The David Knight Show (02/17/2026) exposes Havana syndrome’s microwave weapon claims, contradicting the CIA’s 2022 denial after a Norwegian scientist self-tested in 2024. It ties Trump’s DHS to reckless protest violence—rubber bullets, flashbangs, and gunpoint—citing court rulings and injuries like a musician’s mangled finger and an ER nurse’s concussion. Moderna’s FDA rejection in February 2025 highlights vaccine industry politicization, while Trump’s "Golden Dome" project and drug pricing policies fuel military-industrial and corporate exploitation. Polls show his approval plummeting 19–26 points underwater, signaling electoral peril as his administration undermines democratic norms, from Washington’s legacy to protest rights, in a "spiritual war" of elite control. [Automatically generated summary]
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 Tuesday, the 17th of February.
You're our Lord, 2026.
Well, we have directed energy weapons from Havana syndrome to autonomous killer robots, from El Paso to the Ukraine battlefield, the coming Skynet battlefields that you've seen depicted in Terminator.
We now have Eric Schmidt working to make that a reality and writing op-ed pieces about its soon to be implemented, maybe later this year.
We also have a scientist who is skeptical about the Havana syndrome directed energy weapons, and he used it on himself.
Isn't it interesting how we keep seeing these science fiction plots brought to real life?
And we'll tell you what happened to him.
But the reality is the battlefield of spiritual war.
Even the secularists see it now in the Epstein ducks and what's revealed with that.
But just like the scientists who discovered DNA, they still seek to deny the reality of God that is behind all this.
We'll take a look at all of that, as well as some hope in the movement in the vaccine wars.
Yeah, the protection of those abusers is not over, but the cover-up is.
And we may hopefully be at the beginning of the end of the vaccine wars.
Well, we have a researcher who's skeptical about the Havana syndrome, as the Washington Post reported, who said, I'll prove that there's nothing here.
And I just think that is the strangest thing.
I said from the very beginning, you know, we've had a lot of indications.
There's, I guess this guy is coming from the perspective that we don't have to worry about EMF.
We don't have to worry about our cell phones.
We don't have to worry about the smart meters.
We don't have to worry about the soup of EMF and the biological effects.
But I've been talking about that for a long time.
And so when this Havana syndrome thing came out, I said, of course.
If you go back and you look at the research of a U.S., I think he worked for the Navy, Alan Fry, the only time that the U.S. has funded any research into this, and it was really kind of his own personal project that he got involved in.
And I said when I was talking about that in the context of 5G and the health effects of cell phone towers and the cancer clusters that they've created around schools because they love to put these things close to schools, why do you think that would be?
Anyway, I drew the analogy to microwave ranges.
Remember, the very first microwave ranges were called radar ranges by Amana.
That was very distinctively, because it was kind of discovered by accident that if the technicians left their coffee sitting on top of the radar device there, that somehow the coffee got hot.
Isn't that funny?
I wonder what it was doing to their body, by the way.
Of course, the good news is that this radiation coming from a point source like that decreases with the square of the distance still, if it was in those early days when they weren't trying to do any shielding, who knows what they were exposed to.
Anyway, it was a similar thing like that with Alan Fry.
They were working on a different frequency spectrum, and he had an assistant who kept hearing these clicking noises, crickets types of things.
And it was from the EMF that they're working with.
It's not unusual if you stop and think about it.
It makes perfectly good sense.
Your nerves operate, you know, the optic nerves, the audible nerves, they are operating on electrical signals.
Why wouldn't you think that some kind of an EMF would trigger certain issues with you?
And so he started experimenting with it.
And I talked about that many, many times in the context of 5G and radiation risks that were there.
But also, it's not just the health effects of 5G.
One of the reasons that they have ignored this stuff is not just for the money that's involved.
Yes, that is a big part of it.
And if you go back to 1996, the Clinton administration ran through this Telecommunications Act, which said there will be no local objections to telecommunication towers that are being put in.
Same type of thing that Donald Trump is doing with AI.
We will not allow you to control this at the local level.
Well, that didn't fly.
You can still stop it.
And many places, many localities did push against that, especially when they found cancer clusters at the kids' schools.
And so they were trying to lay the groundwork to make sure there was not going to be any regulation of this network that they wanted, a national network, a network where the corporations had bought special favors from the politicians.
So that goes back to 1996, 10 years, by the way, after the 1986 legislation that Reagan signed, that Fauci started as his first thing they did at the NIH, to make sure that pharmaceutical manufacturers would not be liable for any of this.
And the Telecommunications Act said localities can require that the towers be covered up for aesthetic purposes, but you can't bring any health claims against it.
And so we have this bias, this industry bias against claiming that there's any deleterious effects of EMF.
So that's a part of it.
It's also something that the government wants very much so because they can't do their smart cities and their internet of things and their internet of bodies without it.
They need to have that ubiquitous RF frequencies that are there.
So there were a lot of motivations for them to deny it.
But I think it also tells us something else about your government, the great Satan in Washington, the fact that they even trash their own people.
You've got people who are working for the CIA and they were seriously injured with this stuff.
And by the way, these injuries that they were suffering with the Havana syndrome were permanent injuries.
They weren't temporary.
It wasn't that they got headaches temporarily or nausea temporarily.
They struggled with this thing for a very, very long time.
And so they had a bias to ignore that, even though it was their own people.
And so the Washington Post says this one scientist who was working on this in Norway, a government scientist in Norway, built a machine that's capable of emitting powerful pulses of microwave energy.
And in an effort to prove such devices are harmless in humans, in 2024, he tested it on himself.
He suffered neurological symptoms similar to those of Havana syndrome, the unexplained malady that has struck hundreds of U.S. spies and diplomats around the world.
It's not really a question.
I mean, it's directed energy weapons.
And William Benny and other people, of course, William Benny, the former global technical head of the NSA, has said that he believes that he has directed energy weapons being used against him.
He's left the country, but nevertheless, they still want to get, they're still very angry about what he did in terms of being a whistleblower.
So the bizarre story described by four people familiar with the events said has come to light.
The secret test in Norway has not been previously reported.
The Norwegian government told the CIA about the results.
Two of the people said, mentioning at least two visits in 2024 to Norway by Pentagon and White House officials.
And yet, even though it makes perfectly good sense that this would be the case, again, when I went back and did research on Monstef Slowy at the beginning of all this COVID nonsense, what I found was that he and Fauci and Francis Collins, this unholy trinity, had been going around doing a lot of speaking engagements.
And the three of them really wanted to talk about electroceuticals as the next big thing.
Why would that be?
And why would they then deny that there's any effects with EMF?
Again, it's just common sense when there's so much in your body that is electrical.
So those aware of the tests say it didn't prove that these things are the work of a foreign adversary.
But the events bolstered the case of those who argue that pulsed energy devices, machines that deliver powerful beams of electromagnetic energy, such as microwaves and short bursts, can affect human biology and are probably being developed by U.S. adversaries.
Of course, we would never do anything like that, right?
Do you remember the Navy yard shooter who got up there and was taking pot shots of people when they killed him or he killed himself or whatever?
They said that on the gun stock of his rifle was carved, this is my ELF weapon.
He wasn't playing Lord of the Rings.
ELF is extremely low frequency, and it has been talked about in the past.
As a matter of fact, Mind Wars, which was written by that Satanist who worked for the NSA, Colonel Michael Aquino, his treatise called Mind Wars.
In it, he talked about the effects of using extremely low frequency as a weapon on people.
And that is something that the Navy is very much involved in because they use extremely low frequencies, ELFs, massive, massive underground antennas.
That's what they use to communicate with submarines because the submarines are underwater and they need to have extremely low frequency in order to be able to get to the submarines underwater.
It's not directional like the higher frequencies are.
So compelling evidence that we should be concerned about directed energy weapons.
Paul Fredericks, a retired military surgeon, Air Force General, who oversaw biological threats to the White House National Security Council, declined to comment on the Norway experiment.
And again, we can look at this and say it makes perfectly good sense, and we can speculate as to what their motivations are.
They've got a lot of different reasons that they might lie to us about it.
The Trump administration took office promising to pursue this as aggressively as they come after the Epstein documents, right?
There's been little apparent movement, however.
A review that was ordered by Tulsi Gabbard was expected to focus mostly on the Biden administration's handling of it.
So again, nothing but partisan finger pointing.
Well, look at what Biden did, blah, blah, blah.
A separate development.
U.S. government covertly purchased a different foreign-made device that produces pulsed radio waves and which some experts suspect could be leaked, linked to these incidents, according to two people.
And then, of course, you've had the implication that Trump made that they used this in the kidnapping of Maduro to incapacitate some kind of an invisible weapon.
When you stop and think about the things that our government has, it truly is amazing.
This is 60-some-odd years, the military-industrial complex pursuing their satanic agenda, creating in secret all kinds of weapons.
And these things will be released once it all kicks off.
And believe me, they are working to try to kick this off at the end of the fourth turning.
So it said it's being tested by the Defense Department.
It's got some Russian origin components, but the U.S. government still has not determined conclusively who built it, say some of the people.
Really?
Well, how'd you get it?
They said that it was interceptive blueprints that they had.
So stop and think about how the government has continued to lie to the public, to its own people who were hurt by this.
They knew it existed.
They had the blueprints for it.
They knew about a Norwegian scientist who had been injured because he didn't believe that this stuff was real and he tested it on himself.
And then they spent millions of dollars to buy it from somebody.
And yet they still play this game with the public.
This is what they do with everything.
The device that the scientists constructed in Norway was not identical to the one that the U.S. government covertly acquired for millions of dollars.
The Norwegian device was built based on classified information suggesting that it was derived from blueprints and other materials stolen from a foreign government.
We've got to pretend, though, that it doesn't exist.
And I think perhaps some of their motivation in this might be the fact that they want to maintain the illusion of American exceptionalism in terms of technological advantage and war machines, right?
They don't like the fact that the Russians and the Chinese have the hypersonic missiles, you know, their Reshnik missile that Russia demonstrated publicly.
They don't like to talk about that, that we don't have that, that we don't have a nuclear-powered cruise missile, which again could have a nuclear warhead on it.
But when Russia did the nuclear-powered cruise missile, the advantage of that being that because it has a nuclear, because it's nuclear-powered, it's like a nuclear submarine.
It can go for a very, very, very long time, almost indefinitely, without getting new fuel.
And so the response of Trump, which is a very weak response from the U.S. government, was, well, then I guess we'll just forget all this, start the strategic arms limitation treaty.
And if you're going to test nuclear weapons, and we'll start testing nuclear weapons again.
And as Putin pointed out, well, we didn't test a nuclear warhead.
What we tested was something that was nuclear-powered, which nuclear-powered cruise missile, just like a nuclear-powered submarine, is not a nuclear warhead test, right?
It can be, but it doesn't have to be.
So again, they're trying to play catch-up in a lot of different areas.
And Trump's Golden Dome project, folks, is a fool's errand and a half.
Interim Assessment Debunked00:04:40
It is going to cost the world in terms of money that is there.
But it absolutely is not going to work in terms of the number of missiles that have to be used, the number of anti-missile devices that have to be used to intercept a singular missile.
It is absolutely impractical at this point.
And the cost would be unbelievably prohibitive.
But hey, who cares?
I mean, we got to send some love to our friends in the military-industrial complex because, you know, they contributed to my campaign.
So let's buy some weapons from them.
Whether or not they work.
And one of the things that Trump's Golden Dome will do is actually undermine U.S. security, the security that comes from being the world's reserve currency.
All this massive debt that he could not care less about is something that is a real security issue and something that's going to affect us in every regard.
But they're going to ignore all of that.
Well, you have the National Ground Intelligence Center, U.S. Army Intelligence Agency, in Charlottesville, that produces intelligence on foreign adversaries' scientific, technical, and military capabilities.
They say that it's very unlikely that the attacks were the result of foreign adversary because, again, that would embarrass them to have fallen behind.
So, again, whatever they say, it's going to be to protect themselves politically.
You need to understand that national security is not really about the safety and the peace of America.
It's about their job security.
It's about their careers.
That's what it's really about.
In subsequent years, U.S. personnel reported hundreds of cases globally.
A top aide to then director William J. Burns reported Havana syndrome symptoms while traveling in India in 2021.
Like I said, they've known about this for a very long time.
A top aide to the CIA director was affected by this.
And still, they lie about it.
And they deny treatment to the people who have been hurt with it.
Much about the Norway test remains obscured by highly classified nature.
People familiar with the events declined to identify the scientist or the Norwegian government agency that he worked for.
The results were all the more shocking because a Norwegian researcher had earned a reputation as a leading opponent of the theory that directed energy weapons can cause the type of symptoms associated with this.
Trying to dramatically prove his point, he used himself as a human guinea pig and he proved that he was wrong.
It's kind of interesting.
You see this kind of, I guess you could say it's kind of a professional Stockholm syndrome.
You see it with the people in the medical industry all the time.
And that's what we saw with this.
By January 2022, the CIA had produced an interim assessment that concluded that a foreign country was probably not behind Havana.
And they are not going to change anything.
They're desperate to hide their professional embarrassment.
And regardless of whatever Machiavellian motive they have, they always lie.
And they show no loyalty to their own.
But just understand that with the unlimited amounts of money and the massive amount of time that has transpired, it's just we cannot even imagine what they're capable of doing.
I've said for the longest time, the biggest mistakes that we can make is to think that these people are not morally capable of doing anything.
And to think that they don't have the technological capability to basically do anything.
So the CIA, again, its interim assessment overshadowed an expert panel's report.
They had an expert panel that came out and said, no, this is real.
And so then the CIA goes public with one right at the same time that debunks it.
And that's the one, interestingly enough, that mainstream media decided to pick up on and follow.
So a former CIA officer and a victim of the Havana syndrome thing said it was clear to the victims, but also unsaid, that no information had come into the National Security Council that had caused the Trump administration to make such a statement.
They said they met with them as during the transition period and they said, yeah, we believe you.
And so they thought something was going to happen, but nothing did happen.
ICE's Violent Enforcement Policy00:14:36
And so when we look at this, just remember in the context what the federal government's police force, ICE and all the rest of them, are willing to do with, they no longer call it non-lethal.
They now call these crowd control devices less than lethal.
They don't necessarily have to be lethal, but the way they use them and how quickly they use them, that is what we're seeing.
Broken bones, burning eyes, how Trump's DHS deploys quote-unquote less lethal weapons on protesters.
And again, you know, protest is specifically protected in the First Amendment.
And we have seen over and over again that the violence is initiated by the police.
And this has been the case for a very long time.
It's just getting worse and worse and more public.
I mean, we have groups I've been involved in covered protests many, many times and reporters have been hit with things.
That goes back to Ferguson, a lot of other events.
But now they are openly doing this and aggressively doing this.
They batter bodies with rubber bullets.
They sear eyes with pepper spray.
They lob tear gas and explosive flashbangs at chanting crowds.
They smash car windows.
They shove people to the ground.
They ram vehicles.
They point guns.
And again, they recklessly do this.
They intend, you know, you don't point a gun at somebody unless you intend to shoot them, right?
It's the first thing you learn about a gun.
It's one of the things people were laughing at Christy Noam about.
Obviously, she's never had any training.
She stands there with people on either side of her, and she's holding her gun and pointing the muzzle right at the head of the guy standing to her left.
So she has not been trained and she's clearly just playing a fantasy role here.
But she has pushed these federal officers to do this and probably nobody more so than Stephen Miller.
Federal officers who were Trump's part of Trump's immigration crackdown have shot 13 people with guns, but far more often they have used harsh tactics to scare or to repel those that they see getting in their way.
Massed and kitted out with military-grade armor and rifles, they have faced down peaceful protesters and people who have threatened, obstructed, or attacked them with methods that are less deadly than guns, but still inflict grievous bodily injury.
It's a cycle of escalation.
Heavily armed immigration officers, open-air raids motivated angry residents to meet officers head-on in the streets.
Rather than trying to defuse a tense situation, officers abruptly used physical or chemical force.
Again, we'd seen the same type of thing at the Bundy Ranch with Dan Love with a BLM, Bureau of Land Management, and the people who were at the same rank as he was, the person who had his same rank, but was in the adjacent jurisdiction in Arizona, had called out Dan Love for doing this.
There's different people have, you can have these bad people in your institution.
And if you don't purge them, then it corrupts the institution.
I've never seen federal agents so out of control and acting in such a malicious manner, said a former federal prosecutor and federal judge who now leads the Illinois Accountability Commission, a state effort to review allegations of abuse from immigration officers.
They said they were going after the worst of the worst, but then they became the problem because they are the worst of the worst law enforcement officers.
And when they go back and look at the statistics of people that they have come after, 14% were violent criminals.
And that is so what they're doing is not what they say they're doing.
As a matter of fact, because they've got quotas that have been put on them by the Trump regime, in many cases, they're going to immigration courts and arresting people who are trying to comply, maybe retroactively with law.
Maybe they came here illegally, or maybe they're trying to extend their stay or whatever, but they're arresting people at the courthouses because they're just interested in filling a quota.
For months, the Trump administration charged Harter, fighting court orders and promoting an air of ruthless impunity.
The signal to officers that they could do whatever they saw fit.
Government officials have defended officers' actions while giving misleading or false accounts of some clashes.
Again, you know, we see these two murders that happen.
Chrissy Dome's reflexive action, just like Donald Trump's, was to talk to people about what was in the video without obviously having ever looked at it.
He saw the video for the first time after he'd been talking about it for days, just making stuff up.
His reaction was documented by the New York Times reporters who were there in the Oval Office and showed him the video when he saw it for the first time.
He kind of stammered and stuttered and changed the topic.
Public outcry led the DHS to change the ground leadership and the surge of Minneapolis and to order the wide-scale use of body cameras.
Trump has now said, well, maybe we could use a little bit of a softer touch, but then he added, but you still have to be tough.
And again, it is, this is not a new issue.
This is not something that is different.
Enforcing immigration law is no different than enforcing any other law.
It's just the Trump administration doesn't want to follow the law.
They don't want to follow the rules of engagement.
Whether that is constitutional law or whether it's immigration law or whether it's law about the conduct of war, whether it's law about how you handle people who have been shipwrecked on the international seas, it is a lawless group of authoritarian thugs.
That's what the Trump administration is.
DHS has blamed local politicians and activists for inciting violence, and yet the agency points to the conduct of some protesters who follow officers with their cars and block them in the streets, curse at their faces, clamor outside their hotels at night.
At times, protests have turned violent, with demonstrators throwing bottles and rockets and fireworks, and officers have arrested many people for allegedly trying to assault them or hit them with their cars.
And yet, we've also seen people who have been alleged to have rammed the officers with their car.
When you look at video that other people have taken, you see it's the other way around.
This is one of the reasons why they attack people who are filming them.
Because if there is existent video from a lot of different sources, it shows them to be the authoritarian liars that they really are.
DHS has said in a statement its officers are facing a coordinated campaign of violence against them.
The agency did not answer questions from NBC about specific instances of federal officers using less lethal force.
Leon Verdon was one such example, 73, a lifelong Minneapolis resident who got upset after the killing of Alex Pretty.
So he and his son drove to the scene and they ended up being a small group of chanting protesters in an alley where they came upon officers that he believed were from DHS.
One of them deployed a flashbang grenade, which federal officers have used repeatedly at protests.
It exploded, shattering his Verdon's face.
Now he sits at home popping Tylenol and trying not to aggravate his surgically reconstructed jaw.
Yeah, what about the recognized right to peacefully redress their grievances?
And again, filming and even swearing, whether you like it, whether you like their cause, those are protected activities.
And you better understand why.
There may be something, most likely, even if you are one of these tribes, there's going to be something that the other tribe does at some point in time that you're going to want to protest.
Arrest as many people that touch you as you want.
Those are the general orders all the way from the top, said Greg Bovino to agents in LA.
These were remarks that were captured by a body camera and later filed in court.
He said, everybody effing gets it if they touch you.
You hear what I'm saying?
A little Nazi, a little Napoleon complex Nazi.
Short little guy.
He wants to be a big man.
Bovino said he planned to ship in tractor trailer loads of less lethal weapons.
The agent said, whose city is it, Chief?
Bovino replied, it's effing ours.
It's effing our city.
Yeah.
This is disgusting.
It's disgusting.
And of course, many people have said that when totalitarianism comes to America, it'll be cheered by many people.
They create this immigration problem.
They let it fester for a very long time.
As a matter of fact, you go back and you look at it.
What have I been saying for the longest time?
It's the welfare magnet, they're paying people to come.
And if you look at most of the immigrants, the majority of them are on welfare.
Of the illegal immigrants, a massive majority of them are on welfare.
Why don't you end that?
Why don't you stop paying them?
Or is it that you want to pay them to be here so that you can send people like Bolvino out on the streets to try to start a civil war or at the very least to escalate the police surveillance state?
A new set of guidelines published in 2022 by the policy group Police Executive Research Forum said lethal weapons should not be used against peaceful demonstrators or against those engaged in minor acts of civil disobedience like blocking a street.
They said flash bangs developed for hostage rescues and designed to temporarily blind or stun should not be used in demonstrations, said the group.
Again, you know, other things like, oh, and by the way, don't fire at somebody who's driving a car, you know, unless they're firing guns at you or something like that.
But don't just, you know, it's a bad idea to kill somebody driving a car.
First of all, you might not hit them and you might hit bystanders, including your own people.
But even if you hit that person, now you've turned that car into a very dangerous, unguided missile.
And when we look at flashbangs and these no-knock raids that have become the hallmark of the war on drugs, we've had several cases where they have thrown flashbangs, grenades into homes.
One of them, I remember, went into a baby's crib, horrific burns on that baby.
And it was the wrong house to boot.
ICE's use of force policy says that lethal force can only be used when no reasonably effective, safe, and feasible alternative exists.
That's ICE's policy.
So these people are violating ICE's policy.
The Border Patrol's policy, which is where Bovino worked, is even more explicit.
It says pepper spray, pepper balls, and chemical munitions can only be used on people who are actively resisting officers, never to be used on children, pregnant women, or drivers, or pointed at someone's head, neck, groin, or spine unless an officer's life is in danger.
They violated all of these rules.
Officers carrying out Trump's campaign appear to repeatedly cross those lines.
Protesters and journalists covering the hostilities say officers shot them with pepper balls, hit them with tear gas canisters without warning while they chanted and shouted, took photos, or were running away.
Some were struck in the head or groin, sometimes at close range.
Others suffered burns on their arms or legs, according to interviews and court findings.
And again, this has been something that we've always seen at protests.
It's just now they've taken it to an all-new level and defiantly done this.
I also want to say, don't bring your baby to a protest.
I would say, for the most part, stay away anyway.
Yeah, if you're not someone that is willing to get messed up and hurt, don't go to these.
But especially do not bring a child to this because I hold these people complicit as well.
You're protesting these people for being what you, you know, you're saying they're fascist authoritarians that want everyone dead.
Oh, it's the perfect place to bring my child.
Get it together.
You're trying.
You're right.
It's a really dangerous place to be, right?
And you are right about that.
Yeah, you know, if you've got an interest in this and if you are passionate about it, but you have to understand what the risks are.
You know, it's like the Bundy Range thing.
We understood what the risks were.
We knew it was very risky, but we're passionate about showing what was happening there.
And so just understand what you're getting yourself into.
This is not going to be a walk in the park when it goes into some of these things.
Unless everybody is armed like at the Alamo, though.
We're going to carry our arms peacefully.
And our whole point is to show that we can be peaceful and carry weapons.
And the police are not happy about that.
But it was a very peaceful protest.
Nobody got arrested or hurt.
Yeah, in closing, basically, if something is a big enough deal to warrant protesting, it's a big enough deal that you shouldn't bring your children to it because they will probably be unsafe.
That's right.
Officers have repeatedly been filmed shooting people, pepper spraying or powder, directly in the faces of people who don't appear to be violent or threatening.
Officers often shove protesters out of the way, just as we saw at the beginning of that murder of Alex Predty.
He goes over and shoves that woman, knocks her on her back quite a bit, and that's when he stepped in front and tried to protect her.
Then they came after him.
Children have been hit with tear gas.
Two young men were partially blinded by rubber bullets in L.A. last month.
Two Young Men Partially Blinded00:03:08
A DHS official previously minimized one of the men's injuries, saying federal officers had been faced with a mob of rioters.
As a matter of fact, I think when they say partially blinded, I think he lost an eye, the one that I was looking at.
So I guess they say partially blinded.
Losing an eye, I think it kind of minimizes it.
You say somebody's partially blinded.
I mean, that's a anyway.
A 27-year-old who said that she was struck with rubber bullets, one of which hit her forehead while holding a sign, shouting at federal officers during a June protest in Santa Ana, California.
She said she experienced brain fog for months.
Yeah, head injury trauma.
That's why they say now less than lethal, maybe.
But they don't say non-lethal.
Federal law makes it difficult to sue a federal officer, of course.
They give themselves immunity, and we've had JD Vance talking about how they have absolute immunity.
I got to say, the guy is dead to me as far as political support.
Anybody who would say something like that in the face of what we saw is not qualified to hold office.
A musician and recording engineer said he heard no warning when officers opened fire from about 10 feet away.
A rubber bullet hit him in the groin, the shoulder, and the leg as he turned to run.
He felt a heavy thud on his left hand and he ducked behind a car.
One of his fingers looked mangled.
He thinks he was hit with something heavy, like a tear gas canister.
It felt like a war zone where there's only one side that has weapons.
The only weapons that we had were our speech and our voices.
Surgeons repaired one of his fingers with a screw, but he still can't properly move it.
And he was a musician and recording engineer, and he can't play guitar now.
He had to find a new job.
He started therapy, physical, psychological.
He found a lawyer who filed papers announcing his intention to sue DHS, saying that officers illegally and unlawfully assaulted him.
He also shared his story in a lawsuit against DHS in LA where a federal judge tried to rein in officers saying that they had, quote, unleashed crowd control weapons indiscriminately and with surprising savagery, unquote.
The Trump administration is still fighting that order.
An emergency room nurse in Portland, Oregon believes that DHS's summer operations were a prelude to the force they used later in other cities.
In June, he was hit in the face with a tear gas canister while he shouted at federal officers through a megaphone.
He said he suffered a concussion and still has hour-long stretches, including at work where he has trouble keeping his balance.
Look, you may not like what somebody says, and you may not like them shouting at the megaphone.
But this is the free speech issue, you know, the canceling of people on social media and everything.
If you don't support free speech, folks, you won't have any speech for yourself either.
You have to support free speech, even if you disagree with it.
And you need to support peaceful protest.
Escalating Encounters in Chicago00:15:05
The founders wisely put all that stuff together.
Free speech, free press, protesting, religious liberty, they all go together.
You cannot separate them.
They either hang together or they hang separately.
To paraphrase what they said, what Franklin said.
DHS as an agency is seeing how far they can push the envelope, how much they can hurt people exercising their free speech rights in non-violent ways, and how much violence they can bring on people to shut them up.
And will the public tolerate it?
That's the key thing.
So over and over again, we have looked at the fact that even in Chicago, you have Trump boasted about what he wanted to do there and how he wanted to go to war with Chicago.
It truly is amazing when you look at how confrontational this has all been.
You know, when he put out that picture of him, like Robert Duvall in Apocalypse Now, who, by the way, just passed away yesterday at 95.
We went through and picked up a list of Robert Duvall movies that we haven't seen in a long time.
Start looking at some of those, but when he put himself in the role in Apocalypse Now, he also tweeted out, he said, I love the smell of deportations in the morning.
Chicago is about to find out why it's called the Department of War.
This is a president who wants to go to war with his political opponents in America.
It's disgusting to see what he's become.
Stephen Miller, the architect of Trump's deportation policies, announced a new anti-crime task force of law enforcement agencies, including ICE.
He said, criminals, quote, have no idea how ruthless we are.
Well, I think we do know.
As many people put him in a little Nazi uniform and call him pee-wee German.
I see the guns and badges in this room, he said.
You are unleashed, Miller told these people.
The handcuffs you're carrying, they're not on you anymore.
Three days later, a Border Patrol agent shot and injured Miramar Martinez, 30 years old, a U.S. citizen.
And the agent who hit her bragged about his aim in text messages.
You see, this rottenness that we see on the streets.
This country is rotting from the top down, from the Trump regime down.
People like Stephen Miller, people like Bovino, people that like Donald Trump.
I won't call him president.
Some officers in Chicago laughed and made jokes about tear gassing protesters.
A federal judge found based on body camera video that he got from them.
On October 24th, Miller sent another public message.
To all ICE officers, you have federal immunity in the conduct of your duties.
Again, this is the same guy that immediately and falsely labeled Alex Predi a domestic terrorist.
It is Stephen Miller, folks, who is a domestic terrorist.
What is a terrorist?
It's somebody who, by the use of force and fear, seeks to achieve a political goal.
Is that what Stephen Miller is doing?
Well, quite frankly, yes.
This is way beyond law enforcement.
This is way beyond getting people who are fraudulently involved with the Somali criminals in Minneapolis, which, you know, that was something that was happening in Trump's first term.
And it was ignored in front of Trump's first term, ignored with all of his buildup of ICE until that reporter brought attention to it.
Then they seized on that as justification for what they had been doing already.
So, again, Miller said, you have immunity to perform your duties, and no one, no city official, no state official, no illegal alien, no leftist agitator, no domestic insurrectionist, no one can prevent you from fulfilling your legal obligations and your duties.
The next day, more mayhem erupted.
Officers shoving a father in a yellow duck costume to the ground and beating the ribs of a 67-year-old resident.
Officers then fired tear gas, filling the air and sickening a two-year-old girl and her mother who were playing in a nearby field.
They weren't even protesting.
This is how insane this all is.
These people want to bring war to us.
It is disgusting.
So, U.S. District Judge, Sarah Ellis, found a litany of civil rights violations by DHS officers.
She said it shocks the conscience.
She barred the use of chemical weapons unless officers' safety was in peril, which, by the way, folks, it was all dismissed.
Oh, this is some leftist judge, some open border judge.
No, this is the policy of Border Patrol and ICE, that you don't use this preemptively, and you don't use it unless your safety is in peril.
But they were using it as punishment to people whose speech they didn't like.
So, again, they're cranking it up and trying to initiate this everywhere.
As a matter of fact, there is a police officer who wrote for an op-ed piece for reason.
He says, as a former cop, I have to ask, what is ICE doing?
And of course, he uses an explicit on this.
He said, videos of recent immigration enforcement raise serious questions about authority and escalation.
In a video of a late January incident in Minnesota, federal immigration officers sped past a, as a matter of fact, this is a different video.
This is an ICE agent pulling a gun on a protester.
Look at this.
He's got his pepperball gun there.
And it's not enough to point a pepperball gun at somebody.
He pulls that down and then pulls out a real gun and sticks it right in the person's face.
Absolutely amazing.
And in this article, he's got a picture, which I think was taken from their dash cam.
You got some ICE agents who, with an unmarked car, they pull in front of this car and get out.
Look at that.
Scroll down and show the picture.
And then they get out of the car, pull their weapons, and approach the car with their weapons drawn and pointed.
Yeah.
So just like no muzzle control, just like Christy Noam.
So in a video of a late January incident in Minnesota, federal ICE officers sped past an observer's vehicle, swerved to box her in.
And while the driver called someone and asked for them to dial 9-11, agents approached with weapons drawn and ordered her out of the car.
Why?
For filming these thugs.
They're thugs.
They're not law enforcement.
They're not enforcing the law.
They're not obeying the law.
They're thugs.
They're a gang.
They've got their uniforms and so forth.
There's no different than the bloods in the crypts.
Except they're more dangerous.
From a citizen's perspective, says this guy who's writing the op-ed piece for a reason, his name is Michael Bulletin.
He says, from a citizen's perspective, the encounter is frightening and tense.
From the perspective of someone who spent years wearing a badge and operating within jurisdictional limits, it raises much deeper concerns.
It appears to have taken place without clear authority, without restraint, and without purpose.
The video is not an outlier.
A growing body of footage shows similar patterns in federal immigration enforcement.
Many of these encounters, initiated without a clear legal basis, then escalate rapidly.
Agents using force that conflicts with widely accepted law enforcement standards.
In one case, an agent punches an individual in the face during an attempted detention, even though the person does not appear to pose an immediate threat.
In others, chemical agents are deployed on individuals already pinned to the ground by multiple officers, sometimes sprayed directly in the face at close range.
I remember years ago, you had some protests in Berkeley, and I don't remember.
I mean, it's a bunch of left-wing college kids, and they had a campus protest.
I've seen that all my life.
And they're all sitting cross-legged on the floor.
You probably remember this.
And there's this fat cop in body armor.
He walks right up to them, just walks down the line, spraying them in the face, you know, just holding the canister right in front of their face, walking down the line, spraying them.
It's like, where is that acceptable?
Under what circumstances is that acceptable?
That kind of initiation of force, that kind of violence, it is not acceptable.
In one case, an agent punches an individual in the face, as I pointed out.
People are being struck with canisters, other objects, pepperball munitions fired at distances that appear to violate use of force protocols.
Modern law enforcement training is explicit about these risks, says this former cop.
Force stacking, prolonged prone restraint, and unnecessary escalation with chemical agents are repeatedly identified as dangerous and in some cases, deadly.
These are core principles taught across agencies because their value is clear and unambiguous.
Taken together, these encounters suggest more than isolated judgment errors.
They point to a broader pattern of authority being exercised without sufficient legal grounds or professional discipline.
Thanks to people like Stephen Miller, Pee Wee German, as I pointed out before, they're provoking this.
You look at him and Bovino, these are the rules of engagement, and it comes from the top.
It comes from Trump.
A federal badge, writes this former police officer, does not come with universal authority or with absolute immunity, as some wrongly claim.
Who would that sum be?
That sum would be JD Vance.
In many of these videos, encounters are initiated with U.S. citizens engaged in constitutionally protected activity.
Now, I got to say, why do we have to explain this to the MAGA crowd?
Didn't they experience all this just five years ago with January the 6th?
How could they forget so quickly?
How could they side with an out-of-control federal government so quickly and all this stuff?
And of course, as I said before, I've seen this happen over and over again.
I've been in a lot of these protests.
And so I warned people not to go.
I said, first of all, there's nothing that can be accomplished.
And you're not going to be welcome in terms of protesting this election.
Put stuff on social media or whatever.
That's dangerous enough.
Get you on a list.
But every police academy teaches the same foundational rule.
If you do not have lawful authority to detain, you cannot use force.
Escalating force does not create authority when that authority did not exist before.
It cannot be a substitute for legal justification.
Yet in these encounters, escalation often appears to come first, followed by claims of resistance that are then used to rationalize the force that followed.
They've got it exactly upside down, inside out, backwards, like the government does to our Constitution and Bill of Rights all the time, isn't it?
Isn't that what they always do?
They invert it, subvert it.
Officers are trained to avoid this kind of dynamic.
We are taught about officer-created jeopardy.
The idea that officers are responsible for decisions that unnecessarily create danger.
Initiating physical contact when disengagement is available.
Escalating verbal encounters without tactical need or inserting oneself into a situation without lawful purpose all become risk.
Don't we all know this?
I mean, haven't we all seen Barney Fife at work?
It's the same type of thing.
Got to nip it.
Nip it in the bud.
So they insert themselves into these things, unnecessarily confrontational as well.
So again, courts understand this, he said.
They do not freeze the frame at the moment that force is applied.
They examine how that moment came to be.
But again, when you look at Stephen Miller, he's creating a police force of Barney Fife's.
We're all hyped up to go engage people.
Use of force policy also makes clear that officers must de-escalate after control is achieved.
Earlier resistance does not justify continued force.
Spraying chemical agents into the face of a restrained individual is not de-escalation.
Holding someone prone while layering force tools is not decisive enforcement.
This is exactly how people get seriously injured or killed.
In other words, you got everybody piled on Alex Predty, which is what Rand Paul showed when he showed the video.
Got all these people piled on him, holding him down.
And you got a guy who pulls his gun and a second officer takes out the gun out of the back waistband of Alex Predty.
And the guy who saw him do it is the one who starts shooting Predty in the back.
These glaring violations and contradictions present in these incidents take a toll on local law enforcement who have to respond to everyday calls against a backdrop of renewed fear and distrust.
The public doesn't distinguish between badges or agencies.
They remember the coercion, not the jurisdiction.
This criticism, by the way, he says, is not meant to be anti-law enforcement.
It is pro-professionalism.
Policing depends on legitimacy.
Patterns of agents who are overstepping, escalating unnecessarily, or treating force as a shortcut to control, weaken the legal and moral foundation that allows law enforcement to function at all.
Many officers see what is happening and know that it is wrong.
Policing's Legitimacy Crisis00:03:23
Now is a time to speak up, he says.
If the current trajectory continues, they may do irreparable damage not only to public trust, but also to the credibility of law enforcement more broadly.
Yeah, they may do what the medical community did to vaccines, by the way.
May not be a bad thing.
It might be a good thing if we start to move back from some of this stuff.
Well, we're going to take a quick break and we're going to move on to other topics.
This is something, though, folks, that is incredibly important.
They desire a police surveillance state.
This is moving the Overton window, how they want to do this.
We've got some comments here as well.
I'm Marty says, good morning, rumblers of the night on Newsmax on X. Lee Greenwood says Trump's greatest president ever.
Yeah, Lee Greenwood needs an emergency MRI.
It truly is amazing when you look at this.
It has become a cult.
Really has become a cult.
Jason Barker, nice to him.
Good to see you.
He says, There's so many control studies on various frequencies and exposure levels, all causing harm.
I've yet to see one that has a mixture of what we are exposed to daily.
That's right.
Just like the vaccines, right?
If they test it at all, they will test one vaccine or one pharmaceutical drug.
But you get this soup of stuff that is involved.
Why is having a therapy?
Talked to a guy about that who was a physical therapist.
And he was telling me his issues with Cipro and the fluoride-based antibiotic that was so harmful to Lance.
And he said, yeah, I had that prescribed for me by a doctor.
He said, it turned out that it was a physical therapy thing that they completely misdiagnosed.
He said he was starting to have a lot of bad issues with that.
And he got off of it and started doing physical therapy.
And he said the problem went away.
They just misdiagnosed it.
But he said, he sees it over and over again in the patients that he's treating.
He said, they give you one drug, of course, and then that may or may not address the initial issue.
But then it causes some other issues.
And so then they prescribe some other second or third drug to address those new issues that were caused by the first drug.
And then, of course, the really crazy thing about it is they don't do tests to see how these drugs interact with each other.
If there is some kind of an interaction, it's going to be something that is immediate and obvious for them to catch it.
But they don't test it ahead of time.
That's what we see all the time.
And that's what we see with the radio frequencies as well.
Citizen of Americaca says the golden dome is not to keep out missiles, David.
It's to spy on what he deems to be internal threats to Zionism.
Yeah, I think there's always different motivations of these different things.
And of course, when you look at Trump's attacks on anybody who criticizes him or reports on him in a way that he doesn't like it, his attacks on people who criticize a foreign government, Israel, and he doesn't like that either.
Trump's Contempt for Freedom00:05:33
When you look at the fist that people who are protesting his policies get on the streets, I've never seen anybody quite like Trump in terms of his open contempt for what is the foundation of America, and that is the First Amendment.
Epstein Island writes, Trump is on the Epstein list 38,000 times, the sickest, most criminal degenerate regime in American history.
I absolutely agree.
I absolutely agree.
As a matter of fact, there was a somebody did the real Melania movie, and it starts out with that.
It's Melania holding a phone that says Trump's name is on there 38,000 times.
And then she sees it on her iPad while she's riding in a limousine, more stuff.
And she gets this expression on her face.
And she whacks Trump with it.
I don't know if she cares or not, quite frankly.
She was a part of that whole scene.
AP Rumble Seat, brick pallets and guillotines miraculously appearing on the streets during the summer of 2020.
That's right.
It was not naturally occurring.
It was orchestrated.
They're trying to do the same thing now.
It is a uni party.
Yeah.
Swamp lover, they need to do away with qualified immunity for police and all government agents.
That's right.
They should be held to a higher standard, not no standard at all.
If you have the entire force of the American government behind you, if you are not restrained by law, you become the most dangerous gang possible.
You're worse than Sinaloa or any of these drug cartels because you have more power, more reach, and a larger mob.
Sylvia 19, I've been watching the China show with Winston and C. Milk on YouTube.
They explain Chinese propaganda tactics as eye-opening because the deep state uses the same things.
Yeah, that's right.
Absolutely.
And it is, we are adopting their economic strategy of fascism as well.
How is it that China, the Chinese Communist Party, could be fascist?
Well, they are fascists by the economic definition.
The merger of state and government economically.
And so that kind of blurs the line.
China, I think, is best understood as the beta test for the technocrats.
They want slave labor and all the rest of the things that you see in China.
They want that power.
How many times have we seen presidents talk about that?
We have seen Justin Trudeau say, well, if only I could do what the Chinese government does, I could just order everybody to save the environment or whatever, fill in the blank.
But George W. Bush has said the same thing.
There's your uniparty.
The uniparty wants to be the Chinese Communist Party.
That's why I say it's kind of interesting that when Microsoft put together the Coalition for Content Providence and Authentication, the initials were CCPA.
It's almost like the Chinese Communist Party of America, isn't it?
Because what they want to know is who created this and are they on the approved list?
And we're going to put together a coalition of hardware manufacturers, software manufacturers, media sycophants, and we are going to stop any kind of communication from the people that we have put on our list, the same way the Chinese do it.
So yeah, they want to be Chinese in every awful sense of the word.
Well, we're going to take a quick break, folks, and we'll be right back.
You're listening
to THE David Knight SHOW.
You're listening to the David Knight Show.
Welcome back, folks.
Glad you're all still here with us.
Placebo Risks Revealed00:14:47
I want to take a brief moment to remind you that you can support the show and get very high-quality Made America products at homesteadproducts.shop.
Again, it's homestead products shop, and they have all kinds of things, whether it's survival food or barbecue sauce.
They have just about anything you could want there.
And like I said, it's all very high quality.
I'm personally a huge fan of their hot sauce.
I think it's delicious.
I stole it, so we don't have any more of it, so we can't show it off to you because I have finished that, but it is very good.
We're going to get some more of it ourselves, as a matter of fact.
We use that code NIGHT to get 10% off.
That's right.
Promo code Night for 10% off at homesteadproducts.shop.
You can see their website here.
And I want to tell people, because we're going to talk a little bit about some good news, right?
And occasionally we do get some good news, and this is some good news we're going to talk about here.
But when we talk about health issues, which is where the good news is, just want to remind people about rncstore.com.
Go there, educate yourself.
They have a tremendous number of books.
Again, one of the best ones that you'll find is A World Without Cancer by G. Edward Griffin.
And you can get natural ingredients that have been shown, and you can do the research yourself, have been shown to be very effective against cancer, more so than the types of things that they're pushing.
It's part of this story.
And you look at the pushback from the pharmaceutical industry.
It's like, oh, come on, you're shutting down approval for these MRA vaccines.
We were just ready to release a new cancer vaccine that was going to be mRNA.
And it's like, yeah, right.
Yeah, a vaccine that gives you what it's supposedly inoculating you against.
But if you want to fight against this stuff, now is a very important time.
And there are natural ingredients, things that God has given us that can be very, very effective other than these poisons that we get from these pharmaceutical companies.
This is what destroying the vaccine market looks like.
A shocking move by RFK Jr.
This is from a publication called The Bulwark.
And it was picked up by the Drudge Report.
And when I saw it, I immediately clickbait for me because it's like, I want to destroy the vaccine market.
Absolutely do.
You won't find anybody more anti-vax than I am.
Moderna decided this past week to tell the world about bad news that it received from the federal government.
A potentially groundbreaking vaccine for seasonal flu.
Yeah, supposedly they got a cure for the cold.
Can you believe it?
Don't believe it for a second, folks.
They said they developed this and they would, but they would not be getting approval from the regulators.
And it wasn't even getting formal consideration.
Imagine that.
The world turned upside down.
They've established a regulatory capture system where basically everything is rubber stamped.
And now what they're getting is a rubber stamp that says no, denied.
And so that's got to be some good news.
I'm glad to see that.
And as I said, you know, when they do the right thing, let's cheer them for doing the right thing.
Doesn't mean that I categorically trust RFK Jr.
I don't.
But in this particular case, I think they've done the right thing.
And they're getting a lot of criticism.
They got all the right enemies, as a matter of fact, all this stuff.
There's nothing normal about the way the federal government is behaving, says Bulwark.
Moderna's flu shot, which uses mRNA technology, is the product of a lengthy research and development process that goes back years.
Oh, yeah.
As a matter of fact, I said this when the COVID shot, the Trump shot was being pushed out there.
I said, they've been around, at that point in time, they'd been around for a decade.
And Moderna was all about mRNA.
As a matter of fact, the way they initially pronounced their name was Mode RNA.
And then they changed the pronunciation to Moderna.
They had produced one happy story after the other about mRNA, how it was going to fix things with genetic manipulation and that type of stuff.
And they'd never gotten a product approved, never, until Trump pushed them through for this COVID vaccine.
What they had done, they'd still made a lot of money because they would put out a happy story about how they had a cure for this or a cure for that.
And then it showed that they didn't have that cure.
It showed that it was harmful.
And then it didn't get approval.
But in the meantime, they were able to pump their stock up based on this happy story.
We got a new miracle drug for Situation X.
The stock goes up and the people running the company make a lot of money off of that happy story that they told Wall Street.
And then it doesn't pan out.
So yeah, they've been around decades doing this kind of stuff.
Along the way, Moderna scientists constantly, or rather, consulted directly with the officials of the FDA, and they review and approve these vaccines.
Such consultation is normal.
Yeah, it's regulatory capture.
And a major focus of the discussion between the company and the regulators was how Moderna should test the new shot to demonstrate its safety and effectiveness.
Folks, they don't have any tests that demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of these vaccines.
Again, we talked about all this five years ago.
How do they test a vaccine?
They don't do a challenge test.
You had a group of people who said, well, you know, this COVID thing is really dangerous and it's going to kill everybody.
We will volunteer to be the guinea pigs.
You give us the vaccine and then expose us to COVID.
Well, they wouldn't do it because there's a problem with that.
A, they'd not isolated COVID to expose them to it.
And B, they never do that.
Because if they did that, people would realize that they're not effective.
They'd realize that there's no contagion that is there.
So they never do that.
They said, well, it'd be unethical.
If we were to take a control group and give them a placebo and then expose them to a disease, we can't do that.
That'd be unethical.
So, no, we can't do that.
They never do that.
What they do is they do their first phase test where they get some, first they test it on animals, then they test a drug on people who are guinea pigs or typically criminals or something like that.
And they still volunteer for it.
It's not supposedly, I guess.
Anyway, they test it on a few people to see if they drop dead instantly.
If they don't, then they do phase two.
Phase two, they get typically, if it's a therapeutic, they get people who have this disease that they think it's going to be treating, and they separate them.
Some of them get a placebo, some of them get the drug, and they look to see how people respond to it.
Does it help people who are already sick with this disease?
If that looks good, and usually it stops at that point, if that looks good, then what they do is phase three, which is a bigger group of people that they tested on.
But they don't do any of that for vaccines.
They do the animal test, they do the initial toxic tests of phase one.
And then what they do is they give people an injection and just let them circulate around the population for a couple of years and then look at the rate at which their vaccinated group comes down with the disease versus the rate at which the unvaccinated group comes down with the disease.
And that's how they determine the safety of it, the effectiveness of it.
The safety is even more questionable because, as we saw with the COVID shot, what they were doing was injecting people with other vaccines rather than a placebo.
So they were getting harmful vaccine.
They were getting vaccines fromitis, for example, as a placebo.
And that included a lot of the toxic adjuvants that were in it.
So again, when they look at it, it's not like it is safe.
It's just that it doesn't have that much difference from people also given a different kind of vaccine with all the adjuvants loaded up in it.
So all of this stuff, folks, about safety and effectiveness is a bunch of nonsense.
Especially when they decided that they were going to, for the vaccine, they were going to skip all the testing.
Not even pretend that they were going to let people circulate around and see if the COVID shot, people who got the COVID shot got sick with COVID at a lower rate than the people who got a placebo.
They didn't even pretend to do that.
Anyway, ultimately, the FDA agreed that Moderna's design for trial was acceptable, according to communication that Moderna cited in a press release.
Moderna proceeded with the testing, got promising results, they said, and submitted its application.
They had good reason to believe that it would receive approval.
Instead, February the 3rd, Moderna got what is known as a refused to file letter from the FDA, to which the agency said the company had not put the new vaccine to a sufficiently demanding test, which is true.
None of these things have ever been tested.
So what they're saying is, you pull the rug out from underneath us.
You change the goalposts.
Folks, there never were any goalposts.
You just had referees out there awarding points to whichever team they liked.
That was the way this whole thing worked.
They were not referees at all.
The FDA rarely takes such a step, says the bulwark.
And when it does, it usually is because an application is missing a whole component or includes suspect data.
All of this stuff is suspect, if you understand how they pull the wool over people's eyes.
The available evidence suggests that this is a case of the FDA disqualifying a vaccine on personal, rather questionable grounds while changing its standards for review late in the process.
Based on reporting and outlets like STAT and the Wall Street Journal, along with the decision, didn't come from senior career staff working most closely on the application because they thought it would move forward.
They said instead it came from the top from Vinay Prasad, a physician researcher whom Kennedy installed as director of the FDA's Vaccines and Biologics Division.
Good.
Good for them.
Thank you for doing that.
A director overruling career staff on a decision of this magnitude is highly unusual.
Yeah, and of course, they are when you're looking at this and what they're saying is, well, all the staff that are there and this institution wants to approve this and rubber stamp it without having done any real testing.
That it's only one guy at the top.
This is the problem with this, that it most likely will revert back to what it's always been once one or two of these people are gone at the top.
It's the loss of reliable federal support for vaccines, said one person, and how that loss is already dissuading companies from developing new shots that could someday protect hundreds of millions of people from dangerous, even lethal infections.
Well, that is excellent news.
The problem is, is that since they don't have to test this stuff, as soon as the administrators at the very top are gone, what the vaccine companies and what the FDA will do is they'll rush to market a bunch of untested lethal stuff.
We've seen this over and over again.
The CDC estimates that the last season's flu circulating late 2024 and early 2025 killed tens of thousands, maybe more than 100,000 in the U.S. Where they get these numbers.
Why didn't anybody question any of the stuff of COVID?
I questioned all that.
As a matter of fact, I got in a big fight with Mike Adams, who was taking the CDC side.
I said, come on, Mike, you know from a fact you've talked about the flu shots and you know how they make this stuff up and yet he pushed the panic button right and he started selling masks and all the rest of the other stuff.
Disgusting anyway.
When designing each year's new vaccine, scientists have to predict which strains are likely to circulate.
How they do that, did you know they've got a crystal ball?
Did you know?
Do they do it with tarot cards or some kind of?
Do they have a divining rod or something so to find the water and to find out what the flu strain is going to be next year?
It's patently absurd.
When you look at this, how could anybody?
This is what I say about the vaccine industry, about virology, about the Covet pandemic.
When you create a fictional world, you've got to do a good enough job that the, that it hangs together logically right, that's a sign of a good sci-fi film or book and a bad one?
Right, a bad one doesn't hang together.
They create a their own fictional world, but then there is a certain logic to it and you have to abide by those rules.
If you don't do it, then uh it's.
You know, everything is off, all bets are off.
And that's the problem with virology, that's the problem with the vaccine industry.
They've created this fictional world and it is logically inconsistent.
How can you say there's a different strain of flu every year and you got to get another flu shot this year because there's a different strain?
But we have made these things up in advance and we don't know what that strain is going to be.
We've just taken a guess at it.
How could you possibly buy into that kind of nonsense?
They admit that here.
They are admitting it.
This is a bulwark.
Who's pushing the panic button about what are we going to do about vaccines?
And they admit the inherent absurdity of this entire thing, because the companies create the key material for most of today's flu shots by growing them inside of eggs.
And so this is the big advantage of mRNA, they don't have the the time thing there.
So supposedly we can go out and isolate this flu strain and then we can make the mRNA to to prevent that.
Except that doesn't work either.
So to unlock all the promise, a company like Moderna, all the promise of mRNA, has to demonstrate to federal officials that a shot actually works.
No, they don't.
They didn't even do that with COVID, of course.
So now we're supposed to see that they have a cure for the common cold.
We know that these flu shots don't work.
I mean over and over and over again.
Pushing Back Against Forced Vaccines00:15:17
You know, before Trump was pushing the COVID shot and before Alex Jones jumped on and told people it's sugar water.
Come on, you can take a little bit of the aluminum and mercury injected in your veins.
That's not a big problem.
You can do it for Trump.
Before that, we used to talk about how, oh, look, Glenn Beck made a big issue of getting his flu shot publicly and he immediately gets flu.
And we see this over and over again with celebrities.
You know, they would go out and they'd get shot with this stuff and it would wreak havoc on their immune system and they would wind up coming down with a cold or flu.
So it never worked.
The companies and their investors, says Bullwork, have taken notice in action.
Even before the flu shot in Broglio, Moderna announced that it was putting on hold research into potential mRNA treatment for other conditions.
And as companies dial back on research and development, it won't just be for current threats like seasonal flu.
Early studies suggest versions of mRNA vaccines could be effective against certain kinds of cancer too.
So I say, go to RNC store, educate yourself.
Look at what G. Edward Griffin did.
Smart guy, honest guy, and read what he had to say about B17.
Again, go to RNC stores and use the code NIGHT.
Don't go anywhere near a cancer vaccine or mRNA.
That'll give you turbo cancer.
And so they're just looking at ways that they can do mass murder, folks.
From public health to security state.
This is from another industry publication.
And actually, what they're doing, they're pushing back against that somewhat.
According to Reuters, you've got a guy, his name is Richard Hatchett doing a hatchet job.
He's CEO of the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovation, CEPI.
You've seen that before.
That's a Bill Gates-funded organization.
He argued that vaccines need to be treated not only as public health tools, but as instruments of state security.
Let me just say to you that this whole idea of public health is an instrument of the security state, of the police and surveillance state.
That is the MacGuffin that they have been setting up.
This whole idea that public health is this nebulous thing that has to be protected.
Your individual health, however, doesn't matter to these people.
It doesn't matter if you've shown that you have had a lot of issues whenever you have been vaccinated or your children.
They don't care about individual health.
They only care about this nebulous thing called public health.
And as I said, how do you have public health if you don't have individual health?
It's not about that.
It's a collectivist idea for control.
And so Hatchett is saying this is a security problem, not just a global health problem.
Pandemics disrupt economies, destabilize governments, and strain military readiness.
Vaccine manufacturing capacity can reasonably be viewed as part of critical infrastructure.
So we're going to make this a national security issue, which means, of course, everything's going to be secret, which means that we are not constrained by law or the Constitution.
It's an emergency, right?
We can do whatever we wish.
This is one of the aspects that was so wrong about Hillary Clinton's attempt to take over healthcare.
As I point out, if we're going to fund all treatment, then basically they're going to determine what kind of treatment you get and if you get treatment.
And in some cases, they're going to mandate it.
I said that when Hillary Clinton was doing that in the early 1990s.
It was very clear where this is all headed.
It's a very public health is a very dangerous idea and it needs to be eradicated.
I'm not in favor of any public health as a tactic or an excuse.
So he says, well, COVID-19 demonstrated what happens when emergency health measures migrate into national security doctrine.
Liability shields are broadened.
Mandates are justified.
Dissent framed as disinformation rather than scientific debate.
Civil liberties and open scientific discourse narrow.
CEPI's call for $2.5 billion in new funding.
New funding from where?
New funding from government.
Beyond its existing $1.5 billion base.
So in other words, they want to triple the size of where they are right now.
The Reuters article notes the Trump regime's funding cuts to Gavi and prior cancellation of more than $700 million for Moderna's mRNA bird flu program later was partially supported by CEPI.
Hatchett also warned about the politicization of vaccine policy to the U.S.
This is a guy who wants billions of dollars of government money.
He's talking about it being a national security issue, and he's got the audacity to talk about don't politicize this.
He's the one who politicized all this stuff.
Anyway, supporters of CEPI argue that vaccine hesitancy could cripple response efforts in a future pandemic.
Well, the problem is, is that it was people being forced to take their vaccines because the industry was not hesitant at all to use force and fraud.
That is what has created this blowback.
Critics respond that hesitancy grew not from ignorance alone, but from perceived opacity, shifting guidance, suppressed debate, and aggressive mandates during COVID-19.
In other words, people don't want it, so you force it on them.
People have questions, so you punish them.
And then you give them explanations, but then you have to change those explanations because the first one and the second one are both lies.
We've seen that.
They think we don't know that, but we've seen it.
Trust was not lost in a vacuum, says this article.
Labeling vaccines as a national security priority can accelerate manufacturing, streamline procurement, and unlock defense-level funding.
But securitization also centralizes authority.
And that's been the point.
That was the whole point of the pandemic MacGuffin, to centralize authority.
To prepare people for a society that operates via permission, a red light, yellow light, green light society, just like China.
So under a security paradigm, of course, emergency powers become normalized.
Regulatory compression becomes routine.
In other words, we skip any kind of regulation or testing.
Liability protections expand without parallel transparency, and public skepticism is reclassified as a threat rather than a signal that something is wrong.
This is all about the militarized police state.
It's all a MacGuffin to create all of that stuff.
Well, as I said before, we do have some good news, and it's more than just non-approval of the latest mRNA poison from Moderna.
Rand Paul has introduced a federal bill to strip vaccine manufacturers of nationwide liability immunity.
And I'm really kind of surprised that he did it.
He was pushing back against Fauci.
Dr. Fauci, you're going to make people vaccine hesitant.
And to me, he was coming across in his questioning of Fauci as somebody who, you know, don't stop people from taking vaccines.
I mean, he has in the past talked about that people ought to have the flexibility to spread out the vaccines rather than taking them in a cluster.
They ought to be able to take them later, spread them out more.
But now he's coming out attacking this 1986 immunity bill.
And I kind of say this is the essence of why I am an anti-vaxxer.
Ich ben ein anti-vaxxer.
So anyway, it's because as soon as I realized that they had no liability, it's like, wait a minute, that means that they have no confidence in their product.
As a matter of fact, it gets even worse if you go back to the justification for this.
They said vaccines are inherently unsafe.
Okay, so acknowledge that your product is inherently unsafe.
You demand to be protected from any and all liability by the government.
I'm done with you people.
I'm not taking any of that stuff.
This has been introduced now by Rand Paul, co-sponsored by Senator Mike Lee.
Bravo.
Thank you for doing that.
A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to end the liability shield for vaccine manufacturers and for other purposes.
It was introduced February the 11th and last Wednesday.
Rand Paul introduced the federal legislation to dismantle the long-standing, just again, this is one of these signals like, okay, so we're going to, we consulted our crystal ball and our tarot cards, and we've come up with what we think is going to be the next flu strain, and we have been manufacturing that for several months now.
So go take our flu shot.
You know, that was a big logical red flag, and so was the 1986 Act.
And so good for them for pushing back on that.
As I said before, this most likely will not go through.
You have so many politicians who are in the pocket of the big pharmaceutical companies as well as the media, and they will pull out every stop to keep this from happening.
So I don't suspect this is going to go through.
I mean, call your representatives and tell them to vote for it, but still, your senters, I should say.
But still, it's not the end, I don't think.
But it could be the beginning of the end because we've never had an awareness like this of people in terms of the corruption of what this thing is all about.
And so the legal architecture was justified at the time as necessary to prevent the vaccine market collapsing amid rising lawsuits.
Again, they said it was unavoidably unsafe.
Well, I think I want to avoid that and go with things that are safe.
If the shield were removed, vaccine manufacturers could face direct product liability lawsuits in state and federal court.
This, by the way, again, I don't think it'll pass, but I think it will be a gold mine for senators, especially people like Senator Cassidy from Louisiana, a former physician who has become one of the biggest cheerleaders for the vaccine poisoners.
Liability protections have been defended for decades by establishment public health officials and pro-vaccine industry groups as essential to maintaining vaccine supply stability and profits for big pharmaceutical companies.
The profits which find their way back into the pockets of the press through these ask your doctor commercials and into the pockets of the politicians who cover for them.
Marks, a direct legislative challenge for the first time to that structure at the federal level.
There should never be a product that has no liability.
Just like there should never be absolute immunity for the police.
There should never be absolute immunity for the vaccinators either.
These poisons of our society.
So again, places the issue squarely on the Senate agenda, signals that the liability question is no longer confined to academic or to activist debate.
And that's a very positive development.
It is now a live legislative matter on the national level.
So whether it advances or stalls in committee will determine whether Congress is willing to reopen one of the most entrenched public health legal frameworks in modern U.S. law.
Again, that was the essence of me becoming anti-vaxxer.
You look at that and it's like, oh, that makes no sense at all.
They should be protected from that.
When they admit that they go out of business if they didn't have protection against harming people.
A judge has weighed whether or not to block vaccine changes from the CDC and RFK Jr.
So now I guess the judges are experts on vaccines.
So lawyers for the Society for Maternal Fetal Medicine.
Think about that.
This is a quote-unquote society that's talking about medicine for mothers, for pregnant mothers and their babies, the Maternal Fetal Medicine Society.
You know, it wasn't that long ago, it wasn't that long before COVID, that they were pushing back.
We didn't vaccinate pregnant women because we weren't certain enough of the safety.
And if you're not absolutely certain, why would you do that?
Why would you expose the children?
Then they pushed it.
Then they pushed it.
Then they wanted this experimental, untested genetic code injection.
They tried to push that on women.
And they've actually got a society that is pushing for injections into pregnant women.
The Society for Maternal Fetal Medicine.
Isn't that amazing?
And it's institutions that we get, the pediatricians, the maternal fetal medicine society.
These people are exactly the opposite of what they should be doing.
That's how our society and our institutions have failed us.
So they are pushing back against the changes at CDC.
You know, people can still go and get their vaccines if they want to poison their baby and take a risk.
There's nothing stopping that from it.
What they're trying to do is just narrow the vaccine schedule and stop this being, stop the coercion that's involved in this.
The CDC on January the 5th, with backing from RFK Jr., narrowed the number of vaccines routinely recommended by the childhood schedule.
Is it a problem when you have instead of getting a shot every six months for the same thing to your children, if you just do one or something, you cut it down, can we just cut that down a little bit?
And yet we've seen how this is weaponized by the insurance companies against pediatricians.
If you don't get your patients vaccinated, we're going to cut you off of insurance collection for real issues.
They drive these kinds of pediatricians out of business.
As a matter of fact, Travis and his wife have to go to a pediatrician for their child where you pay.
It's like joining a club because they have been punished financially by the medical system and by the insurance companies to the extent that their patients have to pay to basically become members.
Price Controls Controversy00:06:43
It's insane.
Yeah.
Our doctor said that she's seen a lot of her cohorts either go out of business and just stop providing care because they're not pushing vaccines or just get on board with it and they push, push, push.
And that's how they make their money.
Yeah, just get over it.
Say, I don't care what happens to my patients.
I'm going to make money.
That's what they want.
That's what the system wants, a corrupt system of corporations that are running this whole show.
So the U.S. is a global outlier among peer nations, they said.
The plaintiffs include several women who say changes under RFK Jr. have prevented them from receiving vaccines.
What utter nonsense.
Vaccines are not expensive, even if you had to pay for them out of pocket, if the insurance companies wouldn't pay for it.
A DOJ lawyer told health officials they were not pursuing an anti-vaccine agenda, and they welcomed, quote, spirited debate about vaccine policy.
But he said the Department of HHS had broad authority to change policy to address a decline in public trust in vaccines following what happened with the so-called pandemic.
He said the court cannot substitute its judgment in the place of the agency.
And again, I don't like the judgment of HHS or CDC or FDA.
They have been shown to not have any honest or scientific judgment at all.
But it's even worse if we're going to hand this over to lawyers and judges who have no medical expertise.
How about they just shut up and let us decide for ourselves instead of being pressured by people like Bill Gates and the insurance industry?
Well, as all of this is happening, you've got the coalition who's warning Congress against codifying Trump's drug pricing scheme.
And again, not everything is good with the state of health and the Trump regime.
A coalition of free market and conservative organizations is urging Congress to reject legislation that would codify Trump's most favored nation prescription drug pricing regime.
And I got to say, why are we not a favored nation of the pharmaceutical companies after Trump poured tens of billions of dollars into their coffers?
Twisted arms, he and Biden twisted arms to get people to take their product, basically mandating it and locking people down to get them to take this product.
But now we're not favored by the pharmaceutical companies.
Why is that?
What do we have to do to get them to like us?
Well, these different business concerns, again, this is the business of medicine.
And these are organizations that are not medical, but they are financial.
And they're saying, we don't want to have the same kind of price controls that other countries do because that's going to restrict our access to these poisons.
The proposal would import foreign price controls in the United States, undermine innovation, ultimately strengthen China.
There we go.
We can't strengthen China, can we?
The policy in question stems from Trump's executive order directing federal agencies to tie the prices of certain prescription drugs to the U.S. to the lowest prices of those same drugs receive in other developed nations.
Why should we be the suckers who pay triple or more what other countries do?
And we've seen this for the longest time.
We don't have a government that regulates them, doesn't test their product, and doesn't negotiate prices.
We say, tell us what you want to charge us.
I'll pay it.
We have been absolutely taken over by these pharmaceutical companies, and these business concerns are upset about that.
They don't like that, that there's going to be some pushback against it.
The signatories acknowledge the imbalance.
They said wealthy countries often impose government price controls and pay less for prescription drugs than Americans frequently pay more.
Just look at the disparity between drug prices in Canada and the U.S., for example.
Their core argument is structural, writes the new American.
If U.S. prices are pegged to those set by foreign governments, Washington doesn't force those governments to pay more.
It accepts their pricing regimes as the reference point.
The letter contends that most favored nation status would surrender to foreign freeloading by basing U.S. prices on the price of countries with socialist policies.
Again, so I guess the answer is that we should let them gouge us on prices like that.
There's often little or no negotiation with foreign governments.
Companies face a take-it-or-leave-it proposition.
So basically, what these people are saying is that the companies should give the government a take-it-or-leave-it proposition.
If firms attempt to withdraw products to gain leverage, governments could invoke compulsory licensing for protection of industrial property.
European Union regulators could allege a cartel-like strategy.
You think the pharmaceutical companies are like a cartel?
I do.
I absolutely do.
So, if the U.S. implements the same price controls, then it's going to make it difficult for us to get their drugs.
This is the same kind of argument.
I'm absolutely astounded at a guest last week who said, Yeah, we can't cut the interest rates in the credit card companies, usury laws, and things like that.
It's like, what are you talking about?
You know, well, look, they just got they extend credit to everybody, and so they have to charge 30-40% interest because they got a lot of people who don't pay their debt.
It's like, well, maybe you should do some due diligence.
You can't do due diligence if it's an unsecured debt.
Yes, you can.
You can look at their income.
Well, we have to let poor people have access to 30% loans so they can completely be enslaved to the greedy banks who don't even pay you 1% on your savings anymore.
Give me a break.
These poor corporations who have never had a greater disparity of wealth, and it is never enough for these people.
They always want more money.
How in the world, I just don't understand that instinct to defend this kind of greed.
And that's all it is.
It's greed, it's exploitation.
For them to say, well, you know, we're going to withhold these dangerous drugs and you won't have as many of them.
George Washington's Birthday Misconceptions00:15:28
Fine.
Fine.
We'd be better off.
So, again, a lot of newly minted billionaires who don't want to give us most favored nation status in these different drugs.
We're going to take a quick break, folks, and we'll be right back.
Music.
Unvaccinated, asked a little bit of Pfizer.
Does no harm.
Little Johnson Johnson does the trick.
A little AstraZeneca so you don't get sick.
It's booster number five.
Decoding the mainstream propaganda.
It's the David Knight Show.
APS Radio delivers multiple channels of music right to your mobile device.
Get the APS Radio app today and listen wherever you go.
Well, yesterday was George Washington's birthday, and we kind of forget about that now anymore, and I forgot about it.
But I saw a couple of articles.
People talking about George Washington said, certainly use him now.
And boy, that certainly is the truth, isn't it?
We look at the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence.
George Washington was 44 at the time.
Newsweek wrote an article and said, as we celebrate his 294th birthday, a more pressing question emerges.
Do we still need to honor and learn from America's first president?
Well, the answer is more urgent than ever.
Yes.
The precedents that he established as our first president remain the very pillars that fortify our republic today.
When he voluntarily stepped down after two terms, when he could have served for life, which look people typically did, he astonished the world.
King George III reportedly said, when he relinquished power, the greatest men in the world, because as king, he understood the temptations of power, didn't he?
Tried to hang on to America, but he couldn't do it.
And, you know, that's the interesting thing I've always thought about.
When you look at revolutions, usually things get worse.
In the American Revolution, they all followed the example of Washington, or they were all of that mind that they devolved power rather than trying to grab as much of it as they could.
That was the case with Washington.
It was certainly the case with Jefferson and so many of them.
And that is not what we see today.
As a matter of fact, we see just the opposite, don't we?
When you look at today's leaders, we have, remember, we've got Donald Trump who thinks that he should never leave office.
He wants to stay there for a third term.
And you got people like Steve Bannon, who wanted to be the PR flak for Jeffrey Epstein and to get him past all this little pedophile stuff, right?
Saying, yeah, we don't care.
Even the, you know, when George Washington looked at this, there was no prohibition there.
There was no law.
He just looked at it and said, it would not be wise, you know, for us to have a lifetime president.
These people are just the opposite.
Even though there is a law, even though there is a precedent and a constitutional amendment, they just talk about with contempt how Bannon and Trump, we got a plan to get around that.
Well, he's going to get a third term.
So Trump 28, Trump is going to be president in 28, and people just ought to get accommodated with that.
So what about the 22nd Amendment?
There's many different alternatives.
At the appropriate time, we'll lay out what the plan is, but there's a plan, and President Trump will be the president in 28.
We had longer odds in 16 and longer odds in 24 than we got in 28.
And President Trump will be the president of the United States, and the country needs him to be president of the United States.
We have to finish what we started.
No, we don't.
The way we finish Trump.
Trump is a vehicle.
I know this will drive you guys crazy, but he's a vehicle of divine providence.
He's an instrument.
He's like Jeffrey Epstein.
He's not churchy, not particularly religious, but he's an instrument of divine will.
And you can tell this of how we've, how he's pulled this off.
We need him for at least one more term, right?
What a snake that guy is.
And it has come out now in the Epstein files.
So as many people are saying, if you still listen to this guy, you're absolutely idiotic.
And I got to say, what a contemptible person Steve Bannon is and all the things that he does and the people that he hangs around with, people he promotes, and things that he's promoted.
Yeah, he's not churchy.
He doesn't like to hang around churchy people, and yet he loves to surround himself with all kinds of religious icons and everything to pretend that he is religious.
What a fraud Steve Bannon is.
I'm disgusted with him.
And it's not just the letter of the law that he has contempt for.
It's the practical aspects of this.
As I write in Newsweek, the peaceful transfer of power wasn't some ritual.
It defined us as a nation.
While the French Revolution descended into violence and eventually installed an emperor, America under Washington's leadership emerged as the world's only stable republic.
Earlier in 1783, after winning the Revolutionary War, Washington had already stunned global powers by willingly surrendering his military commission to the Congress.
So twice he walked away from power.
Twice he chose democracy over dictatorship.
And you've got these wannabe pedophiled dictators like Trump and Bannon.
I can't believe that people who are Americans could be so ignorant, so foolish, so lacking in discernment that they would follow these grifters, criminals, and pedophiles.
Just beyond belief.
Washington established the cabinet system, recognizing that no single person could possess the knowledge necessary to lead effectively.
He navigated international crises with neutrality, and he was wise to do that instead of picking fights with people.
He warned against the dangers of political factions and sectional division, just as Trump exploits those things.
Warnings that resonate profoundly today.
These were not abstract principles.
They were practical foundations that transformed revolutionary ideals into lasting governance.
How do we truly understand Washington?
Not through textbooks alone.
History comes alive through places.
And the rest of this is written by a guy who is the CEO of Mount Vernon.
And he talks about how instructive it is to go there and to see how these guys lived, the home that he lived in for 45 years.
And they have a very ambitious preservation effort.
They spent $40 million, privately funded revitalization of Washington's mansion, a birthday gift to America.
He said that they had to actually lift it up off of its foundations and repair all the foundations that are there.
I think that basically needs to be done to our country as well.
It's going to cost us $40 trillion to do that, though.
And, you know, when we look at this, I got to say that Trump is anti-Washington.
And I don't mean the District of Criminals.
He's perfectly at home in the District of Criminals.
He is one of them.
He is a partisan hack.
He is part of the uni party.
Donald Trump is perfectly at home in the district of corruption and criminals.
What he is anti-Washington in, he's anti-George.
Donald Trump is the antithesis of George Washington.
That's the reality of where we are today, folks.
As a matter of fact, people are starting maybe to realize that.
One CNN data analysis says, I'm not sure there is a floor in his approval polls.
The guy said, look, I got four numbers across for you on this screen here.
And these are all second-term lows for a given pollster.
The AP has Trump 26 points below water.
What do you mean below water?
That is saying, well, you've got this percentage of people who favor him and this percentage of people who don't like him.
And there's 26% more people that dislike him than like him.
So 26 points below water for AP.
The NBC poll shows 22 points below water.
The Yahoo YouGov poll, 20 points below water.
Quinnipac, 19 points below water.
He says, so it ranges from 19 points below to 26 points below.
He says, folks keep asking, where's the floor for Trump?
I'm not sure there is a floor.
And if there is one, Trump, at least in term number two, has just fallen through it to another low level.
It's just like one of these 9-11 buildings, right?
Let's hope so.
Anyway, so they pointed out that this is much worse than he did in his first term, much worse than Biden did.
He said in his first term, he was 17 points below water.
He said now he is 27 points below water.
When you are 27 points below water, underwater, with the center of the electric with the independents, you lose and your party loses.
And he said that's the key issue is how he's doing with independence.
And that's why he's so low.
As a matter of fact, if you go back and you look at real clear politics, there was in his aggregate polls and his average polls over his first term, he had 42% approval.
And I'm sorry, yeah, 42% approved.
53% disapproved.
In other words, he had a net negative of 10%.
538 showed him as 19 points down with a 38 to 39% approval and a 57 to 58% approval.
Now, 19 is as good as he gets from any of these.
He's now, so in other words, 538 showed him down average of 19 points.
Real clear politics showed him down an average of 10 points.
But now he's down, depending on which of these large polls you look at, anywhere from 19 to 26 points.
And when you look at where he was at the end of that term, he's way below that.
And he lost in 2020, just remind people that he lost.
Melania is suffering a devastating weekend at the box office.
I guess all the fanboys and girls went the first week and dressed up like Melania with a white dress with a black zigzag on it.
You know, Robert Jeffries had him doing it.
And I thought this is one of the best gifts I've seen.
This is, she's laughing.
This is the first inauguration.
And there's Trump.
And he looks around and she gives him this really nice, warm smile.
And as soon as he turns around, she gets a sour look on her face.
So the documentary continued to plummet on only its third weekend, suffering a 62% drop in attendance.
You know, they have a term for that in the movie business.
They say if a movie, they all drop after their first or second week, but I mean, 63% is huge, 62%.
But if it doesn't drop like that, you know, if it only drops like 20 or 30%, they say the movie has legs.
So I guess we could say Melania doesn't have legs.
She has no legs.
So this is they have grossed.
It looks like they're on pace to finish up at $15 million total.
Nowhere near the $40 million that Bezos spent to acquire it.
And then he spent an additional $35 million to promote it.
So they're in for $75 million.
It looks like they're going to make $15 million at the box office.
By the way, $28 million of that $40 million went directly to Melania.
And that in and of itself was many, many multiples more than what the typical documentary has as its total budget.
So usually, and I forget what these numbers were.
I pointed out when it came out a couple of weeks ago.
But if you look at what the average documentary costs to make, they don't spend a lot of money on documentaries.
And she was many, many times many multiples of what the entire budget is for a typical documentary.
It was Payola.
They're buying favors with the Trump family.
That's what it was, pure and simple.
Well, they're trying to make a, put a happy spin on it and try to not look like losers in this.
Of course, you know, if you are the studio chief, if you're the one responsible for making these decisions, you want to say, well, it's not as bad as it looks.
It was a 67% drop off after the first week.
So second week, it dropped 67%.
Second week, it dropped an additional 62% off of that.
They said, well, we think we'll make our money back when we put it on Amazon and stream it.
Well, they've got a lot of money to make back.
They're in the hole.
Looks like they're going to be in the hole from the box office thing of $60 million.
And then they said during her black carpet premiere at the Kennedy Center last month, she teased that a docuseries would soon build on this vanity project.
So we're going to have an entire series of these things.
Well, they call it Melania Wears Prada or something.
That was that one movie studio.
I think they were in Oregon.
And they put that up on their billboard.
Find out on Friday if Melania wears Prada.
Referring to the movie The Devil Wears Prada.
They saw that.
They pulled the movie from that theater.
Whether or not people like it, the value of these movies is different for our business model.
We're going to make a lot of money when it gets streaming.
And so what we want to do is we just want to cover our PA cost.
And that's our print and advertising cost.
Well, the print and advertising costs are $35 million.
And they're only looking to make $15 million.
They're a long ways from even recovering their print and advertising costs.
But that's really not what their business model is anyway.
Their business model was to buy influence with a corrupt president.
Celebrity Prison Influencers00:06:25
And we have the rise of the celebrity prison influencer.
This article mentions people like Elizabeth Holmes, Harvey Weinstein, and many others.
They don't mention Ghelane Maxwell, though.
I mean, don't you think that she would be a prison influencer?
She could get a podcast or something like that or a docu-series.
In January, venture capitalist Sam Lesson playfully suggested on X that convicted fraudster Elizabeth Holmes should start a, quote, jailhouse venture fund.
For Holmes, it was an invitation to chat.
Nearly four hours later, the Thoranas founder replied directly to him and said, thank you for the kind words and volunteered her prison address.
I was surprised, he said, but there is a growing cohort of famous felons who are leveraging new media to rehab their images.
And mates, including Sam Bankman, Fried and Harvey Weinstein, have turned to people like Tucker Carlson and Candace Owen to present alternative narratives to their cases.
Kind of like, you know, Jeffrey Epstein going to Steve Bannon, except it was more than that, wasn't it?
The reality is that they have teams of people, said George Santos.
He's cashing in on this as well.
You know, he's been on with Tim Poole.
You know, he wants to have George Santos on.
I wouldn't give George Santos the time of day.
Unbelievable.
The only good interview I've seen with George Santos is when he did with this troll kid, Matan Evan, who literally just kept obliquely bringing up or directly bringing up the fact he's a criminal who's going to prison and making fun of him for it.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Just unbelievable.
Just imagine if we'd had this kind of culture when Charles Manson was around, he would have had a podcast.
The Manson cult would have had a podcast, especially if Steve Bannon had been around.
So these people are influencers who are trafficking in crime and perversity, really.
And again, you know, what does it tell you when you got influencers like Owens and Candace Owens and Bannon promoting these different characters like Weinstein and Epstein?
In May, Weinstein appeared on Candace Owens' podcast.
And, you know, this is why they do anything for audience.
Doesn't matter.
Truth doesn't matter.
Important issues don't matter with him.
Just can I get eyeballs on here?
It's a freak show.
For convicts, convicts that are right, the right-wing political podcasts are playgrounds where their stories can go largely unchallenged.
The podcasts are willing to go above and beyond for us, said a PR Whiz.
As a matter of fact, you look at somebody who had no convictions, Donald Trump, and I mean it not in the legal sense.
I mean it that he would do anything.
She got an interview with Donald Trump, and I've played that clip many times.
She starts to engage him on the criminal acts of his Trump shot, his genetic code injection.
He pushes back and she just lets him go with it.
I'm sure she's the same way with Harvey Weinstein.
It's also a way for federal convicts to unleash step one in the commutation playbook, drumming up support from MAGA World, because again, they've shown they've got Stockholm syndrome over and over again, and they absolutely are delusional when it comes to what is happening.
He had Tucker Carlson bring on Sam Bankman Fried, and the title of the episode was Sam Bankman Fried on Life in Prison with Diddy and how Democrats stole his money and betrayed him.
See, it's the Democrats.
Amazing.
New York Times later reported that the Bankman Fried article was placed in solitary confinement afterwards because the Bureau of Prisons was upset about what he had done.
And Ghelain Maxwell's lawyer says mounting media campaigns from federal prisons is hardly as simple as buying a ring light and pressing record, but X offers a workaround.
Maybe that's what happened.
Maybe she didn't get a ring light.
Maybe that's why her eyes and her ears and her nose all look so different.
Maybe they can get a ringer to stand in for her for a podcast, just like for doing time in the club fed prison that she's in.
They said that it's ideal for people doing short sentences.
Yeah, Twitter is ideal for short sentences.
As a matter of fact, you only got like 258 characters, I think.
But anyway, this is the state of our culture.
Got a couple of comments here and a tip.
Thank you very much, Stealth Patriot.
Thank you.
He says the Trump administration is demanding the social media companies hand over identities behind the anti-ICE accounts.
Welcome to your golden social credit score.
That's exactly right.
That's exactly right.
And it is his contempt for anybody who criticizes him, his contempt for the law as well as the essence of what America is about, as we see with his actions with being the anti-George.
Thank you for joining us.
Have a good day.
The Common Man.
They created Common Core to dumb down our children.
They created Common Pasts 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.
Tracking and Controlling Us00:08:35
Please share the information and links you'll find at the DavidKnight Show.com.
Thank you for listening.
thank you for sharing.
If you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers.
TheDavidKnightShow.com.
American Dream.
You're listening to The David Knight Show.
Liberty, it's your move.
And now, The David Knight Show is a
revolutionary act.
It's the David Knight Show.
As the clock strikes 13, it's Tuesday, the 17th of February.
You're our Lord, 2026.
Well, we have directed energy weapons from Havana syndrome to economist killer robots, from El Paso to the Ukraine battlefield, the coming Skynet battlefields that you've seen depicted in Terminator.
We now have Eric Schmidt working to make that a reality and writing op-ed pieces about its soon to be implemented, maybe later this year.
Docs Revealed EMF Worry00:05:11
We also have a scientist who is skeptical about the Havana syndrome directed energy weapons, and he used it on himself.
Isn't it interesting how we keep seeing these science fiction plots brought to real life?
And we'll tell you what happened to him.
But the reality is, the battlefield of spiritual war, even the secularists see it now in the Epstein docs, and what's revealed with that.
But just like the scientists who discovered DNA, they still seek to deny the reality of God that is behind all this.
We'll take a look at all of that, as well as some hope in the movement in the vaccine wars.
Yeah, the protection of those abusers is not over, but the cover-up is.
And we may hopefully be at the beginning of the end of the vaccine wars.
Well, we have a researcher who's skeptical about the Havana syndrome, as the Washington Post reported, who said, I'll prove that there's nothing here.
And I just think that is the strangest thing.
I said from the very beginning, you know, we've had a lot of indications.
There's, I guess this guy is coming from the perspective that we don't have to worry about EMF.
We don't have to worry about our cell phones.
We don't have to worry about the smart meters.
We don't have to worry about the soup of EMF and the biological effects.
But I've been talking about that for a long time.
And so when this Havana syndrome thing came out, I said, of course.
If you go back and you look at the research of a U.S., I think he worked for the Navy, Alan Fry, the only time that the U.S. has funded any research into this, and it was really kind of his own personal project that he got involved in.
And I said when I was talking about that in the context of 5G and the health effects of cell phone towers and the cancer clusters that they've created around schools because they love to put these things close to schools, why do you think that would be?
Anyway, I drew the analogy to microwave ranges.
Remember, the very first microwave ranges were called radar ranges by Amana.
That was that very distinctively, because it was kind of discovered by accident that if the technicians left their coffee sitting on top of the radar device there, that somehow the coffee got hot.
Isn't that funny?
I wonder what it was doing to their body, by the way.
Of course, the good news is that this radiation coming from a point source like that decreases with the square of the distance still, if it was in those early days when they weren't trying to do any shielding, who knows what they were exposed to.
Anyway, it was a similar thing like that with Alan Fry.
They were working on a different frequency spectrum, and he had an assistant who kept hearing these clicking noises, crickets types of things.
And it was from the EMF that they were working with.
It's not unusual if you stop and think about it.
It makes perfectly good sense.
Your nerves operate, you know, the optic nerves, the audible nerves, they are operating on electrical signals.
Why wouldn't you think that some kind of an EMF would trigger certain issues with you?
And so he started experimenting with it.
And I talked about that many, many times in the context of 5G and radiation risks that were there.
But also, it's not just the health effects of 5G.
One of the reasons that they have ignored this stuff is not just for the money that's involved.
Yes, that is a big part of it.
And if you go back to 1996, the Clinton administration ran through this Telecommunications Act, which said there will be no local objections to telecommunication towers that are being put in.
Same type of thing that Donald Trump is doing with AI.
We will not allow you to control this at the local level.
Well, that didn't fly.
You can still stop it.
And many places, many localities did push against that, especially when they found cancer clusters at the kids' schools.
And so they were trying to lay the groundwork to make sure there was not going to be any regulation of this network that they wanted, a national network, a network where the corporations had bought special favors from the politicians.
So that goes back to 1996, 10 years, by the way, after the 1986 legislation that Reagan signed, that Fauci started as his first thing they did at the NIH, to make sure that pharmaceutical manufacturers would not be liable for any of this.
And the Telecommunications Act said localities can require that the towers be covered up for aesthetic purposes, but you can't bring any health claims against it.
And so we have this bias, this industry bias against claiming that there's any deleterious effects of EMF.
Norway's Nuclear Missile Mystery00:13:59
So that's a part of it.
And it's also something that the government wants very much so because they can't do their smart cities and their internet of things and their internet of bodies without it.
They need to have that ubiquitous RF frequencies that are there.
So there were a lot of motivations for them to deny it.
But I think it also tells us something else about your government, the great Satan in Washington, the fact that they even trash their own people.
You've got people who are working for the CIA and they were seriously injured with this stuff.
And by the way, these injuries that they were suffering with the Havana syndrome were permanent injuries.
They weren't temporary.
It wasn't that they got headaches temporarily or nausea temporarily.
They struggled with this thing for a very, very long time.
And so they had a bias to ignore that, even though it was their own people.
And so the Washington Post says this one scientist who was working on this in Norway, a government scientist in Norway, built a machine that's capable of emitting powerful pulses of microwave energy.
And in an effort to prove such devices are harmless in humans, in 2024, he tested it on himself.
He suffered neurological symptoms similar to those of Havana syndrome, the unexplained malady that has struck hundreds of U.S. spies and diplomats around the world.
It's not really a question.
I mean, it's directed energy weapons.
And William Benny and other people, of course, William Benny, the former global technical head of the NSA, has said that he believes that he has directed energy weapons being used against him.
He's left the country, but nevertheless, they still want to get, they're still very angry about what he did in terms of being a whistleblower.
So the bizarre story described by four people familiar with the events said has come to light.
The secret test in Norway has not been previously reported.
The Norwegian government told the CIA about the results.
Two of the people said, mentioning at least two visits in 2024 to Norway by Pentagon and White House officials.
And yet, even though it makes perfectly good sense that this would be the case, again, when I went back and did research on Monsef Slowy at the beginning of all this COVID nonsense, what I found was that he and Fauci and Francis Collins, this unholy trinity, had been going around doing a lot of speaking engagements.
And the three of them really wanted to talk about electroceuticals as the next big thing.
Why would that be?
And why would they then deny that there's any effects with EMF?
Again, it's just common sense when there's so much in your body that is electrical.
So those aware of the tests say it didn't prove that these things are the work of a foreign adversary.
But the events bolstered the case of those who argue that pulsed energy devices, machines that deliver powerful beams of electromagnetic energy, such as microwaves and short bursts, can affect human biology and are probably being developed by U.S. adversaries.
Of course, we would never do anything like that, right?
Do you remember the Navy yard shooter who got up there and was taking pot shots of people when they killed him or he killed himself or whatever?
They said that on the gunstock of his rifle was carved, this is my ELF weapon.
He wasn't playing Lord of the Rings.
ELF is extremely low frequency, and it has been talked about in the past.
As a matter of fact, Mind Wars, which was written by that Satanist who worked for the NSA, Colonel Michael Aquino, his treatise called Mind Wars.
In it, he talked about the effects of using extremely low frequency as a weapon on people.
And that is something that the Navy is very much involved in because they use extremely low frequencies, ELFs, massive, massive underground antennas.
That's what they use to communicate with submarines because the submarines are underwater and they need to have extremely low frequency in order to be able to get to the submarines underwater.
It's not directional like the higher frequencies are.
So compelling evidence that we should be concerned about directed energy weapons.
Paul Fredericks, a retired military surgeon, Air Force General, who oversaw biological threats to the White House National Security Council, declined to comment on the Norway experiment.
And again, we can look at this and say it makes perfectly good sense, and we can speculate as to what their motivations are.
They've got a lot of different reasons that they might lie to us about it.
The Trump administration took office promising to pursue this as aggressively as they come after the Epstein documents, right?
There's been little apparent movement, however.
A review that was ordered by Tulsi Gabbard was expected to focus mostly on the Biden administration's handling of it.
So again, nothing but partisan finger pointing.
Well, look at what Biden did, blah, blah, blah.
A separate development.
U.S. government covertly purchased a different foreign-made device that produces pulsed radio waves and which some experts suspect could be leaked, linked to these incidents, according to two people.
And then, of course, you've had the implication that Trump made that they used this in the kidnapping of Maduro to incapacitate some kind of an invisible weapon.
When you stop and think about the things that our government has, it truly is amazing.
This is 60-some-odd years, the military-industrial complex pursuing their satanic agenda, creating in secret all kinds of weapons.
And these things will be released once it all kicks off.
And believe me, they are working to try to kick this off at the end of the fourth turning.
So it said it's being tested by the Defense Department.
It's got some Russian origin components, but the U.S. government still has not determined conclusively who built it, say some of the people.
Really?
Well, how'd you get it?
They said that it was interceptive blueprints that they had.
So stop and think about how the government has continued to lie to the public, to its own people who are hurt by this.
They knew it existed.
They had the blueprints for it.
They knew about a Norwegian scientist who had been injured because he didn't believe that this stuff was real and he tested it on himself.
And then they spent millions of dollars to buy it from somebody.
And yet they still play this game with the public.
This is what they do with everything.
The device that the scientists constructed in Norway was not identical to the one that the U.S. government covertly acquired for millions of dollars.
The Norwegian device was built based on classified information suggesting that it was derived from blueprints and other materials stolen from a foreign government.
We've got to pretend, though, that it doesn't exist.
And I think perhaps some of their motivation in this might be the fact that they want to maintain the illusion of American exceptionalism in terms of technological advantage and war machines, right?
They don't like the fact that the Russians and the Chinese have the hypersonic missiles, you know, their Reshnik missile that Russia demonstrated publicly.
They don't like to talk about that, that we don't have that, that we don't have a nuclear-powered cruise missile, which again could have a nuclear warhead on it.
But when Russia did the nuclear-powered cruise missile, the advantage of that being that because it has a nuclear, because it's nuclear-powered, it's like a nuclear submarine.
It can go for a very, very, very long time, almost indefinitely, without getting new fuel.
And so the response of Trump, which is a very weak response from the U.S. government, was, well, then I guess we'll just forget all this, start the strategic arms limitation treaty.
And if you're going to test nuclear weapons, and we'll start testing nuclear weapons again.
And as Putin pointed out, well, we didn't test a nuclear warhead.
What we tested was something that was nuclear-powered, which nuclear-powered cruise missile, just like a nuclear-powered submarine, is not a nuclear warhead test, right?
It can be, but it doesn't have to be.
So again, they're trying to play catch-up in a lot of different areas.
And Trump's Golden Dome project, folks, is a fool's errand and a half.
It is going to cost the world in terms of money that is there.
But it absolutely is not going to work in terms of the number of missiles that have to be used, the number of anti-missile devices that have to be used to intercept a singular missile.
It is absolutely impractical at this point.
And the cost would be unbelievably prohibitive.
But hey, who cares?
I mean, we've got to send some love to our friends in the military-industrial complex because, you know, they contributed to my campaign.
So let's buy some weapons from them.
Whether or not they work.
And one of the things that Trump's Golden Dome will do is actually undermine U.S. security, the security that comes from being the world's reserve currency.
All this massive debt that he could not care less about is something that is a real security issue and something that's going to affect us in every regard.
But they're going to ignore all of that.
Well, you have the National Ground Intelligence Center, U.S. Army Intelligence Agency, in Charlottesville, that produces intelligence on foreign adversaries' scientific, technical, and military capabilities.
They say that it's very unlikely that the attacks were the result of foreign adversary because, again, that would embarrass them to have fallen behind.
So, again, whatever they say, it's going to be to protect themselves politically.
You need to understand that national security is not really about the safety and the peace of America.
It's about their job security.
It's about their careers.
That's what it's really about.
In subsequent years, U.S. personnel reported hundreds of cases globally.
A top aide to then director William J. Burns reported Havana syndrome symptoms while traveling in India in 2021.
Like I said, they've known about this for a very long time.
A top aide to the CIA director was affected by this.
And still, they lie about it.
And they deny treatment to the people who have been hurt with it.
Much about the Norway test remains obscured by highly classified nature.
People familiar with the events declined to identify the scientist or the Norwegian government agency that he worked for.
The results were all the more shocking because a Norwegian researcher had earned a reputation as a leading opponent of the theory that directed energy weapons can cause the type of symptoms associated with this.
Trying to dramatically prove his point, he used himself as a human guinea pig and he proved that he was wrong.
It's kind of interesting.
You see this kind of, I guess you could say it's kind of a professional Stockholm syndrome.
You see it with the people in the medical industry all the time.
And that's what we saw with this.
By January 2022, the CIA had produced an interim assessment that concluded that a foreign country was probably not behind Havana.
And they are not going to change anything.
They're desperate to hide their professional embarrassment.
And regardless of whatever Machiavellian motive they have, they always lie.
And they show no loyalty to their own.
But just understand that with the unlimited amounts of money and the massive amount of time that has transpired, it's just we cannot even imagine what they're capable of doing.
I've said for the longest time, the biggest mistakes that we can make is to think that these people are not morally capable of doing anything.
And to think that they don't have the technological capability to basically do anything.
So the CIA, again, its interim assessment overshadowed an expert panel's report.
They had an expert panel that came out and said, no, this is real.
And so then the CIA goes public with one right at the same time that debunks it.
And that's the one, interestingly enough, that mainstream media decided to pick up on and follow.
So a former CIA officer and a victim of the Havana syndrome thing said it was clear to the victims, but also unsaid, that no information had come into the National Security Council that had caused the Trump administration to make such a statement.
They said they met with them as during the transition period and they said, yeah, we believe you.
And so they thought something was going to happen, but nothing did happen.
Different Enforcing Styles00:07:53
And so when we look at this, just remember in the context what the federal government's police force, ICE, all the rest of them, are willing to do with, they no longer call it non-lethal.
They now call these crowd control devices less than lethal.
They don't necessarily have to be lethal, but the way they use them and how quickly they use them, that is what we're seeing.
Broken bones, burning eyes, how Trump's DHS deploys quote-unquote less lethal weapons on protesters.
And again, you know, protest is specifically protected in the First Amendment.
And we have seen over and over again that the violence is initiated by the police.
And this has been the case for a very long time.
It's just getting worse and worse and more public.
I mean, we have groups I've been involved in covered protests many, many times and reporters have been hit with things.
That goes back to Ferguson, a lot of other events.
But now they are openly doing this and aggressively doing this.
They batter bodies with rubber bullets.
They sear eyes with pepper spray.
They lob tear gas and explosive flashbangs at chanting crowds.
They smash car windows.
They shove people to the ground.
They ram vehicles.
They point guns.
And again, they recklessly do this.
They intend, you know, you don't point a gun at somebody unless you intend to shoot them, right?
It's the first thing you learn about a gun.
It's one of the things people were laughing at Christy Noam about.
Obviously, she's never had any training.
She stands there with people on either side of her, and she's holding her gun and pointing the muzzle right at the head of the guy standing to her left.
So she has not been trained and she's clearly just playing a fantasy role here.
But she has pushed these federal officers to do this and probably nobody more so than Stephen Miller.
Federal officers who were Trump's part of Trump's immigration crackdown have shot 13 people with guns, but far more often they have used harsh tactics to scare or to repel those that they see getting in their way.
Massed and kitted out with military-grade armor and rifles, they have faced down peaceful protesters and people who have threatened, obstructed, or attacked them with methods that are less deadly than guns, but still inflict grievous bodily injury.
It's a cycle of escalation.
Heavily armed immigration officers, open-air raids motivated angry residents to meet officers head-on in the streets.
Rather than trying to defuse a tense situation, officers abruptly used physical or chemical force.
Again, we'd seen the same type of thing at the Bundy Ranch with Dan Love with a BLM, Bureau of Land Management, and the people who were at the same rank as he was, the person who had his same rank, but was in the adjacent jurisdiction in Arizona, had called out Dan Love for doing this.
There's different people have, you can have these bad people in your institution.
And if you don't purge them, then it corrupts the institution.
I've never seen federal agents so out of control and acting in such a malicious manner, said a former federal prosecutor and federal judge who now leads the Illinois Accountability Commission, a state effort to review allegations of abuse from immigration officers.
They said they were going after the worst of the worst, but then they became the problem because they are the worst of the worst law enforcement officers.
And when they go back and look at the statistics of people that they have come after, 14% were violent criminals.
And that is so what they're doing is not what they say they're doing.
As a matter of fact, because they've got quotas that have been put on them by the Trump regime, in many cases, they're going to immigration courts and arresting people who are trying to comply, maybe retroactively with law.
Maybe they came here illegally, or maybe they're trying to extend their stay or whatever, but they're arresting people at the courthouses because they're just interested in filling a quota.
For months, the Trump administration charged Harter, fighting court orders and promoting an air of ruthless impunity.
The signal to officers that they could do whatever they saw fit.
Government officials have defended officers' actions while giving misleading or false accounts of some clashes.
Again, you know, we see these two murders that happen.
Chrissy Dome's reflexive action, just like Donald Trump's, was to talk to people about what was in the video without obviously having ever looked at it.
And Trump's reaction when he saw the video for the first time after he'd been talking about it for days, just making stuff up.
His reaction was documented by the New York Times reporters who were there in the Oval Office and showed him the video when he saw it for the first time.
He kind of stammered and stuttered and changed the topic.
Public outcry led the DHS to change the ground leadership and the surge of Minneapolis and to order the wide-scale use of body cameras.
Trump has now said, well, maybe we could use a little bit of a softer touch, but then he added, but you still have to be tough.
And again, it is, this is not a new issue.
This is not something that is different.
Enforcing immigration law is no different than enforcing any other law.
It's just the Trump administration doesn't want to follow the law.
They don't want to follow the rules of engagement.
Whether that is constitutional law or whether it's immigration law or whether it's law about the conduct of war or there's law about how you handle people who have been shipwrecked on the international seas, it is a lawless group of authoritarian thugs.
That's what the Trump administration is.
DHS has blamed local politicians and activists for inciting violence, and yet the agency points to the conduct of some protesters who follow officers with their cars and block them in the streets, curse at their faces, clamor outside their hotels at night.
At times, protests have turned violent, with demonstrators throwing bottles and rockets and fireworks, and officers have arrested many people for allegedly trying to assault them or hit them with their cars.
And yet, we've also seen people who have been alleged to have rammed the officers with their car.
When you look at video that other people have taken, you see it's the other way around.
This is one of the reasons why they attack people who are filming them.
Because if there is existent video from a lot of different sources, it shows them to be the authoritarian liars that they really are.
DHS has said in a statement its officers are facing a coordinated campaign of violence against them.
The agency did not answer questions from NBC about specific instances of federal officers using less lethal force.
Leon Verdon was one such example, 73, a lifelong Minneapolis resident who got upset after the killing of Alex Predi.
So he and his son drove to the scene and they ended up being a small group of chanting protesters in an alley where they came upon officers that he believed were from DHS.
One of them deployed a flashbang grenade, which federal officers have used repeatedly at protests.