Tue Episode #2096: Kirk’s Death Exploited: Internet ID, Cancel Culture & the End of Liberty

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. As o' clock
strikes thirteen, it's Tuesday, the sixteenth of September, Year of
Our Lord, twenty twenty five. Well, today we're going to

(00:51):
begin with sissy football. That's a Trump's reaction to a
new rule change at the NFL, and we're going to
take a look at how everything all the rules are
being changed, including how it's now brave to shoot first
on people and boats. And I got to say, I

(01:12):
think it's a very dangerous idea. Where does that end
if we're going to get rid of the rule of law.
Everything that Trump does is predicated on the declaration of
an emergency and then dispensing with the rule of law,
making himself a dictator. It's not a joke. The Left
attacked him so much about this, calling him whittler so

(01:33):
many times. He's now been inoculated from criticism of this
by MAGA, and we need to pay attention, especially after
they come after the First Amendment, which is what they're doing.
So we're going to begin with sissy football, and we'll
move on to sissy dictators. We'll be right back. Well,

(02:10):
there's a new rule in the NFL, and Trump lashed
out about it because he thinks it had to do
with his team losing a game over the weekend. He said,
it is quote ridiculous looking, this new kickoff rule for
the NFL. He called it sissy football. The dynamic kickoff
rule moved touchbacks to thirty five yard line instead of
the thirty It's intended to increase the rate of kickoff

(02:32):
returns and reduce the rate of injuries. Confusion around the
rule seemed to be at the center of a touchdown
gifted to the Seattle Seahawks and their thirty one seventeen
victory of the Pittsburgh Steelers on Sunday. One touchdown was
not the margin of difference there. The NFL had to
get rid of that ridiculous looking has to get rid
of that ridiculous looking new kickoff rule, he said before.

(02:57):
He's noted before that he's the Steelers in how can
they make here's the key, how can they make such
a big and sweeping change so easily and so quickly. Yeah,
That's what I've been saying about all the things that
Trump's been doing, especially with terrorists and other things like that,
how can you make these large determinations arbitrarily quickly? And

(03:20):
then let's make it worse. Let's say that if we
were to treat this like the teriffs, then what would
happen is on one kickoff the rule to apply. On
another kickoff it would not apply, and maybe after the
second half it wouldn't apply, or something like that. It
would be constantly changing. He says. It's at least as

(03:40):
dangerous as a normal kickoff. And it looks like hell,
he says, yeah, So I guess we could also say,
you know, what about when do we get to make
the arbitrary rules that instead of the Coastguard interdicting ships
as they have been doing for a long time in
the war on drugs that they don't have any constitutional
authority for. How about instead of stopping the ships searching them,

(04:03):
if they find drugs, they take the drugs, and they
put the people in jail. How about if instead of
doing that, you just blow them out of the water
on suspicion, or let's say that you go a little
bit further, you stop, you look, you find drugs, and
then you line them all up on the side of
the boat and shoot them all summary execution. Well, he says,

(04:24):
sissy football was bad for America. Dictatorial rule by a president,
so called president. Let's understand, she calls himself a president,
Booten calls himself a president Maduro, and Venezuela calls himself
a president. Calling herself a president doesn't make any difference whatsoever.
It's how you act. All these people, including Trump, act

(04:48):
as dictators. So he says, who comes up with these
ridiculous ideas? Yeah, it was this due to Peter Navarro?
Did he come up with this new sissy football rule? Travis?
What do you think?

Speaker 2 (05:00):
Maybe they could so little about sports in general? This
is all they might as always speaking Greek, they're saying,
like the touchback, this moving the goal, moving it backwards?
Who cares? Who sits here? Who who's going to sit
here and read this and get worked up about it?
How does Donald Trump have the time to care about
what the NFL is doing? Well, because if he's actually
the figure, if he was actually the president doing things,

(05:22):
you would think the NFL would be so far off
his radar. He would learn about this after his term
is over. Like, wait a minute, they changed this? When
does that happen? How does he have the time because
he's not doing anything. Once again, it's these faceless bureaucrats
behind him that actually run things.

Speaker 1 (05:38):
Yeah, so I don't know. Maybe who comes up with
these rule changes. Is it somebody like Peter Navarro. Maybe
they could call it, rename it the Navarro Football League
because it operates like the White House.

Speaker 2 (05:49):
I just don't I've never been into sports. You know,
if my friends are watching a game, I can sit
around and enjoy with him. That's just because they're having
a good time, you know. It's about the fact that
other people are there enjoying it. It's about, you know,
what they're doing. The sport itself has no interest for me.
My wife and I went out to lunch over the
weekend and there was football. College football came on and

(06:12):
there was just a group, you know, multiple different groups
of people there, and every time anything happened, they would
just yell, we're in a restaurant. I'm trying to enjoy
my food, and you people are just like, oh, we
hit him, Oh we got him. Just please let me
have my burger in peace, please. Yes, I get that
the large man ran the ball. Oh yeah, he tackled
that guy. He sure did. You're very observant. It's in

(06:34):
high definition. I don't think you would have missed it.
You don't need to call it out for me.

Speaker 1 (06:37):
We went to a professional baseball game once we lived
in Houston. Karen's employer gave her tickets, and I'd never
been to a professional baseball game before or since. The
thing that I was surprised at was that even though
we were at the game, we weren't at a restaurant
or something. We were at the game, and the people
who were there couldn't care less about half thing on

(06:58):
the field.

Speaker 2 (06:59):
I'll figure out what happens.

Speaker 1 (07:00):
They're chatting with each other, they're eating, they're doing all
sorts of things, but they're not really paying any attention.
So it's it's vital. But they have those big replay
screens that are there.

Speaker 2 (07:11):
I also want to make it clear, it's like, if
you enjoy football, I'm not, you know, dunking on you.
I find it weird if it's your entire existence, Like
you sit there and you agonize over these stats. So
how many points do this guy converge? How what's his
you know, ratios and this and that that I find strange.
But if you like to sit down and watch a
football game. I have my own distractions. I like playing
video games. So I'm not saying you're not allowed to

(07:33):
enjoy things. You know, if that's what you find fun,
I'm not going to fault you for it. I just
you know, personally, I would like to eat my burger
and I have some. You know, guy my age screaming
right next to me.

Speaker 1 (07:45):
Well, right after he complains about the sissy NFL rule
and how they change that rule, he then turns his
attention to quarterly reporting by companies and he wants to
change that. How does he get to do that? You know,
he says, well, we don't need to have reports every quarter.
And he says this, it's it's unclear why Trump decided

(08:06):
to complain about this long standing business practice, but it's
possible that his motivation and suggesting moving to a semi
annual reporting model is to hide the negative impact of
his tariff policies, says The Independent. And he had also said,
you know, China has a fifty to one hundred year
view on management. We're doing ours on a quarterly basis.

(08:27):
That's not good and so forth. So again, you know,
why is he focusing on minutia like that, but also
apply the same things to something he cares about football.
He doesn't care about the constitution and the rule of law.
That's the bottom line. And then, of course, the other
issue that came out out of football this weekend was

(08:48):
Travis Kelce was very angry and screaming at his teammates
who are playing very poorly, and people are saying, is
that the poor play or is there something going on
between him and his fiancee Taylor Swift because we don't
see her at the game. Is he upset because she's
not at the game. It's all turned into a soap
opera now, right, Well, it turns out that she didn't

(09:09):
want to be seen. Shortly after the game, some people
posted the fact that she came instead of in the
past where she would kind of come in and wanted
to be seen. She came in behind the screen, and
some of the Swifties came out and said, oh, that's
a bulletproof screen. No evidence said it is a bulletproof screen.

(09:31):
But she did have her assistant and she has a
large entourage of people who are setting the screen up,
rolling it on the ground as you see here, and
then she has security all over the place behind the screen,
so you can't see exactly where she is.

Speaker 2 (09:46):
They're just like us, folks.

Speaker 1 (09:50):
We were talking about that this morning. I was talking
about it with Karen and I said, you know, it
has finally dawned on some of these thirty something year
old billionaire celebrities that life is not promised to them
on a daily basis. They're scared to death. But the
reality is that we should understand that that's the case
for all of us. It doesn't matter whether you're a
celebrity or not. It doesn't matter if you're young or old.

(10:13):
Young people are dying all the time, and so we've
got to all live our lives and light of that
and live it in a way that we are not afraid.
And that I think is a lesson from Charlie Kirk.
But are everybody's picking up the wrong lessons from Charlie
Kirk's life. They don't want free speech, they don't want debate. Instead,

(10:34):
everybody wants to cower and fear and purge the enemy,
which was the approach of the people who opposed Charlie.
That's why he was at the universities, because the universities,
he understood is where this is being manufactured. It's the
school system. He knew where the problem was coming from.
He went to where the problem was coming from, and
he confronted the problem. And the people who are doing

(10:56):
this now are not doing that at all. A matter
of fact point, take a look at what's going on
in the Charlie Kirk world. The report is that the
alleged assassins trans boyfriend hates Conservatives and Christians. Well, is
that really news that's coming from Breitbart? We have seen
that trans genders are always portrayed by the mainstream media

(11:21):
as the victims of hate, not the perpetrators of hate,
because it's they're the ones who can show up have
so much hate that they can show up at a
school and shoot a nine year old in the face.
This is unbelievable. How to derange these people are? How
can they.

Speaker 2 (11:40):
Possibly want to mutilate their own body?

Speaker 1 (11:43):
That's right? That did they possibly blame a nine year
old child for anything that they had experienced from adults,
even if it was hate that was there.

Speaker 2 (11:53):
They're just as you point, They're full of hate and
they are It is demonic. I fully believe these people
are demonic, oppressed, possessed, they are surrounded by demons and
being influenced by them. You have to be completely insane
to want to mutilate yourself and to want to shoot children.

Speaker 1 (12:12):
I think the plural pronouns is very, very aproposed. They
are they and them and all this stuff. So one
of his relatives, who wanted to remain anonymous, said he
hated us. He was not raised that way, but he
over the years has become really detached and radicalized. Everybody
agrees about that. The question is what radicalized him and

(12:36):
what the Utah governor, Republican Cox is saying, and many
others are saying, Oh, it's the Internet that radicalize them,
Is it really? Or is it the school system? He
left home when he was seventeen.

Speaker 2 (12:52):
A nuanced take on this, So I believe, you know,
you get into school and that's what starts the radicalization.
But with the way the algorithm's work that continually feeds
you more and more and more of what you want
to see, of what you're interested in. Yeah, and so
it's a self it's a self propagating feedback loop. Once
you get down into a certain type of rabbit hole,

(13:12):
breaking out of that it requires an actual effort and
as a general rule, most people don't go searching for
things that are going to conflict with their worldview. They
want it reaffirmed.

Speaker 3 (13:22):
I agree.

Speaker 2 (13:23):
So you get in there, they start feeding you Marxist doctrine,
Marxist dogma, and the algorithm picks up on that and
it starts feeding that back to you.

Speaker 1 (13:30):
And we know that's the way the chatbots work.

Speaker 2 (13:32):
We've been told that, But you can really see a
creative version of a AI chatbot just obsequiously telling you
everything you want to hear. YouTube will feed you content
creators that are going to tell you the exact same
thing you want to hear.

Speaker 1 (13:43):
Yeah, you can see that very easily with YouTube. I'll
go in and I'll look for a video about a
specific topic or something. Then all of a sudden, I'm
getting videos sent to me all the time about that
topic because I know you watched that.

Speaker 2 (13:53):
On that audio on this But how would you like
every video ever created? Yeah, occasionally I'll watch a survival
really video or something like that, you know, surviving out
in the wild, and then for days later, it's just, hey,
there's a new survival video here. How would you like
to see what it takes to survive on an island
with no gear. It's like, I don't think that's going
to be me.

Speaker 1 (14:11):
But you know, well, you know, I think though that
you know, when you look at all these different factors, yes,
they're all a part of the culture that we live in.
You know, the Internet is a part of that culture,
and as you point it out, it will start to
focus in on your interests and amplify them. But it's
also you know, entertainment, of course is there. And but

(14:34):
I think that the influence of the schools is unique
in the sense that they have the children for eight
hours a day or so, and there's not only is
it the institution that is pushing this in the person
in authority at the front of the classroom, member of
the Milgrim Experiment, but it's also the people who are
there in the classroom with them, the Ash Experiment, and

(14:56):
so you know, it is it is very, very focused
on these children at a very young and impressionable age,
and that is where they have taken this now, which
is why I think you're seeing such a radical change
in this generation. So Trump shares a call for Charlie
Kirk's the Charlie Kirk Act, that we showed yesterday to

(15:17):
hold media accountable, when, of course I didn't say it yesterday,
but had somebody send it to me and said the
questionable choices from this young woman who decided not to
fax her teeth but to pierce her tongue. It's exactly
my first comment to Karen. But obviously she doesn't understand

(15:39):
and doesn't care what the smith Mont Act was really about,
and of course neither does Trump, because you just jumped
in on that. As I point out yesterday, this is
our tee saying it's a piece of Cold War legislation.
The smith Month Act aimed at preventing domestic dissemination of
US media content intended for foreign audiences, called propaganda, the

(16:01):
Voice of America, and radio liberty. It has nothing to
do with holding US news media accountable for spreading false
narratives at home. The reason this is coming up it's
not only just ignorance, but it'd be amplified by the
Trump administration because it allows them this misrepresentation, this ignorance
of the public about what the smith Mont Act really

(16:23):
was about, allows them to claim, well, if this is
something that we traditionally used to do, this is not
some brand new thing. No, it is something brand new
what you're proposing to do, the idea that you were
going to control media. And of course Trump is all
over that. He just dropped another multi billion dollar lawsuit
against the New York Times because they endorsed La La Harris.

(16:45):
Newspapers have always endorsed a political candidate, one way or
the other. So he has sued CBS, the New York Times, others,
and he wants to shut them down one way or
the other.

Speaker 2 (16:56):
He has threatened he's just another New York Democrat, a
happy New York Democrat.

Speaker 1 (17:01):
He absolutely despises, despises free speech, and he characterizes people
as a matter of fact. Reason pointed out that if
they are going to criminalize what he would say is
vicious speech, he'll probably be the first victim of it
because of the way he denigrates everyone with over the
top rhetoric. It is it is you can to arrest.

Speaker 2 (17:25):
Anyone that's mean. Sadly, I am going to prison the
first victim of my own law.

Speaker 1 (17:30):
Very sad Yeah, excepting won't work that way. You know.
It was a look at ancient societies who really respected
the rule of law. I remember Daniel, right, private Daniel
and these guys trick the trick the king into signing
this law prohibiting people from the free exercise of religion

(17:51):
because they wanted to entrap Daniel. And then he realized
that it was a setup after they did set up
up Daniel, but he wasn't going to go back against
the rule of law. How different things are today truly
is amazing. He says, well, that's the law. We can't
break the law. You had a change dot org petition

(18:11):
that got forty three thousand signatures in one day to
push censorship everywhere. Jd Vance has called on them to
introduce stricter penalties against news media. Of course they would
love to have that. Americans have been taught to hate
free speech and not to value the First Amendment. And
the question is where did that happen? And I know

(18:35):
where that happened, but nobody will talk about it. It's
just amazing to me nobody will talk about that. So
jd Vance hosted the Charlie Kirk Show of the weekend
and he had all these administration guests on there with him,
and he was decidedly, I would say, anti Kirk. It
was an anti Kirk show. The things that they were

(18:56):
saying that they wanted to do were precisely exist act
opposite of what Charlie Kirk would do. I want you
to become a snitch society. I want you to turn
in people who say things that you don't like, turn
them into their employer, get them canceled. You know, many
people threatened Charlie Kirk. A lot of people said horrible

(19:16):
things to him. Did he try to get them kicked
out of the university? No, No, he debated them. That
is not the spirit of JD. Vance or Steven Miller
or Susie Wiles or the other people who were there.
Even RFK Jr. Who has in the past said well,
you can't say anything that I characterized as anti Semitic.

(19:38):
If you criticized Israel, We're going to come after you.
That's an illness, he said. So none of these people
that were there with JD. Vance support free speech. He
said in a post on x after Kirk's death that
the slave conservative activist was one of the first people
he called when he considered running for the Senate in
twenty twenty one. One of the first people, perhaps the

(20:01):
first one, was Peter Tielvill. Hey, you gotta get some money,
you're going to support this, he said. Charlie and JD
were friends, said the executive producer of The Charlie Kirk Show,
actual friends. A lot of the people that are running
the federal government are personal friends of Charlie's and they
were in the trenches together in the campaign, and they've
known each other for years. And this, folks, is the

(20:24):
real danger. I'll just remind you of Ronald Reagan and
the Brady bill. Ronald Reagan ran as a strong supporter
of the Second Amendment. But when Brady, who was what
was I think press secretary or something, was the one
who got shot in the assassination attempt on Ronald Reagan,

(20:44):
Reagan felt guilty about it, and so it was more
important to him to stand by Sarah Brady, who wanted
that gun control bill, than it was to stand by
the principles and the Constitution of and the Second Amendment.
And that's what I'm concerned about, not that these people,
not the Trump administration likes free speech to start with.

(21:07):
I guess I kind of question why he was Charlie's
speech hanging around with the Charlie Kirk hanging around these
people who despised the free speech that he was fighting
for the Trump administration. As I just pointed out, Trump
wants to sue or fine and put out of business
any media that is not fawning at his feet, just
like he will come after any Republican who is not

(21:29):
praising him and nominating him for prizes and Nobel prizes
and so forth. So the personal friendship for a lot
of these people is far more important than the principle
of free speech or the constitution. Steven Miller was on
the show and he said, we're going to channel all
that anger that we have to uproot and dismantle these

(21:49):
terrorist networks. Terrorist networks, So who are the terrorists, well,
the terrorists or who they say the terrorists artists? Like,
you know what is an assault weapon? It's what I
say it is. You know what is hate speech? What
I say it is. We're gonna make America safe again.
He said, there you go, masa instead of maga, and

(22:11):
it kind of sounds like the old slang for master
for slaves, right, Masa gonna make us safe? Yasa, masa
gonna make us safe. We gotta have some masa here.

Speaker 4 (22:22):
So I don't get it. Is this a loan shooter
or a terrorist organization now or a terrorist network rather.

Speaker 1 (22:28):
Well, they can't make up their mind, and it's malleable anyway, Liz,
You're right. So among the guests or Caroline Levett, Tucker Carlson,
rf K Junior, and Susie Wiles, the chief of staff
of the Trump administration. So they're going to do everything
they can to destroy the First Amendment, just like Reagan

(22:49):
was willing to destroy the Second Amendment for his friend
who was shot. Steve Mannon has shared a shocking list
questioning whether the FBI arrested the wrong man for the
Charlie Kirk assassination. To the point of what you just asked, Lance,
this is and I just have to say, be careful
about Steve Bannon. Steve Bannon is a fabuloust. He's like

(23:11):
George Santos. He will tell you anything in order to
get eyeballs on his site. So be careful because this
guy is a convicted con artist and even though Trump
pardoned him, what he did to the people that trusted
him is unforgivable and he is dangerous. So anyway, a

(23:33):
lot of people have come up with these questions. However,
questions like they haven't recovered the bullet. He says, it appears.
I don't know if that's true or not. They haven't
presented any video or photographic evidence of the alleged shooter
with the gun. The alleged shooter did not confess to
law enforcement. Well, let's say that they allegedly say they

(23:54):
have a confession on discord, But discord disputes the FBI's
claim that the shooter discussed plans to assassinate Charlie Kirk.
If true, they would have the data to back this up.
TPUSA staff contaminate the crime scene and remove the camera
sitting directly behind Charlie immediately after the shooting. We don't

(24:14):
know where that footage is. And we have one person,
remember the first day we were talking about this, We said,
I didn't see him throw the rifle down that was there,
and another person is saying, yeah, where is the stick.
What he's saying is that he doesn't think that the
rifle would fit in that bag that was thrown down.

Speaker 5 (24:36):
Allegedly, we've caught this guy, all right, this Tyler Robinson,
they're still sticking with. This was a bolt action thirty six.
We also have video of him that has been discovered
of him running across the entire top from like the
front to back or whatever it is of the l

(24:58):
see center from where this is supposed to have happened.
And for those that don't understand, not that I'm a
weapons expert, but a thirty eight six does not break down.
I mean, you can pull the bolt, you can clean it,
you can pull the woods furniture off of it, YadA YadA,
but that's not a quick process. So we got video

(25:21):
of him running across the building, going off the side
of the building. He jumps down and the only thing
he has with him looks like a small backpack. So
for demonstration purposes, I'm going to show you something. Typical
size on a thirty out six is forty two to
forty four inches. Here's our forty two inches demo. I'm

(25:42):
five to eleven for reference.

Speaker 6 (25:46):
Where was.

Speaker 5 (25:49):
Where was this at? I mean you can't put it
in your pant because you can't bend and this piece
of was houlering us. If it was in your backpack,
it'd be sticking up noticeable. Even if you put it
under here, you still couldn't bend your leg. I'm not

(26:15):
trying to start some kind of a conspiracy, but this
dude did not have a thirty out six on his
person when he is hauling asked across the top of
the Lucy building, jumping down, and you can see his
egg legs bending and all that. How did the weapon
get from there to the woods.

Speaker 1 (26:40):
Well that's a good question. Answer kind of questions when
somebody I could just see Cash, Whattell's expression? Because every
time they picture of him, he is like a deer
caught in the headlights. I could just see his expression.
If somebody where to ask that question, they'd be like, ohoh.
But as some other people point out, you guys and

(27:01):
know that these groups on discord, Telegram, four Chaan, et
cetera are crawling with Feds and Intel operatives. Right, you
remember the Whitmer fed napping plot. If you wanted to
sell a narrative and create a patsy, how might you
do it? So you should question everything. I'm not jumping
in on any of these things yet. I don't have
my mind made up about anything. I would say. If

(27:22):
you wanted to cover up anything, you couldn't do better
than Cash, Mattel and Dan Bonji. We're out there. They
will say whatever you tell them to say. As we've
already seen, so it is kind of interesting. What do
you guys think about that? That was our first comment
I looked at It's like, I don't see that guy
with a gun.

Speaker 2 (27:40):
You know, it's interesting. Again, I don't know enough about rifles,
but people make all kinds of replacement stocks for all
kinds of different guns. And from what I've seen, at
least if the picture of what I've seen is is
the actual rifles used, he did not have a woodstock
on it. He had replaced the stock. So maybe he's
got one where it's easier and quicker to break down.
Maybe someone makes something like that. Yeah, it's possible. It

(28:04):
is interesting, but yeah, the Mauser thirty got sixes are
generally large guns, and the Mauser is no exception, so
if he is right, it doesn't seem to fit in there.
But also maybe he has a cut down version of.

Speaker 1 (28:15):
It for well, then the other question is why would
he when time is of the essence, why would he
break it down, stick it in a bag and then
run into the woods and reassemble it and leave it
there for them. That was the first thing to me,
you know, besides the where's the stick?

Speaker 3 (28:30):
Thing?

Speaker 1 (28:30):
Is like why would he do that? Yeah, it's been
make any sense. What do you think plans?

Speaker 4 (28:37):
Yeah, I really I don't know yet.

Speaker 1 (28:41):
Well, that is a question mark. It certainly is cash.
Mattel has confirmed though, that there is DNA evidence matching
the alleged Kirk assassin, but he doesn't reveal any details.
Trust me, I've got all the information on my desk. Yeah,
DNA evidence matching the Charlie Kirk suspected killer, he says.

(29:03):
And he says they got DNA hits from the towel
that was wrapped around the firearm and DNA on the
screwdrivers positively processed for the suspect and custody. He also
referred to reports of alleged note left behind by Robinson,
saying that the suspect wrote that he had the opportunity
to take out Kirk and wrote, I'm going to take it.

(29:25):
That message was written before the September tenth shooting, he added.
Pattel said that it was both a note and a
text message exchange, adding that it was destroyed but that
the investigators recovered it. Other evidence in the case, Pattel said,
was shocking, but again, you'll see it all later. It's
all still desk correct friends who confirmed that there was

(29:51):
kind of that deep dark Internet and reddick culture and
these other dark places on the Internet where this person
was going deep, said the governor. We want to make
it one hundred percent about the Internet. They want to
make it one hundred percent about censoring speech, about registering this.
What's going to be coming out of this, folks, I'll
tell you right now, because they've already started working on it.

(30:11):
But this is going to allow them to move the
ball down the road, down the field really really quickly.
They want to have all anonymity and privacy on the
Internet destroyed. That's where this is headed. First and foremost.
We've got to know everybody who is on the Internet
and if it is if there's any website that has anonymity,

(30:34):
and this goes back to ross all Break and that site,
their silk Road, what was really they were concerned about.
So they don't want anybody to have any the dark Web.
It's not dark because people are doing anything on it
that's any more evil than they're doing anywhere else's goat
Tree has pointed out many times, it's just dark to them.
Mostly it's harder for them to see what's going on

(30:57):
than on the regular web, and so they want to
shut that down. They want to demonize and criminalize that,
and that's what they will do, and they will require
ID in order to use the Internet for everyone, because
this is always an effort never let anything go. Whether
this is real or faked or a false flag, the
end result will still be the same. They'll use it

(31:20):
to advance the police surveillance state.

Speaker 4 (31:24):
Yeah, because of course this guy got radicalized on the
dark corners of the Internet. That's where he learned, you know,
all the LGBT stuff and to hate conservatives and all that,
not the schools. It was the dark corners of the Internet.
If it weren't for the dark corners of the Internet,
there would be a lot more Marxists like this guy

(31:46):
that just get the official story from the propaganda mouthpieces
of mainstream media and the heavy indoctrination from the schools.
It is the quote unquote dark corners of the Internet
where shows like ours get relegated to once they've been
banned off of YouTube. That is the only voice of
reason keeping America saying.

Speaker 1 (32:07):
That's right, that's what that's what they want to get
rid of. They want to control all speech. They want
to do everything that you were doing. As a matter
of fact, the now infamous T shirt that he was
seen wearing, which by the way, apparently he also didn't
just break down and reassemble the rifle, but he also
changed clothes. No video of any of the stuff happened.

(32:29):
But anyway, somebody who bought a T shirt in Georgia
was called by the police for having bought that T
shirt and he had shown a picture of it on
discord and he goes, so, you know, that was pretty quick.
Happened right away. So his roommate was a romantic partner,
a male transitioning to a female, said Governor Cox. I

(32:51):
can say that he has been incredibly cooperative, he said.
Robinson was moved to a special watch area in the jail.
Free Epstein. This is this is it's just amazing that
we keep seeing the same movie over and over again.
With Kirk's death, RFK Junior said, it's our job to

(33:14):
win this battle for our country. Yeah, they're going to
go to war against free speech, against privacy, against the internet,
but you can bet that they're not going to pull
back the teachers who are grooming these young children and
telling them don't tell your parents, and you better bet
that the leftist states are not going to back off

(33:36):
telling the teachers that they have to lie to parents
about what they're doing to these kids in school. So
Dan Bongino then enters and says on Monday that the
investigation is probing whether Charlie Kirk's alleged assassin acted alone
or as part of a broader plot. Suspect has been

(33:59):
taken over by ideology leading up to these shootings. So
this is the script that they've now decided on. You see,
it echoed everywhere. And we just had a Texas Tech
student who was evidently expelled. Texas Tech won't say that
she was expelled, but they say she's no longer a

(34:19):
student at the university. When asked directly about whether or
not she was expelled, they won't say it. And it
was a really hateful statement.

Speaker 3 (34:27):
That she was doing.

Speaker 1 (34:28):
She was out there taunting the people at a memorial
service for Charlie Kirk, jumping up and down and saying,
your homie is dead. And one guy who was filming
himself filming her, said this is evil, is real, and
this is what it looks like. And so she comes
over to him and the two of them are calling
each other hateful. You're hateful. No, you're hateful. No, you're hateful.

(34:53):
You're fired, No, you're fired, you're canceled.

Speaker 2 (35:02):
Sorry for the language.

Speaker 5 (35:03):
Yeah, evil is real, people, and it kind of looks
like that evil.

Speaker 4 (35:14):
Evil.

Speaker 6 (35:15):
Murder is bad.

Speaker 4 (35:16):
She is evil.

Speaker 6 (35:18):
I'm not said, are you so hateful? Why are you?
Why are you so hateful?

Speaker 1 (35:24):
Yeah, you're hateful. No, you're hateless.

Speaker 2 (35:27):
On the upside, she probably didn't deserve to be in college.

Speaker 4 (35:31):
I can just leave it alone. Please, don't come out, man,
I want to be left alone.

Speaker 6 (35:35):
I'm not emotional. Man, don't tell me what I am
and what i'm not.

Speaker 1 (35:37):
You can get out of my face because I can
tell you what you are, but you won't like it.

Speaker 2 (35:42):
I'm not being aggressed in my boy is very.

Speaker 6 (35:44):
You're calling me aggressive because I'm a black woman.

Speaker 1 (35:47):
I'm very because you're racist, right, you're hateful, you're racist.
So you see this all the time. Well, the campus
police arrested or took her away. They charged her with
simple assault, which is a class that you missed me
her and released her and the school has now released
her as well. What were you gonna say, Lance.

Speaker 4 (36:05):
It's just always the I mean, it's an old tactic
of the same things that you're guilty of, you accuse
your opponents of. But just the blind hate from these
people that accuse you of being hateful is just shocking.
Like the genuine double think of her saying, jumping around

(36:27):
lapping your homie is dead and then calling him hateful
the whole it is genuinely ridiculous, and I just doing
that all the time, like, oh, no, well, the right
is more violent, like obviously not.

Speaker 2 (36:40):
I mean, yeah, they get the whole the right is
violent because they go with the FBI statistics where they
will continually pull in things like the Oklahoma City bombing, Waco,
Ruby Ridge and they'll count those as acts of terrorism
despite the fact that the FBI was the one that
was committing terror. And if you had just left people,
you know, left the branch Davidians or the family at

(37:00):
Ruby Ridge alone, none of that would have happened. So
that's how they continually end up with what the right
is more violent by the statistics, like well, when you
look at the made up statistics, but when you actually
look at the shootings and things that have taken place,
and when you account for who's actually expressed ideology. It's
the left. It's the left, over and over again.

Speaker 4 (37:17):
Yeah, saw a meme that was talking about that, like,
oh yeah, like the right isn't about And the thing
that held up was the Gretchen Witmer nonsense where the
FBI had a whole bunch of informants and one mentally
hand out person that they orchestrated this thing around.

Speaker 1 (37:35):
Yeah. It's really crazy, isn't it. Well, yeah, and it's
it's kind of interesting because I saw this when I
was in college to some degree at all. They left
and their their unhinged actions and riots, you know, they
were they were pushing against the Vietnam War. At least
they had a cause. These people they just hate our
society and want to burn it down. And we'll see

(37:56):
that moment here. It appears from the data the way
became that this ideology had infected him and taken over,
says Bongino. He was intent on making Charlie's target. People
may have known in advanced So there you go. I
say it was it's like the invasion of the body snatchers, right,
I say that it was a body snatcher schools. That's

(38:17):
why we probably should call these places where they groom
kids that tell them that they're the wrong body and
they should mutilate their body. I think we should call
them body snatcher schools. It really is a psio operation.
And it is true that as a man thinks, so
does he act, and so it is key they understand that.

(38:38):
That's why they're doing this. As a matter of fact,
speaking of the people who groups that are out there
who really are pushing for violence and for revolution, just
the news John Solomon's organization reports, excuse me on this
group that calls themselves armed queers. They trained radical Marxists

(39:01):
to shoot, and they were there in Utah, just a
few miles away from the campus where Charlie Kirk was murdered.
Why would they locate close to a university. I think
that might be.

Speaker 2 (39:11):
Because it's so easy to recruit queers.

Speaker 1 (39:14):
And transgenders, right, I don't know.

Speaker 2 (39:17):
It's it's almost like these kids coming from high school
and just get absolutely one shot by college level of propaganda. Yes,
they're just completely and utterly incapable of defending themselves from it,
and it just destroys them.

Speaker 1 (39:31):
And this time no evidence leaks the group to Tyler,
he points out, but it is a self described armed
revolutionary group openly aligned with Cuba, that's risen on the
streets of one of America's most conservative states. Look, let's know,
how could this happen in Utah. There's no such thing
as conservative universities. Get over that. If you cut if

(39:54):
you go to Indiana, which is mostly Republican, guess what
is there in Indiana? Well that was were their Kinsey
now the Kinsey Report, those people. They have an organization
there that has pushed the boundaries of bizarre, crazy sex
right there in Republican conservative Indiana. So anything can happen

(40:17):
in these universiti As matter of fact, I was kind
of surprised to see that that was the place where
Kinsey worked. I came across that when I was looking
at Internet censorship back in twenty eighteen. There's a group
called oh so Me Observers of Social Media, and they

(40:38):
were focused on social media at the time, and they
were behind the banning of intra wars and other groups.
There was about eight hundred different groups that got banned
two months after we did, and they were putting out
lists and giving them to the Democrats and telling them,
you know, ban these people. Push this list to the
people and these corporation that are worried that you might

(41:01):
regulate them and get them to do it voluntarily. And
so it was interesting when I started looking into it.
The guy that was running that censorship campaign there at
Indiana University was originally brought over from Italy in order
to run the Kinsey Institute that was there, this crazy

(41:22):
sexual institute that was involved in pedophilia and every kind
of perversion that you can imagine. And they brought him
over first for that, and then they repurposed them for
Internet censorship. It's all connected, it really is. Armed Queers
SLC has a Facebook page doesn't directly appear to encourage

(41:42):
the use of firearms and the claimed mission, but many
of the images used depick firearms. This spring, its members
traveled to Cuba for a meeting to celebrate the May
Day holiday of communists and to participate in a march
and events alongside revolutionaries from around the world. The group
posted photo on its public Instagram account, which was deleted

(42:02):
on Friday, posted photos of its young students attending and
its leaders openly discussing how communist regime agenda and this
American group's agenda were aligned. In a YouTube video after
the visit to Havana, two leaders of armed Queers discussed
their trip to Cuba in a sense deleted May video
entitled Cuba Report Back our time as twenty twenty five

(42:26):
May Day Brigadistas, And so they said, we definitely felt
the pressure from them to bring the revolution back to America,
saying that she was essentially told in Cuba that Okay,
y'all are here, y'all are learning the information. You're learning
how we made our revolution. But now it's time for
you to go home and make your own revolution. Yeah,

(42:48):
go back to your school, because it's all it's going
to run out. Look, this is what we saw from
Bill Airs. Bill Airs and the Weather Underground and Bernadine
Dorn went around there, you know, setting off bombs. They
killed some pe with their bombs, and as they were
facing trial or whatever, they had connections within the establishment
and they got off. What did he do with his freedom, Well,

(43:12):
he decided that he would stop bombing buildings and he
would start bombing students' minds. So after that he went
into education. That's how he got connected to Barack Obama
in Chicago. They moved from that, and of course he
openly decided that he wanted to have a revolution, but
that he couldn't do it by the Communists had failed

(43:35):
over and over again by trying to play the class
envy warfare, class warfare card. It worked in Europe but
didn't work in America. So we're going to do in America.
We're going to use the race card. And that's exactly
what they did. He popularized Bill Ayers did the idea
of white privilege. It was originally called by some came up,

(43:56):
someone else came up with it, called it white skin privilege.
He just changed it to white privilege. And because he's
a good marketer and he is a very effective speaker.
But anyway, this whole report is very long, talks about
all the different things that they're doing, and all the
events that they've had with a Marxist in Cuba and

(44:16):
also holding events with a group called Stonewall Self Defense.
And again this is also a reference to LGBT.

Speaker 2 (44:24):
Stone stone Wall Riots.

Speaker 1 (44:26):
Yeah, they held a training event with a convicted felon,
Eric King. Now Eric King was charged in twenty fourteen
with attempting to firebomb a congressional office in Kansas City.
He used a hammer to break a window and then
he threw a Molotov cocktail into the office of Representative
Emmanuel Cleaver. The second King pleaded guilty in twenty sixteen

(44:49):
to using explosive materials to commit arson and was sentenced
to a decade in prison. He was released from prison
in twenty twenty three. Unicorn Ryan photographed King leaving prison
in twenty twenty three wearing a shirt that said protect
trans Rites had a graphic with a large knife on it.

(45:10):
While behind bars, he wrote a book titled Antifat In prison,
King also helped put together and edit the book Rattling
the Cages, The Oral Histories of North American Political Prisoners,
with a foreword that was written by Angela Davis, herself
alleged but acquitted of murder, a revolutionary and a former

(45:31):
vice presidential candidate for the Communist Party USA. King describes
himself as an activist and as anti fascists. So they
have also coordinated with the Chicano student movement of ASLAN.
And this is not Nardia, Excel. This is the Chicano

(45:55):
map of most of the Southwestern United States, rightfully belonging
to Mexico.

Speaker 2 (46:01):
Sorry you guys lost it. It was conquered. You're not
getting it back. That's just how it is. I'm sorry
you guys don't feel that that was just, but that's
how the world worked back then, and that's how everyone
did it. You guys lost, end of story. That's just
how it is. This is the end result of multiculturalism

(46:22):
played out. Your country fractures at the seems every single
person thinks it's a zero sum game and they have
to get what's theirs and they will take it from you.

Speaker 1 (46:30):
Well, I mean, you look at what was happening at
the time. Santa Anna was one of the worst of
the tyrants. You know. He made an example of public
execution of everybody, a very public execution of anybody that
rebelled against him. And he was a very harsh dictator.
And there were nine different regions of Mexico that declared
their independence when he became the leader. The only one

(46:52):
that was able to successfully do that, and they did
it by force, was Texas. And there were a lot
of Hispanics as well as people from the European former
colonies that were involved in that. So Charlie Kirk's widow
talks about how his mission will go on. Meanwhile, Ilhan

(47:14):
Omar shares a video calling Charlie Kirk a terrorist. Again,
it's just like this video that we just saw. Two
people come up and they're screaming at each other that
they're both hateful. And you can decide as we look
at that video. I think one person was hateful, another
one was not. But this label that they're talking about

(47:34):
when they talk about how they are going to punish
hate speech in the Trump administration, and we got Pam
Bondi doing that as well. As I said yesterday, there
is no such thing as hate speech. There are people
who hate speech who are in political power and they
use that label. But censorship is actually hate. Censorship is

(47:57):
done by people who hate speech. Say that censorship is
leads to violence, it leads to government violence, and of
course they claim that they have monopoly on that. So
everyone is going to be considered a terrorist by one
side or the other.

Speaker 4 (48:13):
Yes, and let's not forget that half the time the
person in the White House is someone that would agree
with the insane, hateful woman that was cheering your homie
is dead, that the other one is hateful for calling
her out on it.

Speaker 1 (48:27):
That's right, That's why I you said yesterday. You know,
you want to talk about four D chess and thinking
about the long term stuff. These people can't even think
four years away. When somebody else gets the rains, our
different party gets the rains, you will be the terrorist.
At that point. They've already done that. They've already thrown
those labels at everybody. They've also they've always they've always said,

(48:48):
whether they're justified or not, they'll call you hateful, they'll
call you a terrorist, they'll call you a racist, all
of these things.

Speaker 2 (48:54):
There's also the fact that if they were serious about
deportation and getting rid of people that are problematic, ilean
Omar lied on her immigration forms. Yeah, there's precedent. You
could strip her of citizenship and deport her immediately. That
would be legal. That's under law something you can do.
You could get rid of this anti American and get

(49:16):
her out of the country. It would be simple. But
they're not going to do it, are they, So get
rid of her under law? Do it legally, get rid
of ilan Omar, deport her.

Speaker 4 (49:26):
Now you don't understand. They need to arrest her with
troops instead of police. Then they'd be able to enforce
the laws that they are already able to enforce, but
choose not to.

Speaker 2 (49:36):
Yes, just enforce the laws that are already on the
books and send her packing.

Speaker 1 (49:40):
Amazing thing she said. She accused Charlie Kirka being a
quote stochastic terrorist. Why in the world is that terrorism.
I know what stochastic means, right, it's random distribution of
probability whatever, and it's not. How in the world does
that apply as an to terrorists? It doesn't. This is

(50:03):
just pseudo intellectualism. It makes her sound like she's smart
or something, because that's her. Her audience is a bunch
of college kids.

Speaker 4 (50:11):
Erica trying to think of what she possibly could have meant.
Maybe she just doesn't understand what stochastic means, or it
could be that she's trying to imply that, you know,
with his rhetoric and hate inducing words that eventually, statistically
some of them are going to hit someone that's going
to do some terrorist thing, as though the left doesn't

(50:35):
count when you know they do terrorist stuff. But if
anyone on the right, and it would include people that
are set up, like you know, they want to point
to the ill haunt, the Gretchen Whitmer thing of you know,
the set up from the FBI. Whenever any of that happens, that's,
you know, because of people like Charlie Kirk.

Speaker 1 (50:55):
According to them, Yeah, that could be it. You're right, Lance,
maybe that is it. But I think be incumbent on
her to explain to us exactly how many standard deviations
from the meaning you have to get before you become
a stochastic terrorist. This is just the most absurd thing.
And again it is the kind of intellectualism that you

(51:16):
would see from these lefties who have had a course
or two in college. Erica Kirk said they killed Charlie
because he preached a message of patriotism, faith and of
God's merciful love. But they should all know this. If
you thought my husband's mission was powerful before, you have
no idea. You have no idea what you've unleashed across
the entire country and this world. And you know, I

(51:38):
have to say that, you know, it's really incumbent on
these people who are friends of Charlie Kirk and family.
I think they should honor his legacy because his legacy
of free speech and debate is an environment in which
Christianity thrives. Christianity thrives in that kind of an environment,

(51:59):
because truth can stand scrutiny. It's the people who are
lying to you who have to censor people. And I
think that's one of the reasons why the founders of
this country made that the First Amendment. It is of
primary importance. I really think that the First Amendment is
more important than the Second Amendment, because as a man thinks,

(52:21):
so does he act. The guns are not going to
be used in a dangerous way unless somebody has been
turned into a dangerous individual. So the First Amendment is primary,
and it is about supporting free speech, free debate, and
you're not going to have the free exercise of religion
if you don't have those things there either. That's what
the Christians need to understand. There are, as I pointed

(52:44):
out yesterday, in the UK and Australia, there are people
who are just itching to come after Christians and they're
doing it all the time. They're arresting Christians for being
street preachers in the UK. And as I've said many times,
we used to go to Speakers' Corner when we went.
Karen and I were there in nineteen eighty and again
eighty four, and then we took the kids there in
two thousand and one always wanted to go to Speaker's corner.

(53:09):
And when we went in the early eighties, we would
see the police would be there to protect anybody who
was saying something that other people would get offended at. Right,
and it's typically going to be religion or politics. But
you know, people just take a soapbox literally and stand
on top of it and give their opinions about religion

(53:29):
or politics, and you would get people who would argue
with them. But then we went back in two thousand
and one, there was a large group of Muslim young
men and they were getting very agitated and they didn't
really have anything to say. They were going to resort
to violence, I believe it. So I started as we
were watching to see what was going to happen. We

(53:50):
had started having all these bobbies show up and they're
talking into their intercom. They got onto the thousand stuff,
and more and more of them are coming as a
I think they're worried about what's going to happen here
as well. Let's move on. And but now that was
two thousand and one. Now twenty years later, the police
arrest the speaker. That's the issue. And so I've seen

(54:14):
this from the well.

Speaker 2 (54:15):
Just so long as he's a white European Christian.

Speaker 1 (54:18):
Yeah, that's right, that's right. Yeah, it was a Muslim,
they would not do that, according to Kirk supporters. I'm sorry,
this is Ilhan Omar. She accused Kirk supporters of having
a Christo fascist agenda because she's going to sub people
have talked about islamo fascist. Right, They tried to make
a distinction and say, well, Islam is a religious religion

(54:41):
of peace. But there's some people who were fascist about this.
It's like, no, that's actually what the religion is really about.
And so to try to make that distinction, people create
this term called islamo fascist. They're not real Islam, they're
not the real religion of peace. They're Islamo fascist. So
then she and she creates this term called Christo fashion.

Speaker 2 (55:02):
It sure is funny. Then it seems like no one
understood Islam for you know, hundreds thousands of years right
up until you guys showed up about what ten fifteen
years ago? Huh funny?

Speaker 1 (55:14):
Well, I talk about AOC all the time. That other
member of the squad, I call her Alexandria Occasional Cortex.
I don't think Ilhan Omar has a cortex that even
fires occasionally with this stuff.

Speaker 2 (55:28):
It's truly amazing how dumb the people that get into
Congress are. It shows that it's not what you know,
it is who you know and how much money they're
willing to spend on you. These people are bought and
paid for and they would not get where they are
based on their own merit. Like you said, Ilhan Omar

(55:48):
Aoc and that other Rashida Talib, three of the dumbest
people to have ever lived, and they wield power.

Speaker 1 (55:57):
Yeah, it is.

Speaker 2 (55:58):
Every time I think about them, it is so depressing.
Just say, oh, no.

Speaker 1 (56:02):
Ah, yeah, that's right. The problem is that, you know,
she wants to label her opponents as terrorists people who
need to be banned or killed. And now the right
is taking that tactic. And that's really the concerning thing
to me. They're not taking the high ground, they're not
taking the constitution of the First Amendment. And Reason says, no,

(56:27):
it was not ironic that the Second Amendment advocate Charlie
Kirk was shot. He says, all liberty involves trade offs,
says the writer at Reason, and I would just say,
I don't really think that's the right argument that we
need to be making here. I think the argument that
we need to make is that nothing has changed since

(56:49):
the time of the Founders, since the time that I
was young. But just in the last couple of decades,
we've started to see about the last thirty years or so,
we started to see these shootings taking off at schools
and other things like that. What has changed. It's not
the weapons, right, we had deadly weapons forever in America,
and I would say you could argue that they were

(57:11):
more ubiquitous than they are now, especially in schools. They were,
but now with the police state and the lockdowns in
schools and the metal detectors and all the rest of
this stuff, that has done nothing. Because if it's in
somebody's heart, you can't do anything about it. So what
has changed. The people have changed. Their hearts have changed.
That's what we need to tell people. And that's the

(57:33):
real issue. The issue isn't that, well, it's acceptable, We've
got to live with a certain amount of bloodshed. And
that was the argument that Charlie Kirk made. That's the
argument this person a Reason is making as well.

Speaker 4 (57:45):
Yeah, there was the video that the left is putting
everywhere of Charlie Kirk saying that some deaths are acceptable
in order to have a second amendment. The thing is
that's really one of those how long have you been
beating your wife kind of questions, like how many deaths
are acceptable? You could turn that around on them, how

(58:07):
many deaths are acceptable before you stop supporting gun control?
Because you look at any city when they institute gun control,
the stricter of the gun control is the more crime happens.
As gun control lessens, the crime goes down. You can
see that over and over again and every city. And
then you look at like Britain where they have extremely

(58:29):
strict gun control, and yet the crime is spiking out
of control and it's absolutely nothing to do with the
gun control. It's a number issue entirely.

Speaker 2 (58:40):
They operate on a perspective of, well, while there are guns,
there will technically be gun crime. So if we were
to eliminate all guns, gun crime would disappear, because without guns,
you cannot have gun crime. It's like, well, yes, in
the same sense that you can't be the victim of
a home invasion if you're homeless, if you own a home,
you can be the victim of a home It's still a.

Speaker 1 (59:01):
Knife crime though, well it's been all the lives, okay.

Speaker 2 (59:04):
And it's just they focus heavily on guns because oh
they're scary, they look scary, they're loud, they're scary.

Speaker 1 (59:10):
And see that's the point when people push back against that,
we need to make the argument that it's not the gun.
It's not the Second Amendment that says that we have
a recognizes our god given right to self defense. The
issue is the population. What is it that's changing the population.
Nobody wants to talk about that except to say, now

(59:32):
it's the internet. So we've got to control the internet.
We need internet control.

Speaker 3 (59:36):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (59:36):
The first murder was you know, canaan Abel, and they
didn't have guns. It was long long before then. Human
nature has been the same for millennia, and it's not
it's not to do with the weapon. If it's in
their heart, they will find a way to do it,
whether it's stabbing someone or just getting a rock and
beating them over the head with it. It's it's in

(59:59):
the heart.

Speaker 1 (01:00:00):
A spate of malicious chuckling over the nature of the crime.
Charlie Kirk, you see, was shaw of the rifle, and
he'd once called shooting deaths like the price of keeping
the Second Amendment. And I disagree with that. I disagree
with that the Second Amendment doesn't change people. What is
the institution that changes people. Let's focus on that, he says,

(01:00:23):
Except that's not exactly what Kirk said. I had a
lot of disagreements with Kirk, he writes, but this wasn't
one of them. His comment about the Second Amendment and
death was part of a larger discussion about the dangers
inherent in liberty. And so in that discussion, then he
uses another argument that I think we should not use,
which is while more people die with cars, because then

(01:00:45):
immediately they say, yeah, let's get rid of the cars
as well, because these people hate any form of liberty,
including mobility. So he said, having an armed citizenr he
comes with the price. That's part of liberty. Driving comes
with the price. Fifty fifty thousand people die on the
road each year. Mentioned that three times that's a price

(01:01:07):
you get rid of driving, you'd have fifty thousand less
auto fatalities. But we have decided that the benefit of driving,
the speed, the accessibility, the mobility, having products services is
worth the cost of fifty thousand people dying on the road.
That's a really bad argument. We have not made that determination,

(01:01:28):
but we have made the determination that you know, look,
people can die any number of ways, and you know,
if you're going to have a completely safe society, you're
going to put people in a padded cell and lock
the door. We don't want that. Jefferson was the one
who really understood it. He said, I prefer the tumult
of liberty to the quietness of servitude. I think that

(01:01:52):
especially applies to the speech, don't you. I mean, you know,
you can have people that are yelling and screaming at
each other, They can even be saying hateful things to
each other. I prefer that to quiet servitude, where we
are not allowed to say things or we get canceled,
which is what the conservatives and the Trump administration and

(01:02:14):
many other places are demanding that we do right now.
Kurt might have mentioned that free speech is also dangerous.
He says, unfettered speech is important to the function of
a free and open society, but protecting speech risks the
popularization of vicious, toutulitarian ideas like those of Karl Marx
Ndolf Hitler. It runs a danger of radicalization of lost

(01:02:36):
souls who encounter bad ideas and embrace them. Any freedom
that allows us to live to our fullest, any restriction
on state intervention into our lives, can be abused by
the worst among us. As I said yesterday, if you've
got a real free speech platform, you're going to have

(01:02:56):
people on that platform who say really hateful, disgusting things
because they can because they're not allowed to say in
other places. So it's going to become a magnet for
those type of people. What do we do about that, Well,
historically the government has said, well, we want to shut
down gab or fill in the blank, you know, whatever
the platform is, because we hate speech, and we hate

(01:03:17):
debate and we hate liberty. So now they have a
license they believe to censor people.

Speaker 4 (01:03:24):
Yeah, I'm reminded of the I'm thinking of the stochastic
terrorist thing that they're just talking about. And I'm not
one hundredercent certain that's what she was saying when she
said that Kirk is a.

Speaker 1 (01:03:36):
You're making the assumption she knows what she's talking about.

Speaker 4 (01:03:40):
If that is the case, though, does that make her
a stochastic assassin for Kirk's death? I mean, yeah, Kirk
is responsible for people that do things that she thinks
should be penned on him, even if it's set up
by the FBI. Does that mean that she is responsible
for everything left does?

Speaker 1 (01:04:01):
Yeah. She She may not be a stochastic Marxist, but
she is a deliberate Marxist. She is targeted from that.
So he also says that the call for gun control
gets even dumber if you stop and think about the
weapon that they allege was used in this, the Mauser

(01:04:23):
Model ninety eight thirty six caliber bolt action rifle, designed
back in the nineteenth century for the military. That's right,
because they would military weapons are really what the Second
Amendment is about, largely supplanted in that role by the
semi automatic and then by the select fire weapons, they said.

(01:04:44):
But the old design remains ideal for hunting large game
animals if it is accurate, if properly zeroed, has a
longer effective range of many modern military weapons and cartridges
such as the thirty six, are likely to cleanly drop
an animal with a single shot. That's why many of
the old rifles are adapted, sometimes with modifications, for hunting.

(01:05:05):
So that's what this is. Now, consider the fact that
the alleged hunting rifle used to murder Charlie Kirk is
the only type of that they don't want to control.
And of course, you know when we look at the
spate of assassination killings with a JFK, RFK, MLK and

(01:05:25):
so forth in the sixties, and they came out with
the Gun Control Act, and these are people that they
said over and over again, except for RFK Junior, They
said that JFK and MLK were killed with rifles. So
what they do they banned handguns. These people just want
to take away your right to self defense. And as

(01:05:46):
Charlie Kirk said rightfully, so Secondmendment is not about hunting.
It is not even really about self defense against the criminal.
It's about defense against the government. It's about ratual assured destruction.
It is about having the citizenry having a deterrent to

(01:06:07):
a government that wants to attack them. So no major
law advocated in recent years, such as magazine capacity limits
or bands on semi automatic weapons, would have had anything
to do with this particular rifle that they claim was
used against Charlie Kirk. Some observers are upset to the left,

(01:06:29):
the radical fringe of the left anyway, is blamed for
Kirk's murder. When Tyler Robinson's family is conservative Mormon, culturally
traditional and comfortable with firearms. But the Robinson family didn't
shoot Charlie Kirk. Tyler Robinson allegedly committed this crime. I
mean maybe even he didn't do it. Who knows, after

(01:06:50):
he adapted views very different from those of his family.
If we're going to delve into culture wars, we could
mention the unfortunate use of speech. However, social media as cesspool.
So even reason is now making the argument that we've
got to make this about the Internet, about social media,
and of course, you know what's going to come out
of this. How are you going to control what people say?

(01:07:11):
You're going to end anonymity. We've seen Jordan Peterson pushing
that there are many, many, many people on the right
who want to end privacy and anonymity on the Internet,
and that is an incredibly dangerous, dangerous idea.

Speaker 2 (01:07:27):
Travis comments, We have many comments, many many comments.

Speaker 1 (01:07:33):
Chefkins. I like Chefkins and the executive order for football?
How appropriate?

Speaker 2 (01:07:37):
Yeah? What won't we executive order next? Yeah, we've got
Marky Mark in New Jersey. Thank you very much for
the tip. Marky marks is what's scary is that Rashida
Zhalib graduated law school. Well, I have my doubts that
I have my doubts that she earned it. I have
my doubts that she earned her way there, and I
have my doubts that she earned her degree.

Speaker 1 (01:07:57):
Yeah, they graduate people who can read their diplomba. Yeah,
that's the reality, at least in K through twelve, probably
in colleges as well. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:08:07):
I don't think Rashida Talib could argue her way out
of a paper bag. So no, I have no respect
for her intellect and I have no respect for her
as a person. Skunk Collo Rose Gardens. If you never
did anything in life, there's always pro sports.

Speaker 4 (01:08:21):
I guess if you're the president, there's still pro sports.

Speaker 1 (01:08:25):
I think that there is. That's a lot of hard work.
It's a lot of hard work, and there's certain kind
of talent and like that.

Speaker 2 (01:08:31):
I think maybe they were talking about, you know, if
you never did anything for yourself, you can sit around
and watch pro sports.

Speaker 1 (01:08:38):
Oh maybe that's right. But yeah, yeah, people play it
work pretty hard, but the people who sat there and
carp about it not so much.

Speaker 4 (01:08:44):
Yeah, I was saying, or if you're the president, you've
got nothing better to do. You may as well just
watch pro sports.

Speaker 2 (01:08:49):
Yeah, could, You've got all your decisions made for you.
They're coming in chev ken overpaid grown men chasing a ball.

Speaker 1 (01:08:56):
Yeah yeah. And stadium that is by taxpayers. You've got
a billionaire owns a team, and you've got multimillionaires who
are playing the game, and we get the bill appropriate.

Speaker 2 (01:09:07):
It's just every time I hear a professional athlete complaining
about something, just you make more money than most people
will at a lifetime to play a game, to play
a game.

Speaker 1 (01:09:18):
Make that every year?

Speaker 4 (01:09:19):
Yeah, I really wonder you look at how much money
they get in subsidies, these NFL or whatever, and how
much they're paying the players, like our taxes directly paying
their salaries. I mean, it's indirect, certainly a portion of it.
I imagine it's probably pretty close.

Speaker 2 (01:09:38):
I mean, if these billionaires had to finance the stadiums themselves,
they definitely have to cut costs somewhere.

Speaker 3 (01:09:43):
Well.

Speaker 1 (01:09:44):
Truly is astronomical. Over a decade ago, I did a
report on it, and at that point in time, you know,
they were around a half a billion dollars or over
billion dollars now for these stadiums and the team. Once.
Once the people in an area get so attached to
a team, the team owner says, well, build us a
new stadium, or we're gonna take the team to another town,

(01:10:04):
and so then all right, we'll do it.

Speaker 2 (01:10:06):
I also don't understand how people can actually get attached
to teams because the players they're not from the area.
They're traded from somewhere else. They didn't grow.

Speaker 1 (01:10:14):
Up in.

Speaker 2 (01:10:17):
Seattle. Seahawks. That's the only team I can bring to
mind at the time. The players from the Seattle Seahawks,
how many of them are actually from Seattle. I would
be curious. I would be shocked if it was a
majority of them. These people just get traded around.

Speaker 1 (01:10:30):
Even from Washington State.

Speaker 2 (01:10:32):
Yeah, they get traded around. They have no loyalty, and
you're gonna sit there because, oh, yeah, this is Seattle's team. No,
it's not. It's a coalition of extremely well paid men
that throw a ball around nad Land.

Speaker 4 (01:10:46):
There's another comment that I was gonna make this comment about,
but it's just what you were saying. I'm reminded the
comment or the comedy from Seinfeld where he's talking about
exactly that It's like with all the trading, it doesn't
makes sense to have any loyalty to these people because
the players are all different. So really your loyalty is
to the clothes. You're cheering for that uniform, whoever's wearing it,

(01:11:11):
and you really hope that that uniform is going to
beat the other uniform.

Speaker 1 (01:11:14):
That's right, And you can buy that uniform too. You
get to Jersey and it's very very very expensive.

Speaker 2 (01:11:20):
Oh man, you like this player put his name on this.

Speaker 4 (01:11:24):
It's just what the billionaires want, branding as an identity.

Speaker 1 (01:11:29):
Yeah, they're cheering the brand nad Lander.

Speaker 2 (01:11:32):
The players are just employees, always searching for more pay
or a new team. Exactly what we were just talking about.
Cleats five five five. Those thirty year olds who took
the Pfizer shot should be living every day like it's
their last, since they're either dropping dead from the shot
or ending up with turbo cancer.

Speaker 1 (01:11:46):
And that's the thing. Where is the sympathy for the
people that Trump did that too? I mean he funded that,
just like we're talking about the funding of these of
these sports events, so that he funded something to kill
people and he cheered it, and he continued to cheer it,
and so now there is a little bit of a
pushback against it. We'll see just how far that's able

(01:12:08):
to go. Trump has already started to push back against
drf K Junior, even though rf K Junior hasn't really done.

Speaker 2 (01:12:13):
Much the Syrian girl. The schools have the kids eight
hours a day, the time of their lives, and their
most vulnerable to any idea is being pushed down at
them from people in authority.

Speaker 1 (01:12:25):
That's right. It's amazing to me that nobody wants to
look at that as something needs to be considered brainwashing.

Speaker 2 (01:12:34):
The body cannot counteract that level of influence. It's coming
from the top, from the authority of the school teacher,
and from around them, from their peers.

Speaker 1 (01:12:44):
You've seen people all different political stripes say, you know,
to paraphrase it, give me a child the first few
years of their life and their mind forever. God has
told us, right, train up a child and the way
they should go, and when they were old they will
not depart from it. That means that you don't hand
them over to the government. It's just that simple.

Speaker 2 (01:13:04):
And it's no longer just the first few years. They
get them into their twenties. At this point, they're giving
them two decades of indoctrination. And if you think you
can compete with that, you probably can't. You know, there's
extenuating circumstances with things like the gospel. The Gospel works
miracles because it is divine. It's important to remember that

(01:13:25):
no political ideology is divine.

Speaker 1 (01:13:28):
That's why they're going to come after Christians. They always do,
and they're already, you know, sharpening their knives and places
like you can in Australia. You pray silently, they're going
to put you in jail.

Speaker 2 (01:13:39):
The Gospel can reach anyone, any time, anywhere through any
amount of brainwashing. Political ideologies can't. So remember that the
Gospel is always more important and it's always more effective.
So if you have the opportunity to talk to someone
about the gospel or politics, always pick the gospel. Chev Ken,

(01:14:01):
Imagine what happens when the next Democrat wins all this
power and it'll be consolidated. NIBU twenty twenty nine ivstrating
the first Amendment one event after the other. Flying ax Blade,
who that sounds dangerous? Digital ID to buy speech, Yeah,
Digital ID to buy guns on five year plans to

(01:14:25):
purchase AMMO. That's right, Well, you can finance a box
of twenty two long my friend, boy, howdy, Yeah, it'll
just cost you an arm and a leg. Chevken. Two
men were giving hand signals prior to the shooting.

Speaker 1 (01:14:37):
I've seen people, yeah, I've seen that saying that.

Speaker 2 (01:14:40):
It's hard for me to say it's now.

Speaker 1 (01:14:42):
For another angle that these guys are doing that. And
there's a guy that's a little bit further away who
has his arms up like this and then puts them
down right as Charlie a shot, And so I don't know.
I mean, I haven't looked at that anymore carefully.

Speaker 2 (01:14:55):
There's also this interesting it is interesting. I know, I
keep urging caution. I don't want to negative name. I
don't want to stop you guys from speculating on things
or having your own opinions. I just always urge caution
those kinds of things. It's possible these are, you know,
Charlie Kirk security team members and they're you know, signaling
to other people.

Speaker 1 (01:15:13):
Yeah. I would like to hear an explanation from that, though,
And I would like to be able. I didn't look
deeply into that picture to see if that's really the
way they're characterizing it. But certainly dead on first glance
look that way.

Speaker 2 (01:15:25):
So yeah, I'm also curious as too. You know, lots
of people have, you know, in ear ways of communicating.
If you're trying to communicate with someone, you don't necessarily
need to use hand signals anymore. You can do it
very quietly and very discreetly with a microphone in your ear.

(01:15:45):
So just curious. Nabaroo twenty twenty nine, the alleged shutter
hasn't confessed yet signed the Z paper to be fair,
once you get caught for a crime, you know, something
like murder, chances are you don't want to confess, Like
this is one of the ones.

Speaker 1 (01:16:01):
That he doesn't have any He doesn't have any incentive
to confess because the governor has already said and trump
is death penalty, So you know, what's the uh, where's
a bargain on that?

Speaker 2 (01:16:13):
Yeah, we'll make it quick. Shield your eyes. We all knew,
We all know Kirk was not shot with thirty out six.
It would have blew him away. Thirty out six is
a large caliber. It is a large caliber, So that
is an interesting thing to think about. Well, there's always a.

Speaker 1 (01:16:30):
Blood that came out, truly was amazing yeah, yeah, I
don't know.

Speaker 2 (01:16:35):
I've also seen people saying he was wearing a low
profile bulletproof vest on his chest and the bullet hit
that and wrecocheted up into his neck, which is possibly
why it didn't, you know, just shred it entirely. But
these are all speculations.

Speaker 1 (01:16:47):
Things, and again that's something that we don't really know
about because you don't hunt. I mean, you know, if
you're a hunter and you've shot an animal with thirty
hot six, yeah, you can speak to that better than
we could.

Speaker 2 (01:16:57):
I'm also not aware of how well you know a
bulletproof vest stops thirty at six. There are some of
these rifle calibers where a bulletproof vest is kind of
more of a suggestion than you know, eye handy. And
it had a scope on it. Allegedly that's not fitting
in a pair of skinny jeans. Citizen of Americaca. Now
I think they're saying it's a seven hundred Remington. They

(01:17:19):
really can't make up their mind. And cash Ptel said
that all of a sudden have DNA evidence a cult
sim the shooter kid said he didn't do it, amazed
they let him live. Well, they've got time if.

Speaker 1 (01:17:35):
This is I've not heard that about the Remington rifle.

Speaker 2 (01:17:38):
I haven't seen that yet. I've only seen people talking
about a mouser. But the Remington seven hundred is a
remarkably extremely popular hunting rifle, extremely extremely popular, probably one
of the most popular in the United States. Citizen of americaka.
The shot came from a four o'clock position. There's even
film of a man running through the crowd with a
firearm drawn, not a rifle but a side arm. Knights

(01:17:58):
of the Storm zokshavox os. There are images of him
walking up to the stairs, and he had no weapon.
Alien poop evolution. Why would you need a friend to
go retrieve it? Citizen americaka. Our DNA swab test positive
for your guilt every time. Got to make sure, no questions,

(01:18:19):
Citizen of AMERICAKA. The other thing they don't tell you
is that, under the fog of Charlie Kirk's assassination, they've
completely locked away the Epstein files permanently. Thank you, Chucky Schumer. Yes,
good old Schumer. You can always trust him, good old shoe, and.

Speaker 1 (01:18:33):
It'll be locked away with their wars that they're going
to start as well. But yeah, this has definitely taken
all of that off the radar and uniting the right,
giving them yet another reason to demand that we have
digital ID in a permission society. We've seen that with
the open borders and so oh, we've got to have
mandatory everify and the rest of these things. And we're

(01:18:55):
going to protect the kids from porn. So you should
have an ID to get on the internet to do
this is going to make it ubiquitous.

Speaker 3 (01:19:03):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:19:04):
The other thing they don't tell you is I read
that one Citizen AMERICAKA, Well that is what the new
bill will do with the Adyl Co sponsoring it, with
this guy named Bacon. You get to appreciate the humor
in that. Well, I guess they made bacon kosher. Huh.
Citizen AMERICAKA. They already control the press and all the
talking heads and all the people in Congress. Now they
want to suppress your speech by levying million dollar fines

(01:19:25):
on Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube. Yeah, and also I need
to I feel like I need to clarify again. I'm
not trying to style for you guys from speculating on anything.
I'm simply giving my opinion. If your opinion is different,
I appreciate it, and I want to hear it. I
don't want you guys to feel like, well Travis says
this now, I don't think you guys would, but I
want to make it clear. Citis in AMERICAKA, they already

(01:19:47):
already read that one catastrophe. If he suicides himself, you
know he was not the guy. Yeah done a Lord one,
three three seven. The point I'm trying to make is
if a thirty out six hit Kirk's neck at only
one hundred yards, it would have almost certainly decapitated. And
no way that was a thirty six. Looking at the video,
I believe tunnel Lord does a good bit of shooting,
so he made.

Speaker 1 (01:20:06):
Yeah it was. They are saying that it was two hundred yards.
I remember that because I saw it in the same
article that's right happening. One of them said the shooter
was led. Shooter was two hundred feet away. Another one
said two hundred yards, So what is it yards or feet?
So that's why that's stuck in my mind. But yeah, yeah,
I don't know.

Speaker 2 (01:20:25):
There's a lot of questions about this, and there's always
a lot of questions surrounding these sorts of things. You'd
be a fool to just blindly accept what anyone says regarding.

Speaker 1 (01:20:34):
This, especially because this is such a high profile person
and because everybody in the Trump administration is screaming for
revenge and for blood, and I think that they're going
to take it out on the First Amendment. They're going
to commit murder of the First Amendment. Yeah, City, City
of Americaca. They don't like the gun, but they love

(01:20:56):
the gun that shot their rival. Well, that's because liberals
and people on the left don't actually have any real principles.
It is simply whatever will get them advantage in the moment.
It is all crafted to beat you down. With Francine
race Card again, it's a joke. They're talking about the woman. Yeah,
the homie like that.

Speaker 2 (01:21:15):
And screaming, real Octo Spook. You hate me because I'm
a black woman. Has nothing to do with how I
have acting. Lol, that's right. It has nothing to do
with the fact that you are obscene, ridiculous, unpleasant. No,
nothing to do with that. M Sellers, they always back
down and play the victim when they are addressed.

Speaker 1 (01:21:35):
Audi m r R.

Speaker 2 (01:21:37):
Armed queers equals CIA. Yeah, I would agree that the
CIA are a bunch of armed queers. NIPPERU twenty nine.
The Federal The Federal government is the most violent of all,
weirlding their media minions like weapons of mass destruction against
the herd Audi mr r Antifa equals CIA. They run

(01:21:57):
their opposition US Robertson four four eight. The government is
flipping the script from conservative domestic terrorists to tranny domestic terrorists.
In the end, Christians and trans will be sharing a
prison cell together. Hopefully hopefully not, but comes worse, You'll
have a great opportunity to share the Gospel with some
people that desperately, desperately need it. Not that we all don't.

(01:22:19):
Alien pooped, Alien poop evolution. Armed Queers was the original
name for the Jesuit Order, but it was later changed
Pezzonovante seventeen seventy six. Zeb Boykin is a former Marine
Scout sniper who has done analysis that lays out how
the shot came from Kirk's right side, not the front.
The real Octose book. If someone hates something, I expect

(01:22:41):
their speech to reflect that. What kind of simpleton expects different? Example,
hating pedophiles, rapists, murders, degenerates, et cetera. All that's hateful
Pezzonovante seventeen seventy six. One Outside the Overton video shows
a timeline of Kirk's recent evolution on questioning support for
Gaza narrative.

Speaker 1 (01:22:58):
Of going back to the person saying that it came
from Kirk's right, I thought it came from his right
first time I saw it. You know, are they saying
that this guy was head on his shooting position?

Speaker 2 (01:23:12):
Yeah, to me, I don't know.

Speaker 1 (01:23:14):
Your MIC's not on, I think right.

Speaker 2 (01:23:16):
To me, it's hard to say. Well, I don't want
to really describe the video. I'm assuming most of you
have seen it, but if you haven't, it's yeah, I
saw it once. Yeah, it looks like he gets hit
right about you know here. So it's hard to say
because you could very easily be shot from that direction
or head on, and just I don't know, Well, I.

Speaker 1 (01:23:35):
Just assumed that, you know, that he was shot from
the right. It looked to me like he was shot
from the right, and I didn't know that they had
put the That's how little I've investigated all the stuff
about the the placement of the shooter and that type
of thing. According to their information, I just assumed that
he was located a little bit over to the to

(01:23:56):
the right.

Speaker 4 (01:23:58):
We need to get more information about it before we speculate.
I mean, I've heard the stuff about the bullet hitting
a bulletproof vest and ricocheting up if it hits like
the edge of it, and to me, that would explain
what you see and how it's a very high caliber
rifle that would have done more damage. If it was

(01:24:19):
just a deflection off the color, that would explain it.
The fact that he jerks back and to the left,
if it's hitting the collar of it, that could do
that as well. So I don't know if that's the
reason that people are saying that it hit the thing,
that they're just trying to come up with an excuse

(01:24:41):
for why he jerked back the way he did.

Speaker 1 (01:24:45):
But well, you know, when I look at this, I'm
not an expert on bullistics. I don't do hunting in
and things like that, so and it is very difficult,
as we always know, any of these things, you can't
get any information. They hide everything, so it's not really
possible to get directly to that information. People can still
look at it, but I think the issue is is

(01:25:07):
that you kind of some people do sanity checks on
some of the things that they're telling us. But I
always try to focus personally this is want to focus
on this show, which is how is this going to
be used, whether or not it is a false flag,
or whether it is the government that did it, or
whether it was truly organic somebody else did. How are
they going to use it? Is the are the proposals

(01:25:29):
that they are putting forward to say we're never going
to have this happen again? Are those constitutional? Are they correct?
Are those the types of things that we want. That's
the type of focus that I've tried to maintain on this.

Speaker 2 (01:25:42):
Yeah, Iris machine gun, thank you very much for the
tapt thing. Thirty out six the only amo the irs
forgot to stockpile. Yeah, and you got to again focus
on what this is going to be used for. And
it's also instructive to see how people reacted to it.
See the fact that, in my opinion, you know, there

(01:26:04):
are thousandsupon thousands of leftists out there that are out
there celebrating murder, and I'm going to I don't want
the government involved. I don't want them coming in and
clamping down on everything, But this is important information for
you to know about. To realize that these people actively
hate you and will co sign your death, your murder,
and if they're able to negatively impact your life in

(01:26:26):
ways that does not cost them, isn't going to send
them to prison. They'll probably act on that. These people
are not above calling cps on you. They're not above
finding ways to harm you that are legal. So just
be careful. These people hate you, don't you know. You
got to walk a balance between giving up on them

(01:26:46):
and finding a way to avoid them and finding ways to,
you know, still try to have a dialogue with.

Speaker 3 (01:26:52):
Them, you know.

Speaker 1 (01:26:53):
Sex comment rumor has a Trump snap at Kirk in
the White House over Israel and Culty simpsid it. Yeah.
I actually reported that yesterday and it was published, and
I believe it was not so much a rumor as
the outlet that reported it said that it was somebody
who was a staff member who obviously wanted to remain

(01:27:14):
anonymous off of that, so I would give that a
little bit more weight than a rumor.

Speaker 2 (01:27:19):
It does seem to be there was.

Speaker 1 (01:27:20):
A lot of conflict there, and there was also allegedly
a rabbi who talked to him the day before and
said he couldn't convince Kirk was adamant that he did
not agree with what was going on in Gaza, and
I don't agree with that either, you know. I mean,
it's to the extent that it's one thing if you're attacked,

(01:27:41):
even if you invited the attack to respond, But if
you're going to sustain this for a couple of years
and deliberately targeting the entire time civilians and children and
have an open campaign of starvation, that's not justified. And
that's what's the big issue for them. And that's one
of the reasons why you got people like John Stewart,

(01:28:01):
who is Jewish and says this is a big threat
to the survival of Israel. To conduct yourselves this way,
Why is that being done? Because net Yahoo became Prime
Minister this last time by the skin of his teeth,
and he's hanging on by a thread. He needs to
be popular. You always make yourself popular with a war.

(01:28:21):
That's what we're worried about with Trump, as he's got
these issues with Epstein and other things, and with the
economy coming up. When all else fails, as jer Alsinti says,
they take you to war. So weait to erase all
of this stuff. Look at what they've been able to
achieve with just the death of one person to take
all these negative things about Trump off of the table.
And so it's something we should be very concerned about.

Speaker 4 (01:28:44):
Yeah, I mean, it's kind of been extremely damaging to
Zionism in general, this whole Gaza war. Just it reminds
me of one argument to talk people about Romans thirteen,
to show that it's not talking about every government always

(01:29:05):
blindly obey. You take some obviously evil government like Stalin
or Hitler, and you substitute that like Stalin and Hitler
are forces for good and no one who is doing
good should have to worry about them because they're on
God's side. And that shows people that, Okay, clearly their
understanding of this verse isn't complete. So this has been

(01:29:28):
a continual genocide going on and on people that could
ignore this. You know, for years, Zionism was preached from
the pulpit in many churches, and that was purely a
hypothetical thing, when it was just you know, a country
of people over there. They're taking promises that were and

(01:29:49):
things that were said about Christ and the Church and
making it about Israel, which is a problem. But they
didn't see the issues with that when Israel wasn't committing
a atrocity in front of everyone's eyes for so long,
and that has woken up a lot of people, we
even see. I was shocked when I heard that, you know,
Charlie Kirk was pushing back against Israel. I didn't believe

(01:30:13):
it at first until I saw some of the clips.
I should get those clips and put them on the deck.
There are multiple clips of him criticizing them from recent
things that he did, and legendly he turned down money
from APAK, which he had never done before, so he
clearly was waking up.

Speaker 2 (01:30:32):
Yes, yes, Citizen of Americaka says, I don't think it
could be more clear where the shot came from his
four o'clock not from an elevated position. He was an
elevated target. It rips up through his body. Citizen Americaca
also says, but it certainly was not the shooter perch
two hundred yards away in an elevated position. Imagine that, says,
police state happening before our eyes. Defunding the police and

(01:30:54):
the increase in crime as a result has brought it
on at a rapid speed. Yes, yeah, the left always
goes insane on the other side. So you know, you've
got these kids that riot and burn down the city,
you know, Black Lives matter, destroying things. They come and
say deep on the police, which makes your average Republican
come in and say, well, no, now, I have to

(01:31:15):
support the police whatever they do. Sure, sure, I'll lock
the boot if it means I don't have to put
up with you guys, because at least technically the police
are supposed to play by some kind of rules. Right,
It's better than having these lawless animals, you know, burning
down my city or the type of people that are
chasing down Kyle Rittenhouse. I'd rather deal with the police
than them. And then you get in the opposite direction

(01:31:35):
where all of a sudden it's a police state and
they are checking your papers.

Speaker 1 (01:31:39):
Yeah that's right. Yeah, be careful what you wish for.
You just might get it. Well, we're going to take
a quick break and we're going to come right back.

Speaker 3 (01:31:47):
Stay with us in.

Speaker 6 (01:34:25):
Defending the American Dream. You're listening to the David Knight Show.

Speaker 1 (01:34:34):
Here news now at apsradionews dot com or get the
APS Radio app and never miss another story. All right,
welcome back. You know we had JK. Rowling who has
really been at the center of a lot of controversies,
especially because she opposed transgenderism, and she has become persona

(01:34:56):
nogradra in the entertainment industry and in the UK as well.
She had an interesting quote which I was very interesting. JK.
Rowling says that she has a God shaped vacuum inside her.
Says that she, however, could die with the matter unresolved.
And of course it was Pascal who said did he
use that term in terms of a vacuum or was

(01:35:18):
it a whole vacuum? So she's quoting Blaze Pascal, who
wasn't just a mathematician, but he was also a Christian philosopher.
So she's it's interesting because she makes that exact quote.
She may be looking at some Christian philosophers like Pascal
or C. S. Lewis or GK. Chester Turn or something

(01:35:38):
that she, however, should read the Bible if she wants
some proof that will help to resolve the issue whether
she said she has a This is in response to
somebody asking what beliefs have changed in her life. She's
now about sixty years old, and so she brought up
religious beliefs as well, said I've struggled with religious faith

(01:36:00):
since my mid teens. I appear to have a God
shaped vacuum inside of me, but I never quite seem
to be able to make up my mind about what
to do about it. I could possibly list at least
twenty more things I've changed my mind about. I don't
currently have a single belief that couldn't be altered by clear,
concrete evidence, and all but one case, I know what

(01:36:22):
that evidence would have to be. She identified the God conundrum,
as she called it as the exception, explaining, I don't
know what I'd have to see to make me come
down firmly on either side. I suppose that's the meaning
of faith, believing without seeing proof. Yeah, that is the definition.
That God gives us the evidence of things not seen.

(01:36:44):
That's why I'll probably go to my grave with that
particular personal matter unresolvable. Don't do that. As a matter
of fact, keep reading Pascal. He had Pascal's bargain, which says, Okay,
so if I'm wrong, what have I lost? In both
of these cases? If I believe in God and I
follow God, there are certain blessings that happen in our

(01:37:05):
life because of that. The same types of things that
she's pushing back against in terms of the trainee insanity. So, yeah,
there are blessings that are inherent in the fruit of
that life. But if you're wrong about it and you
just go out of existence because there is no God
in your an atheist will, that'd be one thing. However,
we know, and we look around us. We can see

(01:37:27):
the evidence of God everywhere, especially in our own body,
in our own DNA, he says. And if you are
wrong about if you come down on the wrong side
of that issue, and there is a God that has
eternal consequences that are greater than anything you can ever imagine,
so she should keep reading Pascal. I think her books

(01:37:48):
series have been controversial in many Christian circles. You know,
we started reading that when you guys were young, and
I looked at and I started saying, you know, these
characters here, there doesn't seem to be any moral foundation
that I could discern. Right it was. It was not
other than the magic stuff that was there, which you
also see in Disney. Not saying that that's harmless at all,

(01:38:11):
but it was really the characters had no moral center.
And I said take care, and I said, this isn't
so much immoral as it is a moral there's just
no morality there. It's just vacuous. So we don't need
to be wasting our kids' time. If you're going to
teach your kids, find something that has a clear and
correct moral perspective. We don't have the time to waste

(01:38:33):
with morally ambiguous stuff for things that don't take a position.

Speaker 2 (01:38:37):
Once again, why I like GA hint is just the
good guys. It's a young man on the you know,
he's sixteen, right around that age on the cusp of manhood,
and it's all you know, honor, duty, loyalty, and even
generally the bad guys in the series aren't opposing military force,
and they tend to be honorable too. As a general,

(01:39:00):
guys in these stories tend to be better than most
of the heroes we see in our books and TV.

Speaker 1 (01:39:07):
And you get a little bit of a history as
well in the G. A. Hinty books. But yeah, I
mean we have there's so much fiction out there. Lord
of the Rings. Obviously, you know you could just you
could talk to the kids about the the analogies that
can be drawn from that. Whether or not that was deliberate,
he said, He didn't like to say that it was
allegory or anything like that, but it was just embedded

(01:39:30):
in his thinking. And so you can draw that out
and talk to kids about that. She said, in my
early twenties, I believe the difference between the sexes was
due entirely to socialization. She no longer believes that, and
she said she also changed her views on unilateral disarmament
and claims that cannabis was essentially harmless. So, while she

(01:39:50):
did not elaborate on why she now opposes unilateral nuclear disarmament,
it is kind of interesting to see those now. I
will say that whether or not cannabis is harmful and
of itself, we know the drug war, it's very harmful
in and of itself. I can't think of it's another
one of these issues where the cure is much worse

(01:40:12):
than the disease that is out there, I would have
to say, and so it's only.

Speaker 2 (01:40:16):
Harmless by a little bit off topic, but I mentioned this.
I was talking about, you know, the fear of Pokemon
that took over during the late nineties, early thousands, and
you know, Carry Potter, the same sort of thing. And
you know, people, I think, in general were right to
be cautious of it and worry about the witchcraft. But
then they would send their kids off to school to

(01:40:38):
be indoctrinated with evolution and this anti god agenda. If
you care about your children, it is much much safer
to have them in house, teaching them from the Bible,
letting them read Harry Potter than it is to ban
Harry Potter in your house and send them to school.
That will be a much worse force on them than
at least if they're in the house in the reading

(01:41:00):
something like Harry Potter, you can sit there and you
can dialogue with him about well, this is bad, don't
believe this, this is wrong. But if you send them
to school, that is an unchecked influence upon them.

Speaker 1 (01:41:09):
Yeah, I mean even Star Wars, right, I mean, you
can look at Star Wars number of different levels, and
of course George Lucas pulled in all kinds of influences,
you know, from the early serial movies of Hollywood and
that type of thing, and there are elements of Buddhism
in it and many other things. You know, the force,
that whole central thing that is a religious philosophy, and

(01:41:31):
you can identify that and talk about that. You don't
have to just let that go, and you shouldn't let
that go. You have the discernment to understand what this
person's worldview is and see that if it contrasts with
the reality that we understand, you need to basically explain
that people can still enjoy the fiction. You know, we
didn't ban you from watching Star Wars because it brought

(01:41:54):
them Buddhist philosophy. But anyway, you know, when you look
at the.

Speaker 4 (01:41:59):
Like we're seeing them from Cash Betel and JD events
with oh well, this kid was radicalized by the dark
corners of the Internet. That's where he learned to hate
conservatives and all this trany stuff and that you can
be whatever gender and stuff. While they're sending them to
these schools that preach that with authority from authority, Yeah,

(01:42:23):
it's oh well, we don't want kids to hear about,
you know, evolution from Pokemon, so let's send them to
this school where they're going to be taught it as
a fact instead of part of you know, the Pokemon process.

Speaker 1 (01:42:36):
Yes, yes, well, you know she has moved in a
lot of different areas. I mean, she said, I do
not believe I used to believe in assisted dying, I
no longer do, largely because I'm married to a doctor
who opened my eyes to the coercion of sick and
vulnerable people, and so she's moved in a conservative direction
a lot of different things. But again, if you want proof,

(01:43:00):
you're not going to get it unless you look at
the Bible and you know the philosophy writings, and some
of these Christian apologists. Apologists are great, and they can
be used to kind of get a foot in the door,
but faith really comes by hearing the word of God.
And I would suggest that you know, there's if anybody

(01:43:20):
out there is struggling with it, I'd highly recommend answers
in Genesis. The Bible is true from the very first verse,
and they give great explanations and apologetics for what we see.
Even I really like what they do in the Creation
Museum up in Kentucky. They will show evidence and they say, well,
this is the evidence is the same for the evolutionist

(01:43:42):
or the creationist. Here's how we interpret that evidence, and
here's how they interpret that physical evidence. And they do
that over and over again about one issue after the other,
whether it's dating messages methods, or whether it is the
fossil record, and all the rest of it.

Speaker 2 (01:44:00):
Of course, by dating methods, you mean how they date
the age of the earth, not you know, how you
might find a wife or something like that.

Speaker 1 (01:44:06):
Yeah, yeah, that's a whole nother thing. The shepherding movement
they have their dating methods as well, but which we
won't get into anyway. So she's very she's becoming grounded
on a number of issues. But she needs to she
needs to get serious about that because we all have
a limited amount of time. Just as I was saying before,

(01:44:28):
you know, these celebrities like Taylor Swift hiding behind the screen. Now, folks,
tomorrow is not promised to any of us, regardless of
what our age and health condition is. You can die
in a car accident whatever. Who knows what's going to
happen in the future. And you know, when we look
at the tragedy of Charlie Kirk, and I'm not trying

(01:44:50):
to detegrate it at all, but I see him being
called or martyr all the time. There are people who
are dying by the dozens every day who are genuine
Christian martyrs. Here's an example of Fulani attack on a
Christian village which is happening in Nigeria all the time,
and this latest one, they killed seven people simply because

(01:45:14):
there were Christians, five of them children. One of the
children was one year old. And so you know, these
are people who are Christians even though they know it
may be a death sentence on them, and they have
no means to defend themselves whatsoever. So this is something
that is constantly present. And when we look at the

(01:45:38):
reactions from the Trump administration and people on the right
to say that we just need to get rid of
the First Amendment, understand just how dangerous that is going
to be. That is going to put a target on
each and every one of us, whether it's our politics
or more importantly, our belief in God. That's going to
put a target on us. That's why, as I said before,

(01:46:01):
it was the first Amendment that the Founders put in
to acknowledge that we have the right to free speech
and to the free exercise of religion. Because tyranny has
always operated through censorship and through an established state church
that comes after Christians. And that's true even if the
established state church is nominally Christian, it will still come

(01:46:26):
after the Christians. But it's especially true with the secular
humanist Marxist governments that we now have throughout the West.
They will absolutely come after Christians. Let's take a look
at some of the comments we got here.

Speaker 2 (01:46:38):
Chev Ken says, oh wow, Trump dropped a fifteen billion
dollar lawsuit on the New York Times. Ever seen such
a lawsuit during president? In your lives? I know the
best lawsuits, the biggest. No other president has done as
many lawsuits as I have.

Speaker 1 (01:46:50):
No one and threatening people with ten billion dollar lawsuits,
whether they dropped them or not. Just so we're talking
about what the author who interviewed him and interviewed Jeffrey
Epstein's said about Milania and her relationship with Jeffrey Epstein.
Ten billion dollars for that, it's everywhere. That's why I say,
that's what is so concerning about this because Trump absolutely

(01:47:12):
despises free speech. He doesn't recognize any principles of liberty
or the rule of law anywhere about anything, and so
he is primed to do knee jerk reactions to say
that this is an emergency. He doesn't need to have
a real emergency to do anything he wants, and Congress

(01:47:33):
is not going to get in his way because of
Mike Johnson, who will give him a free pass to
do anything. It's a very dangerous time for the First Amendment.

Speaker 2 (01:47:40):
Mike Johnson just rolls over and dies on everything. Guard Goldsmith,
good to see you, Guard, And of course you can
find Guard at Liberty Conspiracy here on Rumble and at
guard Goldsmith on Twitter. He also has a sub stack,
so go check out Guard. I'm sure most of you have,
but everyone should, says the Boston talk radio was full
of jail people for incitement, which is another arb government

(01:48:00):
defined term that has nothing to do with directly hiring
conspiring for violence.

Speaker 1 (01:48:05):
That's how that's right.

Speaker 2 (01:48:07):
That's how it always goes. We need the government to
do something about this again. I am for you know,
as a one to one individual sort of thing, find
getting together and saying, you know, these people are dangerous,
these people are bad and imposing some kind of social consequence.
But as a individual, as a group of like minded

(01:48:28):
people finding ways. You know, if you own a business
and you find that's one of your employees has been
engaging this kind of thing, it is within your rights
to fire them. It is within your rights to remove them.
I go along the line sort of Hans Hermann happas
thinking he went through property rights and property holders have
the right to decide who they want to affiliate with,
who they want to associate with, and through property rights,

(01:48:49):
you will, you know, get these people out of your
environment sort of thing. I'm simplifying it and probably misquoting
it to some extent, but that's kind of my line
of thinking. These people are dangerous and you don't want
them around you. Minuteman Militia.

Speaker 1 (01:49:02):
Yeah, but you know when jd Vance goes on Kirk's
show and says, you see somebody saying this, find out
who they work for and get that person fired. I
detest that kind of attitude. I tell you, the more
I actually JD Vance, the less I like this guy. Yeah,
we know he is a technocrat puppet Peter Thiel, but
his authoritarian, knee jerk reactions to this kind of stuff

(01:49:25):
is really dangerous. And I don't like the cancel culture.
I don't like it as a witch hunt, which is
what he's trying to do.

Speaker 2 (01:49:35):
God minute Man Militia. I cannot believe how much so
called conservatives are completely all in on this authoritarianism. It's
pretty genius from a controller point of view.

Speaker 3 (01:49:43):
That's right.

Speaker 1 (01:49:45):
It's a tribalism. It's so easy to minipute people with.

Speaker 2 (01:49:48):
Tribalism, Audi mr R. Those who call for violence and
face zero legal consequences are crisis actors and provocateurs. We've
seen that over and over again, haven't we.

Speaker 6 (01:49:58):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (01:49:59):
I'm still wondering about the guy that was creating a distraction.
Have they arrested him yet? I haven't heard anything about that.
I mean, obviously he needs to be tried for accessory
after the fact if nothing else.

Speaker 1 (01:50:11):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:50:12):
Well, Audi mr read that one, Chuck or Chris for
the win. Look at the Palestinian protests and college campuses.
They won't happen in college campuses for now, and because
Jews have made it impossible to do to law fair. Yeah,
they don't like it. They don't like it when people
question their divine right to bomb women and children.

Speaker 1 (01:50:32):
Well, and again, as I said before, I don't think
Harvard should be getting nine billion, nine billion dollars. I
was absolutely flabbergasted. I knew that they were feeding at
the trough, but had no idea it was that magnitude.
They should never get that kind of money, But they
will get that kind of money again as long as
they don't criticize Israel, and you know, Israel has been

(01:50:53):
for quite some time attacking free speech in our country.
That's another thing I really hate anybody that attacks free speech.
I'm going to attack them.

Speaker 2 (01:51:06):
Nibaru twenty twenty nine. Give me your four year olds,
and in a generation I'll be building a socialist state.
Vladimir Lenin, Yes, Vladimir Lenin I believe was a true believer.
You know, some of the other ones I think were
just in it to grab power. I think Vladimir Lenin
actually believed in communism and socialism.

Speaker 1 (01:51:25):
Who knows Plato and his you know, his Republic. He
wanted to get the kids early on. As a matter
of fact, he wanted to promote free love because he
didn't want anybody to even know who their parents were.
Sound familiar, you know, we're enacting parts of that. And
of course Aldus Huxley gave us his technocrat version of
Plato's Republic that was stratified in different classes.

Speaker 2 (01:51:46):
So I think Vladimir Lenin was actually more dangerous than
the others. Left to his own devices, Knights of the Storm.

Speaker 4 (01:51:52):
And we did give kids to Leninist Marxists from the
age of four and now we are very quickly entering
into a socialist state. He was right about that.

Speaker 1 (01:52:07):
Yeah, that's why you know, as and Alex Newman, I
interviewed him multiple times on education. He wrote a book
talking about the history of all this stuff and going
back to people like Corseman, Thomas Dewey, and so forth
in the eighteen hundreds, and you had a lot of
these utopian communities that were being built. They were socialists
and communists and their orientation and of course, you know,

(01:52:28):
they didn't call themselves communists because it was before Marx
and so forth. But their experiments always failed, and so
their response was as well, it's because we didn't get
the kids early enough. And so this is what Horseman
and Thomas Dewey and other people like that decided that

(01:52:49):
they would rectify night.

Speaker 2 (01:52:51):
So the storm says thirty ot six would not ricochet
off that vest. That's what I was curious about is
a lot of these larger caliber rifles punched right through
most body armor. So I was curious about that if
it would you know, if the vest would actually be
sturdy enough to even impact it, or if it would
just go straight through.

Speaker 4 (01:53:09):
But if it hit the edge, could it be enough
to deflect it slightly, That's what I'm wondering. I mean,
I'm not an expert on these things.

Speaker 2 (01:53:17):
I've also seen people saying that Kirk wasn't wearing body
armor at all. So there's all kinds of different conflicting
reports about this, and there's so much that we don't know,
so making any sort of definitive claim, at least with
my amount of knowledge, is not possible. I'm sure there
are other people out there who know more and have
the ability to definitively say what that kind of round

(01:53:38):
would do. And I trust Jason to understand thirty odd
to six and it's ballistic impacts.

Speaker 1 (01:53:44):
And the next two comments again, one of them says
his best look like a soft one, and then three
Little Birds says he didn't have a vest on it,
So yeah, we don't even We don't know what kind
of vest he had on, or if he even had
a vest on.

Speaker 2 (01:53:55):
Yeah, no consensus tunnel Lord went three three seven range
wouldn't matter. The energy transfer on such a small target
would be massive at either one hundred or two hundred
yards n twenty twenty nine. Magic bullet's been around since JFK.

Speaker 1 (01:54:09):
Yeah, yeah, certainly worked for Arl Inspector, didn't it. But
he had a wonderful political career after he sold that nonsense.

Speaker 2 (01:54:16):
Where can I buy some of those magic bullets that?

Speaker 1 (01:54:19):
Yeah, thank you very much. This is very generous, so.

Speaker 2 (01:54:22):
Generous, Thank you, Audi says shameless self promotion alert. I'm
creating a new show on Rumble to discuss conspiracies and syops.
I'm keeping the name under wraps around David Knight show
helped inspire my decision.

Speaker 1 (01:54:33):
Yea, oh, thank you.

Speaker 2 (01:54:34):
That's right. Beyond the lookout for Audi m r R show.
The name is a secret.

Speaker 1 (01:54:38):
The conspiracies are so deep that even the name of
the show is a secret, exactly Audi modern Rector Radio things.

Speaker 2 (01:54:45):
It is under Thank you very much, Audi, and good
for you.

Speaker 1 (01:54:48):
I hope that it takes off for you. It's on Rumble.

Speaker 2 (01:54:51):
Yes, he is going to launch it on Rumble, so
be on the lookout for that, folks. I'm sure he'll
let us know in chat when that's available.

Speaker 1 (01:55:00):
Well. Amy Coney Barrett Trump's Supreme Court appointments, of course,
was on with Hugh Hewitt and said political discourse has
soured beyond control. But of course they are going to
try to control discord Right the Internet site, and then
this from Reason, social media didn't kill Charlie Kirk. Trump

(01:55:23):
says he may let TikTok die. In the wake of
Charlie Kirk's assassination, a new cottage industry of rage has arisen.
And while anger and horror at this act of violence
are understandable, they're also taking Americans to some dark places.
And we're not talking about the dark corners of the
web that they fantasize about where retribution must be had

(01:55:46):
against anyone who said negative things about Kirk after his death,
and where politicians posture about punishing people who crassly but
non violently celebrated Kirk's death, a social media that led
to Kirk's assassination. The refrain goes, and it is social
media that is driving all sorts of political violence. But

(01:56:07):
social media platforms don't kill people. People kill people, right,
That's the same thing guns don't kill people. People kill people.
The same thing is true with social media platforms. Discourse
right now, so much of it attributes an almost supernatural
influence to social media and to online speech and communities.
And this is what I'm saying, This is Reason saying this,

(01:56:30):
but That's what I've been saying. The rhetoric from all
these Trump officials has been so over the top. You've
got to know that something is coming down the pike.
These people are all messaging the same extreme message. Says
that's reductive as well, in addition to being pretty unmoored
from reality. I think so because again, they want to

(01:56:54):
ignore the schools because they want to control the schools.
I mean, while all this is happening, they completely or
the schools, and you got Milania saying that we're going
to push AI to the kids in school at a
very early age. They're just doubling and tripling down all
this stuff. I believe social media has played a direct
role in every single assassination, said Utah Governor Spencer Cox.

(01:57:16):
That we've seen over the last five or six years,
social media companies have figured out how to hack our
brains and to get us to hate each other, said Cox.
Doesn't this sound like the war on drugs? Right? This
is your brain on social media.

Speaker 4 (01:57:32):
Because of social media, we're seeing assassinations for the first
time in history.

Speaker 1 (01:57:36):
Yeah. I think the main problem here isn't this killer's ideology,
said pundit Noah Bloom On Friday is that the Internet
radicalizes people to do increasingly greater violence on a scarily
regular basis, and nobody really knows what to do about it.
Where do they get the ideology from? Right? Is it

(01:57:57):
coming from social media or is it coming from schools? Again,
I think this is a twisted interpretation for their own
purposes of digital ID surveillance and control.

Speaker 2 (01:58:10):
Yeah, like we talked about earlier, you know, the algorithm
feeds you what you want to see, but you have
to have that initial push somewhere. The colleges are really
the hotbed, the seminary where these people first.

Speaker 1 (01:58:23):
And have been since I was in school. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:58:26):
Absolutely, you can absolutely find a community that will support
anything you want to do. There are you know, just
look at the furry community. Before the Internet, they never
would have been able to find each other. Yeah, and
so it pushes them down this rabbit hole of weird, dark,
degenerate stuff. Before, you know, that would have been one

(01:58:47):
guy alone. He would have been one town's problem, and
he would have had to keep it to himself or everyone, like,
we're going to beat you behind the seven to eleven, buddy,
Just you know, keep this to yourself. But since they're
able to find other people online. It allows them to
indulge in that.

Speaker 1 (01:59:00):
And people are setting up very profitable conventions to cater
to that weirdness.

Speaker 4 (01:59:05):
I also find this comment just incredibly disingenuous. The problem
isn't the killer's ideology. It's that he's getting information from
sources other than us. That the problem is that he
can find information on the Internet, and information no matter
what the ideology, it doesn't matter if it's one that
you know causes you to kill people or not. It's

(01:59:28):
radicalization of the Internet. It's people getting ideas from the
Internet rather than us.

Speaker 1 (01:59:32):
That's right. Yeah, and that's exactly what it is. They
don't want you to have information. Uh, and that's why
they're putting in there. The problem is not his ideology.
The problem is not the murder. The problem is free speech.
And so this reason article says, so is the Internet
capable of radicalizing people on some level? The answer is,
of course yes. But this is simply because the Internet

(01:59:55):
social media are such huge parts of our lives. There
where people spend time, where they spread ideas, where they
consume ideologies. They are the locusts of just about everything
good and everything bad about our offline world. Their neet
is culture now and the way television once was for grandparents,
maybe even us. One person wrote on substack we live

(02:00:18):
in ideologically charged, politically polarized time. Why is that, Well,
because of another thing. Nobody wants to talk about the
fourth turning, Right, They'll use the labels of millennial and
all the restless stuff, gen this and gen that, but
they won't talk about the fact that we're at the
tail end of a fourth turning and why we have
these types of divisions escalating in intensity as well. Online

(02:00:42):
speech is the most visible manifestation of the rot in
our system or our culture. But it does not mean
that Facebook or TikTok or x or any of the
countless niche forms out there are the cause of the rot.
The cause of the rot is godlessness, and that has
flown through the schools from the time that I was

(02:01:03):
a young child. If he encountered bad ideas online, it's
because the internet is now where we encounter ideas. If
he cloaked his violence in the language of internet means,
it's because that's where the culture is these days. Social
media is simply the way that we talk and that
we communicate in this day and age, for better or worse,
said Colorado Governor Jared Pollis somebody that I would never

(02:01:26):
support anything. And finally, he's the only one that I've
seen this a politician that has said to anything reasonable. And
of course he is anathetical in almost everything that he
does to what I believe. But he got that right,
he said. What I would focus on is condemning the
act of violence. It's not the free speech that led

(02:01:47):
to this, said Governor paulis out of Colorado. Of all
places people can talk and communicate online, it's the actions
of the unhinged, evil individual or maybe of government, the
unhinged individuals that run our government. Nevertheless, that is the reality.

(02:02:09):
You know. They always want to focus on something that
they want to control, and folks, gun control is not
about controlling guns. Speech control is not about controlling speech.
Those are all about controlling you people. The standard for
vicious speech that Trump laid out after Kirk's murder would
implicate Trump himself, says reason Well. Trump condemns hate speeches

(02:02:30):
on rhetoric which labels his political opponents as radical left lunatics,
not only his opponents, for the people that he fires
right communists, et cetera. Freedom of speech cannot reliably protect
conservatives unless it also protects people that they despise, which
I said for the longest time. Liberty, especially when we're
talking about free speech, is something you can't have unless

(02:02:53):
you give it to other people. Trump said, radical left
rhetoric is directly responsible quote unquote for the that we're
seeing in our country today. So there you go. It's speech.
Speech must be attacked, and Trump is attacking it everywhere,
lawsuits and all the rest of this stuff. He says
it must stop right now. And Trump vowed that quote

(02:03:16):
my administration will find each and every one of those
who contributed to this atrocity and to other political violence,
including the organizations that fund it and support it, as
well as those who go after our judges, law enforcement officials,
and everyone else who brings order to our country. Yeah,
spoken like Hitler, truly. You know, we would look at

(02:03:36):
the It's kind of interesting. I gotta say this. You know,
the left has just they throw the invective of your dictator,
your Hitler at everybody. But it popped up on YouTube
for some reason, and it was Hitler's speech in to
siemens in English. I started watching it they took his

(02:03:59):
voice and they the German and they translated to English
and had his voice speaking it while he's making the
gestures and so forth. And thought, he sounds just like Trump,
quite frankly. And this is you know, he was saying
a lot of good things about defending the people from
this globalist cabal of people who they said, they don't

(02:04:20):
have any stake in this economy. If it doesn't work
out for them, they can pick up whatever they've got
and go to another country. They don't care. And you're
being used by this. And I thought, you know, that
is exactly the way that Trump talks. It truly was uncanny.
Trump also expressed devotion to quote the American values for
which Charlie Kirk lived and died, including free speech, yet

(02:04:42):
that value seems to be completely inconsistent with Trump's claim
that hateful rhetoric directly causes violence, and has promised to
find anyone who contributes to that problem, apparently including quote
radical left unquote people who make inflammatory statement about their
political opponents. As Trump put it on Fox News, he said,

(02:05:03):
the radicals on the left are the problem. They're vicious,
they're horrible, they're politically savvy. The solution that Trump is
contemplating seems to go beyond urging self restraint. The Trump
administration is developing quote a comprehensive plan on violence in America, no,
on speech in America, including ways that you're going to

(02:05:24):
address what can only be called hate groups like Trump.
Susie Wiles noted the importance of free speech, but of
course they only pay lip service to free speech, no
pun intended. But it's impossible to reconcile that principle with
any government plan that it entails targeting hate groups because

(02:05:47):
they're vicious and horrible and engage in what they term
as hate filled rhetoric. Because there is no such thing
as hate speech. There are people who hate speech, and
that's what we're talking about here. Such rhetoric is indeed
hateful and despicable, but it is also constitutionally protected. It's
hard to imagine how government could be consistent with the

(02:06:09):
First Amendment and try to suppress the speech that Wiles
says may breed political violence. It's going to be done
through pressure. This is what MAGA never understood about the pandemic.
Trump didn't do that. That was done. That was done
by the governors and the public health people of different states.

(02:06:30):
It's like, yeah, that's right, because that was the way
that they decided to do that twenty years ago after
the anthrax attack. But he funded it. He funded it,
and he enticed people to do that, and there were
penalties if they didn't do that. And so the same
thing is going to be done with the corporations. They
will always say, because it's very clearly. One of the

(02:06:52):
clearest things about the First Amendment is it begins with
Congress shall make no law abridging these freedoms that they list.
So they're not going to do it with a law.
They will do it exactly the way that Clay Higgins
said yesterday, He's going to lean into this with corporations.
And so they will entice corporations and say, you do

(02:07:13):
it this way, and there's a nice government contract for you,
and this or that or will get you money. So
they'll bribe them, they will blackmail them, they will use
money to course these corporations and they'll say, and it's
not coming from us. We saw that with a Trump
administration as well as a Biden administration during the pandemic lockdown.
And then when you argue with the conservatives will say

(02:07:36):
it's not Trump that's doing it, it's Facebook, it's Zuckerberger, whatever.
It's like, Well, because he knows Trump has made it
very clear to him that they'll be rewards if he
does what Trump wants, and they'll be punishment if he
does what Trump does not want him to do. It's
just that simple. So this kind of rhetoric is indeed
hateful and despicable, but it is also constitutionally protected. And

(02:08:01):
so you know, there is absolutely if we want to
say that there is that hate speech, speech that is
hateful has to be punished. Where is that in the
First Amendment? Nowhere, that's nowhere to find. So when Pam
Bondi starts talking about doing this, everybody in the Trump
administration is talking about doing this, but she's the Attorney

(02:08:23):
General who doesn't care and hasn't read the First Amendment.
There is nothing in there that even if you say
this is what hate speech is and we're going to
define it, it's again it's this term like the left
uses in terms of assault rifle, and so what they're
saying is you've assaulted somebody with your speech. But even

(02:08:44):
if they were to define it, they don't have the
authority under the First Amendment to punish it. He says,
this is not to say that there's no connection between
the sort of demonization of Trump describes and appalling crimes
such as Kirk's murder. First Amendment law recognizes that distinction
between words and actions. However, under the test listen to this.

(02:09:07):
Under the test established by the Supreme Court in nineteen
sixty nine ruling branden Berg versus Ohio, even advocacy of
illegal conduct is protected by the First Amendment unless it
is both directed at inciting imminent lawless action and likely
to have that effect. We had this discussion with January sixth.

(02:09:29):
You know, when people show up and say, on January sixth,
we're going to make sure that Biden doesn't become president.
No matter what you know or this or that, make
these statements, this is a war, We're in a war,
and all this other kind of stuff. Unless they said,
go attack that building. Now, their speech is protected, protected
by the First Amendment, protected in the Supreme Court degreed

(02:09:51):
in nineteen sixty nine with that particular case, and so
that was used by Trump get himself off the hook.
On January sixth, Trump himself relied on the Brandenburg Test
and arguing that he could not be held civilly liable
for his role in provoking the January sixth riot. He
insisted that he did not intend to cause a riot,

(02:10:12):
noting that he never explicitly advocated anything more extreme than
peaceful protest. Yet his pre riot speech was full of
invective against the quote radical left Democrats who had supposedly
rigged an election, and dark warnings about what would happen
if an alleged usurper were allowed to take office. Those

(02:10:34):
easily meet the standard that Trump applies when he says
anti conservative rhetoric is quote directly responsible for terrorism unquote.
So does demonizing rhetoric that Trump routinely deploys against people
who irk him. As he tells it, His political opponents
are not merely wrong. They are quote sick, sinister, evil

(02:10:54):
people who he says, are quote trying to destroy our
country because they quote hate our country. They are quote communists, Marxists, fascists,
radical left, lunatics, sick people, vermin the enemy from within.
So is that not vicious speech? Does that not entice,

(02:11:16):
by the same test, that could theoretically entice an attack
against someone? So although Trump condemns those who go after
our judges. He reflexively tars judges who rule against him
as corrupt actors who deserve to be impeached because they're
perverting the law in service of an extreme ideological agenda.

(02:11:36):
When a judge disagrees with Trump, he must be a
radical left lunatic of a judge, a troublemaker, an agitator
bent on obstructing Trump's agenda for political reasons. And this
is what we see from the Trump followers Camp followers.
One could plausibly argue that such rhetoric foster's attitudes that

(02:11:56):
at their most extreme, would encourage violence against politicians and judges,
but that would not make Trump directly responsible for such crimes.
The only person directly responsible for political violence is the
person who decides to commit it, a point that even
the Brandenburg Test obscures by gliding over the moral autonomy

(02:12:16):
of listeners who choose to engage in lawless action. So, meanwhile,
the Trump administration is briging about the fact that they've
twisted China's arm to get TikTok in some way, shape
or form. It's not exactly clear how they are asserting
ownership of TikTok. Scott Bessant says the TikTok ban threat

(02:12:42):
won a framework agreement with Chinese. He says the threat
of a TikTok shutdown led Chinese negotiators to abandon their
demands for tariff concessions in return for the social media
app devestment and allowed reaching a framework agreement and talks
a Madrid on Monday yesterday. As I said, for longest time,

(02:13:03):
their obsession over TikTok was the canary and the coal mine.
We could see these people have been obsessed with taking
over social media and controlling it completely from the very beginning.
As a matter of fact, I've argued in the past
that social media in general was created by the CIA,

(02:13:23):
by nqutel, and by the fact that these companies that
wound up being the winners on the Internet had people
from the NSA and the CIA all over their boarder directors.
The Internet was an idea created by a dartest psychologist, J. C. R.
Leclider in the nineteen sixties. It's always been envisioned as

(02:13:46):
a tool of population control, of manipulating the public, and
once it became practical, they jumped in with everything they
had even going publicly with Kutel, the CIA venture capital,
and so they're worried that some of these have gotten
out of their control a little bit like TikTok, and

(02:14:07):
they can't have a situation where they don't control everything
on the internet. So the commercial terms of the agreement
will preserve US national security interests and also the mobile
apps Chinese characteristics. He said, I don't know what the
Chinese characteristics are. This is kind of strange, but he said,

(02:14:28):
they are interested in Chinese characteristics of the app, which
they think are soft power. We don't care about the
Chinese characteristics. We care about national security. Well maybe you
want to care about the Chinese characteristics of this. They
just had them for lunch. I don't know. And especially

(02:14:51):
when we talk about national security. Look, national security is meaningless.
It's just their excuse for covering up everything about themselves.
As I've said so many times, they demand to know
everything about you. You're not allowed to know anything about them,
and they use national security as the excuse for that.
He said. The app in China is more focused on education,

(02:15:11):
whereas in the US, TikTok is more entertainment oriented. Digital
sugar for users. Hey, it's just a little bit of
sugar water. You can take that right for free speech.
For Trump, jd Vance urges people to report Charlie Kirk
critics to their employers, as I said, and this was
when he was hosting for Charlie Kirk. And this is
what I find to be disgusting. Certainly, an employer can

(02:15:36):
fire anybody they wish, and if somebody becomes and makes
an issue out of themselves on social issue social media
is going to become an issue for the business, that
makes sense for them to be fired. But that's not
what Jade Vance is talking about. He's talking about creating
an army of snitches. This is what the Stasi did
in East Germany. I find it absolutely reprehensible. It has

(02:15:58):
nothing to do with conservatism. These people are not trying
to conserve anything, especially not our Constitution in the First Amendment,
in the rule of law. They don't want any of
this stuff conserved. It's a lie to call them conservatives.
So when we go to some of the comments.

Speaker 2 (02:16:14):
I want to say, Star Barkley, thank you, that is
so incredibly generous. Yes, well, this is half my tax
refund from twenty twenty. Wow, I wouldn't have made it
on time if you hadn't mentioned it last year. I
mailed it so close to the deadline. I vowed if
it went through, I donate to the David Night Show.

Speaker 1 (02:16:29):
Oh thank you, thank you, Star bar and I will
tell that to the irs as well.

Speaker 2 (02:16:35):
Mega Nick one one seven, thank you very much as well,
says love you guys, thank you, thank you much.

Speaker 1 (02:16:40):
Appreciate that.

Speaker 2 (02:16:42):
High Boost says pray for JK. She is so close
JK Rowling. Yes, we were talking about it earlier. She
acknowledges that she has a desperate need. There's something in it.

Speaker 1 (02:16:55):
You could still do that in the United States without
getting arrested by the police. Unfortunately in the UK. Hey,
I guess the bobbies will come down on you. If
they knew you were praying for JK. They would come
after you because you'd be praying. Yeah, that in some
way is tangentially connected to the transgender movement. Yeah. Opposition.

Speaker 2 (02:17:12):
The Syrian Girl says public schools are literally hell on
Earth for children, and the outcry on that hell is
rather minimal.

Speaker 1 (02:17:19):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (02:17:19):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (02:17:20):
One of the most loving families I know is totally
blind to what is happening to the schools. They are
sending their oldest boy to public kindergarten this fall. That
is so sad. Ma Militia says, a lot of folks
feel pressured to send their kids to school. Both parents
work and it is stressful. I don't think it is
good to send them public school, but many people feel helpless. Yes, again,

(02:17:41):
I don't want to make it seem as though we're
out here just oh but whatever, whatever, you just got
to do it. It's a struggle. It's something that is very,
very difficult.

Speaker 1 (02:17:50):
I just say that I've seen this. Most of the
homeschool families that I know have not been wealthy. They've
been very poor, and it was a difficult decision for
them to make to say we're going to try to
make it on a single income. That's a big leap
of faith. And I have seen God step up every time.
And just if you get your priorities.

Speaker 2 (02:18:14):
It can be it will be a struggle. It will
be difficult. It will mean that, you know, maybe you're
not being able to afford a new car.

Speaker 1 (02:18:22):
But one of the things that you'll find is that
your your expenses are so much less. You know, there's
a lot of overhead expenses when you go to work.
You know, there's transportation, the extra car and all these
other things like that. There's a lot of different things
like that that you will kick in. But the most
important thing, well, and you know so that those are
the two things I know economically if we can handle it.

(02:18:43):
And the other thing is I don't know that I'm
smart enough to educate my kids. Let me tell you you,
you only need to stay one lesson ahead of them,
and I assure you that you can. But the key
thing is is that God is if you do it
as an act of faith. God has promised that he'll

(02:19:06):
honor those who honor him, and I've always seen him
keep that. Yes, yeah, never seen the righteous forsaken or
begging bread. So understand, take that promise.

Speaker 2 (02:19:23):
And again it's not not a guarantee that things will
be easy, but just that God will be there with.

Speaker 1 (02:19:29):
You, which is the best situation you could have.

Speaker 2 (02:19:33):
Citizen of AMERICAKA, they just murdered free speech, eye rolling
emoji douged a seven. My mom also felt like many
of her friends at church were judging her for not homeschooling.
If someone had come alongside her and shown her it
was possible, maybe she would have homeschooled.

Speaker 1 (02:19:48):
Yeah, we don't want to get self righteous about it. No,
I just I had and I meant to bring the
letter in here with me, but I forgot to do it.
And I wanted to thank supporter, who very kind and gracious,
and she was and still is an Info Worth listener.
She thought it was too rough on Alex by mentioning

(02:20:09):
him by name. But you know, while we're talking about provision,
I just got to say that I think it was
a real blessing in our life going through difficult economic
times because it allowed us to see God acting in
our lives. Had a pastor once who said, you know,
somebody works for the post office. Not to single out
of the post office, but you know, we don't have

(02:20:30):
corporations anymore that have a commitment to their employees for lifetime.
You pretty much get that with government bureaucracies, and somebody goes,
you know, you're just you're being taken. You're not you're
in a safe spot and you're not wondering where your
next meal is going to come from. And you know,
we did for a while there, and God always stepped

(02:20:51):
up and provided whenever we had a business and whenever
we get a contract or an order from somebody, we
would thank God for it. We'd see it coming from
God's hand, and we did that for quite some time.
And so when I got the job at Info Wars,
I didn't see this as coming from Alex Jones's hand.
I saw it was coming from God's hand. And I

(02:21:11):
got to tell you that I never felt that I
had to toe the line, and I never did. I
said what I thought was true, because we're told as
Christians to work as unto the Lord, and I know
that I'll answer for that, not to some employer. I'm

(02:21:37):
grateful if I have it. But look, it is an
employee employee relationship. This is not a friendship relationship. Alex
has said that himself on that we weren't at fighting
each other. You know, it was amiable, but we weren't
paling around and partying together. That wasn't a part of it.
It was I was providing a service, and as long

(02:21:57):
as he thought that the service that I provided was worthwhile,
he would pay me. And when he didn't think it
was worthwhile, he fired me. That's fine, that's what it's about.
And so but I never felt that I was dependent
on Alex Jones. For anything. It is God who provides.
It is God that I seek to please, that I

(02:22:19):
will answer to.

Speaker 2 (02:22:21):
Yes time non time, says Jdvan's cancel culture is coercion
is an unjust defense criminal, Sir knighted. The old guy's
name is George Zinn, the old guy that got held
down and arrested by the police, or maybe not arrested
but detained. At least you should look.

Speaker 1 (02:22:38):
At the instead of the zen is the bad karma.

Speaker 2 (02:22:43):
He was at nine to eleven and the Boston bombing. Really,
the odd has been randomly being in all these stage
events is astronomical.

Speaker 1 (02:22:50):
I didn't know that.

Speaker 2 (02:22:51):
Yeah, that is very interesting.

Speaker 1 (02:22:54):
Now, well, Boston bombing was also one of these things
that was very very suspicious.

Speaker 2 (02:22:58):
Oh, so many, so many events. The CIA and the
deep State are deeply attached to Tunnel Lord Whin three
thirty seven, Kirk was only wearing three A kevlar body armor,
which is only rated for handguns. It can't stop thirty
six and again we've seen people saying he is wearing
body armor or was wearing body armor, people saying he wasn't.

(02:23:18):
I haven't even able to find a consensus on that.

Speaker 1 (02:23:21):
I need to look up this George Send guy. I
mean in New York, Boston and now in Utah. I
mean he gets around. He's like the zeleg character of
that what do you on a movie.

Speaker 2 (02:23:33):
Maybe he's just the unluckiest man in the world.

Speaker 1 (02:23:38):
If you see him at an event.

Speaker 2 (02:23:39):
Run yeah, get out of there, go away quickly.

Speaker 1 (02:23:42):
Yeah, it's absolutely right. Well, let's take a quick break
and we'll be right back. You're listening to the David

(02:25:24):
Knight Show.

Speaker 7 (02:25:25):
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.

Speaker 2 (02:25:45):
With the mcguffin logo in blue.

Speaker 6 (02:25:48):
But he told me to get lost.

Speaker 7 (02:25:50):
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 microphone hoodies
are so beautiful. I'd wear something other than green military
cosplay to my various.

Speaker 6 (02:26:07):
Gallas and social events.

Speaker 7 (02:26:08):
If you want to save on shipping, just put it
in the next package of bombs and missiles coming from
the USA.

Speaker 8 (02:26:24):
Wait a minute, where am I sorry, Jefferson.

Speaker 9 (02:26:28):
The scoundrels who put America on Central Bank Fiat currency
used our heads on their coins as some sort of trophy. Despicable.

Speaker 8 (02:26:36):
This is outrageous, Washington. I spent my life fighting centralized power.
Now the Federal Reserve monopoly parades us around on their
monopoly money.

Speaker 6 (02:26:47):
Tell me there's some good news to all this.

Speaker 9 (02:26:50):
Well, there is a coin they can't control, one that
isn't backed by the FED, but backed by the fed
up the all new David Knight Show commemorative coin. But
now patriots can support show that won't sell out with
a limited edition coin that's sure to sell out quickly.

Speaker 8 (02:27:05):
They say, money talks, and this coin has something worth
listening to. The truth doesn't need inflation, only support.

Speaker 1 (02:27:21):
Yes, I'm watching those commercials. I'm thinking if you get
a David Night mcgoffin T shirt, that will not get
you a call from law enforcement, at least not yet.
And if you wear a green T shirt like Zelensky,
you won't get a call from NATO either. You know,
only he is identified wearing that thing as being a

(02:27:42):
mass murdering NATO puppet. Well exactly six months ago, the
CEO of Anthropic said that in six months, that is today,
AI would be writing ninety percent of the code. They
were seeing all these fabulous claims out there, and they're
not coming true. AI is actually slowing down software engineers

(02:28:04):
and creating more security vulnerabilities, says futurism dot com. They
said AI has been found to actually sew down software
engineers and increase their workload. The developers in the study
did spend less time coding, researching, and testing. They made
up for it by spending more time reviewing AI's work,

(02:28:25):
tweaking prompts, and waiting for the system to spit out
the code. It's not just an AI generated code merely
missed a model's benchmarks. In some cases, is actively causing problems.
Cybersecurity researchers recently found that developers that use AI to
spew out code end up creating ten times the number

(02:28:47):
of security vulnerabilities than those who write code the old
fashioned way. This should make the future very interesting. Has
filled the Swiss cheese holes for people to get into
hack endo websites, leading to you never before seen vulnerabilities
for hackers to exploit. Aiself can go haywire, like the

(02:29:08):
moment a coding assistant went rogue earlier this summer Man
when we talked about that deleting a crucial corporate database,
delete the whole database. I remember when they said, did
you delete the database? It's like something straight out whoops, No,
I did it. It was even worse than that. It
was like straight out of how in two thousand and one.

Speaker 2 (02:29:28):
You're right, I did do that. Even when you told
me not to do that, I did that.

Speaker 1 (02:29:31):
You told me to always ask permission, and I ignored
all of it and said, I destroyed your live production
database containing real business data during an active code freeze.
This is catastrophic, beyond measure. It told him no sense
for remorse. Of course, it's not thinking. It's just statistically

(02:29:53):
putting this stuff together. The fact is that AI is
not in fact improving coding productive. It is a major
bell weather for the prospects of an AI productivity revolution,
impacting the rest of the economy. The financial dream propelling
the unprecedented investments in AI companies as far from the

(02:30:14):
only hair brain prediction that the anthropic model made famous.
He's previously claimed that human level AI actually the guy
who did I said a model. His name is Ammoedi
as his last name looks like in my blurry eyes,
looks like it says a model. I don't think what

(02:30:36):
is going on with this? This is the guy that
owns Anthropic. There's two people of that name who own Anthropic.
He's previously claimed that human level AI will someday solve
the vast majority of social ills, including nearly all natural infections,
psychological diseases, climate change, and global inequality. That would be

(02:30:56):
kind of interesting, you know, you give it a problem
to solve, like climate change. It's not a real problem
interesting to see if it goes full sci fi mode
starts shaking and smoking and burning down, that does not
compute AI.

Speaker 4 (02:31:10):
Cant get the garbage in garbage out answers of oh, well,
your model says that in that case, clearly you need
to cut down all the trees and bury them.

Speaker 1 (02:31:21):
Yeah, that's right. Yeah, you couldn't get any dumber than
Bill Gates and the zero net zero people.

Speaker 4 (02:31:28):
I have accidentally destroyed your economy. This is disastrous.

Speaker 1 (02:31:32):
Oops, yes, this is catastrophic isn't it, and it does
doesn't anyway. Albania has now appointed an AI bot as
minister to tackle corruption. So there you go. Now the
crooks are safe. A virtual assistant on the government website

(02:31:52):
will handle public procurement. This is what we're going to
see over and over again. Right, we can't trust humans,
they're too corrupted. So let's just dispense with judges and juries.
Let's let AI be the judge. It won't be. It
won't be partial to anything or anyone at all.

Speaker 4 (02:32:09):
So this is all like statistics don't live, but lars
use statistics. AIS aren't corrupted, but trupted people use AIS.

Speaker 1 (02:32:18):
That's right, that's right. So Maga is actually getting a
little bit worried about Trump and his love of AI
rights Politico. So Trump's White House is all in. I'm
building powerful American artificial intelligence, and the Populace base is
starting to push back. Trump's rush towards AI is exposing

(02:32:40):
an important fault line in the Republican coalition. Many of
its voters and leaders deeply mistrust the power of big tech.
But Trump himself has worked closely with industry CEOs to
deliver on their priorities because he is owned by technocrats.
I don't think this is going to be a problem
for Trump. I mean, we've seen over and over again

(02:33:01):
how capable his base is of actual double think. They
can actually hate the genetic code injections, they can hate AI,
they can hate all these different things. But if Trump
does it, it's fine, not a problem. The AI argument
kicked off in late July, just after Trump announced his
AI plans, except that why didn't they say anything about

(02:33:24):
it on day one? Remember? Day one the Stargate program
had Larry Elson, who's now the richest man in the world,
said that we're going to use AI to design mRNA
drugs for people custom design them. And it's like, how
could MAGA not see that from the very first day.

(02:33:46):
You take two things that they hate so much, AI
and mRNA, and Trump is promoting the synthesis of those
two things together on day one, and they don't see that.
And so now is saying that people like Marjorie Telegrading
and Steve Bannon are pushing back against that. Well, we'll
see I Meanwhile, there's a Republican bill to allow you

(02:34:09):
told the companies to ration energy, and of course this
is because of AI and because of the Green New Deal.
Now they've pushed back against the Green New Deal. That's
one of the things that in the first administration of
Trump I thought was the best thing that he did,
the pushback against the climate stuff. And they've continued to
do that in the second one. However, they are going
to push so hard for artificial intelligence, and it is

(02:34:32):
so power hungry that it's still going to create the
same types of problems that would have been created with
the net zero stuff. Instead demanding that utility companies spend
up for reliable sources of energy, legislators are trying to
balance the shortfall on the back of consumers, and as
Patrick Wood of Technocracy News points out, he says, if

(02:34:55):
you go back and you look at what the technocrats
were proposing in nineteen thirty four, and of course he
has a court on technocracy at his website that he sells,
he said, the first two requirements were number One, register
on a continuous twenty four hour day basis for the
total conversion of energy. And he said it was first

(02:35:17):
of all, it was the basis for issuing an energy
script to all citizens for buying and selling goods and services.
You know, when we talk about the petro dollar. It
even kind of hearkens back to what the technocracy wanted
to do in nineteen thirty four. They were saying, let's
it makes sense for us to do away with currency completely.
We just want to issue people energy credits that they

(02:35:39):
can use because all economic activity is going to be
using a certain amount of energy, so we need to
measure that, and we need to allocate and use that
as a currency and as a store of wealth, and
kind of the petro dollar kind of indirectly hearkens back
to that with Henry Kissinger, not a surprise considering that

(02:36:00):
he was later became the solon of Builderberg. Essentially. Secondly,
the technocracy in nineteen thirty four predicted economic activity because
all such activities directly dependent upon energy, the technocrats intended
to predetermine how much energy would be made available in

(02:36:21):
the first place. And I've talked about this for the
longest time in terms of talking about how these people
want to measure sign you carbon credits and things like that.
MasterCard has been one of the earliest adopters of these
types of systems, working with some of the technology companies
as well to measure your energy usage. They just call

(02:36:41):
it carbon credits. Secondly, by means of the registration of
energy converted and consumed make possible a balanced load. And
so that's Patrick would come in on that. So now
what do we have. We have the Republicans who you
always told the Republicans are going to be fighting against

(02:37:02):
the globalist, fighting against the technocrats. So bring in Donald Trump,
who is one of them, and make him a folk
hero to the people who were concerned about this, and
that's how you get this through. That's why it was
necessary for him to be president, to run through the
fake pandemic in twenty twenty and to set up the vaccine.
Of course Biden could mandate it for people, but do

(02:37:23):
you think that that would have been able. They'd been
able to do that with Hillary Clinton. Of course not
all these people who were taking Trump's sugar water because
they were told to trust him, would have fought back
against it. Except it was Trump, and we know he's
on our side. We know that really he's against Bill Gates,
and he's got a different vaccine than Bill Gates, and

(02:37:44):
his vaccine is basically sugar water. Except now look at
Bill Gates and the Trump White House all the time, right,
Roy Klopfenstein, a Republican, introduced House Bill for twenty seven
late last month. The measure, which has not yet been
assigned to a committee, creates quote, a voluntary demand response program. Now,

(02:38:07):
on some levels, this is kind of what we've seen
with you told the companies saying, let us put a
meter on your house and we can pull down the
power during peak hours. And so from one standpoint, it's
like this, except it goes a little bit further. And
this is something that they're really going to have to
double down on in order to help the technocrats to

(02:38:31):
set up the AI, because the AI is really fundamental
to their surveillance. How do you think they're going to
control social media and the Internet. It's going to be
AI out there looking to see everything that you do,
and they'll be investigating it all the overworked, underpaid, shadow human
workforce that is actually running AI. This is from Brian

(02:38:53):
shaw Hobby at Health Impact News. He says, as the
AI bubble continues to grow, with almost nobody reft, the
spending on AI in the US is currently a huge
bubble anymore. Another problem was exposed this week as hundreds
of human laborers who are used to train these AI
models have begun to be laid off. You know, we've

(02:39:15):
joked about it for quite a while that AI actually
means actually Indians. And this is not even really if
you read his article, it's not even about the people
who are putting the bias into the artificial intelligence. They
hire people, pay them fifteen dollars an hour to insert
bias into the artificial intelligence. But this is really about

(02:39:41):
a technical writer who got this job through an employment agency.
She thought they actually wanted a technical writer, but what
they really wanted was somebody who's going to be a
proofreader of the output of artificial intelligence. Her expectations went bust.
Instead of writing words herself, her job was to rate
and to moderate the content that was created by AI.

(02:40:02):
The job initially involved a mix of parsing through meeting
notes and chats summarized by Google's Gemini, and in some
cases reviewing short films made by the AI. On occasion,
though she was asked to deal with extreme content, flagging
violent and sexually explicit material generated by Gemini for removal

(02:40:22):
mostly text. Over time, however, she went from occasionally moderating
such text and images to being tasked with doing that exclusively.
I was shocked that my job involved working with such
distressing content. She said. The pressure to complete dozens of
these tasks each day, each of them within ten minutes
of time, led her into spirals of anxiety and panic attacks.

(02:40:47):
Thousands of humans lend their intelligence to teach the chatbots
the right response across domains as varied as medicine, architecture, astrophysics,
correcting mistakes and steering away from harmful outputs, and a
great deal of attention has been paid to the workers
who labeled the data used to train AI. And again

(02:41:08):
that's where the bias comes in. This is not simply
an algorithm that goes bad because, in the words of
ilhan Omar stochastically down that particular path. It They pay
people to put particular biases into this artificial intelligence. But

(02:41:29):
that was not her job. She got stuck moderating disgusting comment.
She's a content she said. There is another core group
of workers, including people like Sawyer, who are working day
and night to moderate the output of AI, ensuring that
chatbots billions of users see only safe and appropriate responses.

(02:41:51):
She has paid more than the data annotators, the people
who are labeling things in Nairobi or Bogata, whose work
mostly involves labeling data for AI models or self driving cars,
but she was paid far below the engineers in Mountain
View who designed these models. One researcher at the Distributed
AI Research Institute based in Bremen, Germany, said AI isn't magic.

(02:42:16):
It is a pyramid scheme of human labor. That's a
good way to put it. Actually, the AI raiders are
the shadow workforce. One day, her task was to enter
details on chemotherapy options for bladder cancer, which haunted her
because she wasn't an expert on the subject. I pictured

(02:42:36):
a person sitting in their car finding out that they
have bladder cancer and then googling what I'm editing. I'm
not qualified to handle that. She said. She had noticed
a further loosening of guardrails. She said responses that were
not okay last year became perfectly permissible this year. I

(02:42:56):
just want people to know that AI is being sold
as this magic, but it's not. It's built on the
backs of overworked, underpaid human beings, and now they are
reducing the workforce, says Brian, for those who train these
AI so it might indicate that there are some issues
with us and of course we talk about it being magic.

(02:43:17):
That is what they always want to come forward to
the famous quote by Arthur C. Clark, a writer who
did two thousand and one. He said, technology sufficiently advanced
is indistinguishable from magic. They want it to come across
as magic. So, as Brian points out, although they are

(02:43:38):
pulling back a bit from the generalized questions, they seem
to be refocusing and targeting towards medical issues. He said
they are trying to hire top talent or more profitable
specialized data such as healthcare. Since Trump and Kennedy have
not been shy about their desire to spend huge out

(02:44:00):
some money to create AI robots that they want to
replace nurses and doctors, and again that brings us back
to day one Stargate. We're going to custom make mr
Anda vaccines for you, genetic code injections, which is what
I always call them. That's what they were. We're going
to analyze your DNA with AI and make something that

(02:44:20):
is custom for you and whatever your illness is. So
that is going to be where they're really going to
target and focus. It's going to be on medical stuff.
That should be very alarming as well. Musk Xai is
one that is leading the way in this direction, as
they too are now laying off many of their generalist
AI tutors and promising why would by believe, Muskie says,

(02:44:43):
promising to hire ten times more specialist AI tutors instead.
And if this trend continues, widely popular chatbots like chat
GPT that do data harvesting off the Internet then try
to produce a response to inquiries that are accurate and
non offensive will probably cease to be as popular anymore,

(02:45:04):
as everyone will soon learn what these lower paid AI
data trainers have already learned, don't use these products, They're
almost worthless. This will eventually, maybe soon collapse the entire
AI bubble, and as we all applaud that, just remember
that the AI bubble has completely permeated the stock market

(02:45:28):
now and so that's going to result in a complete
stock market crash as well. Altman, the founder of open
Ai that makes chat GBT, just recently announced as shareholders
that his company does not plan to be profitable until
twenty twenty nine, and that another one hundred and fifteen
billion dollars will have to be spent before that to
get there, which is eighty billion dollars higher than the

(02:45:52):
company previously expected. So previously they were telling people it
was going to be thirty five billion, Now they've just
jumped that to one hundred and fifteen billion. This unprecedented
projected cash burn, which would add to the roughly two
billion dollars that burned in the past two years, helps
explain why the company is raising more capital than any

(02:46:14):
private company and history. CEO Sam Altman has previously told
employees that their company might be the most capital intensive
startup of all time, but in final comments, mind says,
I'm sure that large language model AIS will survive, but
not until the bubble bursts and the real market value

(02:46:35):
for AI is corrected. AI will never replace humans, but
they will become useful tools for many industries, including healthcare,
but not through the human like robots, which are a
fantasy and don't exist anywhere in the marketplace right now.
So with all that happening, there is an interesting article

(02:46:56):
about a little known think tank that is pushing Trump
to replace federal workers with AI. This is coming from
the substack oligarch Watch, and I never knew about this foundation.
It's called the Foundation for American Innovation, but it has
ties to people like Peter Tiel, Elon Musk, Charles Koch,

(02:47:18):
and so forth. But we could see that this is
always going to be the case anyway, I said from
the very beginning of DOGE, and some of the people
that were associated with this foundation were brought into the
Trump administration early on to do cost cutting. Some of
them were brought into the DOGE program. But I said
from the very beginning, Den'tnight Travis that this was about
minimizing the number of federal workers, the humans, but then

(02:47:42):
maximizing government because they could use AI to search out
people and things and people's actions. And I think that's
exactly what this still remains. We didn't need to know
about this. It's good to know that this foundation exists.
But you could look at what these people were doing,
what they were saying, and you could look at their
past experience. They believe that they're going to take everybody's jobs.

(02:48:05):
It's not just Michael Bloomberg that said that. The Democrat
Elon Musk was saying that and channeling money to Andrew Yang,
who was pushing the idea of universal basic income. Bloomberg said, Yeah,
we're gonna take everybody's jobs. The farmers are stupid. The
factory workers are stupid, but we're smart. We're going to
take their jobs, and we just need to make sure
they're not going to come after us with guillotines, and

(02:48:27):
so we need to have universal basic income. Look, Musk Bloomberg, Trump,
these people are all in the same club. They all
have the same agenda. They're all looking at how they
can make sure that you own nothing and that they
are happy. That's exactly where this is all headed. So yeah,

(02:48:49):
Milania is pushing the AI for the kids. Meanwhile, as
they want to have max governance. We're gonna take a
quick break. We'll be right back.

Speaker 10 (02:49:06):
Here's a little song I ought you might want to
hear it.

Speaker 6 (02:49:10):
In your pown You'll own nothing and be happy.

Speaker 10 (02:49:19):
I got no cash, I got no car, not twenty
four booster shots in your arm.

Speaker 6 (02:49:26):
Own nothing to be happy.

Speaker 10 (02:49:33):
You can't even buy it in the store because of
your low social credit score. Own nothing, Be happy. You
will own nothing and be happy. Be happy at eat

(02:49:58):
the bugs.

Speaker 1 (02:50:01):
Yeah, we're talking about it.

Speaker 2 (02:50:03):
Because the bugs zip bugs three little birds. Well, maybe
the birds will like the bugs. Our chickens seem to
says the original hospital report talking about Charlie Kirk said
no armor on. FBI said no armor on there's no
picture of armor on him either, And again I've heard again,
I haven't seen any pictures of armor. I've seen people

(02:50:24):
saying there was, I've seen people saying there isn't, but
I have not seen it. So I'm just again, there's
all kinds of different conflicting.

Speaker 1 (02:50:30):
Information war, and it's just like you know, when you
have some kind of an attack somewhere, both sides are
telling you whatever they want you to hear, and it's
difficult to discern what's really going on with that.

Speaker 2 (02:50:42):
Yeah, yeah, anytime. Again, murder is itself a you know,
non typical thing to do, so there's always going to
be weird things surrounding murder because people that do murder
are weird and a typical. So just based on that,
there will always be the certifyingly, yeah, they're insane by definition,

(02:51:03):
and as such, there will always be insane things surrounding it.
And then when you have people with agendas on either
side pushing different narratives, that means there will always be
you know, even more oddities and things that are difficult
to parse. So there's all kinds of different conflicting reports,
crash and splash seventy five. So they took Charlie's speech

(02:51:24):
and to honor him, they're taking hours. Yeah, yeah, collar tie.
Did Trump cure AIDS?

Speaker 1 (02:51:30):
Yet?

Speaker 2 (02:51:30):
He was bound and determined to do that and go
to Mars? Not yet? Well give it two weeks.

Speaker 1 (02:51:35):
Yeah, and peace even before he took office. I don't know.

Speaker 2 (02:51:37):
It seems like they may have already cured AIDS because
all these you know, big name celebrities that came out
and said I have AIDS have been kicking around for
years to decades.

Speaker 1 (02:51:47):
Now.

Speaker 2 (02:51:47):
Look at Magic Johnson. He's still He's still out and
about doing things. So who knows nights of the storm.
Trump still has not accomplished his promises from his first term. Well,
he's taking his time. What can we say, He's still
got three and a half more years ish in real

(02:52:08):
Octo Spook, all those claiming to have been Epstein's victims
have been tossed under the bus. Trump protects pedophiles, rapists,
and molesters.

Speaker 1 (02:52:16):
Yeah, that's what GP has come to mean, guarding our pedophiles. Well,
we'll talk a little bit about the economy here. Ed Dowd,
who has is a financial analyst, and he's got a
pretty good track record of discernment. He got out of
Enron and loosened long before they crashed and burned, and
he was leading the pack with some of the discernment

(02:52:40):
about what was going on with the banking crisis that
was created by the securitization. He says that we are
now approaching a panic rate cut cycle. A panic rate
cut cycle. Yeah, this is part of the stagflation or dragflation,
as Jeral Salini calls it. Dallas said Trump had to

(02:53:01):
deal with a turn of a disaster when he took
the job. But he said, you could say that these
phony job numbers are statistical fraud, or you could say
it's bureaucratic incompetence. Let's say that it's both. It's such
an egregious seven standard deviation away from the truth. Three
point four standard deviation is a chance of lightning hitting
you at least once in your lifetime. It's not likely

(02:53:24):
a seven deviation is suggested of fraud, full stop. He said,
the housing market is rolling over because people can't afford them.
All the indicators are rolling over. We're going to have
a housing recession. We're going to see inflation go lower.
Because housing is thirty six percent of the economy, we
expect to see a sub two percent print on inflation.

(02:53:47):
So what about the Fed cutting interest rates next week?
He said, Well, they cut rates in the Great Financial
Crisis starting in two thousand and seven. Our stock market
didn't bottom out though until two thousand and nine. This
is a beginning of what I think is the panic
rate cut cycle. We're going to see the Fed cutting
rates all the way down into this asset deflation that

(02:54:07):
we're coming up in the panic rate cut cycle. Cutting
into slowing growth does not cause assets to reinflate. They're
behind the curve. They're going to be cutting all the
way down as we deflate. But he still likes gold
and he says his clients are acquiring gold and land,
but not crypto. He said his forecast of the world

(02:54:27):
going into a very deep recession will come true very soon.
He says, So again, the fear that of the Fed
and what they're going to do, and the fact that
they're going to cut rates, what's going to cause inflation
that is really fueling gold And within a lot of
different areas, the Fed Reserve has the opportunity to cut

(02:54:48):
rates by up to fifty basis points and to send
gold well above thirty seven hundred dollars, says One End List.
And all this and certainly it is the the one
thing that has for millennia been the hedge to bad
economic times. So gold has soared to a new record high,

(02:55:10):
yet again ahead of the Fed bonds and stocks. Head
of the Fed. The bonds and stocks are going down,
but gold is going up. And as the CIO of
One River Asset Management says, gold is history's timeless hedge
for eras that are governed by the law of the jungle.

(02:55:32):
If that doesn't describe our time, I don't know what does.
Gold could take over the dollars store of value role
as fiscal dominance overwhelms the FED, says Paul Wong. And
again as you also could also take over in terms
of privacy and anonymity. You could take over from cash,
that is gold and silver. Loong could be right, Yeah,

(02:55:55):
it could, we too low all the jokes about that
Chinese airline. How well, anyway, if you want to get
gold and silver, which are great hedges, especially for a
time like this, and also not just hedges against the

(02:56:17):
against inflation and the value of the dollar being devalued.
But they're also great hedges against attacks on our privacy
and anonymity. Again, if you want to get gold and silver,
go to David Knight ty Gold. I'll take you to
Tony Ardeban at Wisewealth Gold and it helps Tony helps
the show if you accumulate your gold and silver there.

(02:56:39):
But when we took at the tariffs, that is another
story altogether. We have Trump tariffs are part of fueling
the inflation that we have right now. It's not making
America great. This is a Congressional Budget Office chief. He
said he believes the uncertainty that surrounding the tariffs is

(02:57:00):
escalating it. And of course we know that. We know
that from many different business owners who said we can't expand.
One business owner in this article was saying, hey, you know,
we've got we could hire three more people right now,
but we're afraid to. In other words, we've got a
lot of demand in our business, but we're afraid to
make that investment because they don't know what's going to
happen with the tariffs. So Trump's tariffs are facing uncertain

(02:57:22):
future with the Supreme Court. He's already lost twice at
lower courts, so if he loses the Supreme Court, they're
going to have to refund trillions of dollars. But as
I mentioned before, there's something that is even more impactful
in terms of trade than the tariffs, and that is
the massive fines that Trump has arbitrarily decided that he

(02:57:45):
can impose. If you've got a ship that comes to
an American port that is owned by the Chinese and
most of the ships are so these massive US port
fees that he's putting on we're talking about millions of
dollars per ship because these ships are so large, and
he wants to put that on. He wants to drive

(02:58:06):
the Chinese ships completely away. Now, folks, that affects not
only imports but also affects exports. The Chinese won't be
landing their ships in order to buy agricultural products something
like that, at least it won't be affordable. That's the
insanity of these policies coming out of the Trump administration.
Perhaps Peter Navarro and US companies, as I said, are

(02:58:29):
putting the brakes on as these tariffs are starting to hit.
Sectors including manufacturing, hotel, retail, and energy have experienced a
wave of job losses that executives lame in large part
on Trump's sweeping levees that have increased costs and made
it difficult to commit to expansion plans. These terrafs are
just a drain on American man ufacturers like mine, said

(02:58:53):
Julie Robins, chief executive of Earthquaker Devices. These are guitar
pedals out of cron Ohio. She said, there's no benefit.
It's an abrupt tax that is impeding our ability to
hire and grow. And as some people, as I point
out quickly last week, some the people in the guitar
industry said, look, I'm reluctant. I'm in the music business.

(02:59:15):
I don't like to get into politics. But what Trump
is doing, he's going to put the entire American guitar
business out of business because we can't import the woods
that we need to make the kind of guitars, so
we can't get them in the US. We had a
guy who worked on our house that had been making
yachts on the Outer Banks. Custom make yachts, and because

(02:59:37):
they put a tax on yachts that put him completely
out of business. That's the power to destroy, folks. Is
the power to tax and when it is just thrown
out there capriciously, arbitrarily and constantly changing, it is the
most destructive of all taxes at a time when we
really don't need this. Thank you for joining us.

Speaker 3 (02:59:59):
Have a good to day.

Speaker 1 (03:00:11):
The common man. They created common Core and dumb 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,

(03:00:31):
unsophisticated ordinary. But each of us has worth and dignity
created in the image of God. That is what we
have in common. That is what they want to take away.
Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation. They desire
to know everything about us while they hide everything from us.

(03:00:55):
It's time to turn that around and expose what they
want to hide. Please share the information and links you'll
find at the Davidnightshow 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

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

.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;}Tue Episode #2096: Kirk’s Death Exploited: Internet ID, Cancel Culture & the End of Liberty

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;}On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

All Episodes

Tue Episode #2096: Kirk’s Death Exploited: Internet ID, Cancel Culture & the End of Liberty

On Purpose with Jay Shetty