence agencies, like Mossad and the CIA.
	That they are the ones who control the government more so than the president.
	The president will basically humiliate himself in public in order to please Mossad and the CIA.
	That's what the takeaway, I think, from this whole Epstein episode is, is it just shows you that the figurehead of the president and who the real government is and the real government is pure evil.
	And of course, you can't talk about them, and you're not allowed to see what they are doing.
	That's the bottom line.
	Well, we're going to take a break.
	Travis, give us the comments here.
	All right.
	I'm pulling them up right now.
	Let's see what we got.
	They're coming in as I speak.
	We're a bit of a system now.
	Yeah, let me start with it then.
	Let's see.
	We've got Marky Mark.
	Thank you for the tip.
	He said the phrase methods and sources enables all sorts of mischief, all sorts of cover-ups.
	Yeah, isn't that interesting?
	They use these vague terms, and that is just like a loophole that you can drive an 18-wheeler through, even if you can't speak English, right?
	Plasma Stream, thank you for the tip.
	He said, I expected nothing from them in regards to the Epstein files, but I will accept the free nails to hammer the MIGA's coffin on the public square and in conversation.
	That's right.
	And again, that was MIGA, M-I-G-A, made Israel great again.
	That's right.
	Got to be careful when you're saying those words.
	Yeah.
	Defy tyrants 1776.
	Anybody else think Trump didn't look or sound well?
	Well, he hasn't looked or sounded well my entire life, so it's kind of hard to say.
	Well, somebody actually called him out on his raspy voice.
	I've got a clip about this here.
	President, I have a question about Venezuela, but can I just first ask the hell the president's always news?
	Your voice sounds a little rougher.
	You're feeling our own.
	I feel great.
	I was shouting at people because they were stupid about something having to do with trade and a country, and I straightened it out, but I blew my stack at these people.
	Well, it sounds like there's a follow-up.
	Yeah, so it's just, you know, it's just the yelling at people.
	That's nothing to see.
	Just move on.
	Hey, Piggy, that'll do, Pig.
	Go ahead.
	Me spiggy.
	Yeah, Supra Charger.
	I saw a Toyota Supra on the road the other day, actually.
	There's not many of them left around.
	Too many people wrapped them around telephone poles and things.
	It was exciting to see it.
	Exciting to see it.
	Supercharger says the Tates and Myron Gaines are leading beat-down men into evil and vice.
	We need to find better male role models for them.
	That's the whole point.
	I mean, you know, why make these people role models?
	You know, that's our question, right?
	You know, I understand why Trump likes them.
	He's one of them.
	He's just like them.
	But that's the question.
	They are undermining our society in a very evil way.
	And it's all, again, I understand the blowback.
	And that's always the danger, you know, when you look at, and I would say, you know, even when you look at Trump's vengeance tour here, right?
	There was a lot of unjustified lawfare that was done against him.
	And on the one hand, I've said in the past, that was what got him elected.
	So he ought to thank some of these people.
	And the money that he spent that he's going to give him, write himself a check, he said, for over $200 million for his legal fees.
	And he's not going to do anything for the J6 people.
	But that money, I just consider that to be campaign expenses because they really put him in office as part of a blowback.
	But there's a right way to handle it and wrong way to handle it.
	And to destroy the rule of law, to set up precedents that I'm going to bring me the man and I'll find the crime, that is the wrong way to handle it.
	And so, you know, when we look at the Tate brothers and they are out there as a pushback against feminism, and I don't use the adjectives of first, third, first, second, or third wave.
	I don't care.
	There'sn't any feminism that is good.
	Being feminine is good, but not feminism.
	And so the pushback against that, there's other ways that we need to push back against it.
	And we need to be wise about how we oppose these things.
	And we need to always have in mind what the goal is, not just to get even, but we have to have a mindset of how we would like to change things for the better.
	And we're going to talk about that when we talk about insurance coming up here in a second.
	Yeah.
	It's also important to remember.
	Andrew Tate has a lot of money.
	He's got a lot of cars.
	He's got everything that the world prizes.
	All this world reveres and worst to own, as the song says, right?
	And any person with an ounce of common sense would look at his life and say, I would never want that.
	Any person should be able to look at that and say, not for me, thank you.
	He is just so obviously empty and trying desperately to fill a void with whether it's social media attention or sex or drugs or anything.
	He is desperate.
	And it's obvious.
	Yeah, there was an interesting back and forth.
	How many men look at that and say, that's what I need.
	That's what I need.
	If only I had his Bugatti or if only I had all these women throwing themselves at me, I'd be satisfied.
	You won't.
	You won't.
	It's obviously not working for him because he's still trying.
	He's still striving.
	He's still on social media, desperate for attention.
	He's still empty.
	You need Christ.
	Yeah, that's right.
	There was an interesting take from a woman who didn't have any real solution for it.
	She's 87 years old and she's an author.
	She came after Musk responded to a tweet and her response to him went viral.
	It got like 12,000 retweets or something like that.
	And she said, look at this guy, and he's got all this money in the world, but he doesn't seem to enjoy anything in life.
	He doesn't pause and look at anything that is beautiful.
	He doesn't relax.
	And you could say that about pretty much all of these billionaires.
	And you could certainly say it about somebody like Andrew Tate.
	They're constantly, they're like a shark.
	They're constantly eating, right?
	Constantly looking for new prey.
	And they can't just be content to sit on the beach because if they did that, the shark would die.
	And so she said that, and it really got under his skin, but it was really true.
	She said, you know, very simple people out there can enjoy the beauty in their life and they can enjoy persons that they're around and that type of thing.
	And then she criticized him for not embracing the transgender aspect of one of his children.
	So it's like, okay, well, I know where she's coming from.
	This is somebody who does not have a base of understanding.
	She can't even understand what reality is.
	But, you know, we can look at this and we can see the billionaires and so many of these influencers and just how empty their life can be because of what they're chasing.
	And I think that we need to always keep that in mind.
	Marky Mark, thank you for the tip.
	He said, Elon is a biblical name.
	Remember Elon the Hittite from Genesis?
	Well, is that where Elon is from?
	Is he a Hittite?
	I don't know.
	That's interesting.
	You know, you talk about the Hittites.
	That was before evolution, the big higher criticism of the Bible was, it talks about all these different nations and tribes and civilizations.
	We have no record of them existing.
	And Hittites were like Exhibit A. Whoever heard of the Hittites, except in the Bible.
	They don't exist anywhere in the Bible.
	Then when they started doing biblical archaeology, they found a wealth of archaeological evidence of the Hittite society.
	And that's the way it typically goes.
	But we're going to take a quick break, folks, and we'll be right back.
	Whoops.
	Hang on a second.
	we are.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	If you like the Eagles on the Dark Desert Highway, the cars.
	And Healy Lewis in the news.
	This ain't the harder on the roads to be.
	You'll love the Classic Hits channel at APS Radio.
	Download our app or listen now at APSRadio.com.
	Yes, welcome back.
	And Travis, you said we've got a couple of tips that we missed that were there.
	We want to thank the people for that.
	Yes.
	Want to thank Marky Mark in New Jersey.
	It says the phrase methods and sources in all sorts.
	Yeah.
	Oh, we did?
	Yeah, we did.
	You must have missed when that got covered.
	Yes, but I agree with him.
	That is a giant loophole.
	All right.
	I don't think we covered Plasma Stream, but just in case, I expected nothing from them in regards to the Epstein piles, but I will accept.
	No, you covered that one as well.
	You covered them all, and I'm just so used to reading them myself.
	Well, that'll do, Pig.
	Just be quiet, Pig.
	And it wasn't just in that interchange, but Trump is getting especially touchy.
	You know, he's always been temperamental.
	He's always had temperament issues.
	But ABC's Mary Bruce hit him in the Oval Office with a couple of tough questions.
	Here's what she had to say.
	Mr. President, is it appropriate, Mr. President, for your family to be doing business in Saudi Arabia while you're president?
	Is that a conflict of interest?
	And, Your Royal Highness, the U.S. intelligence concluded that you orchestrated the brutal murder of a journalist.
	9-11 families are furious that you are here in the Oval Office.
	Why should Americans?
	Who are you with?
	And the same to you, Mr. President.
	Who are you with?
	I'm with ABC News, sir.
	You're with who?
	ABC News, sir.
	Fake news.
	ABC fake news.
	One of the worst things.
	So he doesn't have to answer it.
	I'll ask you a question.
	I have nothing to do with the family business.
	I have left, and I've devoted 100% of my energy.
	What my family does is fine.
	They do business all over.
	They've done very little with Saudi Arabia, actually.
	I'm sure they could do a lot.
	And anything they've done has been very good.
	That's what we've done.
	We've built a tremendous business for a long time.
	I've been very successful.
	I decided to leave that success behind and make America very successful.
	And I've made America more successful by far than it ever was.
	America's looking like a casino.
	It never could have been, no matter who was president.
	There would be nobody bringing in $21 trillion, that I can tell you right now.
	As far as this gentleman is concerned, he's done a phenomenal job.
	You're mentioning somebody that was extremely controversial.
	A lot of people didn't like that gentleman that you're talking about.
	Whether you like him or didn't like him, things happen, but he knew nothing about it.
	And we can leave it at that.
	You don't have to embarrass our guests by asking a question like that.
	You know, I feel painful about the families of 919 in America.
	But we have to focus on reality.
	Reality, based on Siyah documents and based on all the documents, that Osama bin Laden used Saudi people in that event for one main purpose, is to destroy this relation, to destroy the American Saudi religion.
	So they're the victims of this.
	So whoever buying that, that means they are helping Osama bin Laden purpose of destroying this relation.
	He knows that strong relation between America and Saudi Arabia is bad for extremism, it's bad for terrorism.
	And we have to approve him wrong and to build our relation and continue developing our relationship.
	It's critical in the safety of the world.
	It's critical against extremism and terrorism.
	About the journalists, it's really painful to hear.
	you know, anyone that been losing his life for no real purpose or not in a legal way.
	And it's been painful for us in Saudi Arabia.
	We've did all the right steps of investigation, et cetera, in Saudi Arabia.
	And we've improved our system to be sure that nothing happened like that.
	And it's painful and it's a huge mistake.
	And we are doing our best that this doesn't happen again.
	Mr. President.
	All lies.
	First of all.
	Oops, we murdered a reporter.
	That was a terrible mistake.
	We've got systems in place to prevent us from murdering reporters on accident.
	Yeah, we accidentally chopped him up in little pieces over an extended period of time.
	Whether he's alive at the time or not, we don't know.
	But Trump's reaction sounded like a mafia don, didn't it?
	You know, well, hey, you know, a lot of people didn't like him, but things happen.
	You know, things happen.
	And then the Saudi guy, you realize that Tim Osman, the CIA operative, you know, he was really doing this and using Saudi people because he wanted to hurt the relationship between Saudi Arabia and America.
	That was his real goal and all of that, even though he didn't do it, even though it was inside the job of our own government.
	His real issue, he wanted to destroy tourism in Saudi Arabia.
	And he wanted to destroy that relationship between America and the Saudis.
	Isn't that an amazing explanation for 9-11?
	I'd never heard that one before.
	Trump's thing sounding like a mafia don.
	First, it's no conflict of interest if my children are profiting off of this because I'm not involved in the family business anymore.
	So therefore, even if my children are profiting off of it, he doesn't see that as a conflict of interest.
	Well, it's just like what Biden did with Hunter.
	It's the same exact thing.
	He's the big guy, and they're trading on his influence with these deals that they have.
	And so one person said, thank you to Mary Bruce for giving it to that child rapist.
	Let's not sanitize what he has done.
	He finds a sick, twisted pleasure in defiling and ripping apart the innocence of a child.
	And much respect to her for calling him out on what is yet another terrorist that he brings in and honors.
	The one that he had last week was the guy who was always with Al-Qaeda and ISIS and al-Nusra and the guy that our criminal government, the CIA, helped in the Pentagon, put in power.
	They gave him air support and everything else to put him in power.
	And now that head chopper there is coming after Christians and Alawites and a lot of different minority groups.
	So Trump says to Mary Bruce, you're a terrible person.
	That would be a compliment coming from somebody like him and somebody like this terrorist.
	He keeps bringing in these terrorists there.
	Trump dismisses the murder while praising the clown prince, says the New York Times.
	Trump brushed off the murder of Jamal Khashoggi by Saudi agents saying, you know, things happen.
	Fighter jets and investment deals were on the agenda for today.
	And it's not just Trump, but there's also the Trump media that is blowing it off as well.
	Trump strongly defended Prince Mohamed, who U.S. intelligence has said ordered the killing of Jamal Khashoggi, the journalist who was killed by Saudi agents.
	Trump closed his remarks by thanking the Saudi clown prince for his earlier commitment to invest a trillion dollars.
	And that, folks, is, by the way, is absurd.
	You know, it's just like the ridiculous amounts that have been pledged by the EU.
	There's no way that they're ever going to make those kinds of investments.
	It's too much in terms of their gross domestic product.
	They don't have that much money.
	The clown prince said, no one speaks better than the president.
	He hailed the U.S.-Saudi relationship.
	He said, we believe the opportunities are huge.
	He ended his short remarks by saying that betting sites had placed bids on what he might be wearing.
	I guess I'm going to bid that he's going to be wearing a white sheet.
	What do you think?
	What's your bet, Liz?
	He always wears the same outfit everywhere.
	Has he got a different thing that holds a sheet on his head?
	Does he change that from day to day?
	Maybe he's got some colored underwear or something.
	I don't know.
	The pattern of the picnic blanket he wears on his head is going to change.
	Yeah.
	Trump just announced that he was elevating Saudi Arabia to the role of a major non-NATO ally, meaning the kingdom and the U.S. have agreed to work closely together on military and economic initiatives.
	No, what it means is that they're going to sell them some fighter jets, and that's all that that means.
	It's just for the military-industrial complex.
	Also, there was Apple chief executive Tim Cook and NVIDIA's chief executive Jensen Huang.
	They sniff a lot of money that could come around there.
	But certainly, the key thing is that he doesn't have the trillion dollars to invest in the country.
	He's talking about a trillion-dollar investment, but that is the size of Saudi Arabia's entire annual gross domestic product.
	They're not going to invest that much.
	It's just like the meaningless pledges from Ursula fond of lying about the kind of investment that the EU was going to make in the U.S. when they were talking about tariffs.
	These people throw these numbers out.
	Trump loves it.
	He parrots these things out.
	And somebody will go back and say, how big is that compared to their income, their annual income?
	And when you look at it and you realize that there's no way that they're going to make that kind of an investment, nobody pays attention to it.
	That should literally be the first thing anyone does.
	Anyone with even a shred of common sense should look at these numbers and go, well, what's the entire country's GDP?
	What's their total export?
	And realize this is an impossibly high number.
	They're not going to commit this percentage of their entire GDP to one thing.
	That's right.
	It's just ridiculous and absurd.
	So it's just lies and BS that we're being fed.
	And by the way, if you want to get upset about Khashoggi's murder, yeah, you know, one murder is a tragedy, but a million people being killed by a vaccine that Trump cheers.
	Or even if you just look at the direct kinetic murders, you know, the bombings, he's got 70 some odd people that he's killed, and one of them, for sure, a fisherman that was not doing any drugs.
	So Trump has killed far more people.
	And so I guess, you know, it's not a big deal for him to host other terrorists since he is a terrorist as well.
	Because he killed them for political reasons, right?
	And to strike fear.
	So I said, Mohammed said that he's in discussions about contributing Saudi money to reconstruction efforts in Gaza.
	He said, it'll be a lot.
	Trump interjected, although the clown prince did not confirm the prince is not keen to get involved in reconstructing or policing Gaza at a time when his financial capital is limited, and he is largely focused on his domestic economic priorities.
	Unlike Trump, right?
	In other words, you can say, at least this guy is focused on domestic economic priorities, not Trump.
	He's out there doing everything he can.
	He now wants to be the leader of the world.
	And that is his aspiration, and it's where his ego has led him.
	And he really doesn't care about what happens with America.
	Trump spends a lot of time denigrating the press, but the vitriol that he's displaying in front of a diplomatic guest, says the New York Times, is stunning.
	He lashed out the reporter's question, calling her a terrible person, and saying that ABC News' broadcasting license should be revoked.
	So, again, Trump spent some time trying to get the prince to say that he's been the best president for the Saudi Arabian-U.S. relationship, but the terrorist demurred.
	He praised FDR and Ronald Reagan, but not Trump so much.
	Since Trump's election a year ago, Dar Global, a business partner of the Trump organization that he has, that has close ties to the Saudi government, has announced at least four Trump-branded developments in Saudi Arabia.
	The Trump organization is also in negotiations that could bring a Trump-branded property to one of Saudi Arabia's largest government-owned real estate developments overseen by Prince Mohammed himself.
	So again, this kind of crony corruption, crony capitalism, and it has nothing to do with Trump.
	It's all just his kids that are out there.
	And, you know, his being president opens the door, as we've talked about before, with the crypto stuff.
	Everybody says, well, I wouldn't be talking to them if it wasn't for that connection, just like with Hunter Biden.
	And so it's, you know, he says that this guy knew nothing about the murder of Khashoggi, but, you know, hey, a lot of people didn't like him.
	Yeah, things happen, you know.
	So the CIA said in 2021, they assessed that Saudi agents in Istanbul acted on the orders of Mohammed bin Salman when they killed and dismembered Khashoggi in 2018, who had written critically of the Saudi royal family.
	And so if you're a reporter who criticizes that, for right now, the only thing that happens is Trump berates you verbally.
	But he would like to do the same thing himself, quite frankly.
	A lot of people didn't like that gentleman that you're talking about, but things happen.
	And so I think it's very interesting.
	He had jets that were flying over, and he brought him into the more elaborate side of the White House.
	Here's what it looked like.
	This is how we honor terrorists, you know, because he's going to be buying a lot of jet planes, so we'll fly some of them over there.
	And we'll have that other terrorist that we put into office with our coup in Syria.
	We will bring him in on Veterans Day as a slap in the face to our own military.
	Which is amazing, isn't it?
	What does it take?
	What does it take for people to figure out where this guy is coming from?
	Well, the way this was all represented again, as we talk about it, it was epic when he calls a reporter, shut up, pig.
	That was the take from InfoWars.
	And the take from InfoWars is MAGA economy win.
	Look at this.
	Going to give us a trillion dollars and it's like yeah, they're going to pass these lies on to you.
	Uh, if Trump cheers terrorists and if um, he's selling economic bs to the crowd, then Infowars will cheer the terrorists and sell economic bs to the crowd as well.
	Truly is amazing to watch this corruption.
	Well, we're going to take a quick break and when we come back, we're going to take a look at the insurance stuff about Obamacare.
	This big.
	That's the heart of this big fight that shut down the government was.
	What's going to happen with insurance?
	And so we're going to take a look at what the Republicans are talking about doing.
	When we come back, we're going to take a quick break.
	Uh well actually, why don't you do the comments there Travis, before we go?
	All right, i'm just waiting for them to come in.
	Right now.
	That is the one issue with the system we have at the moment.
	Lance is sending them over and again.
	Travis is in Austin.
	He'll be uh, back on monday.
	That's right, be back monday.
	Very excited to be back.
	Well, i've got some here.
	I'm already says.
	In other words, Massey admits he had to allow a poison pill in the bill to get it passed.
	Another shot in the foot.
	Yeah, that's right.
	That's right.
	If you're in Washington, you have to apparently make concessions and do deals with the worst people on the planet.
	Yeah, I would never be interested in being a congressman.
	Uh, because they can shut you down with parliamentary procedure and all that.
	They can put a gag on you where you can't even talk, let alone pass a bill where you think you're going to get something to happen.
	All the government is secret.
	All of it is run by this evil cabal that we call generally National Intelligence, and it's primarily the CIA.
	A lot of times I just use that as shorthand, but it's all these different intelligence agencies, a lot of them military, and of course, the intelligence agencies are not monolithic.
	Some of them have a right-wing agenda, some of them have a left-wing agenda.
	CIA is predominantly left-wing.
	The Military Intelligence Agency is the other way.
	But uh, you can't get anything done.
	Um, nothing is going to happen until the government in Washington collapses and uh, it's going to be difficult to go through, but it can't happen soon enough.
	As far as i'm concerned, that will happen.
	Yeah, we've got nibiru.
	2029 says safety and security equals the most tyrannical terms in the world.
	It's for your safety.
	Yeah, that's right.
	It's for your safety, so you have to go along with it.
	It's for your safety or it's for the kids' safety?
	They love saying it's for the safety of children as they're trying to prey upon them or mutilate them or just flat out murder as many children as they can through abortion.
	That's right.
	There are uh man, those are the comments that I have.
	Okay, i've got another one here from Niburu 2029.
	Back in the mid-90s, while his good buddy Clinton was in office, Trump announced if he ever ran for president, he would run as a Republican to make sure that he could get selected.
	Yeah, and there's a couple more here.
	Was the Piggy reference from the Lord Of The Flies?
	Yeah, that's a good question right there, that's from Plasma Stream also writes, uh, or was it Lord Of The Flies?
	Was it from it or was it actually the thing?
	Yeah, Piggy kind of remember that.
	All right, we're going to take a quick break, folks.
	We'll be right back.
	Old of you to assume Trump reads.
	Yeah, I don't think he does.
	Making sense.
	Common again.
	You're listening to the David Knight Show.
	Whether you're feeling like the booze or Blue Grass, APS Radio has you covered.
	Check out a wide variety of channels on our app at APSradio.com.
	Well, we've been spending almost two hours talking about what's wrong with America, especially in Washington, but also, you know, the different currents that have taken over our society, different role models that we have there.
	I think this was an interesting story that's gone viral.
	This is a FedEx driver who dropped everything to go back and help a grieving woman.
	Her name is Amanda Riggan.
	She works hard as a FedEx driver, and she also runs a mission that she calls Hungry Heroes to encourage others and to thank local heroes by making them food according to its website.
	And here's what happened as she describes it one day.
	Go ahead and run that clip, Lance.
	Hey, everyone, as you can tell, I'm at work.
	I just had to pull over and share something real quick.
	As I'm delivering, I pull up to this house.
	The lady walks out because she's checking her mailbox for her newspaper.
	And I have two boxes for her.
	So we start walking up the driveway together.
	And she asked me if I had a happy holidays.
	And I was telling her how busy it was.
	I told her I had a really great Christmas and New Year's.
	And I asked her the same.
	I was like, how was your holidays?
	And with tears in her eyes, she said it wasn't good.
	And she said, he's sick.
	My husband's sick.
	He has cancer.
	I continue to small talk to try to change the subject because that's awkward.
	And I deliver her package.
	She said, what's your name?
	I said, Amanda.
	And she told me her name.
	I drove off.
	My heart's pounding.
	I do probably 20 more stops and I have to go back.
	You know, with this kind of job, we're on a tight schedule.
	Quicker you do it, the better.
	Quicker you get home.
	I stopped what I was doing.
	I went back to that neighborhood and rang her doorbell and asked her.
	She came down the stairs and she had tears in her eyes when she saw it was me.
	She smiled and I said, ma'am, can I pray with you?
	And she just broke down.
	She came out on the front porch and squeezed me so tight.
	This lady I've never met.
	She held my hand so tight and I prayed for her and her family and for her husband.
	And the point of this is, is a lot of people want the Lord to use them.
	And for me as an example, I pray every day for the Lord to use me.
	But when he's trying to use you or when you feel that call and that tug on your heartstrings, do you move your feet?
	Do you move?
	Because I easily could have just went, I have 100 stops.
	I easily could have just went about the rest of my day thinking about it.
	So when you feel those tugs on your heartstrings and you feel like you need to do this, stop and do it.
	You know what I mean?
	Oh, man.
	That was like the most genuine hug I have received in a long time.
	And I just want to share that with you guys.
	If you're praying for the Lord to help and to use you in people's situations, when he is giving you a chance, do it.
	If not, you're going to continue to think about it and think about it and regret it.
	So be sure you know what you're praying for when you're praying.
	I don't know.
	It made me sad, but yet it made my day.
	This lady was just so alone.
	But anyway, you guys have a good day.
	So I want to play that because, you know, we look at what is it that we can do?
	We can transcend all this evil in government, Washington especially.
	We can transcend it.
	And we can do that with just simple tasks that are one-on-one.
	And that's the only way that we will ever transcend that evil.
	And so I think that is the important thing.
	You know, we look at this national debate and, you know, the problems come down.
	The rot comes from the head down, doesn't it?
	But the solutions are not going to be there.
	And it's something that, you know, each and every one of us needs to be able to do.
	You know, first we establish our relationship with God, as she was talking about, listening to God's leading and then taking action.
	And there's things that we can do at the individual level.
	That's why, you know, politics, you want to keep your head up.
	You want to look and see what is coming and see the different directions, the types of attacks that are coming.
	But politics is not going to protect anybody.
	A good example of that, again, is this big battle of releasing the information, which isn't going to get released anyway.
	But we can transcend that evil, and we have to do it at the local level.
	Gavin Newsom maybe is becoming a Christian nationalist, right?
	Well, that's kind of sarcasm, but he made a speech at a press conference two weeks back.
	And again, he was chiding Trump and blaming him for the shutdown, which is being done by the Democrats for the insurance issue.
	And we'll take a look at that before we run out of time here.
	I hope I'll move this on quickly.
	But he said, I spent a little time at a wonderful Jesuit university.
	If there's anything I remember about my four years with Father Cause is that the New Testament, Old Testament have one thing dominantly in common.
	It's about food and serving those who are hungry.
	Did you realize that?
	I guess that's the Jesuit take on the old New Testament.
	Sum it up.
	No, we should help people.
	We should meet them where their need is, but it's about much more than that.
	And so he said, it's not a suggestion.
	It says bread of heaven.
	It's all about food.
	It's not about suggestion in the Old and the New Testament.
	Its core is central as to what it is to align to God's will.
	Period, full stop, he said.
	This is the guy who more than anybody else has pushed this abomination of same-sex mirage on people.
	He was doing it as mayor of San Francisco in defiance of the law and in defiance of then Governor Schwarzenegger at the time.
	He was marrying people who were same-sex, defying God's law as well.
	He said, these guys need to stop the BS in Washington.
	They're sitting there in their prayer breakfasts.
	Maybe they've got an edited version of Trump's Bible, and they edited out all that stuff, cruelty as the policy, he said.
	And so for many years, writes this person on Christian Post, the left have anxiously warned about the rise of Christian nationalism as an extreme threat to our republic.
	The problem with Christian nationalism isn't with Christian participation in politics, but rather with a belief that there should be Christian primacy in politics and the law, said David French in the New York Times.
	But, you know, the reality is, is that, as I said too many times, politics is really downstream of religion.
	It's people who are secular, who are humanists, people who are people like Gavin Newsome.
	They will be exercising their religion even if they are secularists and atheists.
	Politics advocating for a particular policy outcome based on their own faith are no longer in vogue with most Democrats who are increasingly secular, except that they do have a religion.
	They do have a worldview.
	And that's what we're talking about when we talk about Christianity being the foundation of America.
	And it's what I talk about when I think of Christian nationalism.
	It's a people that embraces those values, that embrace those worldviews.
	The problem is, is that people like Gavin Newsom and the Democrats, they have faith.
	They have unwavering faith in government.
	And they want to treat government as if it were God.
	But I want to get to this insurance thing before we bring on our guest real quickly.
	You know, we've had Trump talk about the fact that they're going to fix Obamacare.
	And we're going to give the money to the people.
	Well, what exactly is the plan that we're supposed to trust?
	They're very cagey about that.
	And, you know, when we talk about false narratives, and this is one of the best examples of it.
	Healthcare premiums have been skyrocketing for 22 million Americans.
	You know, it seems to always happen when the government decides it's going to help somebody.
	We saw this happen with college tuition.
	The more the government got involved, the more the government subsidized college tuition to make it affordable, the more expensive it became.
	And the same thing is happening now with insurance.
	So Trump's pushed to send the federal assistance directly to consumers rather than health insurers.
	But guess what?
	They don't have any details.
	There is no plan.
	You want to get the government out of health care is really what you want to have.
	It's in there too much, and that's what's driving the costs up.
	And Obamacare has failed exactly as people said it would.
	But they use that always.
	Government failure is used as an excuse to increase more government.
	So they're looking at price increases, and they're looking at the price increases and saying, well, now we need to go up on the subsidies as well.
	Just consider this.
	Enacted by the Biden administration in 2021, they enhanced the premium subsidies that made Obamacare policies more affordable.
	And they're saying, if you remove those Biden-enhanced subsidies, people are going to see their premiums go up 114% on average.
	Well, that's just, in other words, their response is once their policies make the prices go up because they have subsidized it, actually made it more than doubles, 114%.
	So after they subsidize it and make the prices go up, their answer is, well, now we need more subsidies.
	Rather than saying we made a mistake the first time around.
	But consider this, a 60-year-old couple with an income of $85,000 could have to pay $20,000 more annually for coverage.
	I don't know.
	They don't say what the total cost is, but they're talking about that's about $1,500 or so more each month if they don't have those subsidies.
	And so this was the fight that shut down the government.
	And guess what?
	Neither party has an answer to this.
	This is the true result of Obamacare, the fact that it more than doubled the cost in a decade.
	The Democrats' answer is, well, let's double down with the subsidies then.
	And the Republicans don't have a plan to reform anything.
	Two senators, Republicans, have jumped on Trump's declaration, sketching out different ways of shifting federal funds to consumers.
	Both of these senators, Rick Scott in Florida and Bill Cassidy, the guy who has become the vaccine cheerleader in Congress, neither of them, because they both had a lot of involvement in the medical business, I should say.
	And they really don't have a plan to start with.
	In other words, the Trump administration, in spite of all the BS that Trump has put out there, well, we're going to give money to people, he hasn't put forward a plan.
	There's been two plans that have been put forward by two senators, Rick Scott, and they're very sketchy.
	They don't have any details, just a general idea of what they would like to do.
	Trump doesn't even have that much of a general idea.
	So Rick Scott said, we need to have some kind of health savings account style accounts to be able to buy health care that people want.
	He has not provided any details about his legislation.
	His proposal does not seek to repeal Obamacare, but he wants to fix it.
	Let me just say, when he says fix it, that doesn't mean repair.
	That means cement it in place.
	Keep this thing.
	And that's really what they're talking about.
	And then you look at Bill Cassidy out of Louisiana.
	He said that they would direct the funds that would have to be spent on the enhanced subsidies into flexible spending accounts that policyholders could use to shop.
	Well, where's the information?
	Where's the competition?
	None of that stuff is there.
	We empower patients to go find the best deal for their dollar that drives competition, that lowers costs, said Cassidy.
	But he would retain Obamacare.
	Again, that's going to be the key thing.
	It's always a ratcheting effect, isn't it?
	You know, why won't they, again, like I said before, one of the things that they could do in terms of affordability, let us keep the money and spend the money first before we send you the taxes.
	So make it fully tax deductible, or better yet, make it a tax credit.
	You do that for education as well.
	The complex U.S. health care system is not designed for patients to shop for services, says this article.
	Consolidation in the industry has decreased competition.
	Yeah, where does that consolidation come from?
	You know, really, just as we were talking yesterday to John Richardson, the FDA is anti-competition.
	They shut down any different approach, any novel approach, anything that is natural, anything that is affordable.
	The FDA is there to shut it down, to criminalize that.
	And while these guys, like Cassidy, do everything they can to push big pharma solutions, quote unquote.
	Giving consumers more control of the funds could actually put upward pressure on health care prices, says the Cato Institute, since they'll have more money to spend on services.
	That, folks, is exactly the mechanism of what caused college tuition to go up.
	You give the students more money with subsidies with this stuff.
	And all of a sudden, now the colleges realize that, and so they raise their prices.
	And there's more money out there, so we'll charge you more.
	And this is why when the government subsidizes something, the cost always goes up.
	And so they don't have a solution to the healthcare issue.
	They shut the government down.
	And again, they created some problems for people who are dependent on the government, dependent on the government for air traffic control, dependent on the government, some of the people because they need to have the food.
	The government wants that control.
	As I talk about the coming Thanksgiving holidays, Sean Duffy says, well, that's it.
	You know, we're now open again, but we still have a shortage of people and so forth and so on.
	They're not going to fix the fundamental problem of that.
	They're not going to fix the fundamental problem of so many people being on welfare because the government wants to have you dependent on them.
	And they're not going to fix the issues with health care either.
	This whole shutdown was just a, again, it was just the government playing their partisan games with each other.
	But we're going to take a quick break and we're going to bring back our guest.
	Oh, wait a second.
	He had a doctor's appointment.
	Okay.
	We had our guesses canceled on us.
	So Dr. Shiva Ayadure, we'll get him back on another time.
	I wanted to talk to him because he's going to be running for Congress.
	And I do, I like not so much.
	I mean, he runs for Congress and he's running for Senate, I should say.
	He ran for president as well.
	I like what he does because he uses that to get attention and then he sells people a grassroots solution.
	And that's really what I want to talk to him about.
	I like that approach that he takes.
	As I talk about Thanksgiving, this article here from Study Finds is telling us that Thanksgiving is going to cost the average American up to $1,000.
	It's like, what?
	I don't see how that could possibly be the case.
	But, you know, it is interesting when we look at what has happened with food.
	We complain all the time about, and of course, this is not just the cost of the food.
	They've included a lot of different things in this cost.
	But when you look at a turkey, for example, I remember we used to listen to old-time radio a lot with the kids when we'd be traveling in the car, taking a trip.
	Because actually, I liked the characterization of the voices.
	They had some people had really, really good voices.
	And it was interesting to go back and get a glimpse into what society was like, let's say in the 40s or something like that, as well as it wasn't anything that you have to worry about the kids hearing.
	And there's one episode, I don't know if you remember it or not, Lance, where they were going on and on about a turkey.
	It was such a big deal because the turkey was like, you know, $50, $60 at the time.
	And we go back and you look at that something that's $50 or $60 back in the 40s, that is really expensive.
	And adjusted for inflation into today's dollars, it's insane.
	But we see that turkeys have become extremely cheap.
	And of course, it's because of the mass production tactics that they've done, which is exactly what we're talking about yesterday, the convenience foods that are there.
	But it's also making the food cheaper.
	And as they make it cheaper, a lot of these techniques that they would do for mass production are really making the food very unsafe.
	And so that's one aspect of it.
	It's not $1,000 for the food.
	If it kept up with inflation, that might have been the case.
	But the average person would spend $952 on food, drinks, decorations, travel, and miscellaneous expenses.
	Never seen travel added before.
	You know, every year they will go in at holiday times, like 4th of July barbecue or something, and they'll total up groceries that people have as part of that meal for that holiday.
	Well, that's only a small portion of this.
	What they said was that food would cost $175 per household, another $110 going towards beverages.
	By that, I think they're meaning alcohol to be that expensive.
	$83 on holiday decorations.
	Miscellaneous expenses, like replacing a broken appliance.
	Are you kidding me?
	I mean, this headline of $1,000 for Thanksgiving dinner is really a clickbait.
	Buying a new outfit for Thanksgiving, another $291 and travel expenses for $293.
	So again, this is not looking at the cost of turkey, even though the pictures throughout the article are turkeys stuffed with dollar bills.
	Part of the reason the price tag feels so high is that Thanksgiving has now morphed into a multi-day event.
	There's not just full family get-together, which 51% of the people do, but household-only dinners and friends-giving celebrations.
	What nonsense!
	Thanksgiving is being erased by Christmas as it consumes more and more of the year.
	Also, I completely forgot to buy my new Thanksgiving outfit this year.
	I need to get on that running out of time.
	Yeah, that's right.
	And speaking of nonsense, Cloudfair, yet again, as we know, yesterday we had some issues.
	Some of our viewers had some issues.
	X was down.
	Chat GPT was down.
	Cloudfair, interestingly enough, is actually there for protection against cyber threats.
	And I guess in the last couple of years, we've seen it shut down more websites than cyber threats have.
	They said that it was not a cyber attack, but it was an internal service degradation that shut down all these different websites.
	I would just say that what we're seeing here as we concentrate and complicate our infrastructure, that concentration and complication equals insidification, which is what Corey Doctorow calls this, as everything becomes more another thing about Cloudflare is it's also another line of attack for certain groups.
	If they can get your website removed from Cloudflare, it leaves you basically unprotected.
	You then have to do all the cybersecurity yourself, and it is incredibly difficult.
	So Cloudflare is not a good website.
	They have deplatformed people, they have gone after people.
	Well, website, you know, you know what I'm talking about.
	They're a service that you basically need to operate on the web.
	And people can go to them and say, wow, you're platforming this kind of hate, this kind of rhetoric.
	Yeah, that's right.
	And then, boom, you get knocked off Cloudflare, and then your life becomes infinitely more difficult when trying to exist online.
	Well, I'm interested to see what alternatives there are to Cloudflare.
	I'm sure there's something because that's another big part of the problem is that it's all being consolidated.
	So that if, like, that major outage that we had just a couple weeks ago was one server on Amazon's cloud service thing went down and that took out half the internet, it seemed.
	It was the amount of centralization of what was supposed to be a decentralized network, the internet, is pretty shocking.
	Yeah, that's what I was saying.
	centralization and the complication of our infrastructure is basically a real sword of Damocles hanging over our heads.
	And another one of these is AI again.
	We've now seen Google has pulled down their AI chatbot because it accused Marsha Blackburn of a crime and it had absolutely no basis for it.
	She said it's an act of defamation produced and distributed by a Google-owned AI model.
	This is Senator Marsha Blackburn from Tennessee.
	She'll probably be the next governor of Tennessee.
	And this AI model that they call Gemma falsely claimed that Blackburn had been accused of rape.
	When asked if there was any such allegation against her, the AI's answer wasn't simply yes, but it created an entire fabricated story.
	You know, we saw this very early on with Jonathan Turley, and he wrote about it.
	And it had, as part of a bio, he looked it up and he asked for information about himself.
	And it said that he had been accused of sexual misconduct as he took, he's a law professor, as he took like a field trip or something with his students to Alaska.
	He said, first of all, I don't do that.
	Secondly, I've never been to Alaska.
	Thirdly, nobody has ever accused me of sexual assault.
	Every detail about it was wrong, but it was highly detailed.
	It imagined all of this stuff.
	And it's the same kind of stuff that you see from these large language models that you see when you're doing images.
	I mean, it's one of the things that makes images interesting, you know, when you're doing video because it'll imagine a lot of interesting details that it would take you a while to put in.
	But, you know, it's one thing when you're doing that in art.
	It's another thing when you're talking about people's lives.
	What it did was it said during her 1987 campaign for Tennessee State Senator, a state trooper, quote, alleged that she pressured him to obtain prescription drugs for her and that the relationship involved non-consensual acts.
	The compelling narrative would have been enough to fool somebody who wasn't familiar with AI's habit of hallucinating.
	But Blackburn claims that Gemma also generated fake links to made-up news articles to back it all up.
	And if you checked them, if you actually clicked on the links, they were all dead ends.
	They didn't exist.
	She said, this is not a harmless, quote-unquote, hallucination, she said.
	It is an act of defamation produced and distributed by Google-owned AI model.
	And she demanded that Google shut it down until you can control it.
	And since she is a very powerful senator, that's exactly what they did.
	That's not going to happen with you and I, but they did it for her.
	They pulled the plug.
	They argued that the GEMA model was intended to be used by developers.
	It was never intended to be a consumer tool or a model.
	So they yanked it from AI Studio.
	Google also rebuffed Blackburn's claims that its AIs exhibited a pattern of bias against conservative figures by admitting to the far larger problem of hallucinations being inherent to the large language model technology itself.
	What do you know about AI Studio, Lance?
	It's just a place where Google has a bunch of different AIs that you can try to do.
	Is it really targeted to developers or is it something that's out there for the public?
	I mean, it's out there for the public.
	You just log on to it on any browser that is signed into a Gmail account, which is almost everyone.
	Yeah, so they're lying about that as well, right?
	It's restricted to only Gmail account holders.
	Oh, there you go.
	If you had a Gmail account, you're obviously a developer.
	And the other thing that we've seen from Google is that they were using AI to search people's emails.
	You know, if you've got a Gmail account, they'll use it to search that.
	So they want everybody to have a Gmail account.
	They'll entice you by saying, well, if you get that, you've got access to some of our AI art tools, but then they will start searching all of your mail email by AI.
	Her complaints prefigure enormous legal quagmires in the future, the seeds of which are being planted as we speak.
	Now, this is another issue for AI and the financial aspect of it.
	Even if you don't use AI, what's going to happen when that AI bubble bursts?
	Well, this summer, a Minnesota solar firm sued Google for defamation after the search engine's giant, notoriously shoddy AI overviews falsely claimed the business was being investigated by regulators and had been accused of deceptive business practices, backing these claims again with bogus citations.
	We've seen people use lawyers who've used it to put together case briefs and it fabricates cases that don't exist and other things like that.
	So it comes after people with bogus allegations and references, articles that don't exist, the rest of this.
	Reporting from the New York Times said that the suit is one of at least six defamation cases filed in the U.S. over content generated by AI models.
	And so we're going to take a quick break and we come back.
	We're going to take a look at some more tech issues that are there.
	We've got a comment and a contribution from Mad Mims.
	Thank you very much.
	And says, check email.
	So I appreciate that.
	I will look it up.
	See if we can find that, but I'll have to do that after the show.
	And Defy Tyrants 1776 said, DK, Baron Trump is worth $150 million.
	He's made $50 million since his daddy took office nine months ago.
	He's 19 Euros old.
	How did he do that so fast?
	I'm sure that has nothing to do with his daddy being president, don't you think?
	I mean, this is not family influence that he's cashing in on at all.
	I mean, Trump specifically said that he's not involved in the family business.
	That's just Baron Trump's business acumen as a 19-year-old genius.
	That's right.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	He just happened to be working with the same people that Trump has in the White House.
	And if you believe that, he's got something even better than a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
	He's got a used casino that he could sell you as well.
	Jordan has some comments.
	Yeah, go ahead.
	You got some comments, Travis?
	Let me check.
	In fact, I do.
	We got this about Mohammed bin Salman, Nibiru 2029.
	Caligula Trump constantly demonstrates his love for sleeping with the enemies of the United States.
	Yeah, that's our good friend, Mohammed bin Salman.
	Done so much for the United States.
	I, for one, remember the time when I was broken down on the side of the highway and past me drove a motorcade.
	And Mohammed bin Salman stopped and he hopped out and he changed my tire for me.
	He was a good guy.
	He's done so much for me personally.
	And I'm sure for all of you as well.
	The Syrian girl says the most offensive thing in that interview was the smile on the air face when the murder was brought up to him.
	Just, uh-huh, yeah, that happened, didn't it?
	Yeah, you know, things happen.
	Yeah.
	Sometimes you just have to chop a guy up and put his pieces into suitcases.
	I mean, that was such a mafia comment, wasn't it?
	Yeah.
	Oh, yeah, things happen.
	I don't know what happened with this.
	It'd be a shame if something were happened to some of you reporters, wouldn't it?
	It's a very nice outlet you got there.
	I'd hate to see anything happen to it.
	Yeah.
	Habibi, my friend, my friend Habibi.
	This is not the line of questioning you wish to pursue.
	Defy Tyrant 1776.
	Oh, that's the one you read about Baron Trump.
	Well, that's the comments we have right now.
	Yeah.
	Swami Goy says that Saudis are the fuel.
	Israelis are the propaganda wing.
	America is the muscle.
	Yeah, it is a I guess we've got an accord.
	We've reached an accord on all that stuff.
	We're going to take a quick break.
	We'll be right back.
	Listening to The David Knight Show.
	You're listening to The David Knight Show.
	Whether you're feeling like the blues or bluegrass, APS Radio has you covered.
	Check out a wide variety of channels on our app at apsradio.com.
	Well, welcome back.
	I mentioned this briefly yesterday.
	The fact that Reason Magazine has done several articles about and praise of driverless cars.
	And I think they've really lost the plot here.
	I mean, the key thing, they try to make it, they say, well, you know, we need to have more, not less, driverless cars.
	These things are so incredibly safe.
	The demand for self-driving services like Waymo grows, and so does the evidence of their safety.
	Well, I've not seen that evidence, as a matter of fact.
	And I would like, if you want to compare it to human drivers, pull out all the people who were drunk when they were driving.
	Those people are still going to be on the road, by the way, even if you've got self-driving cars.
	Except that where we know this is going, and Eric Peters has talked about this forever.
	As long as he and I have been talking, we've been talking about the crony capitalism of Elon Musk, and we've been talking about self-driving and what the real issue is with that.
	And as he pointed out, we've got autopilot on planes, but in order for that to work, you've got to have the air traffic controllers keeping these planes way far away from each other.
	And in the same way, you're going to have to have no human drivers.
	You can't have that human element there, especially intoxicated drivers or something like that.
	You can't have that if you're going to have the self-driving cars.
	They're going to have to be there on their own.
	They're going to have to have full situational awareness and control of each and every thing, or it's not going to work.
	And The take that reason has here is that these are people who are just Luddites.
	The new Luddites want to pump the brakes on driverless cars.
	With innovation comes those who fear it, they say.
	No, here's the real issue.
	It's about freedom, not safety.
	And it really bothers me to see libertarians selling a false safety that is out there, the illusion of safety is always used.
	It's never, usually when you sacrifice your liberty, you're sacrificing it, as Benjamin Franklin said, for the promise of safety, not for the reality of safety.
	And even if what you were giving it up for was safety initially, as I've said many times, if you become a slave, and to the extent that you give up your liberty piece by piece, slicing off little bits of it, each time you slice off your liberty, you become more of a slave.
	And slaves are never safe.
	So you're never going to get that safety.
	But as Jefferson said, he prefers dangerous liberty to peaceful slavery.
	And I prefer dangerous driving the car myself to the promise of peaceful safety by a self-driven car.
	The problem is, as I've said many times, so many doctrinaire libertarians and libertarian or conservative think tanks think that business can do no wrong.
	Government can do no right.
	And the liberals think that government can do no wrong and business can do nothing right.
	And what both of them miss is the fact that it is a uniparty, right?
	In the sense that business, big business, and government have merged into a kind of fascist symbiotic relationship that is here.
	And they just completely miss the bigger picture.
	They said the reality is, yeah, go ahead.
	Any group that fails to realize the nature of humanity, the fallen sin nature of humanity, will never understand why these things happen.
	That's right.
	Any system, no matter who makes it, it could be the most well-intentioned, the most thoughtful person on the planet.
	Eventually, they'll be dead or it will pass on to someone else who may not have those same intentions.
	And since human nature is fallen, it will fall as well.
	Everything built by human hands will eventually corrode, degrade, decay.
	And you have to continually fight and maintain these fight against the corruption to maintain these systems.
	If you do not do that, if you aren't continually striving to make the system better, it will automatically get worse.
	You can never rest on your laurels.
	You can never sit here and say, we have built the perfect system.
	Our system of government is flawless.
	It works well.
	I'm checking out.
	If you want a good system, you have to sit there and continuously, sedulously maintain it, monitor it, look at it, and make sure that the people who are in charge are doing what they're supposed to be doing.
	Because as I said, human nature is fallen.
	You can't put it on autopilot like a Waymo.
	And the founders understood that as well.
	Because they came at government from the understanding that we were creatures of God, and that meant that we all had certain inalienable rights.
	And by the way, that's all persons, not citizens.
	We look at the different Bill of Rights and other things like that, due process.
	That means anybody that's within the jurisdiction of the government needs to be treated as someone who is created by God in his image, not just simply the citizens that are there.
	But they also understood, as you point out, as Madison said, because we are not angels, we need to have government, but because the government's going to be consisting of human beings, we have to really keep an eye on them.
	Who watches the watchers type of thing?
	And as Jefferson point out, we have to constantly be reforming it.
	We're going to have to have more revolutions as it gets off course.
	You constantly have to course correct it.
	It's not an autopilot thing.
	And just by producing a paper document like the Constitution, it's not self-enforcing.
	And if we don't require these people to follow basic moral and ethical principles, we're going to have an immoral, unethical government, which is what we have.
	So the land is always effectively whatever the people will tolerate.
	That's right.
	That's right.
	So they've got their statistics.
	In this article, they try to make excuses for Waymo.
	They don't talk about the situations where they all went to one intersection and froze.
	They don't talk about how they drive so slowly that you could set an open cup of coffee on the dashboard and not have it spill.
	They don't talk about all those different aspects and how it freezes, for example, at a four-way stop.
	Because it can't really figure out what the humans are going to do.
	You know, we can kind of glance over and we can kind of get a read on what somebody's going to do at a four-way stop, but it is hesitant.
	And so hesitant that it just freezes.
	And then the people behind it get outraged and they go zooming around it, and that's when accidents happen.
	That's why I say you're going to have to take the people out of the equation completely.
	Otherwise, they can't really navigate things like four-way stops and it's going to cause rage with the driver's.
	Automaton cannot comprehend free will and as such cannot comprehend the human nature.
	That's right.
	So, you know, when you look at this, they're trying to walk back some kind of famous cases here.
	They had a cat that was run over by Waymo, and they said, well, it was just a bodega cat.
	It really didn't really belong to anybody.
	So it really wasn't very important.
	And they made a big deal of the fact that it hit one of these autonomous food delivery things, this little R2D2 that was delivering food.
	More robot-on-robot violence.
	That's right.
	Sad to see.
	They got R2.
	The reality is that human drivers are far more likely to be involved in harmful accidents than driverless vehicles are, says Reason.
	And they give some statistics, which I seriously question.
	91% fewer serious injuries, 92% fewer pedestrian crashes with injuries, 79% fewer crashes resulting in airbag deployment.
	Well, they haven't even put these things on the interstate.
	So that's a bogus reference there.
	I also have the question.
	Now, I'm assuming Reason isn't being too dishonest.
	I'm assuming they've adjusted it for scale.
	They've looked at it and said, well, there's orders of magnitude more human drivers.
	And as such, you are just going to have far more accidents there, as opposed to just putting in the raw numbers and going, look, you know, the autonomous vehicles have only had a few instances of accidents when there's only a few, who knows how many thousands, as opposed to the hundreds of thousands of people driving every day.
	So I assume they're being at least good faith with those numbers, right?
	Yeah.
	The only thing I've seen where they play games with these numbers is that they'll have all accidents attributed to the person that hit or was hit by the car rather than say that like the total number of accidents they're involved in,
	but rather the number of accidents that they claim it caused when it's driving super cautiously and that amount of hesitation itself can cause an accident even if they aren't legally liable.
	You know, I think if you're going to do an apple-tapple comparison, you need to look at how many accidents have and injuries have people had when humans are driving golf carts.
	Compare that to these things because that's the real apple-to-apple comparison.
	For example, one of the things that they're talking about here is the delivery robot I mentioned colliding with a robo-taxi at about four miles per hour.
	See, this is a big issue, but it also tells you how these things drive.
	It also tells you one of the reasons why they're not having that many accidents.
	Do you really want to have to drive around at four miles per hour?
	And yet they say the slow approval of self-driving cars is costing lives.
	Yeah, that's right.
	These corporate cheerleaders that are out there.
	Yeah, it's how many of these accidents was because of a Waymo car or was with a Waymo car.
	It's sort of the opposite of the games they paid with the COVID vaccine.
	Yeah, it is very concerning.
	But the luxury electric vehicle, you know, they want to say, well, we need to have a marketplace, don't we?
	Well, you know, the issue is, is that the marketplace, even though it is heavily, heavily subsidized, like the luxury electric vehicle, the marketplace is speaking.
	And Reason Magazine, the libertarians, don't want to listen to the marketplace.
	You know, why shouldn't we be allowed to have the cars that we choose?
	Why should it be forced down our throats?
	And this is an issue above and beyond the self-driving stuff.
	But I think that the self-driving thing was primarily, at the beginning, it was a way for Elon Musk to add a razzle dazzle to the anodyne golf carts that he was selling and say, yeah, they're self-driving.
	It's the future and all the rest of this stuff.
	It's the future if the government controls all of your movement.
	That's the future.
	And that's why the very first competition that DARPA ran was for self-driving vehicles.
	But now that they're taking away the subsidies, the luxury electric vehicle is in trouble.
	Reason needs to look at the marketplace and say, why can't we choose what kind of cars we drive?
	And why, when people are allowed to make these choices, even if the government pays them to make this choice of electric vehicle, people are not choosing that.
	Sales of the expensive battery-powered cars like the Ford F-150 Lightning have stalled, forcing automakers to slow production and offer more affordable vehicles.
	Its future is in doubt.
	Ford has stopped making the truck whose prices start at $55,000 and can rise to more than $85,000 for premium versions with added features.
	And it won't say when or if production will restart.
	For many years, many of the electric vehicles that Americans bought were luxury models that typically sell for more than $80,000.
	Hummers, Porsches.
	When the subsidy went away, the high-dollar vehicles really began to slow down.
	And it's not even just that.
	If you look at BYD, which is the Chinese electric vehicle company, they are much, much cheaper.
	And they've got some cheap models.
	It's just people are not choosing to have this technology because it's not mature enough to be practical yet.
	And the government's everywhere trying to force this.
	So even the cheap Chinese EVs are having a big issue.
	The chief executive Volkswagen and Porsche said in a conference call, we have seen a clear drop in demand for the exclusive battery electric cars, and we're taking that into account.
	The vice president of Edmonds, which does research on cars, of course, said a lot of people thought that the high-end luxury EV segment was going to be sustainable and that it would continue to grow.
	But with all the changes that have come into the industry, it's just not as big as we thought.
	I guess my big question is, will they be able to recover?
	You know, I look at the analogy of what is happening with the deindustrialization of the West.
	And the first place that that hits is with the automobiles, with steel and with other things like that, because of power and because that's being shut down.
	And I just kind of wonder, it's kind of like the COVID lockdown, this deindustrialization.
	And when you look at how it impacted the education of a lot of kids who were reliant on schools, I wonder how long it's going to take the industrial part of Europe and America to recover from this forced lockdown by the globalists based on climate nonsense.
	How long is it going to take to recover from that?
	Just as we saw the farms being damaged by Trump's lockdowns, they couldn't get product to market in the format that they were selling it.
	So they were just basically destroying the food at the farm while there was nothing on the shelves of the grocery stores.
	This is what happens when government gets involved.
	And we'll just have to see if this is a fatal thing or if this is some kind of a hit that it's just going to take a long time to recoup from.
	A Ford deal in Arizona said about 75% of the electric models that he was selling were leased.
	He said, but without a strong lease proposition on these vehicles, they become very much on the high end from the affordability standpoint.
	Mercedes is offering discounts of $10,000 or more on some electric models and as much as $50,000 discount on a Maybach, which has a starting price of $180,000.
	They can't sell these things even to the uber-rich.
	It truly is amazing.
	And we're going to take a quick break, folks, and we will be right back.
	Defending the American Dream.
	You're listening to the David Knight Show.
	Hear news now at APSradionews.com or get the APS Radio app and never miss another story.
	Well, as I mentioned earlier in the program, we got Mike Pompeo is now advising a Ukrainian weapons company that is at the center of a massive corruption scandal within the company.
	He's now figured out a way to give them classes on how to lie, cheat, and steal, just like he did at the CIA.
	He is advising a heavily scrutinized Ukrainian defense firm called Firepoint, which will allow him to benefit directly from Western military aid to Ukraine.
	The war that he has advocated very heavily for, more and more spending, and this is yet another example of the revolving door for these military-industrial complex types.
	Quickly rising to prominence in wartime, this company, Firepoint, is currently under scrutiny for alleged price gouging practices.
	No, really?
	I guess that would be the way they advise them to operate.
	That's the way the military-industrial complex operates here in the U.S., right?
	Why not do it over there?
	And for its ties to a Zelensky associate being investigated for corruption charges, critics also charge that the company has an unfair monopoly over the drone market.
	Earning about a billion dollars this year, Firepoint is now constructing a factory in Denmark.
	Responsible Statecraft reported last summer that Pompeo stood to benefit from the Trump peace plan that he proposed in the Wall Street Journal, which called for the Ukraine to join the EU for a $500 billion lend-lease program for Ukraine to buy U.S. weapons, which he could sell and profit from.
	He is also director at a prominent Ukrainian telecom company.
	You know, this is again influence peddling.
	Same kind of stuff that we saw from the Biden administration.
	Isn't it interesting how much they are alike?
	Pompeo would have stood to gain from the economic benefits realized through the Ukraine.
	And again, this is why we have these wars in the first place.
	It's simply because of these types of reasons.
	The graft scandal has weakened Zelensky, says the French paper Lamond.
	Zelensky is scrambling to secure support from Western backers after being weakened by a $100 million corruption scandal involving a close ally, the same guy that's there.
	These people are just as corrupt as they can be.
	It's no different than the Biden administration and Hunter being put on as director of an energy company or whatever it was.
	I mean, Burisma.
	And it just, you know, they even run the same grifs, the Republicans and the Democrats.
	But we're supposed to believe that they're completely different, right?
	The revelations of widespread corruption in Kiev could provide significant arguments for European politicians advocating for reduced aid to Ukraine.
	The anti-corruption probe by Ukraine's Western-backed National Anti-Corruption Bureau uncovered an alleged $100 million embezzlement scheme involving state-owned nuclear energy from Inner Goatom.
	Investigators have linked the company to this same guy, Timur Mindich, a close associate and former business partner of Zelensky.
	So this is a different company, but the same guy, because he's involved in a nuclear energy firm as well as the military-industrial complex.
	Again, looking very much like America, right?
	France has demanded that Ukraine engage in decisive fight against corruption as Zelensky arrived in Paris to seek military support from Macron on Monday.
	And of course, his wife loved to shop in Paris.
	She was famous for spending $50,000 in just an hour shopping in Paris.
	I wonder how they fed all that stuff in the car.
	When she has an 18-wheeler that they backed up to the place, no, she's not buying in bulk.
	It's the stuff that she gets is so incredibly overpriced.
	You know, $4,000 purses and all this kind of stuff.
	It does add up, you know, pretty quickly when you do that.
	So, this, folks, is what our money is going for.
	Even Bill Gates said that Ukraine was the most corrupt country on earth.
	And that explains one of the reasons why we are there and why we have our politicians who always talk about national security.
	They always want to get involved in these wars because then when the bullets start flying, people aren't really paying attention who's grabbing the cash and running.
	That's another example of this.
	Well, we see that while we're talking about war, let's take a look at Trump's policy towards Latin America.
	And of course, it is the big stake policy Completely different than the way that Teddy Roosevelt said.
	He said, walk softly but carry a big stick.
	Trump's approach is to scream at people and hit them in the face with a stick.
	And so that's what we're looking at here.
	Swagger obnoxiously.
	That's right.
	And then chicken out at the first sign of any resistance.
	Yes, yes.
	But the family of a fisherman who's been killed in the U.S. military strike is saying it just wants to have justice.
	And this is the incident that caused a blow-up with the Colombian president calling out Trump.
	And remember, Trump said, all right, no more subsidies for you guys because you produce cocaine.
	Well, really?
	We've known that for a long time.
	Why were you giving them subsidies?
	The guy who was killed was Alejandro Carranza, a Colombian fisherman who his family said had long plied the Caribbean in search of marlin and tuna.
	He called his teenage daughter and told her he was going fishing, and he said he'd be back in a few days.
	The day after he left, his family, fellow fishermen, and Colombia's president say that he was killed in the U.S. military strike on his boat.
	The furor about what had happened to him has ignited a feud over the U.S. military buildup in the Caribbean and the legality of the deadly attacks on nearly 20 vessels since September.
	Again, if we have a situation where no evidence is presented and there is no due process, they don't pull over the boats and find drugs on it.
	And as I said before, even if they did that, it would still be a violation of U.S. international law to then line the people up on the boat and machine gun them to death, right?
	But the Trump administration just goes directly to that last illegal action without looking to see if they even have any drugs.
	The attacks have enraged the leader of Colombia, Petro, who accused the U.S. of murdering Carranza in one attack.
	Trump responded by imposing sanctions on Petro and his family and moving to slash aid to the country.
	This week, Colombia suspended intelligence sharing with the U.S. until the Trump administration stops its strikes.
	Well, a secret U.S. memo, again, national security, don't tell anybody.
	I've got this secret memo here, has linked Venezuela to a chemical weapons threat.
	Boy, I tell you, you know, history doesn't repeat itself, but it sure does rhyme, doesn't it?
	Here we are back to weapons of mass destruction and lies about weapons of mass destruction.
	This particular time, the lie involves saying, well, they're doing fentanyl, which they're not doing.
	We've already established that.
	It's been known from the very beginning.
	Nobody has ever in the past accused Venezuela of manufacturing or trafficking in fentanyl.
	That's coming from China.
	It's coming from Mexico.
	But they're saying, no, they're making fentanyl, which they're not.
	And then they're calling fentanyl a potential chemical weapon.
	This is in a classified Justice Department briefing authorizing the strikes on these boats.
	So again, secret, no debate, no second guessing.
	There'll be no declaration of war either.
	You're not even allowed to see what they say is the issue, right?
	Isn't that interesting how that works?
	You say this is in terms of national security, and we're going to just get rid of the Constitution.
	Yeah, the whole history repeating itself.
	It reminds me of the guest you had on a while back who was talking about Vietnam.
	And one sort of famous sniper among the Vietnamese was a girl that saw her father just shot randomly by Americans and then said, okay, now I hate Americans.
	I'm going to kill as many Americans as I can.
	It's just creating enemies.
	Obviously, there is no chemical weapons threat from Venezuela, but you're going to start creating people in Venezuela that want to destroy America.
	Oh, yeah, you might create people who will do attacks on us.
	Which is exactly what they want.
	Yeah.
	And I think that the whole issue about this war, I think the timing is very dependent on when it is politically expedient, because there is no threat from Venezuela.
	So the whole reason that they're going to do this, you know, when Trump kicks off this war, which inevitably he will do, it will be too politically expeditious for him.
	It'll be another wag the dog thing.
	And they've now come up with a name for it.
	We had War Pete telling us that he's going to call this Operation Southern Spear.
	Isn't it interesting that whenever they go to war, they always call it Operation something or the other.
	That was what Operation Warp Speed was.
	It was going to war with you and me and all Americans.
	So War Pete says this mission defends our homeland.
	It removes narco-terrorists from our hemisphere.
	And it secures our homeland from the drugs that are killing our people.
	Yeah, right.
	Every single aspect of that is a lie.
	Isn't it amazing?
	You know, you've got people like Mike Johnson and Warpete who wear their Christianity on their sleeve, or in the case of War Pete, they tattoo it on their arm.
	And they are such a reproach to the name of Christ.
	And really, when you look at you will not bear the Lord's name in vain, it's not really talking about the kind of stuff that people like Penn and Teller, you know, when he talked about that, he said, I don't like to use the F-word because it just makes you sound stupid.
	People use that for every aspect of speech.
	They use it for an adjective, a noun, verb, whatever.
	And he goes, but I love to blaspheme the name of Christ because I don't believe in him.
	That's really not what it's talking about.
	It's talking about people who are, just like, you know, talk about an image bearer or whatever.
	This is a name bearer.
	You call yourself a follower of Christ and you do these kinds of things.
	It's just, I got to say, not.
	This is not what Christianity is.
	These people are not the face of Christianity.
	They're the face of hypocrisy and blasphemy.
	Chemical weapons angle is unlikely to be very convincing to congressional leaders, much less to the American public, says Zerohedge.
	But again, the policy is to scream at people and hit them in the head with a big stick.
	Venezuela has long been a transit route for Colombian cocaine, but there's no evidence that it produces or traffics fentanyl, which is typically made in Mexico, smuggled over land.
	It is an incredible stretch, said a former legal advisor to the State Department, and we all know that.
	Fentanyl as a chemical weapon.
	Several years going back, the single biggest source of the world's fentanyl trade has consistently been identified as China and Mexico.
	It's impossible to know, and it hasn't been disclosed, whether any of these some 20 boats have been blown up by the U.S. military have been loaded with fentanyl or in what quantities or whatever they have, right?
	We don't know.
	Was it blow them up?
	We don't look.
	We don't do an inspection.
	We don't do any legal due process.
	So the Trump doctrine for Latin America is chaos, right?
	Santi War.
	And folks, that is his doctrine for America as well.
	Chaos and infighting.
	Divide and conquer.
	Trump is the king of chaos.
	Under Trump, the U.S. is unapologetically an empire operating without pretense.
	That is what has changed.
	The unapologetic aspect of it.
	The idea that these things that they were always didn't want you to see, that they tried to hide from you, that they would deny, he does it openly.
	International law is for losers.
	A newly minted war department deploying the most lethal killing machine in history need not hide behind the sham of promoting democracy anymore.
	Recall that in 2023, Trump boasted, when I left, Venezuela was ready to collapse.
	We would have taken it over.
	We would have gotten all that oil.
	You know, it's the same type of thing he said about Syria as well.
	We should take the oil.
	And they were taking the oil.
	You know, as part of this ongoing war before they overthrew the government, you had American soldiers that were stationed there that were stealing the oil.
	And you would have these reports in the press, and they'd say, well, you know, such and such, there's rockets that hit, and you've had American soldiers in Syria that have been killed or injured because of these rockets.
	What are we doing in Syria?
	Oh, that's right.
	We're stealing the oil.
	We become a giant pirate empire, really.
	That's what this is really about.
	Trump's mission is not about being restrained by respect for sovereignty.
	Venezuela, with our oil under its soil, is now the crosshairs of the empire.
	Not only does Venezuela possess the largest petroleum reserves, but it also has major gold, cobalt, bauxite, and nickel deposits.
	It would be simplistic to think that it is driven only by natural economic motives, however.
	Leverage over energy flows is central to maintaining global influence.
	This is what we saw in Syria as well.
	Syria had some oil.
	It wasn't that large.
	The primary oil issue in Syria was a pipeline from our Arab allies that we wanted to have run across there instead of the pipeline coming from Russia.
	And so that was what that fight was about.
	It's about energy flows.
	Most gallingly, Venezuela nationalized its oil instead of gifting it to private entrepreneurs.
	So Venezuela has got a partnership for defense with China and with Russia and with Iran.
	And so many conservatives will say, well, that's reason enough to go destroy them.
	But they might want to rethink that.
	In 2015, Obama codified what economist Jeffrey Sachs calls a remarkable legal fiction.
	And he's not talking about the Paris Climate Accord.
	That was also 2015.
	That was when John Kerry said, I and Obama have self-ratified this treaty.
	It should never have been treated as anything legitimate.
	It was always a fiction.
	But this is a different fiction about Venezuela.
	Obama's executive order designated Venezuela as an extraordinary threat to U.S. national security.
	It has been renewed by each succeeding president.
	And this executive order is really an implicit recognition of Venezuela's Bolivarian revolution as a counter-hegemonic alternative challenging Washington's world order.
	The AFP reports tensions between Washington and Caracas have dramatically risen as if the one-sided aggression were a tit for tat.
	Venezuela, however, is seeking peace, but it has a gun held to its head.
	Reuters blames the victim, claiming that the Venezuelan government is, quote, planning to sow chaos in the event of a U.S. air or ground attack.
	How dare them defend themselves?
	Same kind of rhetoric that we see in terms of Israel and Gaza.
	How dare them defend themselves from attack?
	Why, we have to step this up.
	In fact, Maduro has pledged prolonged resistance to Washington's unprovoked assaults rather than merely conceding defeat.
	So far, the death toll from U.S. strikes on the small boats off Venezuela exceeds 75 and continues to rise, but not an ounce of narcotics has been confiscated.
	In contrast, Venezuela has seized 64 tons of drugs this year without killing anyone.
	Russian foreign ministries Maria Zakharova said now that the U.S. has suddenly remembered at this historic moment that drugs are evil, perhaps it's worth it for the U.S. to go after the criminals within its own elite.
	Because it's the CIA that created crack cocaine out of Central America, and it was the American government that was escalating the production of opioids out of Afghanistan while we occupied that.
	Yeah, if you want to look at the drug war, I think we has met the enemy, and the enemy is us.
	And a breathtaking understatement, the Washington Post allowed the breadth of firepower would seem excessive for drug interdiction in what is glowingly described as a, quote, stunning military presence.
	Yeah, you can see there's not too much pushback against this war, is there?
	Venezuela is now on maximum military alert with threatening flotilla off of its course, of its coast, and some 15,000 U.S. troops standing by.
	Millions of Venezuelans have joined the militia.
	The populace has united around its Chavista leadership.
	So it's going to blow back on us.
	That's what always happens, right?
	If you would not attack these guys, eventually somebody say, you know, we're kind of tired of being poor.
	Maybe we should try something other than Hugo Chavez and Maduro.
	Maybe we should try something other than socialism and communism.
	But when you attack them, basically they're going to defend their home.
	And that will cause people to become more codified and supportive of these regimes that haven't worked at all and have been extremely oppressive for them.
	Because wartime presidents are always popular.
	The regime that's fighting the American imperialists is going to be popular regardless of what it's done to its own people.
	Yes, that's right.
	And of course, the person that they have chosen, the U.S. puppet that they would like to put into place, she just won the Nobel Peace Prize, Maria Karina Machado.
	And she is the designated leader that the U.S. would like to see in place.
	She is calling for military invasion of her own country.
	How's that going to work out for her?
	This is insane.
	And not only that, but she actually has gone bonkers.
	She said there is absolutely no doubt that Maduro rigged the 2020 election against Trump.
	So you can kind of tell where this lady is coming from, and I think all the people in Venezuela can see it as well.
	This is another example of how it's going to backfire against them.
	This is going to be the politics that's going to backfire against them.
	The Washington Post now finds that the Trump administration's approach is illegal, really.
	The UN experts warned that these unprovoked lethal attacks against vessels at sea amount to international crimes.
	I look at this and I say, I just can't believe that the UN and the Washington Post ever get anything right.
	But this is pretty hard to miss how badly this is set up, how stupidly and foolishly and illegally it's being done.
	So what is new is that the U.S. administration is overtly flaunting supposedly covert machinations, saying, yeah, we've got the CIA is scoping this thing out.
	Usually they have the shame to not say that.
	That was one of the jokes that Dave Chappelle made about Donald Trump.
	He said, these other guys are then there scheming about things that they can do.
	He'll come out and he'll tell you, you know, they're going to do this, this, and this, and there.
	And then he said, rather than stop them, he'll go back in there and join them.
	And that's what we have seen.
	The Wall Street Journal says, nobody in the Trump administration seems prepared to ask the hard questions about what happens if they do destabilize the Venezuelan regime, but if they fail to topple it.
	Oh, that could never happen, right?
	That didn't happen in Iraq or Afghanistan or in these other places.
	So again, what does boots on the ground mean?
	It's really going to mean troops in the ground, casualties.
	This is Latin America under Trump's Don Rowe doctrine, as some people called it.
	So Monroe, it's Don Rowe.
	So, yeah, he is being presented with options and he's saying, well, I haven't made up my mind yet.
	That's one of the most damning statements I've heard.
	Going to war isn't about one individual making up his mind about what he's going to do and when he's going to do it.
	But that's what this is.
	Plasma Stream, thank you for the tip.
	He said, drugs have been winning the war on drugs for about 50 years so far, 54 years.
	I might put a hundred quid on Polymarket to predict that the winner of the next round is going to be drugs.
	Yeah, that's right.
	Citizen of America Kaka says, what do you think it costs us to blow up each of those little fishing dinghies?
	About a million dollars?
	Well, that would be good for the people like Pompeo who work for the military industrial complex.
	Thank you for joining us.
	Have a good day.
	The common man.
	They created common core to dumb down our children.
	They created common past to track and control us.
	Their commons project to make sure the commoners own nothing in 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 thedavidnike show.com.
	Thank you for listening.
	Thank you for sharing.
	If you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers.

▲