Thu Episode #2103: Trump’s Ukraine Flip & NATO’s Drone Panic: Sleepwalking Into World War III

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:30):
In a world of deceit, telling the truth is a
revolutionary act. It's the David Knight Show.

Speaker 2 (00:43):
As a clock strikes thirteen, it's thirty, the twenty fifth
of September, Year of Our Lord, twenty twenty five. Well,
it didn't take long after Trump did a one to
eighty on the war with Ukraine for them to come
up with some false flying justification. We have some drones
that again flew over Denmark airports, this time over four

(01:04):
of them. Is this going to be the thing that
drags us into World War three? Of course, it was
the assassination of an archduke that got us into World
War One, which is still scratching my head about. This
is another one of those issues, and it's also time
for revenge. Trump is coming after Comy and his cult applauds.

(01:28):
Why didn't he ever go after James Clapper? That's the
question to ask. Well, we're going to talk about those
when we come back, as well as look at the
reactions to Kimmel and what Charlie Kirk had to say
about education. Seems like we're on the same page when
it comes to education. Alex Newman had an article about

(01:50):
his interview with Charlie Kirk, We'll be right back to
stay with us. Well. As they say, revenge is best

(02:11):
served cold. In this particular case, it comes to the
side of hot lies as well. This is the war
that they're trying to get us into. I guess you
could say is revenge, and what we're talking about with
James Comy it was. It's nothing other than personal revenge,
I believe because the attorney sycophant, Pam Bondi does whatever

(02:32):
Trump says, and they never came after James Clapper. Remember
James Clamper when he was asked point blank by Ron
Whiten the only time I've ever agreed with Ron White
He said, are you spying on the American people without
a search more a center? Not intentionally? It was an
accident that he spied on us, right.

Speaker 3 (02:52):
We just accidentally built this giant data center to catalog
everything you do.

Speaker 2 (02:56):
And it was obviously lying you had. Michael Hayden later
in a lecture at Washington Lee University said, I blame
Rod Wyden for that. He knew perfectly well and so
in all of his staff what we were doing, and
he exposed it. It's your problem if you exposed the lies, right,
But he went for five years, folks, without ever being

(03:19):
charged with lying to Congress. He didn't just lie to Congress,
he lied to the American people. He lied to the
American people about violating the requirements in the Constitution for
a search warrant that was significant. And to boot. This
is James Comy, who was also part of the cabal
that ran the Russia Gate fakery that was out there.

(03:40):
It's really amazing that nobody ever brought this up. Nobody
in the Senate, nobody in Trump's Department of Justice ever
came after James Comy, James Clapper, but the coming after
James Komy. Now and again, it is not about restoring
the rule of law. If it was about restoring the
rule of law, they would have come after James Clapper,

(04:01):
but they didn't. This is simply about revenge. Very dangerous
what Denmark is doing, saying that they're going to try
to invoke Article four, which you drag everybody into a
war with Russia. You know, Trump his supporters are saying, well,
this is just a bluff that he's doing in order
to get Russia to come to the table. I said,

(04:23):
it's a really foolish and stupid bluff, and now I
think the NATO warmongers are calling Trump's bluff. We'll see
what happens. Meanwhile, we had a Dallas ICE shooter named
Joshua John. No information about this guy yet, and the
only thing that we know is that he supposedly was

(04:44):
attacking the police and attacking ICE because they conveniently found
again a signed bullet casing. All these people scratching their
name in the bullet casing. Isn't this interesting? This is
kind of like the passport that drifted down on I
love him that did not burn or get destroyed. I
just don't know. Even the message on it really didn't

(05:07):
make any sense. It said anti ICE, even though he
shot up detainees and no ICE agents or police officers
were hit. Perhaps it's because we don't have the details yet.
They say they fired into a van, but so maybe
that was that. Maybe he's just blindly shooting into the

(05:27):
van thinking that he's going to get the ICE people
that he supposedly is against. I don't know. There's no
concern from the press or the police about the people
that were killed, because you know, hey, they're just illegal immigrants.
But it's all you better not come after the police. Well,
evidently he didn't. You know, I just don't understand this yet,

(05:51):
but we'll see what happens. It certainly does look like
they're using it already for their agenda, and that bullet
looks a bit fishy to me. But he killed when
several people, at least one died, and then when they
got up there, he was dead already. So you had
another one of these cases, almost like an MK ultra

(06:12):
type of thing, isn't it. Although he appeared to target
migrants in Ice, custody, trained General Kim Paxton said the
shooting represented attack on ice and law enforcements. Y's just it.
The other people are not people. There was like twenty
shots in a row, they said, So maybe he just
rapidly and randomly fired into the van. Maybe that's what happened.

(06:35):
Vance said. The obsessive attack on law enforcement, particularly Ice,
must stop. I'm praying for everyone hurt in this attack
and for their families. Again, the narrative immediately is this
is Ice, Ice, Ice police, police police, and we don't
know too much about this guy. They're going to jump

(06:56):
into this thing. That's what they want it to be.
So that's what they're going to make it. Well, Trump
do gun control again. I mean, I can see when
you got people from the Texas Attorney General to Ted
Cruz to the Vice President jumping and saying this has
got to stop. There's too much of this, it's got
to stop. What's Trump going to do to stop it?
Remember when he did gun control by executive order with

(07:16):
a bump stock that was in reaction to one of
the most obviously fake shootings. In terms of not saying
that nobody died, I'm saying the narrative that they came
up with was one of the most obviously fake. And
one of the most fake aspects of that narrative was
the bump stock, which is what Trump focused on to
set a precedent of gun control by executive order. So

(07:41):
what will he do with this? Why are they doing
this type of thing? Meanwhile, in the US park police
removed a statue that was put up. It was taken
down the day after it was put up. It was
supposed to be there for four days. I had a
permit to have it for four days, and it was

(08:01):
a statue. See if you can put there, you go, yeah,
let's see the statue there to have a picture of it. Yeah,
that's it. Trump and Epstein the best friends Forever together again.
Protest artwork has been removed by the park police. A
lot of people showed up to see it the next day.

(08:23):
Because there's a lot of people in Washington, d C.
That don't like Trump. He's very unpopular there. They posted
a video. One person posted video of a uniformed officer
supervising a team of maintenance workers loading it onto a
flatbed truck before sunrise. After the sun rose, the only
thing left was an outline of the sand, revealing where

(08:43):
it had been. Dozens of people came down to see
the statue on Wednesday morning, disappointed to see that it
was already gone. It's supposed to be up that permit
to have it there through the weekend. They went through,
got permission. And by the way, the First Amendment, which
Trump despises so much, says we have a right to protest,

(09:04):
and that especially includes satire. That's the thing that evidently
he hates the most. And it's just reminder Saulolenski's Rules
for Radicals said satire is the most effective weapon because
there's no answer to it. What do you do to
answer to this? This is showing Trump and Epstein together. Now,
somebody who has served this country for seventeen years to

(09:25):
ensure the freedom of speech for a fellow countryman is
beyond reprehensible to me, said Navy veteran Christopher Hooper. He said,
he comes down to freedom of speech and that includes art.
So the fact that it's gone, we're no longer in
the threat of an authoritarian government. We are in an
authoritarian government. More and more of our rights are being eliminated.

(09:47):
You can't protest now, and that is, like I said,
especially satire. The statue had a plaque that said, in
honor of Friendship Month, we celebrate the long standing bond
between Trump and his closest friend, Jeffrey Epstein. Beneath the
inscription was a carving of two hands held together to
form a heart and a reference to Trump's message to

(10:10):
Epstein in the birthday book Voiceover. There must be more
to life than having everything, so said the Epstein case said,
one person reminds me of Watergate and the missing eighteen
minutes of tape. The truth will always bubble up, slowly,
but eventually so the more he panics about it, and

(10:32):
the more you realize that there is something there, something
there about Trump or something there. Certainly I think about Trump,
but especially there about the controllers of Trump. So when
Trump is called the Epstein files a democratic coax, of course,
but this actually was a hoax, the satire, and he

(10:54):
doesn't like that either. Meanwhile, Jim Jordan, who hyped the
YouTube mnasy that you talked about yesterday Chris Manhen said,
actually the fine print tells a different story. He appears
to have simply been lying. No, not that Washington with
it breaking due to our oversight efforts. Google commits to

(11:15):
offer all creators previously kicked off of YouTube due to
political speech violations to return to the platform, said Jim Jordan. However,
if you look at the text of the document written
by Google's lawyers, it only says that they will provide
an opportunity for all creators to rejoin the platform. If
the company terminated their channels repeated violations of COVID nineteen

(11:40):
and elections integrity policies, they're no longer in effect. I
don't know. I was never given a reason, so I
mean that could be there. I continually violated their policies
not to talk about COVID nineteen, and I did my
best to violate all the policies from Trump and his
big pharmaceutical schill running HHS at the time coming up

(12:00):
with these nonsense mask issues. I violated it every way
that I could think of. But anyway, it's we'll have
to do this anyway. I have to try it be
a good report to find out what they're doing about is.
I have to try it with the weekend, I guess. Yeah,
it'd be interesting to see Chris Monahan Informational Liberation. Thanks. Well,
that means then that if they just banned you for

(12:23):
general political purposes. He mentions Nick Fuentes and Alex Jones.
He said they're going to remain banned. Who knows. I
don't know, just as Israeli lobby wants. Well, I don't
think Alex Jones and the Israel do you? Nick Twente is,
But I don't think Alex is. Maybe maybe he says that,
but he also he's all over the place with everything.

Speaker 3 (12:46):
I'm sure he's mentioned Apak once or twice.

Speaker 2 (12:50):
Yeah, we've had a lot of questions about a pathway
back to YouTube for some terminated creators to set up
a new channel. YouTube's press account said this will be
a limited pilot project available to a subset of creators
in addition to those channels terminated for policies that have
been deprecated. More to come soon. So again it's looking

(13:12):
more and more doubtful that they will allow this. Not
that it breaks my heart. In other words, the GOP
secured amnesty for quote unquote all creators ban for their
political views. It's actually just a limited pilot project for
a subset of creators. YouTube was not having their arm
twist twisted too much because they really wanted to do

(13:35):
this as well. They were doing what they wanted to do.
Their fallback position as well, we had our arm twisted
by the federal government, and the federal government says, well,
we're not censoring anybody. YouTube is doing it. All of
this it's just so disingenuous and fake. We know exactly
what they're doing and why.

Speaker 3 (13:54):
Yeah, the former YouTube CEO Susan Jicki was extremely left leaning,
extremely planning. She was banning people because she wanted to,
not that she was sitting there with the band button herself,
but implementing those policies was something she was just giddy
to engage in.

Speaker 4 (14:10):
I'm sure, yeah, I mean there are recordings of her
talking at YouTube events to YouTube creators that she liked,
talking about how she's going to boost their channels or correspondingly,
that's going to limit the reach of other channels. It
was never a fair playing field.

Speaker 2 (14:30):
Do you remember the Democrat convention back in twenty twenty,
they had sink Uger, I call stink Uger and the
young turds. They were there on site live broadcasting. YouTube
paid him to go to both Republican and the Democrat
national conventions and to broadcast live from there. That should

(14:51):
tell you something about what their politics are. And so
also points out Chris Monahan, the most that they would
do would be to let you start a new channel.
They would not give you your old channel back. With
all the videos that were there and the viewers and subscribers.
Lest to anyone forget the GOP last year worked together

(15:12):
with Democrats and the Biden administration. The ban TikTok on
behalf of the Israel lobby. That's why Chris Monahan is
saying that. And of course now TikTok is Larry Ellison
is going to have a huge role in TikTok as well.
There was an interesting article on the Drudge report about

(15:33):
how much media is coming under the control of Larry Ellison.
He's got major studios and major news organizations. We've never
seen consolidation like this before. I remember about twelve years
ago we were talking about how we're going to wind
up with just maybe a half dozen media companies. It's
going to be far less than that because all of

(15:56):
the entertainment media, as well as broadcast news, the rest
of the stuff is all being folded under just a
couple of oligarchs that are there. And of course Ellison
is heavily preferred by Trump. He's not taken a public
position and drawn attention to himself like Elon Musk. Elon
Musk made the Steve Bennon mistake of making it about

(16:19):
him instead of making it about Trump. Ellison has been
a little bit more clever stayed in the background for this. Meanwhile,
we have Trump's homosexual cabinet secretary for the Treasury coming
after La La Harris because she snubbed Pete Boutige didn't
select him for her running mate because of his sexuality.

(16:44):
He called it proof of how low regard she holds
the American people. Yeah, the American people or the DEI stuff.
Not so with Trump. You know, Trump is more than
happy to cater to the DEI crowd, especially the LGBT people.
They have had multiple festivities and events at mar Lago,

(17:07):
They've given Milania multiple awards, and in twenty twenty you
had the Trump people selling rainbow merchandise. I don't know
if they did it in twenty twenty four or not.
Trying to reinvent themselves. Trump, of course, was not just
wanting to put trainees and women's sports. He wanted to
put trainees in women's beauty contests that he owned. You know,

(17:28):
that might be one place where they might be able
to successfully compete. It's in the I of the older
I guess, I don't know, he discloses. In her book,
she calls one hundred and seven days. I think she
should smell that daz la la. Anyway, she discloses that
Bootyguet was her first choice, writing that he would have

(17:49):
been an ideal partner if he wasn't homosexual, but he
was a straight If he was a straight white man,
she said, but it was too big of a risk,
so she got Tim Waltz. Maria Bartiromo rolled back a
clip of Harris doubling down in an interview with MSNBC's

(18:10):
Rachel Maddow, and she pressed Bessent on the Vice president's admission,
and he said, first, it shows her emphasis on identity
politics really, and the American people moved on. Two, it
shows how low I regard she holds for the American people.
She was just a terrible candidate, said Bessent, because she

(18:34):
didn't double down on the DEI stuff. Well, Trump has
been very happy to do that, and he used not
only Bessent, but to use Rick Durnell to virtue signal
to the LGBT. And at the same time that he
goes to all these events for the Christian Nationalists, he's
all things to all people, and he's able to get

(18:56):
away with this double think and double speak. Must Meanwhile,
all has put up a giant power center, the first
two gigawatt AI data center. He's doing it in Memphis,
and he's got large battery backup that will back the
whole thing up for like four hours. So he may

(19:16):
wind up burning Memphis down like Sherman burned down Atlanta,
but for different reasons.

Speaker 3 (19:20):
You see, if he really wanted to do it the
right way, he should have bought the bass pro Shop
pyramid and put it underneath there. Yeah, you know, a
thousand years when people rediscover it, they'd be like, what
was this?

Speaker 2 (19:30):
Yeah, destroyed everything.

Speaker 1 (19:32):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (19:33):
So this is his system that he calls Colossus, because again,
you know, nothing to be concerned about. He just named
it after a science fiction movie where the AI tries
to take over the world, The Foreman Project. But he's
got three hundred and fifty gas turbines. Isn't it interesting?
You know, this is a guy who made became the

(19:55):
world's richest man, made his fortune doing green gas lighting.
We're all going to die if you don't buy my
electric cars, and on and on. Right, and yet he's
got a two gigawatt gas turbine power system, so he's
going to use gas there. And of course he's shooting
off rockets left and right. It only matters when the

(20:17):
little guy does it right. He can do one launch
and use more than probably we do, and everybody in
the audience uses in their entire life combined. And that's
not a problem. It's just you can't have any energy,
you can't own anything, you can't have any privacy. So
he's greenwashed his way to becoming the world's richest man.

(20:39):
And this is so large, Just to give you an idea,
it could power fifty percent of the city of Memphis.
So he's that's the power that he's giving to himself personally,
At least I don't think that he's having the local
utilities pay for it. It's taking it off grade. So
that's one thing at least I don't know. And then

(21:02):
that brings us to terraces. Terrafs are torching. The US
Container Imports says in the analysts that freight waves China
tariffs are driving sharp decline in inbound trade and we're
seeing a tremendous plunge, which is only happened two times
in the past sixty years. One time was during the

(21:26):
Great Recession the pump and dump housing crisis. The second
time was during Trump's lockdown five years ago. He appears
to be the guy that they go to to create
chaos and to lock down our infrastructure. Inbound volume through
the top ten US ports in August finished zero point

(21:48):
one percent ahead of the same month in twenty twenty four,
but that happened primarily because the first week or so
of August people had rushed and accelerated their shipments before
the August seventh deadline of the renewal of the uciprocal teriffs.
They wanted to get these goods in before that came up.

(22:12):
And it was also happening in July. July's volume was
three point two percent ahead, trying to get the shipments
in earlier. Now what is happening is Trump in August
announced yet another ninety day pause, another taco Trump always
chickening out, and the chaotic China trade war. And as

(22:33):
I said before, I don't think taxes of any sort
are good. I think these things are done in arbitrary,
capricious way. But the worst thing about it is the
arbitrary capricious way where they're on, they're off, the rates
change constantly. He can't make up his mind because there
is no plan. He's simply reacting to things. One day,

(22:54):
he's angry with the leader of a particular country and
he jacks the prices the terrafs up by another fifty
additional fifty percent or something. It's insane. And it's that
kind of temperamental chaos that is causing so much destruction,
even more destructive than the taxes themselves. Front loading by

(23:16):
anxious shippers during the previous tarift break soaked up most
eastbound volume moving in the peak season, while economic uncertainty
and tariff stoked inflation has undercut demand, as shown by
weaker container rates on the eastbound trans specific without a
spike from front loading, the US would have seen a
drop in year to year volume in July at least

(23:37):
as high as the Far East positive number. So China
is shifting to other people. The US is a less
relevant player in world trade today than it was prior
to these various tariff initiatives, and will come more so
as announced plans or implemented. Said the person who has
an organization attracts us. His name is McCown. Forecast by

(24:00):
the National Retail Federation shows import volumes following three point
four percent for the year that translates in the remaining
four months of twenty twenty five being down by fifteen
point seven percent compared to the same four months in
twenty twenty four. So they're looking for it to really
crash in the last four months, and this is the

(24:22):
build up to Christmas. What does that tell us about
the economy and what's it tell us about supply and prices.
What's going to happen to them if and when those
terrafts are implemented, Because nobody knows what he's going to do.
This is why it is so devastating, especially the small businesses.
They don't have the capital to be able to weather
this kind of engineered chaos by Trump yet again. But

(24:45):
of course, as Trump said in twenty twenty, the small
businesses are non essential. You shut down Walmart's going to
stay open, but you shut down. That infuriates me. As
I said, I had a personal experience of that after
a storm with our businesses, and I can't explain how

(25:05):
mad that may be. On a year to hear decline
and inbound volume is a rarity in the more than
six decades of container shipment. As I said before, this
is McCowan matched only by drops during the two thousand
and nine financial chronic crisis and the pandemic. Both of
these things engineered and unnecessary. Trump is a one man

(25:26):
dictator of one man wrecking crew, whether you're talking about
his lockdowns of twenty twenty or his tariffs of twenty
twenty five. And he's also going to expand the tariff powers.
He wants to it's not enough that Trump can just
set there with his pen and whim and add them
here and there. Now he wants to encourage American producers

(25:47):
to add products and things to the list. This is
coming from the Commerce secretary. The Trump administration wants to
expand US teriff authority, proposing new rules imported auto parts
and metals, and implementing a fresh tear framework with Japan.
You see, this will never end. This has been going

(26:09):
on now for what nine months, and they're still messing
with it. They're still shifting things around, and nobody can
plan anything chaos. It will kill the economy, especially the small,
non essential businesses, according to Trump. But I think when
you look at this and the attack on cars, this
is Trump's contribution to making sure that we have no

(26:33):
cars whatsoever. Make it impossible, you know, regulation, expenses, tariffs, taxes,
all of this the Department of Commerce. Maybe they should
call it the Department of No Commerce. This is from Lutnik,
who wants to crash the economy as part of the
great reset, pump and dump, and then have everybody buy
stable coins. Then he wants to be able to grab

(26:55):
all the natural resources. I think this is what's going
on with the technocrats and the Trump adminstray anyway, the
Department of No Commerce released an interim interim final rule
creating a new inclusion process for the imports of cars
and auto parts under Section two thirty two. The rule
would let us producers petition for additional imported components to

(27:17):
face the existing twenty five percent terrace. The Department of
No Commerce is also accepting inclusion requests for steel and
aluminum downstream products through September twenty nine. After each window closes,
the Department of No Commerce will accept public comments for
two weeks. See this is how things are done in

(27:38):
post constitutional America. We don't follow laws anymore. We certainly
don't follow the constitution, and we have no debate.

Speaker 5 (27:45):
You know.

Speaker 2 (27:46):
It used to be that you would have a debate,
your elected representatives would pass a law after that public debate.
But now you have edicts from the bureaucracy like the
Department of No Commerce, and they will come up with
rules rather than laws, and then that will be followed

(28:06):
by a short period of comments which they are free
to completely ignore. If you were talking about America, first,
you need to bring back the American Constitution first, What
did you say the lines, and.

Speaker 4 (28:20):
This is the process of you know, corporations cutting off
the ladder below them so that they can't have competition.
This is that made automated. Here's a government system so
that you can do that by yourselves. You don't need
to lobby and bribe people anymore. You can do it directly.

Speaker 2 (28:39):
You can work directly with a bureaucracy and you don't
have to you know, it's surprising that the politicians are
letting themselves be cut out of this lucrative loop that
they've created. Yeah.

Speaker 4 (28:48):
I mean this way, if they've got some manufacturing process
for something that they've developed in house so that only
they can produce this, then they can get to errors
put on it for manufacturers for everyone else that uses
that product in China.

Speaker 2 (29:06):
Yeah, we've always seen, you know, when you look at
local businesses, the easiest way to see this as a
restaurant business. Right, they will go to the local people
or the state government and they say, you know, we
need to have these extreme rules and it's just there
to keep people from opening up a new restaurant. People
are already opened or not affected by this, and that's

(29:27):
the way they keep their competition out a coalition of
more than forty business associations. Not forty businesses, but business associations,
have raised concern about the expanded inclusion process. They said
the sudden expansion of tariffs with limited industry consultation increases
cost by generating significant compliance burdens for businesses of all size,

(29:50):
including those that do not purchase or produce steel and
aluminum products. They pointed out that manufacturers account for more
than half of all usm Think about that. You know
you're going to this is going to really harm American
manufacturing because there's so many cases you can't find somebody
that makes the components that you need if you want

(30:11):
to make something in the USA. One of you guys,
was it you Lance or was it you Travis? We're
talking about the guy that was that a GoFundMe project
and he wanted to make whatever it was he's making
complete in America. Yeah, it basically just had to give
up because you couldn't find some of the things that

(30:31):
he needed.

Speaker 4 (30:32):
Yeah, it was a YouTuber smarter every day who was
trying to make just a grill scrubber here in the
US out of entirely US sourced parts. And there were
two parts that he just couldn't get in quantity was
one was a specialty part, but the other I think
was just a bolt. And he had a lot of

(30:54):
trouble finding any manufacturer that made it at all at
MC quantity is he wanted, actually not at a reasonable price.

Speaker 2 (31:01):
So he just had to scrub the grill scrubber project
that's going to be made in the US entirely. He's
basically found other people. He said, we found a few
of them available such and such a place, and maybe
you will get one that is one hundred percent made
in America. But I can't promise it'll be one hundred
percent made in America. We may have to buy this
minor part somewhere else. Well, that's what these policies are doing.

(31:23):
They absolutely don't care. And he needs to go back.
And I said this when he shut down the economy
and decided that he's going to centrally plan that only
Walmart could stay open and things like that. I say,
he needs to go back and read Leonard Reid's eye pencil,
where the market puts together all these things and all
these different components. You got rubber from this country over here,

(31:46):
and you got graphite from that country over there, you
got wood from Canada. Maybe all these different things came
together and without the government's help, without the central planning
of government, the free market put all this together, and
they pulled all these components from all over the world
in order to manufacture pencil. Well, we're not even going
to be able to manufacture that if you've got Trump

(32:07):
and Lutnik and Peter Navara have their way. The harm
to US employment among downstream producers of items now covered
will ultimately be significant, including with respect to those that
are key to powering critical industries and the broader US economy.
You know, when you go back and you look at
the rare earth minerals. For example, I interviewed a guy

(32:29):
with US rare minerals and they were trying to put
together to develop it here in the United States. They said,
we have plenty of the they're not rare, it's just
the refinement of them is rare. We have the materials there,
but we've got to build the refining procedures to extract
it from what we're already mining. But he said that'll
take five years, even if we throw a lot of

(32:50):
money at it. What Trump is doing is he's just
shutting everything down, and there is no opportunity, not waiting
for any kind of a transition, not allowing companies to
continue to be able to make products downstream using rare minerals. No,
he's just going to cut off the supply just like that.
It's boneheaded, stupid. It's so stupid that it has to

(33:11):
be intentional. That's that's my belief. Not even Trump is
that stupid. And he did the same thing in twenty
twenty five, if you remember, with a lockdown, he had
farmers who were destroying food on their farm because they
couldn't get it to market because their customers had been
large industrial suppliers, people with toilet paper, let's say, creating

(33:34):
these gigantic rolls of toilet paper that they use in
business facilities. I told the story at the time when
we came back from China with our daughter. She was
not used to having toilet paper in China, and Karen
had gotten her acclimated to it, and the only word

(33:54):
she knew was mama, and so she went they went
to the restroom in New York Airport and she sees
those those giant rolls of toilet paper that are like
two feet in diame or whatever. She grabs it and
she comes out, Mama, Mama, like, look what I found.
We're fixed for life. We don't have to go to
Costco ever again. Anyway. The import tariffs on some of

(34:15):
the largest trade partners are things like fifty percent to
Brazil because we don't like what they're doing to bowls
and arrow bowlsonarow bows and arrows. Fifty percent to India
because we don't like them either. China is only thirty percent.
I say only thirty percent. Remember when it was like

(34:35):
one hundred and it was over one hundred percent. It
was one hundred and forty five percent or something like that.

Speaker 3 (34:40):
It was about two hundred percent.

Speaker 2 (34:42):
Yeah, it's just all over the place. It's just all
over the place. So now it's back down to thirty percent.
When you look at Mexico and Canada, they used to
be our trading partners, and Trump gave them this special
deal at the end of his first term. Now he
wants twenty five percent on Mexico and thirty five percent
on Canada. We don't like them, you know, They've got

(35:04):
these hockey teams, and we don't like Canada, so we've
got to punish them. Thirty five percent. Japan and South
Korea are at fifteen percent. Now, the question is will
Trump's power to tax, therefore his power to destroy be
upheld by the Supreme Court. Well, reason talks about the

(35:25):
issues legal issues behind this because it is coming up
to be to be looked at by the Supreme Court.
I mean, he's been creating this trade chaos now for
eight or nine months, and they're finally going to review
it on November the fifth, which will be like ten
months I guess since he became president, not quite. The

(35:47):
Supreme Court hear oral arguments the cases rising from Trump's
unilateral scheme to impose tariffs. The matters have been consolidated
by the Supreme Court into a single case for the
purposes of briefing and arguments. The Supreme Court will probably
turn on the application of an important legal principle known

(36:09):
as the major questions doctrine. That doctrine says that when
and of course, major questions doctrine is not something from
the Constitution, it is something invented by the Supreme Court.
The law is clear. They're not going to decide this
based on the law. They're going to decide this based
on interpretation. Of their previous opinions. This is how bad

(36:29):
things have gotten. The Questions doctrine says that when the
executive branch seeks to wield significant regulatory power, it must
first point to an unambiguous delegation of such power by
Congress to the executive. Well, how about if they take
a look at you know, this is being delegated supposedly

(36:50):
by the case of emergencies. How about we define what
a real emergency is. I mean, we know what it
means in English. But evidently Trump doesn't speak English, or
at least he doesn't care any more about the dictionary
than he does about the Constitution, where the things are defined.
So this is really Trump's patented fraud of declaring an

(37:11):
emergency unilaterally and then saying, well, since I said it's
an emergency, now I get to do whatever I wish.
And so they said, it'll take a look at the
Emergency Economic Powers Act IIPA, the International Emergency Economics Powers
Act that grants him virtually unlimited power to impose terraffs.
If the Supreme Court concludes that IEPA's text, which does

(37:35):
not mention tariffs, fails to provide clear authorization for in Congress,
then Trump's terroifts must be ruled illegal under the Major
Questions doctrine. The Trump administration seems worried about that outcome,
because I'm kind of liked to stand on this is
as ridiculous as Trump's lawsuits against the press, especially the
one that just got thrown out against the New York Times.

(37:58):
So worried in fact, that its brief attempts to rewrite
the Major Questions doctrine in a way that shields the
president from ever facing any of the negative judicial consequences.
The text is an issue because that doctrine addresses the
particular and recurring problem of agencies asserting highly consequential power

(38:20):
beyond what Congress could reasonably be understood to have granted.
The argument goes that from the White House says, well,
Trump is not an agency. In other words, the Major
Questions thing was brought up and said, we don't want
these bureaucracies creating their own policy when they weren't given
that kind of power by Congress. And so the response

(38:41):
from the White House Trump administration, well, Trump is not
an agency. I think he is an agent for somebody.
He's an undercover. Each of the Yes Congress is far
more likely to grant consequential power to the president than
it is to grant such power to an agency. As
a matter of course, they say. But reason says, remember

(39:04):
what type of agencies we're talking about here. We're talking
about executive agencies. All of these agencies are under the
executive branch. The president is head of the executive branch.
The agencies are part of the executive branch. You know,
the buck stops with him. Even though MAGA doesn't want
to say that. Under the Trump administration's own preferred theory

(39:26):
of the unitary executive, the personnel of all such agencies
are entirely subservient to the president, even though MAGA doesn't
understand that, and they don't understand how the federal government
gets its way by bribing and blackmailing people with money.
The distinction makes no sense, they said. The Supreme Court
drew no such distinction between the presidency and agency when

(39:50):
it relied on the Major Questions doctrine to decide Joe
Biden's student debt cancelation plan. They declared it to be
lawful because it was an example, they said, of the
executive seizing the power of the legislature. That's precisely what's
happening here. Do you see how similar Biden and Trump are?

(40:11):
You know, there are both of them want to act
as dictators and they don't care a whit about the Constitution.
One of them wants to act as a dictator to
buy votes from students by canceling their student loans. The
other one wants to curry favor with his technocratic donors
by using tariffs. So so, under Trump's distorted theory, Biden

(40:36):
should have won that case because Biden was supposedly not
an agency. So the Supreme Court properly scrutinized Biden then
and should similarly scrutinize Trump now. The whole point of
the Major Questions doctrine is the enforcement of the separation
of powers by ensuring that the executive branch does not
exceed the lawful authority granted to it. Wouldn't it be

(40:58):
interesting if we just held everybody to the Constitution we
just read that document. Wouldn't that be interesting? That would
take care of the separation of powers? I think, because
that's what's defined there. Well, I guess it's kind of
interesting to see that Trump is already looking at his
presidential library. It's something they usually wait until after they're

(41:21):
out of office. But he's got Eric Trump scouting out
places and he wants to build it in Miami. This
is for a guy that I don't think has ever
read a single book, going to have a presidential library,
and it is going to be put close to Freedom Tower,
which is a landmark there. They could call it Freedom City,
who knows. So it's going to be a really One

(41:45):
of the reasons that they're scouting it out right now
is because it's going to be a really large development.
It's going to have, of course, a hotel that'll be
there'd be a Trump Hotel, the first presidential library to
have a hotel development.

Speaker 4 (41:59):
The first library to have a casino in it.

Speaker 2 (42:03):
Yeah, you feel in lucky punk.

Speaker 3 (42:04):
Maybe you can get some books on game theory before
you go in there.

Speaker 2 (42:08):
Yeah, maybe that's what he never read. So he went
out of business. It's kind of interesting. You know. Obama
was going to spend at one point I saw but
they were up to a half a billion dollars on
his presidential library. He was going to build it in
Chicago and he was going.

Speaker 3 (42:23):
To then he realized nobody in Chicago can read.

Speaker 2 (42:26):
So yeah, yeah, Bill Airs took over the educational system.
They're just used to radicalize people.

Speaker 3 (42:31):
Now, let me be clear, we're going to build it here,
but none of y'all are literate, so.

Speaker 2 (42:36):
And we're going to build it in the poorest neighborhood
and disrupt it. That's what they didn't like about. It
was going to be this big disruption, and the people
in Miami don't like.

Speaker 5 (42:43):
Uh.

Speaker 2 (42:44):
There's a lot of Democrats in Miami Dade County still obviously,
And when I was in Florida, it was solidly New
York City Democrats. I guess it is now as well.
But they already had the state get in there and
shut down a lot of things that they would do
to object to building it. Maybe they could relocate the
Trump Epstein statue there. That's part of the library in

(43:08):
case anybody read Epstein's birthday book. So they said the
legislation was passed in part because the two thousand and
six legal fight between Trump and Palm Beach officials over
an eighty foot pole flying an American flag. The flag
was flying over the Trump golf course, and local officials
said it was larger than allowed by town ordinance. The
issue was later settled allowing a seventy foot five pole

(43:32):
in a slightly different location. So because of that fight,
they put this lawyer. And of course that was about
the same time that Trump started fighting with his best
friend Jeffrey Epstein over a piece of real estate. And
I think that that was the reason that Trump became
the quote unquote informant for the government. I think that

(43:53):
was to get even with Epstein. You know, it's interesting
how he can continue to go and go and go
with Epstein and everybody, but he sees what he's doing
to cover this stuff up. When you have Sarah Ferguson,
who was at one time married to Prince Andrew, the
guy that you see pictured with Virginia Guffrey and has
been basically he's now the man who used it was

(44:15):
formerly known as Prince because he's basically been kicked out
of the royal family because of this Epstein scandal. Well,
his wife, who later they were divorced, has had been
kicked out of UK charities. They've cut their ties to
her after a reported email in which she called Epstein
a Friend's a very different treatment than we're giving Trump

(44:39):
here in the United States. There you write one email
saying you've been a great friend to us and you're out,
And I say, fine, I don't have a problem with that.
Charity does not want to be associated with her. But
here in the United States, this guy can write birthday
wishes to Epstein, he can hang out with him for
fifteen years, and he can do everything in his power

(45:02):
as president to cover up discovery of the other friends
of Epstein. And he doesn't pay any consequences with his supporters.
He's paid some, but not enough.

Speaker 3 (45:13):
One of the things that always gets me is you'll
see so many people on line saying, oh, well, the
book is fake, the book is fake. There's no proof
it's real. Whether the book is real or not, there's
evidence of him hitting around for fifteen years. Like, even
if you just totally disregard the book, even if I
grant you that the book is fake, there is so
much other hard evidence, the pictures, the videos, the way
they are just you know, latched onto each other, you know,

(45:36):
shoulder to shoulder, you know, in each other's presence continually.
This is so suspect. Show me your friends and I'll
tell you who you are exactly. Even if I grant
you the book is fake, even if we throw that
into the trash bin and ignore it, there is too
much evidence already who The book is just the icing
on the cake. It's there as this little extra bit

(45:56):
on top to show what a weird, strange relationship they had,
But there's already proof of the relationship.

Speaker 4 (46:03):
It's like what Moskowitz said, how do you become an
FBI informant?

Speaker 2 (46:08):
There's usually some deep inside this thing. Yeah, and now
he's he calls it a hoax, the thing that he
became an informant for, it's now a hoax. It's just
Donald Trump is the very embodiment of Orwellian doublethink and
double speak. More succinctly, He's just a liar. But yeah,

(46:32):
it was you know that whole thing about it being
fake Travis and Trump filing that lawsuit, That was because
somebody had described it to the Wall Street Journal and
they put it out there in the book. I guess
maybe Trump didn't know that the book existed or it
was going to be released publicly. But then it was
released by the Democrats in that committee, and we could

(46:52):
see that it was exactly as the Wall Street Journal
described it. But Trump is not going to back down.
He's going to continue with this lawsuit, which may be
the only way we get the documents released during discovery.
Who knows. Let's take a look at comments before we
take a break.

Speaker 3 (47:05):
Yeah, North American, how hippoh. Thank you very much and
it's good to see you. I hope you're doing well,
says If it's any consolation to r S and Alabama
prayer requests last week, he as I did two years ago,
has time to say goodbye to his mom. It's not easy,
it's heartbreaking, but I'm grateful I could be there. We'll
be praying pray for RS.

Speaker 2 (47:24):
Yeah, just to remind you RS's mother was diagnosed with cancer. Yes,
he's as for.

Speaker 3 (47:29):
Prayer, Knights of the Storm. Thank you very much, Jason,
that is very generous.

Speaker 2 (47:34):
Yes, thank you.

Speaker 3 (47:34):
So it's getting late in the month. Let's fill the
gas tank.

Speaker 2 (47:38):
Thank you very much. And before we go further, let
me just had this on my desk yesterday forgot to
thank these people who have mailed contributions to us us
A from Brooklyn, New York, missus A. William G. Jack
H Kelly M. Matt and Monica, Peter g Ronald C.

(47:58):
Aaron f on Are and Charlie aps. Thank you all
so much. Thank you all.

Speaker 3 (48:06):
I really do appreciate it, because if you were able
to continue to do this. Nad Lander says, have you
seen the statue at the National Mall in DC of
Trump and Epstein holding hands?

Speaker 2 (48:15):
L L we're talking about?

Speaker 3 (48:17):
Yeah, says how long will the Trump Epstein statue last?
For you? Yeahs already gone today. It should be deemed
a national treasure. Well, I'm sure they'll archive it away
in a building somewhere and they'll have top men working
on it. Guard Goldsmith of Boston radio host Today said
at least no ICE agents were hurt, thank god, totally

(48:38):
dismissing the other desks.

Speaker 2 (48:40):
Yeah, could have been a human, could have been shot. Right.
This is this is what's dangerous about this, folks, because
the government can come up with any kind of prevarication
to deny rights or humanity to any group that they
don't like. And I mean, just look at the hate
on the left to people, dehumanizing them. Look at what
they have done to unborn children, dehumanizing them that allows

(49:03):
them to rip them apart limb by limb. So we
don't want to take any of this stuff lightly. And
we understand that our rights are not privileges granted to
us by the American government. The government is prohibited from
infringing on these rights, and presumably there to protect them.
That's a purpose of government according to the Declaration of Independence.

(49:26):
It is not to grant privileges to us. And if
we allow them to ignore God given rights or natural rights,
however you prefer if we allow them to do that
for one class of people. In this particular case, people
violated the law coming to this country illegally. What else
are they going to do. It's a slippery slope. And

(49:48):
we don't have to imagine that the government is going
to do this. We've seen them do this over and
over again. They must be restrained by the constitution. People
recognize that. With the Faiza Act, they said, you're not
going to spy even on foreign citizens who are in
America without a search warrant. You can only spy on
foreign citizens and foreign countries without a search warrant. And

(50:12):
yet you know they ignored that, of course, nor.

Speaker 3 (50:15):
With American House Hippo. When I shoot people, I always
make sure I engrave my name and so security number
on the bullet first. That's right, Patty Wax. If they
teach cursive in schools again, it'll be harder to engrave
the bullets. They could do some nice scroll work. Maybe
some filigree. Yeah, b l hoton the statue in the
center of the White House ballroom would be appropriate.

Speaker 2 (50:36):
That's right. Yeah, in the ballroom.

Speaker 3 (50:39):
It's out a lord one three three seven A ha.
So they only want to bring back channels. The FEDS
want back on the platform. That sounds like they want
to control what narrative is allowed back on the platform.
That's right, Citizen of Americaca.

Speaker 2 (50:51):
The categories of speech will be allowed certain categories of people, you.

Speaker 3 (50:54):
Know, Citizen Americaca. The only restitution that YouTube needs to
pay is actually becoming a free, uncensored platform. Never gonna happen,
never ever gonna happen, says, But that won't happen with
this new Anti Defamation League hate bill. When they start
getting half a million dollar fines levey on them for
allowing your freedom of speech. De you Resimer trump Epstein

(51:16):
statue exemplifies the level of respect rightly garnered by government.
Citizen americaka David walmart In FEMA. David walmart In FEMA
and have been together at least twenty years, if not
since inception.

Speaker 2 (51:31):
That's right.

Speaker 3 (51:31):
We give them our money so they can target us
and our freedoms. You got to get them where it hurts.

Speaker 2 (51:37):
But you know, we used to report on that, but
now the police state is not an issue and the
FEMA camps are not an issue because it's Trump. So
we're going to applaud that. At least that's what Alex
is going to do.

Speaker 3 (51:49):
Shield Drye says, war on cars there is. That's what
you and Eric talked about yesterday partially as well. If
you haven't seen that interview, go check it out on
the Run channel. It's there. It's also on bitchoot Hot
to see Twitter all over the place. Guard Goldsmith I
like David's new title for the department perhaps as a

(52:10):
called the Department of Communism the Department of Central Planning.

Speaker 4 (52:15):
That they still keep the c in there, just out
of p at the end, the Communist Department.

Speaker 3 (52:22):
And of course Guard Goldsmith hosts Liberty Conspiracy, which you
can find on Rumble and Twitter at six pm every
day and he has the Monday through Friday, Monday through Friday,
and his sub stack is Guard Goldsmith may throw all
paper pulp used manufacturer in the US. Paper comes from
one company in Brazil.

Speaker 2 (52:41):
Oh sounds like something hitting the fan scenario.

Speaker 1 (52:44):
Does it?

Speaker 3 (52:46):
Audi, Mr r. I've never walked inside of a library
named after one of these APAC owned Zionists.

Speaker 2 (52:54):
It's just trying to picture what it's got, nothing but
Scofield bibles. I'm just wondering what Bucky's going to put
in there. You know, it's a guy that doesn't read,
so it's going to be a.

Speaker 3 (53:03):
Bunch of picture books. Yeah, Ratisbro, thank you very much,
Ratus Bro, very generous. We really do appreciate it.

Speaker 2 (53:10):
Yes, thank you.

Speaker 3 (53:11):
A shooter to distract the animals on a Mara farm
that the FBI still has no clue or physical evidence
on who killed Charlie Kirk and we are just moving
past it, par for the course. Yes, that's how it
always goes. Hey, look something else. Also, if you're watching
the show, please where you're watching it, drop alike on
the stream. It really does help. I know, we have
a we've got a group of people that like to

(53:32):
come in and dislike it before the show even starts.
So if you can drop alike on it, we appreciate it.

Speaker 2 (53:38):
Yeah, I got a lot of the an army of
haters here. Maybe they're gropers or whatever. From Nick Quinas
I was talking before about and I've mentioned this now.
An article has been done by The Guardian talking about
Rodrigo Duterte, the former Philippines president. He is being held
in prison charged with crimes against humanity at the International

(54:02):
Criminal Court, and of course the US and Russia and
China are not involved in the International Criminal Court, so
it's difficult to get them to do anything. We have
American criminals doing the same stuff that Dutarte did, which
is Donald Trump wants to do that. I believe the
charge of them from his year's long campaign in the
drug war and that rights groups say have killed thousands.

(54:26):
He left office in twenty twenty two. You know, like
Trump due Tarte told his subordinates to kill suspected drug
dealers without due process. That's what's going on off of Venezuela,
the extra judicial murder of thousands, tens of thousands of
people in Philippines. Same and principle as what Trump is

(54:46):
doing to these ships in Venezuela. Again, if the ship
is not you haven't verified that it has drugs, and
when it sees the planes coming in. If it turns
around and starts heading back to Venezuela, you are not threatened.
America is not threatened. You can't make the case for that.
And we've got high ranking admirals who are head of
the military judiciary saying the same thing, said even if

(55:09):
you could make the case, and you couldn't that because
this is carrying drugs, we're going to blow it up.
That's not been policy. Policy has always been we're going
to interdict it, we're going to stop it, we're going
to take the people to prison, we're going to confiscate
the stuff. But now he's just going to do extra
judicial killings. And this is what happens when you start
ignoring the Constitution. Again. The drug war was created by

(55:31):
the United Nations. They created the schedules and they completely
ignored the Constitution. Why did we have to have the
eighteenth Amendment to prohibit alcohol, but we never amended the
Constitution to have the war on drugs for anything. It's
because we don't care about the constitution anymore. International Criminal
court prosecutors have charged the former President of the Philippines,
du Terte with three counts of crimes against humanity over

(55:55):
the bloody campaigns carried out during his war on drugs.
They laid out accusations against a now eighty year old
former leader who's been an icy ced detention in the
Hague since March. They accused of Terte of designing and
disseminating a policy to neutralize alleged criminals during his term

(56:16):
as mayor of a city, later during his term as
president of the country, alleging he induced hitmen to a
death squad, and he provided weapons, incentives and immunity for killing.
Same thing that Trump is doing. And I think that
we're probably if we don't stop Trump. I wouldn't be
surprised to see him do the same thing with the

(56:36):
military in the US city. I know it sounds extreme.
You don't think Trump is capable of doing it. The
charge refers specifically to seventy six murders. They offered no apologies,
no excuses for his policies. He said to the court
in the Hague, he said, I did what I had
to do, Whether you believe it or not, I did

(56:57):
it for my country. There you go, three counts of crime,
names and as a co perpetrator in nineteen murders. The
real issue, however, is that the prosecutors themselves say that
it is over thirty thousand people that were killed in this,
even encourage private citizens to shoot people on site if

(57:17):
they thought the person was a drug dealer. Could you
see Trump doing something like that? I absolutely could, you know,
just have deputized armies of people to do that type
of thing. I wouldn't put anything past it. And as
I said before, Larry Ellison a media mogul like no
other before. See, if you can't control a speech by

(57:40):
controlling the free press, then the next thing you can
do is you can consolidate the free press under one
of your pals is an oligarch. And I think that
this consolidation is really the purpose of It is not
only to make money for these corrupt politicians, but I
think it is also about speech control.

Speaker 3 (58:01):
They're going to press gang, the press gang.

Speaker 2 (58:04):
The family of Elson, his son is one of the
ones running CBS paramount. After Trump stopped blocking this when
they capitulate to him on his personal lawsuit, he stopped
using the government to block the sale, and the sale
was to Ellison's Larry Elson's son. The Ellison family could

(58:27):
soon control an empire that includes CBS Paramount, Warner, CNN,
and a piece of TikTok. That's pretty amazing. You know,
we used to talk about the fact that there's just
going to be a few media companies in terms of
the news. Well now there's just a few media companies
in terms of everything, news, movies, social media, all consolidating.

(58:52):
So it remains unclear exactly what's going to happen with TikTok.
But Larry Ellison has in the last couple of years
his fortune has skyrocketed. His power could exceed those of
fabled predecessors like William Randolph Hurst and Pulitzer. Yeah, and

(59:13):
he will be able to say, just like kirst did
you want a war I can get it for you, right.
I can use my power on the press to do that.
TikTok is just one part of the rapidly expanding Ellison
family media portfolio. Ellison's son David, who recently secured an
eight billion dollar deal for Paramount and CBS, is busy

(59:33):
putting his own stamp on them and is widely reported
to be preparing a much bigger bid for Warner, which
includes CNN. And there's not going to you know, interestingly enough,
the FCC is not going to fight this kind of consolidation,
just as we talked about how do we get a
few banks a half dozen banks that were too big
to fail? And it always goes back to that seminal

(59:55):
merger between Bank of America and California and Nation's Bank
North Carolina. As Gerald Suntius pointed out, it was at
first they removed the restrictions on interstate banking, and then
in the Clinton administration, you had irksome Boyle. It's a
what I called him. His name was Erskine. I can't

(01:00:16):
even remember his real name now.

Speaker 3 (01:00:17):
He was an irksome boyle on your Erskine bowls.

Speaker 2 (01:00:20):
Erskine bowls, thank you.

Speaker 6 (01:00:21):
He was.

Speaker 2 (01:00:22):
I think he was a high position in the Clinton administration.
I think he was chief of staff for a while,
and he had been involved in the banking industry in Charlotte,
which is where Nation's Bank was headquartered, and so he
approved got the merger approved, and I remember when it happened,
and everybody said, you're going to wind up with a
half dozen gigantic banks nationwide, which is what happened. And

(01:00:45):
that's when they were able to do the pump and
dump in the real estate with securitization, and then they
got bailed out, while hundreds of banks every year were
failing subsequent years. So everything is consolidating, sat a media historian,
recy of Maine. What makes these deals different is that
they are across multiple platforms to have an opportunity to

(01:01:06):
establish an editorial line across TikTok, CBS News and CNN.
That's a new world, he said. Paaramount declined to comment.
On a recent day, he saw the value of his
Oracle holdings increase about one hundred billion dollars, making him
briefly the richest man in the world. Mister Musk has

(01:01:27):
now taken that back, but Ellison has a net worth
higher than three hundred and sixty seven billion dollars. This
kind of consolidation is for control, for cronies, for corruption.
Ellison is eighty one years old. In nineteen seventy seven,
he and two colleagues started software development labs. Within a

(01:01:48):
few years it was renamed Oracle. He was less the
technical genius than he was the chief salesman. His son
is in the discussions to acquire The Free Press, a
new digital publication that presents itself in opposition to traditional
news media, but It is run by Barry Weiss, who's
likely to be given some oversight of cbs MS. Weiss

(01:02:09):
formerly worked as an editor for the opinion section of
The New York Times. So you can see she's on
the far left here, and she is a heavy, heavy Zionist.
So Trump meanwhile pressuring his attorney sycophant Pam Bondy to
charge his political foes. As I said at the beginning
of the program, We'll be charging James Comy. I have

(01:02:31):
no love of James Comy. I would have thought that
it was enough for Trump to humiliate him by firing
him on TV. He was like in California or something,
and he was about to give a speech and he
saw on TV that he had been fired. He wasn't
even noticed me. Yeah, anyway, we're going to take a
quick break, folks, and we will be right back.

Speaker 1 (01:04:30):
You're listening to the David Knight Show.

Speaker 7 (01:04:33):
Hello, it's me, Voladimir Zelenski. I'm so tired of wearing
these same T shirts everywhere for years. You'd think with
all the billions I've skimmed off America, I could dress better.
And I could if only David Knight would send me
one of his beautiful gray mcguffin hoodies or a new
black T shirt with the mcguffin logo in blue. But

(01:04:56):
he told me to get lost. Maybe one of you
American suckers can buy me some at the David Knightshow
dot com. You should be able to buy me several hundred.
Those amazing sand colored microphone hoodies are so beautiful. I'd
wear something other than green military cosplay to my various
gallas and social events. If you want to save on shipping,

(01:05:18):
just put it in the next package of bombs and
missiles coming from the USA.

Speaker 2 (01:05:33):
Well, Jimmy Campbell came back, and as I mentioned, I
think it was on Tuesday night, so people were reacting
to it yesterday. As I said before, you know, when
Trump spoke at the UN he got it right. He
was on the right side of the issue in terms
of climate. Unfortunately, he doesn't explain why climate changes of
Rodney just pronounces it that way. And I said, I

(01:05:55):
find it very damaging to see this guy on my side.
And of course we've had some people on the left
who said that about Jimmy Kimmel. The sad thing is
that Trump has made this vile, disgusting unfunny quote unquote
comedian who is out there saying, yeah, wheezy, you didn't
get the vaccine, so we're just gonna let you die,
you know, that type of stuff. Not to mention his

(01:06:20):
racist comedy really was racist, I guess his black face
if ever. I mean, that really sets them off against
anyone except for Jimmy Kimmel. He gets a pass on that.
He gets a pass on sexual harassment and videos that
he's done. He's done some really vile and disgusting things.
You can see him if you care to look up
what I'm characterizing here. But when he does his comedy

(01:06:42):
bits Kimmel and bits, and they're not funny, they're just political.
He's now become a hero to many on the left.
He's now become a victim of trump censorship after the
First Amendment. And I really don't like that. And so
there's servatives saying, you know, why did Trump do this?

(01:07:03):
And people on the left are saying, we don't want
him as our totem for free speech. It's really reprehensible,
his voice breaking at times, kim Well said he understood
why his comments last week seemed ill timed or unclear
or both. He said, it was never my intention to
make light of the murder of a young man, he said,
and he choked up. So I see those people on sell,

(01:07:27):
these people on social media saying, well, quite an acting
job that he's got there. I don't think Timmy kim
Will can act. I think he was genuinely choked up
about that. I would think that any human being would be.
But it wasn't really he wasn't criticizing Charlie Kirk. He
wasn't even really criticizing Maga that much. What he was

(01:07:47):
criticizing was Donald Trump. I played the clip for you
at the beginning of his monologue on Monday, that Monday,
not this last Monday, and he played that clip where
Donald Trump was asked by the press, what do you
think of Charlie Kirk? Oh, yes, horrible. But then he says,

(01:08:08):
just immediately pivots, but hey, have you seen my ballroom?
Let's talk about that, and his comment, which was funny
and devastating satire. He said Trump showed as much compassion
as an eight year old who just had his pet
goldfish dye. That was brutally honest, true satire, and that

(01:08:29):
I think just penetrated to the heart of the issue.
It wasn't saying that it was the right that was
doing it. And of course Brendan Carr has tried to
claw this back and portray himself not as just a
shill hinchman for Trump to come after his enemies in
the press. He says, well, you know, these stations have licenses,

(01:08:51):
and they are supposed to as part of that license,
they're supposed to be true with broadcasts. If they're deliberately
giving fake news on the broadcast, well guess what, Who
in their right mind would believe that Jimmy Kimmel was
giving news. It's obviously his spend his opinion. As stupid

(01:09:12):
and as wrong as it is, it's still his opinion.
Everybody understands that Trump is also trying to come after
the New York Times because they had an op ed
piece endorsing La La Harris. You are allowed to have opinions,
you're allowed to have satire, and a comedian and a
late night show is not news, and an op ed

(01:09:33):
piece is not presenting itself as news. Even if you
don't agree with it, you're not allowed to take it down.

Speaker 3 (01:09:39):
And so it was we could do away with a
lot of the issues caused by you know, late night
TV Propaganda's all this by just restricting the voting rights
back to what the founders had originally had.

Speaker 2 (01:09:50):
It as just head of household.

Speaker 3 (01:09:53):
Yeah, yeah, well landowning males.

Speaker 2 (01:09:56):
You know, well it wasn't even landowning males if you
were a widow and you owned the head of household.
So if you were a widow and you owned property,
you were allowed to vote. You know, it was just
one vote per household, and it was people had a
stake in the community. But getting back to this, Trump
has harangued him as saying he's horrible. His show ratings

(01:10:18):
are horrible. And one of the things that kim said
when he came back, he said, well he repeated those
charges at things that Trump had said about him. He says, well,
I guess he fixed that, didn't he He got fourteen
million views on YouTube and when he came back, he
got massive. That's why I said Trump made him bigger
than ever because Trump violated the Constitution. Trump made the Constitution,

(01:10:42):
the first Amendment smaller than ever. He minimized them, and
he enlarged Jimmy Kimmel, I mean, what's wrong with this
picture here? So kim Oll mentioned that some Republican senators
like Rand Paul and Ted Cruz had stood by the
First Amendment. But and he said, that's not legal, that's

(01:11:02):
not American, that is unamerican, and it is so dangerous.
And he was right about all that. Trump has put
this guy in, he's elevated him by doing this. So
the local stations are still going to local franchises, Sinclair
Next Star are still not going to carry a show,
which is always that prerogative. So Trump had won the

(01:11:23):
lawsuit against ABC in the past because Stephanopholis had said
that the lawsuit from Egene Carroll was for rape, and
it wasn't. It was for sexually abusing and faming her.

Speaker 3 (01:11:37):
One of the things is just the president of the
United States should be above the sort of petty back
and forth with late night TV hosts.

Speaker 2 (01:11:45):
That's right.

Speaker 3 (01:11:46):
Your focus shouldn't be on what Jimmy Kimmel says about
you on TV. You're supposed to be the head of state,
negotiating the troubled waters of the world for the country,
and yet here you are. Jimmy kimmeles mean to me.
He was very don't like that man.

Speaker 2 (01:12:01):
He shouldn't be punching down. No, he should be. He
should be above Jimmy Kimmel, as you said, and he
should be under the constitution. But he's simply a narcissist.

Speaker 3 (01:12:11):
I see all these people online saying, well, the you know,
the presidency always deserves or he's the president, so he
deserves your respect. Then he should act like he's worthy
of respect.

Speaker 2 (01:12:20):
Yeah. Always in the past presidents have come under withering
criticism and false accusations because they're public figures and because
they take positions that are very unpopular people, and they've
always risen above that rather than descending down and punching
the people. But that's Trump, he says. I think we're
going to test ABC out on this, said Trump. He said,

(01:12:41):
let's see how we do. Last time I went after them,
they gave me sixteen million dollars. This one sounds even
more lucrative. A true punch of losers. You know, he's
the biggest loser. So Kimmel also came after Brendan Carr.
He said, telling an American company, we can do this
easy way, they are the hard way, or that these
companies can find ways to change conduct and take action

(01:13:04):
on Kimmel or there's going to be additional work for
the SEC ahead, he said, in addition to being a
direct violation of the First Amendment, it's not particularly intelligent
threat to make in public. He laughed about He said,
you know, this guy is, as Ted Cruz said, he's
acting like a mafioso, But he goes, mafioso is smarter.
They don't usually make these threats in public. Usually to

(01:13:27):
get these threats, you've got to spend all night sitting
in a car outside of Italian restaurant with the microphone
waiting to catch this stuff on tape. Exactly right. So
the FCC's Brendan Carr says that the Democrats are engaging
in projection and distortion over these remarks. He's not telling

(01:13:48):
you the truth. Still again, I don't think that's it
really has anything to do with accusing Maga. If it
did have something to do with Maga, I mean, you
know who was damaged by this was that specific person.
You got to have to standing in this, and so
where is mister Maga who is going to come back
on this? It was really coming after Trump, he said,

(01:14:09):
when we have a broadcast license, there's a public interest standard,
which means that you have to operate consistently in the
public interest. So I said before, when you look at
these claims about public interest in the public standard, think
about public health. Every time they put public in front
of something, it's there to wield it as a club.

Speaker 1 (01:14:31):
And so.

Speaker 2 (01:14:33):
In the past he has said exactly the opposite of
what he has said. This time, Disney has painted itself
into a corner that it can't win, says John Noulty
at Breitbart. He said, they continue to poor hate on
normal people, or they can lose what's left of their
customer base the far left. Disney has so alienated us

(01:14:55):
with its decade long campaign to groom our children and
warp our beloved movies and TV icons, and all Disney
has left or as far left customers. Those far left
customers are now the tail that wags the rabbit dog.
The problem is is that John Nolty is one of
these people who is in bright part in general is
probably an example now of the worst of the Hegelian press.

(01:15:18):
And I say that in every area area they just
they don't look objectively or constitutionally at anything. I mean,
I still go there to take a look at at
what they're they're saying, but they're more rabidly right wing
than Mediaite is left wing, and they've become a parody
of news themselves. So you know, this is also John

(01:15:39):
Nolty not just pushing tribalism now over the First Amendment.
This is a guy who pushed the vaccines, who stood
behind the lockdowns and the mass mandates throughout all this
stuff on bright part, and he was ratioed by the
commenters on that website for doing so, but he never
changed his mind.

Speaker 5 (01:15:58):
And so.

Speaker 2 (01:16:00):
You know this is he wants to talk about the
rabid leftists. And yes, Disney is pushing that agenda, but
as I said many times before, said it today, Trump
pushed that agenda as well. He pushed that agenda as
an entertainer, he pushed that agenda. As a politician, he
pushed the training stuff so to people like Michael Flynn
in the military. So the reality is that Mediaite says

(01:16:25):
that the left should be embarrassed by Jimmy Kimmel. This
is a left winging publication. They're embarrassed by Jimmy Kimmel
because he is and they're upset that Trump has made
him into a hero. They said that Trump left a
little doubt that intimidation was the intention of his administration

(01:16:47):
while they raged over Kimmel's return to the airwaves on
Tuesday night. So Brendan Carr wants to say, we were
just talking about the local stations. We weren't talking about
the overall network. Brendan Carr says, we don't have any
authority to tell ABC what to do. You know, this
is a network. They can put the stuff up there.
But we do have authority over the local stations that

(01:17:09):
broadcast this out and it was never our intention to
cancel them. The problem is that he's lying, and it's
pretty easy to see that he's lying. Trump was saying
before it happened, and he was saying after it happened,
and he's saying it now after he's back, that he
wants to take him off. And Trump wrote, I can't

(01:17:30):
believe ABC, fake news gave Jimmy Kimmel his job back.
The White House was told by ABC that his show
was canceled. In other words, first, they were going to
do what we demanded, and that is to change their
content for my feelings. And now they're going to put
him back. That's why I said, we're going to test
ABC out on this, he said, and I'm going to
get even more money from them this time. Well, again

(01:17:57):
to the news outlets stating that Jimmy Kimmel suggested the
suspect was a Maga Republican media, I said, I woul
strongly encourage you to watch the actual clip and see
if you still think that's the case. And so you know,
if he slandered MAGA, who has standard standing in that.
And of course, genuine threats and slander are things that

(01:18:21):
people can take an issue with personally, and there are
remedies for that that don't involve censorship. Broad censorship in
the wake of an actual tragedy that left a left
winger saw a left winger gun down a father, husband,
and son, this person's going with the established narrative. So
a millionaire progressive with inertia alone to thank for his

(01:18:46):
continued employment, used his platform to smear his political opponents. Well,
Jimmy Kimmel's speech, as usual was reprehensible and not funny.
But free speech allows reprehenid offensive things. If you don't
allow reprehensible offensive things, you don't support free speech period.

(01:19:06):
If you only support it for the things that you like.
Reason says Trump's vision of broadcast regulation is the threat
to conservatives. And you know, it's a threat not just
a conservatives, folks, it's a threat to liberals. It's a
threat to libertarians. It's a threat to Christians. It's a
threat to anyone with an opinion. It's a threat to
anyone who makes a joke, anyone who makes a meme.

(01:19:29):
Censorship is censorship, and it will be applied to everyone.
And we've already seen this. This is not understanding of principle.
It's not that we're on a slippery slope. We've already
at the bottom of the hill, folks with this stuff.
With nine seven percent of the stories are bad, said
Trump on Friday. And so it's no longer free speech
when TV networks take a great story and make it bad.

(01:19:52):
I think that's illegal. This is a child. You know,
you talked about an eight year old and his goldfish
by goldfish, imagine he came up with that age because
that's the way Trump speaks. Trump is wrong on both points,
says Reason. Yes. It is both stupid and authoritarian and

(01:20:12):
groping towards a justification for the regulatory threats that preceded
Kimmel's expulsion. Trump embraced a principle that historically is bad
for conservatives, one that they are apt to regret reviving.
All they do is hit Trump said the president, referring
to himself. They're licensed, and they're not allowed to do that. Well,

(01:20:35):
you are not allowed as a president to take on
constitutional actions because your feelings are hurt. He made similar
noises during this first administration. He said network news has
become so partisan, distorted in fake that licenses must be
challenged and if appropriate, revoked. But his FCC chairman Agit

(01:20:56):
Pie said exactly the opposite. He would not do it.
I believe in the First Amendment, said Pie. The FCC
under my leadership, will stand for the First Amendment. And
under the law, the SEC does not have the authority
to revoke the license of a broadcast station based on
content of a particular newscast. Now, however, Bendon Carr is there,

(01:21:19):
and he is willing to be a sycophant to Trump.
He has no such constitutional compunctions, says Reason. He preposterously
invoked the SEC's policy regarding broadcast news distinction. And again,
like I said before, and they make the point, who
in the right mind would think that this is broadcast news.

(01:21:40):
But let's just set that aside for a moment. They
don't even shouldn't have the authority to determine what is true,
what is fair, what is right, And that's why they
talked about conservatives. Yes, taking away free speech hurts everyone,
But Carr and Trump have alluded to the broadcaster's vague

(01:22:01):
duty to operate quote in the public interest, you know,
like the lockdowns run the public health interest. And yet
this is all reminiscent reason of the FCC's defunct Fairness doctrine.
I've mentioned this over and over again. It required broadcasters
to present contrasting views when they covered controversial issues. So

(01:22:22):
just say, well, you're not even going to be allowed
to talk about that issue. We're just going to keep
that Anything that they didn't want to talk about, they
just label it as controversial. The FCC repudiated that policy
during the Reagan administration precisely because it impinged on First
Amendment rights. The Candy administration, for example, had deployed the

(01:22:42):
fairness doctrine against the president's political opponents. Our massive strategy,
said former Assistant Secretary of Commerce William Rutterer. He acknowledged
a decade later. Our massive strategy was to use the
fairness doctrine to challenge and to harass right wing broadcasters
and hope that the challenges would be so costly to
them that they would be inhibited and they would decide

(01:23:05):
it was too expensive to continue. By getting rid of
the fairness doctrine, it allowed the political speech on talk radio,
enabling the rise of influential conservative commentators such as Rush Limbaugh.
Exhuming and extending that policy, as car and Trump seek
to do, would be a short sighted and constitutionally dubious policy.

(01:23:29):
Although it might feel good right now to threaten Jimmy
Kimmel said Ted Cruz, when it is used to silence
every conservative in America, we will regret it. It is
unbelievably dangerous for government to put itself in position of saying,
we're going to decide what speech we like and what
we don't, and we're going to threaten to take you
off the air if we don't like what you're saying.

(01:23:49):
And as Reason says, the root of the problem is
the arbitrary distinction that the Supreme Court has drawn between
speech that is aired on TV or radio stations and
speech in every other medium. And it was people like
John Nolty at Breitbart who was slamming his fists on
the table, saying, that's our airways, that's our airways. He

(01:24:11):
sounds like a communist because in this he is, and
this people like Nolty at Breitbart want censorship like a communist,
and they think that the airways belong to everyone. They don't.
There was an auction, and you need to follow that
in terms of property. You know, once you sell this,
once you auction it off, go away. You know, we

(01:24:33):
don't need to have an entire bureaucracy for that. So
reason said that kind of distinction. To say that speech
and every other medium will be free except on TV
and radio makes no sense, and it's even harder to
defend in the current media environment. Government licensing of newspapers, websites,
or streaming services should be a constitutional non starter, inviting

(01:24:58):
all sorts of interference with freedom of speech. Government licensing
of broadcasters poses similar perils, as Trump and Carr seem
keen to demonstrate. It's all simple. You just go back
to the Constitution, which these people will not do. So
when you look at this, where does this go? It
goes everywhere. As I said, it's not just going to

(01:25:20):
be conservatives, it'll be liberals, libertarians that will be Christians.
Here's the example. The US Supreme Court is taking a
look at a counseling ban that has been put up
in Colorado. This is a Christian counselor who say she
works with children, and she's got teenagers who are unconcerned

(01:25:42):
her are struggling with their unwanted sexual feelings, and they
might seek out her help. But under the new Colorado
state law, it allows her to support them if they
want to have same sex attraction or to imagine that
they're in the wrong body, But if you want to
support a biblical understanding of sex, she's not allowed to

(01:26:05):
say that. This is how this operates. Understand that when
you get rid of free speech and you trample on it,
it's going to be used by the very worst actors
in society. You want to talk about the radical left, well,
don't give them that tool, just like you don't want
to give the radical left like Biden, the tool to
do gun control by executive order. Penalties for breaking the

(01:26:28):
law are severe, a five thousand dollars fine for each
violation and a loss of her license as a counselor.
On October the seventh, the Supreme Court will hear her lawsuit.
The person is Kiley Chiles challenging The law at issue
in the closely watched case is a deceptively simple is

(01:26:49):
counseling speech or is it conduct? If it's speech, hey,
it's going to be protected. Wait a minute, If it's conduct,
it's the free extra size of religion, isn't it. Both
of those are protected under the First Amendment. You can
say the free exercise religion, it's conduct. Well, that's fine,

(01:27:10):
it's still protected, just like a protest that is peaceful
as protected as well. Why would that even matter?

Speaker 5 (01:27:17):
You know?

Speaker 2 (01:27:17):
So this is a long article talking about is it
going to be speech, is going to be conduct? Not?
You know, but the First Amendment protects both of those things.
The tenth US Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Colorado
and said it was conduct, so we can regulate it.
So we can tell you that as a counselor, you
can counsel people that they can have same sex attraction.

(01:27:38):
They can imagine they're in the wrong body. The LGBT
is fine. Just don't talk about the Bible, okay, don't
talk about reality. Child who works in Colorado Springs, only
talks with her clients. She does not engage in discredited
practices like aversion therapy or shock therapy. That one defined

(01:28:00):
conversion therapy, and I've said from the very beginning these
terms are carefully chosen to weaponize. They use the term
conversion because they want to come after Christians. They use
the term therapy because they want to go back to
a time when psychologists were or psychiatrists, I think, are
the ones who practiced it, when they were using electric

(01:28:22):
shock therapy against people. So they carefully put those things together,
kind of like a portmandeau, you know, conversion therapy. So
they could come after both counselors and Christians doing this psychologist,
psychiatrists and Christians. But they want to come after Christian conversion.
We have seen that in other countries where they've used

(01:28:43):
that same kind of terminology. An Alia is Defending Freedom.
Attorney representing Childs compared her case to the NAACP in
sixty three versus Button. The US Supreme Court ruling is
struck down in Virginia law limiting the solicitation of legal services.
Virginia had used the law to block the NAACP from
providing legal assistance to African Americans who faced racial discrimination,

(01:29:07):
claiming the state was regulating conduct. By the Supreme Court
ruled the NAACP's legal activities were modes of expression and
association protected with the fourth Fourteenth Amendment and the First Amendment. Look,
there's no doubt about it that this is covered under
free exercise, religion, and free speech. Circuit courts, however, have

(01:29:28):
been divided on this issue. Third and the Eleventh Circuits
have both struck down counseling bands as unconstitutional infringements on
free speech. But the Ninth Circuit, the liberal Ninth Circuit
out in California in twenty twenty two, upheld a Washington
law that was similar to Colorado's. And so now we've

(01:29:48):
had the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals upholl this with Colorado,
and they are one thousand percent wrong. The Supreme Court
did not review that previous ruling, but Justice Clarence Thomas
wrote at the time that Washington's law strikes at the
heart of the First Amendment. In Chiles's case, the Tenth

(01:30:10):
Circuit Judge Harris Harts wrote a descent criticizing fellow judges
for playing a labeling game, rather than looking at what
the regulation took, aim at the expressive content of what
is said. A ruling in Chiles's case will reach professional
professions beyond counseling. However, a Friend of the Court brief

(01:30:30):
filed by the Christian Legal Society addresses a spellover effect
on bar rules in some states that attempt to discipline
attorneys not only for conduct, but also for speech that
the licensing entities believe is harassing or discriminatory. That could
include a view that same sex marriage is immoral. Scruggs

(01:30:51):
rejected Colorado's claims that merely talking to kids about their
feelings regarding their biological sex is harmful. He said, if
you dig deep, they admit that there's no proof of
actual harm here. But see, this is really a freedom
of religion issue. Who are the secular atheist courts to
say that they are going to define marriage. Government should

(01:31:14):
have no role in defining marriage, and it is a
religious issue. Who are they to say that I'm not
allowed to express my religious beliefs. It's absurd, it's tyrannical.
Officials shouldn't be cutting off dialogue with kids. The government
is saying that we know better than counselors than kids

(01:31:35):
about what views they should adopt and what ideas they
should hear. That really is a global threat to the
First Amendment right there. And I think the thing that
bothers me the most is the fact that you can
talk about the kids sexually in one direction, but you
can't talk about the other direction. How in the world
could anyone try to justify that? Travis, you want to

(01:31:56):
get the comments here? Yeah?

Speaker 3 (01:31:58):
Soon. Let you know, we have Tony Rdburn coming up
right after this, so we will be going to him shortly.
Klaus Schwab's cat responding to Audi, says, I feel like
I've stumbled into a FEMA camp upon entering Walmart Audi,
Mr r want to get rid of the cartels and
the drug war.

Speaker 2 (01:32:16):
That's right, and then that is the case. I mean,
you got these cartels that you just had. Republican Congressman Mills,
who has introduced a bill to expand the Authorization for
the Use of Military force. We don't do decorations of
war anymore. Instead, we give a blanket power to the
president over categories of things, to do whatever he wants,

(01:32:36):
whatever country you want to go to, and he says,
if you look at how just one cartel, the Cineloa cartel,
is involved, that could give the president the power to
go to war with over forty different countries. It's amazing
when you look at the reach of the Cinaloa cartel
and all of that was created, just like al Capone's
gang was created with alcohol prohibission. We have created a

(01:32:59):
multinational narco, a criminal enterprise because of the stupid war
on drugs.

Speaker 3 (01:33:06):
Yeah, Audi mrr. I predicted that the Kimmel thing was
a sigh up. I knew he'd be back on TV
in no time, and now he's gotten more publicity than
he has in many years. Kimmel is one of them.

Speaker 2 (01:33:16):
Yeah.

Speaker 6 (01:33:16):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:33:17):
Guard Goldsmith says, Kimmel got six million viewers on his return.

Speaker 2 (01:33:21):
Yeah, and he fourteen on fourteen million on YouTube. Yeah,
took care of the rating. Sydney, He's back.

Speaker 3 (01:33:29):
The real Octo Spook says Jimmy Kimmel has a lot
in common with the mouse that roared. Didn't someone say
something about fifteen minutes of fame?

Speaker 2 (01:33:37):
Yeah, Yeah, that's a funny movie. Principal of the movie,
Peter sellers, they own a small country. They go on bankrupt,
and they said, what do we do? We declare war
on America and then we surrender and then they will
give us all kinds of foreign aid like the Marshall Plan.

Speaker 3 (01:33:49):
Yeah, got to scroll the window up, Yeah, Audi, mrr.
Jimmy Kimmel is actually a very funny guy, but once
he made his deal with the devil, he was forced
to make CIA talking points funny, which is a tall order.
Just ask Colbert. I don't think I've ever actually watched
anything from Jimmy Kimble.

Speaker 2 (01:34:06):
I haven't early either, because what the late night shows
have become, you know, they it's such obvious mockingbird media,
and and it's just disgusting and unfunny. Uh, they're not
even clever about what they have to say. Yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:34:19):
I remember watching David Letterman when I was very very
young with you guys occasionally, but yeah, that's it.

Speaker 2 (01:34:25):
Yeah, he was. He was funny at the beginning, and
then he went down that path as well. You actually
got a chance to meet David Letterman once in a
Beverly Hills hotel that we were both staying at, and
it was we weren't paying for it, we were guests
of it was our distributor who had us there and uh,
we got a video of us, you know, talking to him.

(01:34:47):
It was a it was a funny guy. Yeah, he
made a couple of jokes right.

Speaker 3 (01:34:51):
There Epstein Island. I still remember what Kimmel said about
the unvaccinated who needed emergency surgery. Yeah, that was his
so long wheezy or whatever. That's right, So he's not
a very compassionate man at all. Timed non tides. I
would say that if they social media have gotten the
benefit of being ruled a platform, then we have free

(01:35:14):
speech rights there, just like the sidewalk, city hall, on
the phone, etc.

Speaker 2 (01:35:18):
That's I've always made that argument. That's right. And as
a matter of fact, Jack Dorsey said in multiple congressional
hearings he said, we are the digital public square. And
I said, well, then we've already got Supreme Court precedent
saying that even if the digital public, even if the
public square is privately owned, the First Amendment applies there.
So just apply that. That's the marsh versus Alabama case.

Speaker 3 (01:35:41):
Yes, Audi, Mr r Maga is being tricked into approving
the attack on the First Amendment.

Speaker 2 (01:35:47):
They've been tricked into supporting Trump no matter what he does.

Speaker 3 (01:35:50):
They've been tricked into a lot of things. Yeah, Ben
Laden BERNANKI one. Jimmy Kimmel has a smaller audience than
me TV primetime. Most of them are older and usually
in bed by a or nine. So that's a minuscule
amount of people. Kimmel visited Epstein Island over twenty times.

Speaker 2 (01:36:05):
Oh wow, I didn't realize that. Well, we're gonna take
a very short break and when we come back, we're
going to have Tony Ardeman of Wise Wolf Gold joining us.
Will be right back.

Speaker 1 (01:37:01):
You're listening to the David Knight shows.

Speaker 5 (01:37:06):
Good welcome back on this joining US gold exchange.

Speaker 2 (01:37:08):
Yeah, we welcome back. Joining us now is Tony Rdeman
and we talked a little bit about the Shanghai Gold
Exchange and what's happening. Last time you're on, Tony, you
talked about the Hong Kong Gold Exchange, I think, and
so China is making a huge move to accumulate gold.
That's been one of the many driving factors. I mean,
we have we're into record territory. We've passed in terms

(01:37:31):
of real terms when gold shot up to eight hundred
dollars an ounce. But it's because there are so many
different things that are driving it simultaneously, and one of
those is, as you've been talking about for the longest time,
the push by a lot of central banks to accumulate gold.
But nobody is pushing it like China. As a matter

(01:37:51):
of fact, they're trying to de westernize the global bullion market,
says zero Hedge. London and New York have been places
where gold has been stored in the past. China's trying
to place that Shanghai, perhaps Hong Kong as well. What's
your take on that.

Speaker 5 (01:38:10):
I thought the story last week about Hong Kong play
was really important because you already have the Shanghai Gold Exchange,
and it just highlights the move that China is making,
as well as the bricks nations to make the move
of commodity pricing eastward. There's another headline up that's up
on zero Hedge, and then just I mean really putting

(01:38:33):
some emphasis on what's going on in the West. And
Canada has no gold reserves, Sam, did you know that
zero gold reserves?

Speaker 2 (01:38:42):
Well, but they've got a central bankers as their prime
minister or whatever, so I guess they're covered right. You
don't need gold if you got a central banker.

Speaker 5 (01:38:51):
I think that's a key indicator of where we're headed
in this decade and especially in this century, is that
everything is flowing out of the hands of the West.
And they had an interview with Ray Dalio and he
was talking about, you know, the juxtaposition of nineteen forty five,
when the United States had about eighty percent of the

(01:39:13):
world's money. You know, we were about five percent of
the world's population, about fifty percent or more of the wealth,
and then that's completely dissipated, and it's flowing eastward and
it's being decentralized out of our hands for sure. So
dollar domination is really I think in this timeline, it's
really in danger of losing more and more market share.

Speaker 2 (01:39:36):
Yes, zero head China headline said, nobody is hedged for
the real gold panic. That hasn't even started yet.

Speaker 5 (01:39:45):
No, No, I don't think it has. As a matter
of fact, it's interesting every day I started calculating the
ratios and not only the gold of silver ratios, but
the Bitcoin of gold ratios, and it slipped a little
bit off of I think AI expansion and other things
that have happened since the rate cut, and that's probably temporary,

(01:40:09):
but it went from thirty one ounces of gold to
make one bitcoin to about twenty nine, and so that
slipped a little bit. But the real metric to watch
is the gold of silber ratio that's starting to come
back to normal, or at least somewhat normal levels. I mean,
we got up to past one hundred ounces of silver

(01:40:31):
to make one ounce of gold not too long ago,
when it was thirty five dollars an ounce for gold
and thirty five hundred dollars an ounce, or thirty five
hundred dollars ounce of gold and thirty five dollars an
ounce for silver, David. And now we're at eighty three
to one because silver passed the forty four dollars more.

Speaker 2 (01:40:49):
Yeah, it truly is amazing. We're hitting one all time
high after the other. But as I said, there's a
lot of different reasons. Especially for us as individuals, we
only get the rise of stable coin. There was an
article from zero Hedge talking about one hundred billion dollar
a year battle that is shaping up between credit cards
and stable coins. But I guess though, really stable coin

(01:41:10):
be more like a debit card, you know, let you
pay for things instantaneously. But we live in a credit
card society. Don't we where people are borrowing from the future,
So I don't know really how much of that is
really going to be over the credit cards versus that.
I think you see the credit card companies are merging

(01:41:32):
with the stable coin companies, as Visa merged with the
biometric company. They want to be there for the for
the surveillance. So imagine you know, they could process the
transaction and still put it on a credit card account
for you and charge your thirty or forty percent interest
as as it continue to allow that to happen. Yeah,

(01:41:53):
I think what.

Speaker 5 (01:41:54):
Makes the stable coin battle between credit card processing and
stable coins is the fees. It's merchant fees. I think
that'll be their selling point. As a matter of fact,
I saw it was I think a coinbasecial about a
year ago, and it was highlighting how small business could
you open up a coinbase account and if they were

(01:42:14):
if they took crypto, but their fees would be lower
than if they just took credit cards, which I thought
it was interesting, and then if you enter in stable coins.
Now I've been looking into stable coins because I thought, well,
if you're gonna deal, if you're gonna have bitcoin or
something you should have stable coin. That's a whole other
like to actually deal in stable coins, it's a lot

(01:42:36):
harder to deal in than it is Bitcoin, at least
right now, you have to go to a third party,
which I think that's probably how it's going to be.
It's not going to be.

Speaker 2 (01:42:46):
Are connected to Trump like Lutnake and others.

Speaker 5 (01:42:49):
Yeah, right, It'll be something else so that it's not
you know, meet the new boss same as the old boss.
It's probably a lot of the same entities or interest
except it's a different vehicle. And they can be competitive
because for the longest time, you know the hidden cost
of credit card fees and I know this from being

(01:43:10):
in the gasoline business my entire life, and you know
three percent at the pump, and how that looks on
your balance sheet when you're selling gasoline at the retail
level that the credit card companies make more than the
retailer most of the time. You know, if it's over
three dollars a gallon, that's nine cents of a gallon
that in the retailer usually makes about a nickel. So

(01:43:31):
that'll be an interesting I think all the infrastructure that's
being put in right now with stable coins. You and
I both know that it's not for it's not to
save the merchant. It's not to save the retailer or
the operator fees or anything like that. It's another transfer
of well.

Speaker 2 (01:43:47):
Oh yeah, yeah. But I imagine people with a lot
of retailers would give it a chance because it is
a really expensive thing to take credit cards. I remember
when we had our retail stores video stores. It was
such a big bite that I said, well, we have
the ability to you know, with the system that I
had written, we had the ability if somebody had late
fees that they'd accrued because they turned something in late,

(01:44:08):
you know, we could have balances on a customer's account
so they could pay it off later. So we tried
it as an experiment. It was a very short experiment
because what happened was we said, well, if you're going
to use a credit card for the small amount, let's
just defer it. Next time you come in, you can
pay it, you know, with a check or cash or
something like that. And that did not work because people
wanted to use credit cards, and we as a store

(01:44:32):
didn't have any club over them in terms of if
they don't pay the bill, they're not going to get
a hit on their credit rating and that type of thing.
So we had to stop that pretty quickly. But it
is really a high fee. And as we look at
the banks you're talking about how stable coin is set
up centrally controlled, just like a central bank, except that

(01:44:52):
it's a crony system. They have a way that they
are going to know their customer and all the rest
of these so called anti money line dring laws that
are out there. Vietnam is showing the pattern talked about
this last week. I think they just immediately closed eighty
six million bank accounts because people did not sign in
and give them biometric data. It's like, okay, well if

(01:45:15):
we don't have your biometric data, we're closing your account
right now. I think we could see that type of
thing happening in the West. That's the way that they're
going to roll this thing out.

Speaker 5 (01:45:28):
Do we lose youh yeah? I think unfortunately.

Speaker 2 (01:45:30):
That's OK.

Speaker 5 (01:45:30):
That's our future, especially is everything it continues to get
board and more digitized.

Speaker 2 (01:45:35):
Yeah, that's right. They're going to force our hands coming through.

Speaker 5 (01:45:38):
OK.

Speaker 2 (01:45:38):
Yeah, you're coming through now.

Speaker 5 (01:45:40):
Yes.

Speaker 2 (01:45:41):
So I think that's the direction that they're going to go.
Without a doubt, and I think that's why there's as
an individual, we're looking not only at the general economy
and at the price of gold, but we're also looking
at the control that's coming through with all this. The
World Economic Forum has got a plan to overhaul the
globe financial system by monetizing nature, don't they. This is

(01:46:04):
an article from Life site, and we've talked about this before.
How Bessant as well as Lutnik, as well as Bergham,
who Trump put ahead as head of the Interior Department,
has all the different parks and public lands in it.
They've talked about how, yeah, we need to monetize and
put to work our natural resources. And so I think

(01:46:25):
that they will monetize nature. They'll come up with some
kind of derivative system to do that, and that's one
of the ways that we will wind up owning nothing
and they will have everything. People like Larry Fincott, Blackrock
and Hoffman and others. That's exactly what the World Economic
Form wants, isn't it.

Speaker 5 (01:46:43):
Well, Unfortunately, I think this is a natural outcropping of
what happens when you have currency. When you demonetize your currency,
you monetize everything else and they're looking for value and everything.
That's the reason civilization is built on sound money when
that's the whole point of a medium of exchange. And
if you lose that, then there's chaos and then you

(01:47:04):
go back to I mean, you're in a sense of
bartering economy, but there's you find value and everything else.
That's the reason why we have such a massive housing bubble.
It's why we have a debt crisis, a debt a
debt time bomb around the world. It's having to borrow
against assets and everything to outpace the loss of purchasing
power in the currencies. And that's a good point of

(01:47:25):
the reason why you're seeing.

Speaker 2 (01:47:26):
Yeah, that's a good point. As you're saying that you've
got to have some pretense that your fiat currency is
linked to something that's real. I mean, first the first
Breton Woods it was gold, and then the second one
they made it with oil or with energy, right, and
so now what's left. You know, they're going to monetize
it with the real estate that's here in the United States,
and that may very well be what they're going to.

Speaker 5 (01:47:47):
Do to monetize everything, and yeah, it'll be it's still
a fiat currency. Then even if we move to a
digitized system like a stable coin back system, it's still
going to be based off of theorial blue sky. It's
going to be based off of nothing. It's going to
be based off of GDP and economic growth and all

(01:48:10):
the rest of that that. Unfortunately, we're seeing the end
game here where you can't inflate your way out, you
can't print your way out of economic downturns and a
lot of the things the metrics are going backwards. Used
to when you lower interest rates and there would be
sell offs and precious metals because people would be taking

(01:48:33):
getting liquid in positions to buy into the market. Now
you're just seeing gold just continue to go up. Every
time I come on the show, it's breaking it's another
all time high. I think silver is about to do
the same thing. And I don't want to give investment advice,
but I'm looking at silver having a big breakout here
probably this year, going into the final quarter of twenty

(01:48:57):
twenty five. And as of right now, well, I'm start
piling if I can get silver and keep it. I'm
holding it if I can financially afford to keep it
on the books from doing that because I think there's
going to be a squeeze even with the amount that's
being sold right now. It's really interesting. Buyers aren't necessarily there,

(01:49:19):
but the price keeps going up, so you have to
take it to the wholesalers. And I just don't like
that game. I think there's something inherently wrong with the
price rising and retail has slowed down and we still
have you know, the smaller buyers are there, but not
like they used to be, where the people are buying
big chunks at a time on the retail level. I'm
watching that very closely because those two things don't go together,

(01:49:42):
the retail slowing down and the price going up. That
means institutions and governments are buying, and they're signaling something
I think that we need to pay attention to.

Speaker 2 (01:49:51):
Yeah, they've been heavily manipulating silver, as we've said before.
You know, it was just a few months ago. I
remember seeing a YouTube video. Somebody sent it to me
as a listener and said, look at this, and it
was a small show of precious metals and the guys
that were there that were dealers, you know, the guy
went around talking to him. He said, yeah, everybody wants

(01:50:11):
to sell silver, but they're not buying he said, And
look at the ratio here, how low silver is. It's
a great deal. And so we're buying all that we can,
but the retail people are not. For whatever reason, they're
selling their silver instead of buying it. So there's a
lot of manipulations in going on for that. For quite
some time.

Speaker 5 (01:50:29):
We got the shop and Dennison against in Texas, my
old new bank, the branch bank that I took over.
I'll just send you some pictures of the signage. It's
a little bit of an experiment where wise Wolf Gold silver,
Bitcoin and I rebranded it. They even have the I'll
have the drive through operational probably sometime by the end

(01:50:50):
of the year. But I was there just working the
counter for my son and from a from eleven am
to one pm, and I did six transactions buying silver
bullion and that was all I bought. It's a silver boy.
There wasn't any goal. There's six transactions of different silver
billion buys and probably about five thousand dollars worth or more.

(01:51:14):
But that's just kind of indicative the steady pace the.

Speaker 2 (01:51:17):
Retail trade is still the retail trade is still selling
it when they're buying it.

Speaker 5 (01:51:21):
Then yeah, well the public is selling to me, and
then I'm having to figure out how am I gonna either,
you know, get it to the trading house and make
a small margin and liquid ate it off my books,
find a way to keep it on inventory and sell
it out slowly. It's it's a very strange position to

(01:51:43):
be in because I love silver, and I think it's
I think it's a bargain right now. It's hard to
always keep it on your books with cash flows, you
know from small business day, but you can't just continue
to to accumulate inventory and survive. So I have to
make that decision. But I think I'm buying I still
think I'm buying it cheap. And the reason is is
what you mentioned, you know, with the the repricing of everything,

(01:52:06):
I don't think that we've factored in the true destructure
of the dollar. The dollars lost forty percent of its
purchasing price compared to gold in the last year alone.

Speaker 2 (01:52:17):
Yeah, that's right, It's amazing.

Speaker 5 (01:52:18):
Just in the last twelve months. Yeah, yeah, and silver
went from what was the last year they had about
twenty nine dollars an ounce at this time. Somewhere in
there and now we're at forty four dollars an ounce
in climbing. I think that's in direct correlation to the
loss of purchasing power and the dollar and where we're
headed with the repricing of commodities. So yeah, it's eventually.

(01:52:43):
And I think there was an article up on zero
hedge about the phone. I mean, I think a lot
of people are going to look back and think this
was this was the time, and they ended up not
being able to buy unfortunately. I think silver is going
to surprise everyone because it's been lying in wait for
forty five years, and everybody's been waiting for silverage to

(01:53:05):
do its thing since nineteen eighty. And you mentioned earlier
adjusted for inflation, you're absolutely right. So in nineteen seventy
nine gold went or the end of seventy nine into eighty,
gold went to over eight hundred dollars an ounce, So
it went from thirty five dollars an ounce in nineteen
seventy one to over eight hundred dollars an ounce in

(01:53:26):
the end of nineteen seventy nine, And that was based
off of it looked it seemed to be that the
Fed and the Treasury's goal of you know, whip inflation
now and all the rest of that didn't happen, and
people were just in it. Gold doubled by the from
first quarter of seventy nine all the way down to

(01:53:47):
the end. And then there was some easing. You know,
Paul Volker raised interest rais to the teens and we've
discussed this many times. So there was a contraction in
the money supply, and eventually there was a you know,
an easing of of perceived inflation. So silver took you know,
went down from fifty two dollars an ounce down to gosh,

(01:54:07):
you know, almost nothing, and then gold went from eight
hundred dollars an ounce down to about three hundred. So
you're right pricing for inflation if you looked at eight
hundred dollars an ounce gold, and seventy nine we just
crossed that line, so that priced into inflation thirty five
I think thirty six hundred dollars an ounce was something
like that is about the adjusted for inflation mark of

(01:54:30):
where we were in seventy nine with eight hundred dollars
ounce gold. But we've not even gotten close with silver.
If I said many times, you know, fifty two dollars
an ounce in eighty was like three hundred dollars today
in purchasing power's that's an estimation. So I think we
got a lot of room to run. And all commodities.
I mean, look at what's happening with platinum, palladium. Palladium

(01:54:54):
is up I think five hundred percent over the past
many five years. And I think it's what's anything that's real?

Speaker 2 (01:55:02):
Actually I get mister yeah, mister prom ten eleven says
sober is up five dollars per ounce just in September,
and he says, thank you, miss thank you, Tony. So
I appreciate that. And again, you know, we go back
and we look at the inflation that was happening in
the seventies. You mentioned it, you know, the WEP inflation.

(01:55:23):
Now the little wind buttons that jeryll Ford want people
to put on their p What are we supposed to
do to stop inflation?

Speaker 6 (01:55:29):
Right?

Speaker 2 (01:55:31):
They didn't know what to do to stop inflation. Yeah,
that's right. I mean they would really just talk to
us as if we were children. It's the same administration
came out with the this is your brain on drugs thing,
you know, the egg in a frying pan. It's like
they really do think that we're children, and maybe they're right.
I don't know, but I never know.

Speaker 5 (01:55:50):
You.

Speaker 2 (01:55:51):
Yeah, that's right. So when you go in it's like, no,
I can't afford.

Speaker 5 (01:55:57):
That none for me.

Speaker 3 (01:55:58):
Thanks.

Speaker 2 (01:55:58):
Yeah. Yeah, figure out what my responsibility and inflation was.
I knew it is wise, but I didn't know what
mine was. Yeah, it's pretty crazy.

Speaker 5 (01:56:08):
That's that really is the crux of the matter is
the fiat currency once you've untethered from value. And you
mentioned earlier, you know, we've talked about the petro dollar.
We had seemingly gold backed dollar until nineteen seventy one.
He wasn't legal for you to own gold. Jerald Ford

(01:56:29):
made that legal. I think in December nineteen seventy four
you could finally own gold again legally in this country.
So we really didn't have the dollar had the perceived
backing of something. And we went off the petro dollar
pretty much officially last year, and you've seen the world
start moving away from using that by setting it into energy. Yes,

(01:56:53):
So what's left, I think is the stable coin models
that we've discussed, and I don't know how that's going
to work out for the dollar, what's going to go
go on? But in the meantime, everything is getting repriced.

Speaker 2 (01:57:04):
Yeah, that's right, that's right. Speaking of that, we got
a couple of comments here, three little birds says, ask you, tony,
who will buy gold or silver when it becomes so
highly valued. I think you'll be buying things with gold
and silver, I think is what you'll be doing. Right, Well,
look at it. I'm sorry, go back and look at

(01:57:26):
the stories about the Waymar Republic. You know, when the
paper money became worthless and people using wheelbearers full of bit.
One guy became incredibly wealthy because early on he got
out of the currency and got into gold and then
he could basically buy whatever he wanted to on the cheap, right.

Speaker 5 (01:57:45):
Well, the hardest money wins, and there's stories about the
Wimar Republic to the meltdown where somebody bought a hotel
for a twenty dollars gold piece, you know, because the
current price in the currency, and that's the This gets
complicated if you've priced in your debt models based off
of currency, so you have a you know, have a

(01:58:06):
promisory note, you have a mortgage that's priced into the
currency at the time. It's one of the reasons why
you know, you had William Jennings Bryan at the end
of the nineteenth century with the Cross of Gold speech,
the currency had become so hard like the United States
was deflationary. It was harder and harder for the farmers

(01:58:28):
to you know, get liquid and pay off that their
their notes, and so that's why they call for free silver.
It's really the whole allegory of the Wizard of Oz
is all about that. With the Yellow Brick Road and
you know, Dorothy's slippers were originally silver, you know's she
tapped them to go back home. All the rest of that,
there's a there's an allegory there, but that was the

(01:58:50):
that was the the inverse. That was the opposite problem.
We had a currency that was so rigid and harder
and like it was deflationary, that it was harder to
get out of that. Now, if you you know, if
you free up capital for a while, it looks pretty good, like, oh,
you can pay off dead a lot easier. But then
you start everything gets repriced and so you know, an

(01:59:13):
ounce of gold will go a lot further. And you
talk about that in relation to what's known as Gresham's law.
And I don't want to get too technical because I
don't think I'm the guy to explain it, but it's
Gresham's law is simply states that when bad money enters
a system, then good money goes into the hiding. And

(01:59:33):
so I always, you know, I try to figure out
what's the what's the end game of Gresham's law? Well,
how do you how does it end up? Good money
comes back? And that's the you know, the the proper
money always reasserts itself. Gold always wins. If you look
at history, gold always comes back. Silver comes back, and
it can be pushed out for a while. And I

(01:59:54):
think that period between when they put down the gold
and silver rebellion, because I really I think that's what
it was in nineteen eighty As I look back and
you realize what happened with the Hunt family, you know,
they were deep stated. You know, I think they were
punished for exposing something that was wrong with the dollar
and making silver go up to fifty two dollars an ounce,

(02:00:16):
and you know, the rest is history with that because
silver was nothing throughout the eighties. In the nineteen nineties,
Warren Buffett for a while seemingly cornered the silver market,
but nothing really happened that's why you called it a
pet rock. You know, it said gold was like a
pet rock, or it didn't do anything and it just
sits there. Well that's the whole points. It's not supposed

(02:00:40):
to it's supposed to sit there. It's supposed to house value.
It's supposed to be a monetary thing. Whereas the dollar,
you know, again the dollars with Fian currency loses purchasing power.
So we had that interim period between the eighties and
nineties and early two thousands where it looked like fiat
currency kind of at least stabilized enough. But that's all.

(02:01:02):
You know, three hundred dollars an ounce gold David in
two thousand and three, and I remember that because I
was going into a rack. I bought my first gold coins,
and I remember, you know, the dealer that I called
put me in some I didn't know what I was doing,
so he put me in numismatic collectibles that I never

(02:01:23):
could get any value out of. But if I just
bought gold bullion, I'd have been way way up. I wish,
wish i'd had that. If I invested three thousand dollars
in two thousand and three, I could have got ten
ounces of gold. I'd be looking a lot better right now.

Speaker 2 (02:01:37):
Well, you know, when you talk about these different scenarios,
you know, one of the scenarios is like the bayer
Ma Republic, where the entire financial system collapses and the
currency collapses, and that type of thing, and that's where
you pay for where you buy the hotel for a
twenty dollars gold piece type of thing. But then you
also have what happened in the seventies and eighties were
because of bad government policy a number of different ways

(02:02:01):
inflation got out of hand, and eventually when they got
that under control, then gold came back down for a while.
But I think we're looking at something that is more
like the Ymar scenario and this fourth turning these institutions.
Everything is being changed, The international financial system is being
re engineered. All of these different things are happening. So

(02:02:24):
I think when you look at exploding debt in the
West and you look, you know, that's looking Ymar like.
And then you've got the desire by the Russians and
the Chinese to completely change the financial system. This is
something unlike what we have seen before, and we could
very well be pushed into a worldwide depression, especially with

(02:02:45):
Trump's capricious and arbitrary tariffs that are happening out there.
So you know, that's really I think more of the
scenario that we're looking at. And as you point out, Tony,
when you have a collapse of that order, people are
looking for real money, for for hard money, for real assets,
and it falls back to that and the FII currency

(02:03:06):
becomes like confederate dollars. So I think maybe that's the answer.
That's exactly right. That's the one that I would give.

Speaker 5 (02:03:15):
History shows us. You know, it's that old maximum of
the golden rule. He who has the gold mags the rules.
And I mentioned earlier about where we were in nineteen
forty five, especially you know post World War two, how
much wealth that the United States held and the rules
that it was able to make because of that, and

(02:03:36):
that's dissipated, it flowed out and because of our monetary policy,
and you look at places, I mean Canada again, that's
another they fall into that fiat trap. Well, we've got
all this currency and we've got a central bank. Well,
so what you know, do you have assets to back
it up? And that's the rest of the world is
moving away and has been moving away rapidly. And I

(02:03:56):
think when I was on last week and I was
pointing out that the Hong Kong Gold Depository, I thought
that was big news. It didn't get a lot of play,
but you know, the next week, Bloomberg's running a story
on China leveraging the Shanghai Gold Exchange in Hong Kong
to usher in a new you know, commodity pricing system.

(02:04:20):
And I think that's really important to watch as the
outflows continue to happen, and these especially the bricks nations
accumulate more and more monetary metal.

Speaker 2 (02:04:29):
And they're doing that again. You know, the centers have
been London in New York, but there's been some scandals
involved in that. A lot of people wanted to get
their money out of New York as well as out
of London, and some difficulty in getting that. So I
think China sees an opportunity there.

Speaker 5 (02:04:47):
Well, they're right, yeah, And the backbone of all of
this is trust, and I believe the West has eroded
its trust, and especially the dollar system and the weaponization
of the dollar. It's very it's mismanaged on purpose. I
was reading an old book by Jim Mars on the

(02:05:09):
plane yesterday was coming out here to to La and
it's ruled by secrecy, and it talks about James forrestall
that famous quote from James Forstall.

Speaker 2 (02:05:20):
You know who.

Speaker 5 (02:05:23):
Was I think murdered, you know, I pushed out of
a window. But does enable hospital for his views as
he was the first Secretary of Defense and under Truman.
But he had that famous quote he said, you know,
if they if they were just stupid, then every once
in a while, the air in our favorite talking about
the ruling elite, he said, they never do. You know,

(02:05:44):
That's how you know that it's it's pretty brilliant and
it's a plan except for you know, the controlled demolition
of the dollar. We have to really ask the question
in the control demolition of this current monetary system, Shu bono,
who benefits? Really, who benefits? Because watching the destruction of
our monitude system in real time and the vacuum that's

(02:06:06):
going to leave you just look at places like China,
which I don't think is.

Speaker 2 (02:06:10):
A good thing. That's right, absolutely Well, you know we've talked,
always talked about the economic system or anything. Let me
get your take on war, because we had quickly before
we leave.

Speaker 3 (02:06:21):
The economic system if we had a comment from three
Little Birds wants to know Tony, do you think the
future could hold two separate economies?

Speaker 5 (02:06:32):
Do I? Do I think the future have two separate economies?

Speaker 3 (02:06:34):
Yes, that is a question.

Speaker 2 (02:06:36):
May medinancial systems.

Speaker 3 (02:06:38):
Their example is a metals based one and an energy
based one. But you know, will there be two separate
ways of doing business? You're like the established method and
then something other than that, say, you know, gold silver.

Speaker 5 (02:06:48):
I think that that's entirely possible. It's going to take
a while. Nothing like this happens rapidly. Well maybe it's
more gradually then suddenly, probably, But I don't think people
are exactly ready for that yet. But I think there
will be, you know, different ways to conduct business in
parallel economies that we discussed for many years, especially with

(02:07:11):
decentralized tokens through crypto, and then things like gold and
silver that are physical in the real world that you
can actually trade and hold in your hand. I think
that will make a that will make parallel economies. I
think naturally people want to have the best money. And
if the if the the money and from the established

(02:07:35):
order is constantly in flux or in danger, or you've
got to deal with social credit scores or anything like that.
You're going to naturally gravitate towards something that's outside of that.
It may not happen in a day, but it will happen.
That's I think that's a natural human condition. History shows
us that you can't. You can't debase your way out

(02:07:56):
of economic downturns. The Romans learned that many times, by
the way they did it more than one. You know,
we've had the coin clipping and other things when debasing
the currency and then bringing it back. We always see
that nations rise on on sound money, you know, Empire
has rise on sound money and economic nationalism, and they

(02:08:18):
decline on on fiat currency and free trade.

Speaker 2 (02:08:21):
Yes, and I think you know, once you get this
dominant viat currency out of the way, you're going to
have the market trying a lot of different things, many
of them probably simultaneously, until they settle on maybe something
or one system. But I wanted to ask you about
war because you know, war is always a part of
these fourth turnings. You know, it begins with financial issues,

(02:08:42):
then they take us to war, as Gerald Slunty said,
And we've had Trump to a complete one eighty at
the UN Now he's all in for Ukraine. They're going
to take back all their land and maybe even some
of Russia. He says, what do you what do you
think is happening with us? And it wasn't even I
think a full twenty four hours before we have Denmark

(02:09:03):
saying well, we've got drones in our airports. Again, this
has got to be the Russians. Let's go to war.

Speaker 5 (02:09:08):
What do you think You're gonna take us to war
pretty quickly. I think this is the most volatile situation
that the world has been in since nineteen sixty two,
since the Cuban missile crisis, honestly, and it's a sad
thing to watch if you followed history or geopolitics like
I have an interest in it and been part of

(02:09:29):
the instrument of failed foreign policy. I was a tiny
cog in that machine as a young man, watching some
disastrous decisions unfold. This is really unnerving, and I've warned
against it for a long time, and it seems to
kind of go away and then it'll come back. You know.

(02:09:50):
The dressing down of Zelensky at the White House. I
wondered how much of that was theater, because it seemed like, oh,
we're making a move here, We're gonna finally put this
thing to bed, which was, you know, the established order
once that war. They want NATO and Russia locked in
some sort of kinetic conflict. It's ideological reasons, it's territorial reasons,

(02:10:14):
it's it's financial reasons. That all of that's baked into that.
And that's something that I thought was so myopic. It's
so I think it's psychotic at the same time, and
they're focusing on one or two things, but the wider
picture is that the West is sleepwalking into a cataclysm.

(02:10:36):
You look at somebody like Zelensky he said earlier, I
think in the last couple of days, he said that
that Russia either makes peace or they make bomb shelters. Wow,
that's the kind of rhetoric a madman.

Speaker 2 (02:10:51):
Yeah, it is. And yet we're seeing that from European
countries now, we're seeing it from Poland, you're seeing it
now from Denmark, that they're all jumping into this. And
we got the Germans just calmly saying, well, we're going
to have to be able to take care of a
couple of thousand casualties a day here in our hospitals,
that's what's coming in. And they're setting up their military,
they're looking how they're going to get a larger army,

(02:11:13):
all these different things. They're just doing it. It's kind
of a matter of fact. It'sn't like there's not any
panic about it. It's just like, well, this is what
we're going to do now, and they're kind of telling
everybody what they're going to do.

Speaker 5 (02:11:26):
And for what, Yeah, what is the point here? What
it would be the point of the sacrifice other than
some sort of ritualistic Luciferian agenda. I mean, I don't
see the point here. What is the point that they're
trying to make? What is the security threat to Europe
by Russia if you leave it alone? I mean, I

(02:11:47):
don't really understand it. Since for all the Soviet Union,
we've done everything to expand NATO, to interfere with even
like you look at the was it twenty fourteen we
had the CIA back who in Ukraine the democratically elected
the leader from the fled to Russia. Then the Orange

(02:12:09):
Revolution in two thousand and seven. We've done everything to
get us to this point is really on the West Russia.
I'm not a ruciphile, and I don't I don't pretend
to think that Vladimir Putin is a great guy or that,
you know, he's a sane actor. But at the same
time we just look psychotic and schizophrenic. I mean, well,

(02:12:30):
it's NATO and we've broken our promise. NATO was set
up to fight Russia. When Soviet Union collapses, it's like, oh, now,
what do we do? Right, And we've had in the
the Warsaw Pact, Yeah, yeah, exactly. In the past, we've
had NATO do Operation Gladio where they staged terrorist attacks,
kidnapped prime minister, killed him, all that type of thing.

Speaker 1 (02:12:50):
Uh.

Speaker 2 (02:12:51):
These are people who are satanic and insane. They have
operated literally as terrorists in Italy and in Germany for
their political agenda. And these are the people who are
looking to do anything that they can in order to
preserve this institution. Mark Ruda, who tried to destroy all
farming in the Netherlands, gets booted out, and where do

(02:13:13):
they put him as head of NATO? Because he's that
kind of guy. I mean, it's almost funny, except that
it's so serious because they're trying to drag us. They're
determined to drag us into World War three, no matter
how whimsy the excuse. I mean, we'll be drug into
World War three over some drones harassing an airport. I

(02:13:33):
mean that sounds like getting drug into a world war
because some archduke was assassinated somewhere and a place that
we've never heard of before.

Speaker 5 (02:13:41):
It's crazy, you've never heard of that makes no sense,
And yeah, you run into the people. I remember I
was at in Washington, d VC in twenty fourteen and
I went up there to speak at an event for
Congressman around fall at the Capitol Grill. And before that
they had a a little luncheon and somebody, some kid

(02:14:03):
from the Heritage Foundation was This was again right on
the heels of the Ron Paul Revolution, and there was
a lot of libertarian thought that was entering into conservatism,
which I thought was a great thing. And I was
one of those people. And they said, we've got to
instruct people, you know, about even things like World War One.

(02:14:24):
You know, world War One was worth fighting and it
was the reason why we fought it. And I remember
looking at this luncheon and I'm like, am on a
different planet, Like what.

Speaker 2 (02:14:32):
Can you explain to me? What that was.

Speaker 5 (02:14:34):
I mean, modern historians really can't say why we fought this.
You know, have Buchanan call it the Great Civil War
of the West, which was World War one and two,
just this blood letting other than some ritualistic bankers. War
was what was the security measure? What was what was
it threat here other than the wealth and control of

(02:14:56):
the very few?

Speaker 2 (02:14:57):
Yeah, I agree. Yeah. One of my favorite movie is
the first half of it is Sergeant Yorck. They gaslight
him and get him to go full you know, and
this war it's like, no, you're right the first time.
Don't let them trick you. You know, war is when
they tell us who to fight revolutions, when we figured
out for ourselves. So you've got a program that's coming

(02:15:17):
up after this show, don't you are you doing that?
You're in California, You're still going to do today's show.

Speaker 5 (02:15:22):
I'm still gonna do today's show live from the from
the green room here in Thousand Oaks. I'm going to
do the arder Burn radio transmission. So yeah, we'll be
live on Rumble and the America Plug Channel and live
on my ex at Tony Arterburn. And I can't believe
I still YouTube me and Jimmy kimmelau't YouTube. Now, I'll
be over at tony arderburn how about you too?

Speaker 2 (02:15:43):
So did they never take you off? They just they
just missed it or something. The sensors are.

Speaker 5 (02:15:48):
Well a long TI. I've had other channels gone, but
I just this time, I just used my name. He
just said I'm tony Ardburner at tony Arderburner. We'll see
how long they take to figure out that's me over there.

Speaker 2 (02:15:59):
And maybe we'll just maybe you got on there after
Linda left. She was the Yacharina or whatever she got
about me? Was that Susan WALJIKEI, yeah, that's right, Yeah,
Lenda Yacarina, she was at X. But well that's great.
So you're going to be on X and YouTube right
after this program, right doing a live broadcast their.

Speaker 5 (02:16:20):
Right at twelve twelve eastern eleven am Central time, will
be will be live. So come join us over there.
And I still want to reiterate too on Davidknight dot
Gold if you if anybody's in your listeners, there's a
there's a special tum running. It's just for David Night
listeners and my listeners. We've got some in house silver
silver deals, and it's a hodgepodge of stuff. Like I

(02:16:42):
said yesterday, we were buying a lot of silver. So
to take advantage of that. If there's in house pricing,
we can beat a lot of the major retailers right
now and give you a pass on a great deal.
Can't promise exactly melt on everything, but we can get
really close to spot wow on some items, and it
could be you know, ten ounce coins, five ounce bars

(02:17:03):
and pre nineteen sixty five US silver. But I'd even
hate to sell it. Honestly, I love I love selling it.
I make a little bit, but I'm trying to stockpile
right now because I think that price is going to
keep moving because the dollar, you know, the saying goes
gold and silver and you know have no top because

(02:17:24):
Fiat has no bottom.

Speaker 2 (02:17:26):
That's a good thing and very true. Thank you so
much for joining us, Tony, really do appreciate it. Again, Folks,
go to David Knight, I Goldbe'll take you Tony's wise
Wolf Gold let him know that you came through us.
Thank you so much, Tony. Thank you for your support
all right, folks, And I also want to remind you,
as we're talking about Warren Peace. Joe Clenti's Occupy Peace

(02:17:46):
is coming up this weekend. You can go to Occupy
Peace dot com and find out information about where that is. Kingston,
New York is a great place. That's where Guard and
I met in person when I was there back in
twenty twenty one, four years ago. And that's a great event.
I would highly recommend it, and we need to you know,
you can enjoy yourself if you're not too far away.

(02:18:08):
You can enjoy yourself in a nice environment there and
show your support for peace. At the same time, we're
gonna take a quick break and we will be right back.
Stay with us.

Speaker 6 (02:18:27):
Here's a little song I ought you might want to here.
In your you own nothing and be happy. Ain't got
no cash, ain got no car, not two empty four
boost O shots. In your own nothing.

Speaker 2 (02:18:50):
To be happy.

Speaker 6 (02:18:54):
You can't even buy in that store because of your
low social credit score. To own nothing would be happy.
You would own nothing and be happy. Be happy at

(02:19:19):
each a.

Speaker 1 (02:19:19):
Box defending the American Dream. You're listening to the David

(02:22:04):
Knight Show.

Speaker 6 (02:22:07):
Here news now at apsradionews dot com or get the
APS Radio app and never miss another story.

Speaker 3 (02:22:15):
Welcome back to the show. We got a lot of
comments s A. Miller one two three. They only claim
there are two sides in order to keep you divided.
Trump is a Democrat place on the Republican ticket to
blur the lines and pull the right towards the left.

Speaker 2 (02:22:27):
Well, he certainly has done that, hasn't he. He's done
a great piper from New York.

Speaker 3 (02:22:34):
I'm of the opinion technically there are only two sides.
There's right and there's wrong. But dividing them along you know,
political party lines.

Speaker 2 (02:22:40):
Is they're two sides of the same coin.

Speaker 1 (02:22:42):
I guess.

Speaker 3 (02:22:42):
Yeah, KWD sixty eight. I had a magga told me
yesterday that the titinal issue for Trump is to draw
out the pharmaceutical companies their IQ drops daily. Yes, four d.

Speaker 2 (02:22:53):
Change no attention to Epstein. Yeah, let's let's talk about
this and again much all yeah again, you know, how
how could you possibly believe that? And why would we
not look for something that has gone up at the
same time and exploded at the same time that the
autism has exploded. It's clearly the vaccines, and they even

(02:23:16):
RFK Junior said that once upon time. But now he's
being pulled back by Trump.

Speaker 3 (02:23:21):
Doug seven, people demand healthcare for all, and when CONVID
came around, suddenly the unvaccinated were deemed unfit to receive
medical care even when in an emergency. That's right. They
suddenly realized wait a minute there.

Speaker 2 (02:23:34):
Yeah, when I look at these care for everyone? Yeah,
well I look at these people like Kimmel, you know,
it's comment about let them die if they're not vaccinated.
And you look at Cobert and his dancing vaccine hypodermic needles,
and of course they did it cartoon wise, and then
they did and even more disgusting when later where they
had human dancers and they had guys with hairy legs

(02:23:56):
like they were dancing like they were rockets or something
that made me want to vomit every level. I mean,
not only you're trying to push people to die, but
you're doing it with your LGBT optics. It's just disgusting.

Speaker 3 (02:24:08):
It's amazing how much humor has become. Haha. Look, we're
doing something kind of gay, isn't it gay?

Speaker 2 (02:24:13):
Yeah?

Speaker 3 (02:24:14):
Yeah it is. Lieutenant Oracle, Florida is going to investigate
if I mecht and could be used to treat cancer.
But they still haven't made it over the counter.

Speaker 2 (02:24:23):
Well, yes, I had a person point out that here
in Tennessee, thanks to the great work of mister Sinder
Nicely Nicely, who unfortunately passed away. I missed that for
several months, so I didn't go back and cover that.
But we owe a great jet of gratitude to him

(02:24:44):
for things that he did in Tennessee here. But he
got that where it was purchasable over the counter. But
that's not the case everywhere. When I was talking about
it being cheap, people using that for cancer treatment along
with the Kedo diet and vitamin C. Intervenously, they're using
a couple of anti parasitics Ibermicican and finn bendesol, and

(02:25:08):
those you can buy the veterinary form of it.

Speaker 6 (02:25:11):
Now.

Speaker 2 (02:25:11):
I guess the issue is do they relax the standards
for veterinary medicines. Do they relax the standards for pet
food for example? I kind of think they do, certainly
for the food. I don't know. That's kind of you know,
you could eat dog food and dog biscuits or whatever,
but you know, the thought of it, and the reality

(02:25:31):
is that they may have relaxed standards for those things
as well.

Speaker 3 (02:25:35):
I don't know, Citizen of Americaca. I thought it was
going to revalue what little gold we had in Fort Knox,
but apparently we just have a bunch of IOUs written
on cocktail napkins and candy wrappers.

Speaker 2 (02:25:45):
It's been amazing. We should go through and do a
compilation of all of the crazy nonsense that Trump has
thrown at us just within nine months. You know, we're
going to take over Greenland, We're going to go to
war with Canada or whatever. It's just make him the
fifty first state. We're gonna go to Fort Knox and
look to see if the gold is there. It's just

(02:26:06):
been one theatrical professional wrestling nonsense piece of nonsense after
the other. It's really what it is. It's just WWE wrestling.
You know, he learned how to get viewership with WWE,
and that's the way he's running his presidency.

Speaker 3 (02:26:23):
Do you Resheimer? Easy five K gold by twenty thirty
could explode to ten k, but it's not the bet
KWD sixty eight silver has to hit two hundred dollars
an ounce to be adjusted for nineteen eighty high with inflation.
It could happen even without the Hunt Brothers guard Goldsmith.
I remember my mom mentioning that her dad didn't turn

(02:26:43):
in his gold on her FDR. The antiethorite arian thread
runs through generations.

Speaker 2 (02:26:48):
I think, oh it does, Yeah it does. I've seen that,
seen it myself. Yeah, give me your gold.

Speaker 3 (02:26:54):
I don't think I will. The collectibles are less reliable
than actual metal. I found out my own mistake years ago,
because in economic times people won't bid as high for
the collectible despite the metal in it.

Speaker 2 (02:27:05):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, that's right.

Speaker 3 (02:27:07):
Citizen Americ cocot Rambo. Eight Old men start at young
men fight it, nobody wins, everybody in the middle dies,
and nobody tells the truth.

Speaker 1 (02:27:15):
That's right.

Speaker 3 (02:27:15):
And Guard Goldsmith again says the wolf Pack is awesome,
And of course wolf Pack is with Tony rdburn is
set up and go to David Night dot gold to
get yourself some gold or silver. Wolf Pack is a
monthly subscription. He will send it to you. He's got
multiple different tiers.

Speaker 2 (02:27:30):
Are and you can set up on a monthly basis,
or you can just do it a one time thing.
You know, we've had people send some to us. As
a matter of fact, don't really do appreciate that. It's
a great way to save because if you put putting
money in a savings account, and a bank is a
guaranteed loser because of inflation and because they don't even
pretend to pay interest anymore on it. Even if they

(02:27:52):
were to pay interest, it wouldn't come close to the inflation. So, yeah,
you've got it. If you want to save, you want
to save in precious metal.

Speaker 3 (02:27:58):
It's always yield savings account. Oh yeah, I yield. I
bet I'm going to get rich.

Speaker 2 (02:28:06):
When inflation several times that. Well, as we're talking about liars,
somebody here is lying about Tom Homan because you have
stories coming out saying that there was an investigation into
him that was shut down, and they said it's part
of that investigation that he had accepted fifty thousand dollars cash.

(02:28:27):
He's still going to cash. I mean he could have
gotten fifty thousand dollars in.

Speaker 5 (02:28:34):
Gold.

Speaker 2 (02:28:34):
That would only be a few ounces, right Also.

Speaker 3 (02:28:36):
I mean fifty thousand dollars, that's not even that much anymore.

Speaker 5 (02:28:39):
What can you But.

Speaker 2 (02:28:40):
Anyway, he gets fifty thousand dollars in a grocery bag
given to him by some people who said that they
wanted him to approve contracts when he became head of
whatever he's going to become head of is I guess
it's not just ice, but it's anyway the border patrol.
I guess that's what it is. And so people are

(02:29:01):
asking when is that going to be It's going to
be investigated, and so you have Caroline Lovett, the Press
secretary for the White House, said that he never took
the fifty thousand. So somebody is lying, and the question
is who. There's no way that we can tell because
everybody who's weighing in on this, whether it's the New

(02:29:23):
York Times or their sources, or whether it's Susan Lovett
at the White House, they have all lied repeatedly about everything.
That's how you know that they're talking. Their lips are moving,
you know they're lying. So he said they found zero
evidence of illegal activity or criminal wrongdoings.

Speaker 5 (02:29:40):
She said, so.

Speaker 2 (02:29:42):
I don't think that this is going to necessarily die.
We'll have to see what happens with it. But let's
take a look at the war because a lot of
people are lying about the war as well. There was
an interesting article on anti War asking what does Trump
want from Venezuela? Do they have to do to get
him to not attack their country. And it reminds me

(02:30:05):
very much of what people were saying about the invasion
of Panama under George HW. Bush, when you had loud
speakers coming in and telling everybody get out of the area.
We're going to be destroying this area. And it's like,
what area are they talking about? You know, such a
small such a small country and city that you could
basically hear this everywhere. So it's like, we still don't
know where they're going to be attacking or why we

(02:30:26):
have no idea. Reporting has recently emerged that the US
is considering direct strikes on Venezuela that could increase volatility
in the region and the risk of war. Well, I
would say that direct strikes are war under the pretext
of disrupting the flow of drugs in the US by
Venezuela and drug cartels. The US has militaries the waters

(02:30:46):
off the coast of Venezuela, flooding them with AEGIS guided
missile destroyers, a nuclear powered fast track submarine, P eight
spy planes, F thirty five fighter jets, and of course
American forces have blown up several boats. Now I think
the count is three of them. But I'm starting to
lose count of how many people, how mean boats he

(02:31:06):
has killed and summarily executed the people. The Trump administration
has yet to offer evidence for its claim. They have
neither publicly identified who the eleven people who were killed
or by the boat were, nor identified the drugs that
they were supposedly caring. And Congress has not been briefed,

(02:31:27):
and Congress hasn't asked to be brief They don't even
care about this. Marco Rubio said the boat was probably
headed to Trinidad or some other country in the Caribbean. Well,
Trump said it was bound for the US, and that's
why they destroyed it, because it was in defense of
the US. It turns out, however, that it was headed
back to Venezuela. US officials familiar with the operation I've

(02:31:50):
now told The New York Times that having spotted the
military aircraft stalking it, the boat had already altered its
course and appeared to have turned around before the bean.
The twenty nine second video that Trump posted on social
media spliced together several clips just like the Epstein tape,
but edited out the boat turning around. Despite the lack

(02:32:13):
of imminent threat, the aircraft, either an attack helicopter or
an MQ nine Reaper drone repeatedly hit the vessel before
it sank. So again, you know, if he's editing the
Epstein tape, if he's editing this extra judicial killing of his,

(02:32:33):
that's worse than what he accused sixty Minutes of doing.
Remember he accused them because they had you know, they
filmed a long interview with Lala Harris, and they aired
part of it on sixty Minutes, and they took another
part of it and used it for the trailer. And
he goes, so you're editing this stuff. It's like, yeah,

(02:32:54):
that's the way it's done. Everybody does it that way.
But it didn't substantially change anything, no matter how they
edited this thing. That could never make her look like
she had a brain, and she'd lost the election. And
yet here he is, his administration is editing the Epstein
tape and we have the metadata that shows that that's

(02:33:14):
the case, and editing this video that he put out
boasting about how he killed people about due process. The
Trumpet administration has claimed the right to supplant the National
Guard in law enforcement with the military and lethal force
on the grounds that the drug cartels are terrorist organizations
who pose a threat to the national security of the
US because the drugs they bring into the US kill Americans.

(02:33:37):
Rubio has insisted that the speed boat was quote an
immediate threat to the United States, except that it had
turned around and so it wasn't. As a matter of fact,
even though he says it's an eminent threat, he admits
that it was on its way to some other nation
in the Caribbean, Setting aside the legitimacy of the terrorist justification.
If the boat had already turned around, the immediate threat

(02:34:00):
argument is blown out of the water. If someone is retreating,
where is the imminent threat? Said Rear Admiral Donald Gooter,
a retired top judge Advocate General for the Navy from
two thousand to two thousand and two. He said, where
is the self defense? They're gone if it ever existed,
which I don't think they did. Another Rear Admiral James McPherson,

(02:34:25):
who was also a top judge advocate general he was
for the Navy from two thousand and four to two
thousand and six, added, if in fact, you can fashion
a legal argument that says these people were getting ready
to attack us through the introduction of cocaine or whatever.
If they turned back, then the threat is gone away.

(02:34:46):
The Trump administration is considering going further. However, they're not
turning back, and more significant, with more strikes on Venezuela.
The strikes could take the form of either shooting down
of Venezuela military aircraft or bombing Venezuelan military airfields, which,
by the way, I will interject, they could come into

(02:35:06):
direct conflict with Russian personnel who are still running their
air defense installations that are there. Such action could be
taken in two situations, if Venezuela threatens US forces off
of its coast, or if Venezuelan President Maduro does not
enhance his administration's efforts against drug cartels, which is why

(02:35:27):
you have anti war saying, so what does Trump want
them to do? They point out that in terms of
enhancing their efforts against drug cartels, that the Venezuelan's collaboration
in the fight against the drug war so called and
drug trafficking has been recognized as among the best in

(02:35:49):
South America according to former Executive director of the UN
Office for Drugs and Remember, the drug war is a
UN war. They were the ones who came up with
this stuff. They were the ones who created the four schedules.
They were the ones who were complaining the loudest. When
California legalized marijuana medical marijuana, the UN was like, you

(02:36:10):
can't do that. And that's that, along with the interviews
I was doing with law enforcement against prohibition got me.
That's when I understood that the War on drugs is
not something that Richard Nixon created. He took the credit
for it, but it was something that was handed to
him by the UN. It was he was pushing a
UN agenda, just like the Agenda twenty thirty or something

(02:36:33):
like that. It's reprehensible. Why would we push a UN
agenda for so long, for fifty years? Well, it's just
like the climate change agenda. Maduro had ordered the more
than doubling of Venezuelan forces to monitor drug trafficking. In
addition to the ten thousand troops already deployed, the Venezuelan
military is ordering an additional fifteen thousand to quote determine

(02:36:55):
and verify the absence of illicit crops and to blog
the area also of possible drug trafficking. So of all
the Central and South American countries, they have arguably done
more than anybody else's stop the drug trade. And there
is no fentanyl that's being manufactured there or transiting and

(02:37:16):
coming from Venezuela. So everything that the Trump administration is
telling us about this is a lie. That's why I
say when you look at the Tom Homan thing and
the bag of cash, is that true the denials? Are
they true? Or is that another bowl faced lie? What
makes a question of what Venezuela is supposed to do
to appease Trump is made more difficult, and that there

(02:37:40):
is nothing that Venezuela can do. The US is demanding
that Venezuela make a course correction to correct a problem
that does not exist. Again, when we look at the
UN's World Drug Report this year, they address they say
that Venezuela quote has consolidated its status as a territory
free from the cultivation of coca leaves, cannabis and similar crops.

(02:38:06):
They continue by saying only fifty five percent of Colombian
drugs transit through Venezuela. The UN report says it does
not mention Venezuela even once as a corridor for the
international drug trade. So Trump administration has offered no evidence
that the destroyed speedboat was carrying drugs or drug smuggling,

(02:38:26):
or that it was on its way to American shores.
The Maduro administration has already addressed the American demands and
has increased its efforts against the drug growing and trafficking
that was never a problem in the first place. Nevertheless,
the US Trump is threatening further military strikes on Venezuela,

(02:38:46):
raising the hard to answer question of what is Venezuela
supposed to do? Well, maybe the only thing they could
do to head this off would be to turn over
the oil fields to Trump, because I think that's what
he's after. He's not after the cocoa. However they grow.
It feels, you know, we were after the poppy feels

(02:39:07):
in Afghanistan and we use that to increase the supply
of opioids that were there. But the only thing they
could do is just hand over the oil to him.
And as I said earlier, you know this du Terte
who is in their National criminal court. He killed. They're
only coming after him for slightly more people than Trump

(02:39:30):
is killed already in these boat attacks. And yet that's
only a subset of the people that were actually killed
by du terte in this war on drug stuff. It
truly is insane. When we look at the War of drugs,
they estimated more than thirty thousand people. And this is
an estimate from the prosecutors. They just have hard evidence

(02:39:51):
for seventy six of those killings and arrested back in March.
A proposed war authorization could allow Trump to target sixty
plus countries. I mentioned this earlier. I said, this is
how powerful these cartels that were created by the War
on drugs. It's how powerful they have become. They've gotten

(02:40:12):
into every kind of criminal enterprise, and they've gotten into
pretty much every country. And now you have an insanely
broad draft authorization for the Use of Military Force au
MF could provide the president with wide latitude to go
after supposed narco terrorists. They have combined the failed war

(02:40:34):
on terror with the failed War on drugs to come
up with narco terrorists and.

Speaker 3 (02:40:42):
Two negatives make a positive.

Speaker 2 (02:40:44):
So well, the question is, you know, when you look
at this war stuff, why is Trump pushing for control
of Bogrum Air Force Base in Afghanistan. Is you're trying
to restart the Afghanistan war as well. I wouldn't be surprised.
So the US war on drugs is escalated rapidly over
the last month with Venezuela and so forth. How far

(02:41:07):
Washington should go in his new counter narcotics campaign has
been the source of controversy within the Trump administration. The
DEA proposed the use of the US military to attack
cartels within Mexican territory during a White House meeting earlier
this year. Remember that officials from the Defense Department and
other agencies reportedly objected in part because the executive branch

(02:41:30):
lacked sufficient legal authorization to do so well. Sufficient legal
authorization is something that has never stopped Trump so far.
Why would that stop him? And it looks like they're
going to turn around for that, but they may try
to have a little bit of legal cover. This is
coming from Representative Corey Mills in Florida. A proposal reportedly

(02:41:51):
brought forth by him for a new authorization for the
ust of military force to be aimed at quote narco
terrorists and circulating around Washington last week just as a backup,
if you remember, the Authorization for the Use of Military
Force legislation was passed in response to the inside attack
of nine to eleven laid the groundwork for the so

(02:42:14):
called Global War on Terror that became the basis for
the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. Because it has extremely
broad language, the two thousand and one Authorization for the
Use of Military Force has since been used to justify
military intervention. Military attacks, folks, that's what we're talking about.

(02:42:36):
Not intervention. We're not trying to help somebody get off
of drugs. We're doing a drug intervention. Yeah, with bombs.
So they they've used it to justify military attacks in
twenty two countries already. And now that we've abandoned the constitution,

(02:42:57):
this is how we do wars. Now give a authorization
for the use of military force on a broad category.
We go to war with a tactic terror. We go
to war with drugs, inanimate objects, okay, We even confiscate
property saying that the property has violated their rules about drugs.

(02:43:18):
We don't charge the person, we just steal their property.
So now Corey Mills out of Vlorida wants to expand
this and make it even broader his new authorization for
the Use of Military force. They put a sunset law
on it. You know that something is bad when they
say well, we'll only try for five years. They know

(02:43:38):
how bad and overreaching it is, and that's just kind
of a pullback. It's a promise we can get rid
of it in five years, and you know what will happen.
They put it out five years because then people get
used to it, and it's a boil the frogs process.
So after five years, oh, yeah, we've had this, and
look we're still here, so let's reauthorize it again. The

(02:44:00):
authorization does not identify specific targets. It contains no geographic
restrictions either. Harvard professor Jack Goldsmith said that the proposal
is insanely broad.

Speaker 5 (02:44:16):
That was his term.

Speaker 2 (02:44:17):
He said, it's essentially an open ended war authorization against
an untold number of countries and organizations and persons that
the President could deem to be within its scope. This
version of the AUMF attributed to Mills would give the
president the ability to use quote all necessary and appropriate

(02:44:38):
force against those nations, organizations, or persons the President determines
are designated narco terrorists, including those who provide financing or
support to narco terrorists. So yes, they go through and
they talk about how if you just look at the
Sinaloa cartel. It operates in forty seven different countries. And

(02:45:00):
they said, you know, it's not just a Cinaloa cartel,
you got some other ones as well. They operate in
a lot of countries as well. I think that this
AUMF that is being put around by Mills is specifically
targeted towards giving Trump a legal prevarication for going after Venezuela.
But it is kind of interesting. I mean, we look

(02:45:21):
at the places where the Cineloa drug cartel is in.
It's not just Mexico or Central or South America's places
like Albania, small distant countries like Albania and the Democratic
Republic of Congo in Africa, France, Germany, we could attack
them if we want, Ghana, Guinea Basa. I don't even

(02:45:45):
never even heard of that country. Ireland, Ireland, Cineloa cartel
and Ireland.

Speaker 3 (02:45:50):
You'd think they'd stand out a little bit in Ireland.
Do you think these guys wouldn't be hard to find there?

Speaker 2 (02:45:55):
New Zealand? It's just everywhere with.

Speaker 4 (02:45:58):
Aout the immigration, it's all the same.

Speaker 2 (02:46:02):
Yeah, that's right. Yeah, we're going to homogenize everybody. Serbia, Slovakia, Spain,
the UK and Belize Canada, so forth right. If the
proposed AMF has targeted the Cinealoa cartel alone, it theoretically
authorized US military intervention in at least forty two nations.
But this is only one of many cartels that have

(02:46:25):
been created by the War on drugs the UNS War
on Drugs. Taken together, the combined forces of the proposed
AUMF and the terrorist designation that have already been assigned
to specific cartels could allow the US president to intervene
in almost every nation in the Continental Americas. Taken literally,

(02:46:45):
it could even be abused to justify military intervention within
the United States, as the terrorists designated MS thirteen gang
was created in Los Angeles and maintains expensive operations throughout
the US. Again, is that what he's going to do

(02:47:05):
with the military that he's putting in all these left
wing areas. That's in California, LA. So yeah, let's use
the Let's put the military in LA, and let's use
them to go after the MS thirteen gangs. Trump is
laying out a framework, and everybody says, oh, he wouldn't
be crazy enough to use that. I say he is.

(02:47:26):
I say he is one hundred percent crazy enough to
do the worst case scenarios. We have seen it over
and over again. This is not speculation, it's not projection,
and it's not even a prediction. It's history, and he
could do it again. There's still a whole host of
constitutional protections against extra judicial targeting of persons within the US,

(02:47:48):
which Trump of course will ignore and MAGA will applaud it.
This is the best juice of our military. JD. Vans
will say, just as he said when they blew up
these boats near Venezuela. US authorities have long tried to
expand their power by blending together the war on drugs
and the war on terror, creating the term narco terrorism.

(02:48:10):
The newly proposed AUMF could therefore be applied to many
traditional terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda, Hesbalah, Taliban, etc. So
once you combine the terrorist organizations with the narco organizations,
we basically have authority to be given the president authority

(02:48:31):
to go to war against anybody on his own declaration.
The bill would create justifications for the White House to
engage in offensive military activity in more than sixty nations.
While there's currently no indication that the Congress is eager
to take this up and pass it. An extremely broad
new military force authorization. If it were to become law,

(02:48:55):
would fully merge two of the largest policy failures in
US history, these two wars on drugs and terror. Yeah,
it's interesting. We've had a war on poverty, a war
on drugs, a war on terror. We've had a war
in Vietnam, We've had a war in Afghanism. Award in
I rack whether the war is literal or metaphorical, we

(02:49:17):
have lost all these wars. H So, I guess we
should just call it the epic fail So the US
sold its longest war with a bodyguard of lives. That's
the headline from Reason magazine. This is about a new
documentary that has come out talking about Afghanistan, asking why

(02:49:39):
the media failed to push back. Now, money and power
kept America's longest war alive long after it was lost.
I believe that we were in, you know, for the
longest time, even after they came in and again, you know,
you have this massive shock and awe and there's basically
no military resistance there. But then they tried to occu

(02:50:00):
by the country, and you know then that they're going
to lose that asymmetric war they always do. But why
would they occupy Afghanistan. I've always believed that it was
because of the opium that just accelerate, it just exploded.
The Taliban had been working against opium, and when the
US military came in, they were guarding the fields. That

(02:50:22):
was reported and filmed by was the guy Heraldo Rivera,
And you know, I've played that many times. But I
think also it was an area that was rich in lithium.
And of course there's not going to be any government
there to tell you that you've got to be careful
in terms of how you extract it, because lithium extraction

(02:50:42):
is very damaging to the areas environmentally.

Speaker 5 (02:50:46):
But you just go in there and.

Speaker 2 (02:50:48):
Rip that place to shreds. I always felt that we're
keeping that prolonged position there because of lithium and opium.
But now Trump wants to go back. Is it because
of the lithium and the opium? I don't know. He
wants to restart this evidently bullying them over Bagram Air
Force Base, which, by the way, that would have been
the logical place to evacuate from, but instead they left

(02:51:13):
Bagram Air Force Base and they went to the Commercial
Air Force Base, which was vulnerable that's why there were
so many problems when they got out. Everything about this
is absolutely insane. And so the new documentary is called
The Bodyguard of Lies, a look at the Afghan War
and the lessons that the public desperately needs to learn

(02:51:33):
from it. Except the public never learns any lessons from
any of these things, just like we didn't learn from
the Covid War either, Rumsfeld, admitting that they were not
going to be honest with the American people, and he
reminds us that within six months of the nine to
eleven attacks, the US had essentially destroyed al Qaeda's capacity
to attack US, but instead of leaving Washington chose two

(02:51:56):
more decades of occupation, strategic confusion, and widespread corruption. So
that's the basis of that documentary again, a Bodyguard of Lies.
So when you look at how we win these wars,
right you look at the failed war on drugs, the
failed war on terrorism, all of the failed wars, is

(02:52:18):
there any wonder that we fail when you look at this.
We've had a couple of narratives about drones. First, there
were the drones that supposedly flew into Poland from Ukraine,
and yes, those were Russian drones. Then we had following
that in a few days there was an incident where
there were two or three drones that would turn their

(02:52:40):
lights on turn them off. In fact, it was like
a harassment campaign. Whether it was done by an individual
or whether it was done by a nation state, there's
no way that anybody can tell. They never caught the
person that was doing it. They simply said, well, this
is very professional, so it must be the Russians. Well
that has been followed up now just yesterday several more

(02:53:01):
drones flying the area. So now Denmark is saying we
want to invoke Article four of the NATO Treaty so
that we can go to war with Russia. But let's
take a look at the very first one, the one
that Donald Tusk, the Polish Prime Minister, tried to use
to push us into World War II, world War three.
This is from RT headline is a million dollar fiasco.

(02:53:25):
NATO fires sidewinders at two thousand dollars drones. Western Europe's
leaders waive the no flys own banners while America shrugs.

Speaker 5 (02:53:37):
And this is.

Speaker 2 (02:53:39):
The essence of these wars. Any asymmetric war is this
exactly this type of thing. Why did a handful of
foam plastic drones leave NATO in such a panic because
NATO is the fear mongering because they went a war.
Why as Poland now proposing to establish a no fly

(02:54:00):
zone over Ukraine? It's been a long time since the
West entertained ideas as reckless as these. Foreign Prime Minister
Sikorski broke what has been a useful tradition of keeping
quiet when he suggested that NATO should impose a no
fly zone. The last time we heard this nonsense was
at the very start of the Russian Ukraine War, where
Zelenski demanded that NATO shoot down every Russian missile and

(02:54:23):
aircraft over Ukraine. Estonia cheered him on, but NATO leaders
dismissed it. They knew then what should be obvious now.
A no fly zone would mean war with Russia, which, folks,
is exactly what they want and what they've been pushing
for since the nineteen nineties. No one in the Alliance
dared risk it in twenty twenty two, but so why

(02:54:45):
bring it up again to point out its political theater.
The trigger was an incident in which a group of
UAVs entered Polish airspace. Western European politicians seized on the episode,
trying to extract maximum political mileage. Decisive action is the
last thing on their minds. The incident revealed just how

(02:55:05):
unprepared NATO is for modern warfare. You know, Trump insulted Putin,
trying to shame him into coming to the table. Perhaps
that's the most charitable interpretation of what he had to
say at the UN. But he said, oh, they should
have won this in a couple of days. Well, you
should talk when you look at the way NATO handled

(02:55:27):
this supposed invasion of small drones. Nineteen unarmed decoy drones
that had no cameras and no remote control. These things
are just on autopilot. They crossed the Polish skies. Their
sole purpose had been to commit suicide against air defenses.

(02:55:48):
They were just there as decoys before any real strike.
NATO managed to shoot down only four these things that
are not flying them. They don't have any evasive maneuvers though,
electronic countermeasures, nothing, and they still only able to shoot
down for them. The rest of them wandered across, pulling unhindered,

(02:56:11):
some traveling nearly five hundred kilometers before running out of
fuel and falling from the sky. It's about three hundred
miles and their panic, NATO scrambled F thirty five fighters
armed with sidewinder missiles, each one of these missiles costing
four hundred and seventy thousand dollars the price of a

(02:56:31):
single decoy drone no more than three thousand dollars. To
bring down a handful of foam contraptions worth between eight
thousand and twelve thousand dollars, NATO spent close to one
point nine million dollars. What's even worse about this, folks,
I talked about it before, at the very beginning, they said, look,
look at this home that was destroyed by one of

(02:56:53):
these drones falling down on it. And they knew at
the time when they put that out, they had already
known for twenty four hours that that home was not
hit by a drone. It was hit by one of
the F thirty five sidewinder missiles, which not only missed
its target, but when it hit the ground it was
a dud, and so it just did kinetic damage to it.

(02:57:15):
There's no explosives involved, so they miss with a dud
missile that cost a half a million dollars. This is
the NATO clown show. These are the people who are
kicking sand in Putin's face hoping that we can get
into World War III. Folks, you better start preparing for yourself, seriously.

(02:57:35):
Get the manual, the Civil Defense Manual. Start preparing in
terms of your independence because these people are absolutely crazy
and suicidal.

Speaker 3 (02:57:45):
And you can find the Civil Defense Manual at jackloss
and Books dot com. Now we've only got a little
bit of time left, so I'm going to be go
ahead and cutting you off and mind people that if
you like to show you can support it multiple different ways.
You go to Davidnight dot news to see all the
ways you can support it. Their subscribe star dot com,
forward slash, the David Knight Show. We got a lot

(02:58:06):
of different tiers set up there. One of them may
fit your budget. We ask that you go check that out.
There's also the po box, which is PO Box nine
ninety four Kodak Tennessee three seven seven six' four and
you address that To David. Knight you can also use
cash app or zell there's a bitcoin address as. Well
we appreciate all the support you guys have given. Us

(02:58:27):
you can also. Donate we'll getting.

Speaker 2 (02:58:28):
Close to the end of the month as, well not
close to the full full point.

Speaker 3 (02:58:32):
Though you can donate On rumble as, well and we
really do appreciate everyone that does. That you can also
subscribe over on kick and real, QUICKLY i want to
run through these comments that we've. Got i'm gonna do it.
Quick doug doub, Seven Frank nicely was a Classic southern.
GENTLEMAN i really appreciate what he was trying to do
for the. People Frank nicely was a very good, man
very great.

Speaker 2 (02:58:52):
Man, yeah he was a was a great. Guy And
i've never seen such a zero of a candidate somebody
who was helped with money from outside of, state who
had absolutely no. Background will you talk about somebody who
is a chameleon. Carpetbacker he is From. Tennessee but you

(02:59:13):
know they got money Against frank, now, yeah the, money, yeah.
Exactly i'm not talking About. Frank i'm talking about the
smear campaign conducted Against Frank nicely by the establishment powers
that They're and of Course Frank nicely tried to stop
outside money from being involved in funding these state. Campaigns
he didn't get his Fellow republicans to vote for, that

(02:59:34):
and he was the casualty of that in the next.
Election it's to outside, money money outside of the state
when to make sure they maintained that influence by punishing
anybody who would push back against. Them, yeah he was
a real hero to, me so we're sorry to see him.

Speaker 3 (02:59:50):
Gone, well thank you all for tuning in today and
then you appreciate. It he will be back tomorrow and
we'll see you.

Speaker 2 (02:59:56):
Then thank, you have a good. Day the common. Man

(03:00:17):
they created Common core and dumbed down our. Children they
created common, past track and control. Us They're commons project
to make sure the commoners own nothing and the communist.
Future they see the common man as, simple unsophisticated. Ordinary
but each of us has worth and dignity created in

(03:00:39):
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 is what

(03:01:00):
they want to. Hide please share the information and links
you'll find at The davidnightshow dot. Com thank you for,
Listening thank you for. Sharing if you can't support us,
financially please keep us in your prayers D davidnightshow dot
com

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

The Joe Rogan Experience

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Thu Episode #2103: Trump’s Ukraine Flip & NATO’s Drone Panic: Sleepwalking Into World War III

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

The Joe Rogan Experience

All Episodes

Thu Episode #2103: Trump’s Ukraine Flip & NATO’s Drone Panic: Sleepwalking Into World War III

Stuff You Should Know