Fri Episode #2143: The Shooter Story PsyOp

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:26):
In a world of deceit, telling the truth is a
revolutionary act. It's the David Knight Show.

Speaker 2 (01:52):
And a beautiful Friday. To everyone here at the David

(02:15):
Knight Show audience, thank you for watching and thank you
for joining me. Gardner Goldsmith filling in for David and
Travis today as they take some needed time off for
the family. Our condolences to Karen and the entire family
for her loss of her brother. And I really want
to thank you for joining me on this twenty first
day of November twenty twenty five. It's great to be here.

(02:36):
Some of you might know my work at MRCTV, although
I'm not there anymore, and you might know my work
from Liberty Conspiracy Live and my substack gard Nicolsmith Substack.
Every Monday through Friday, we broadcast Liberty Conspiracy Live at
six pm, sort of wrap up of the news and
we try to derive some long standing lessons for liberty
out of those news stories and offer you the opportunity

(02:59):
to play scholarship as well. You can be the professor
on the program, so you can stream us over there
at Rumble every Monday through Friday at six you can
go over to the channel and see the breakout videos,
and of course you can follow me on x that's
at guard Goldsmith. Well, it's been a very very busy,
not even twenty four hours since I was last streaming,

(03:20):
So we're gonna touch base on some of the stories
that I got to discuss with my audience on liberty
conspiracy last night because of course freedom is out of fashion,
and introduce some news stories as well as open up
the video chat to you and if you want to
get your comments put on the screen, just go to
my Gardner Goldsmith feed and you can do so. Of course,
you can always drop a lot inside Rumble. We love

(03:43):
to see what people have to say inside Rumble and
it's always a great team over there. We're streaming a
kick and d Live and Odyssey as well, and please
visit the David Knights Show website to find out all
the things that you can do to help the program.
And it's always a big deal when I fill in
for David to mention that while I stream for David,
you can still contribute and support the show, because that's

(04:06):
how the show is supported through your purchases at the
website and your donations and your subscriptions. It's a wonderful
thing to think about, all of you who support the
program and support such good people as the Nights. So
let's get started for today. Don't forget again. If you
want your comments seen on the screen, just go to
my at guard goldsmith x feed and here in Mother Russia,

(04:30):
because of course we only spread the Russian propaganda on
liberty conspiracy. You can talk to the Russians. They'll get
your comments right there on the screen, and we'll try
to do that as often as possible. In fact, we're
already seeing some great comments in there from everyone. Thank
you so much everyone for doing so. And we're getting
some great comments from Kick that I can also see,
so if you're over on Kick you can drop your

(04:51):
comments in there as well. We've got a lot to
cover from last night, as I mentioned, but some news
stories plus Eric Peters will be joining us, and Jason
Barker from Nights of the Storm has the opportunity to
join us, most likely in the third hour. So let's
take a look at what we are interested in covering.
The Russians and I work very hard on our very

(05:12):
long office table, putting together the production show notes and
making sure that we've broken apart the stories properly to
get that pro liberty marrow out of the stories. So
let's find out what we'll be discussing on the program
today on The David Night Show for the twenty first
day of November twenty twenty five. First, as I often
try to do on my program, I usually play Genesis

(05:35):
with tonight tonight tonight and say tonight, tonight, tonight, what
are we going to be discussing. Sometimes it comes in
with the wrong music and suddenly we hear Humpty Dee
in the Digital Underground, or Black Flag or Rod Stewart.
It's very strange. I don't understand it, but you have
to trust Anthony Fauci. He knows the musical science. He's

(05:55):
told me that every time one of those strange songs
has come on, he's done a piece. It's thee our
test on the song. He's found some notes that might
have been used by Genesis, He's amplified it forty trillion times,
and the song is actually Genesis. So let's find out
what's on tap tonight or perhaps how about today on

(06:16):
the David Knight Show. This is the way we often
do it on our show, right, So there you go,
Anthony Fauch. He'll tell you that's genesis. That's the way
that we check out our secondary sound system at the
beginning of each program. Well, what's on tap today? One
and all? In the David Knight Show, We're going to
be starting with the big story, as we did last night,

(06:39):
the Huckabee Pollard pot Luck edition. It just gets worse
for Mike Huckabee as yes, he met with one of
the most infamous spies in the past fifty years in
the United States and evidently didn't tell anyone, or perhaps
a lot of people in the White House did know,
but they're making it look like they didn't know. You

(07:01):
can figure out that skullduggery yourself and perhaps offer your
comments and let us know what you think. We'll discuss that,
and will discuss Mike Huckabee's absolutely rabid Christian Zionism that
seems to be completely blind or supportive of genocide. We'll
also discuss on our second story, the Democrats. The Democrats

(07:22):
who spoke up and stated essentially and actually a tepid
version of what the military oath is, which is to
comply with lawful and the actual oath is constitutional, which
is a very profound difference orders and to not comply
with unlawful orders. That is being flipped around by Donald Trump,

(07:47):
who now claims that those congress people and senators who
said that one of them comes from New Hampshire, perhaps
one comes from your state, and they're Democrats. He says
they should be hanged for sedition. Yes, there's nothing like
a balanced president, is there. It's part of your balance breakfast.
So it has gotten worse, as Caroline Levitt, who comes

(08:10):
from New Hampshire, which is where I'm located, spoke up
about it and again tried to completely flip the narrative.
This is beyond gas lighting. It's just outright lying. And
talk radio hosts in Boston were saying the same thing,
that they should be hanged. Yes, and now after this
talk host in Boston said that those people should be hanged,

(08:30):
he came on at six this morning and said, they're
trying to start a civil war. Look what these people
are doing. I say, let me just figure this out.
They're calling for only complying to lawful commands, and you
yesterday said yes, they should be hanged for sedition. I
don't know where the violence is coming from, but we'll
figure that out. We'll also discuss Trump's tariff terrorism meeting,

(08:54):
the economic numbers. Yesterday, the labor statistics numbers for September
came out not good, So get ready. I hope your
Thanksgiving plans are going to be looking good. Nonetheless, and
we'll discuss that. And we'll also discuss how, yes, again,
it is like Humpty dumpty world. They're just saying anything
they want. The Trump administration says, oh no, the numbers

(09:16):
are great. It's like Raiders of the Lost Dark as
Bellock stares into the light, it's beautiful. We'll also discuss
our mind meld subjects with Eric Peters. Please head over
to the Eric Peters autos dot com website. His newest
one just released this morning, will be on tap and
it's a big one about the government giving us back

(09:39):
some money. And we'll talk about trucking lines further being
hit by Trump and the ice invasions, and specifically I
went in and did some extra research on who are
actually the riskiest drivers on the roads as the Trump
administration tries to use the very tragic and very widespread

(10:00):
and visible accidents that were caused by some migrant truckers
recently to say, the federal government has got to be involved,
and those foreigners can't drive trucks. There are a lot
of nuances for constitutionalists out there that they might want
to remember. So we'll get into it, and we'll get
into the statistics which show, yeah, you got it. We

(10:22):
discussed it on the program last night. Native domestic drivers
of trucks are actually much more dangerous proportionally, including, as
I said, the proportion of the people that are on
the roads, because it's only a very small number of
foreigners who are driving. So thanks again for joining us, everybody.
We're going to have an awesome, awesome time today, and

(10:42):
again I want to thank David and Travis for asking
me to stop by. I really appreciated. This is where
we usually turn for the liberty conspiracy news notes, so
we're going to be referring to that. If you want
to go to my website, that's something that I put
out every Monday through Friday for the paid subscribers, and
Sunday's we do something called the Sunday News Assembly, which

(11:02):
is free for everybody, and he usually has about twenty
stories pertaining to freedom, a lot of historical contexts or
economic information that I might have taught in a lecture
hall and hopefully it gives people something that they can
enjoy on their Sunday. But right now, let's enjoy a
little something else. Let's enjoy some music, shall we. For

(11:23):
the subject of spycraft, we need a little visit from
the most famous fictional spy of all time. Wonderful Stuff's

(12:28):
get a little bit of that swing in it so good.
And you know, they have that new ken Burns documentary
on the Revolutionary War, and all I can think of
is the abysmal documentary that he did on rock and roll,
and he always he sort of went with the pat
line that rock and roll is a fusion of country
and the blues, completely missing the drive of big band swing,

(12:51):
the drums of Jeane Krupa and Louis Belson. You just there.
I watched the whole thing with my dad. I said,
do you think something was missing? Dad? He goes, yeah,
I think so. It was just ridiculous. He comes from
New Hampshire as well. Thankfully he's not my neighbor. I'm
sure he's a very very nice man. All right, let's
get rolling, everybody on this story. Mike Huckaby, it just

(13:12):
gets crazier Huckaby, as one of the headlines says, he's
out of control. So here's the story from media heighte
He's out of control. MAGA demands answers after Trump Ambassador
Mike Huckaby covertly meets with spy who told American secrets.

(13:33):
And last night when I opened up the Liberty Conspiracy
program six pm US streaming over at the Liberty Conspiracy
Channel Eastern US time or Moscow time, perhaps as we
spread to as you know, the Russian propaganda. Well, I
got to say, there is something about knowing that Mike
Huckabee was always a hardcore Christian Zionist, and then wondering

(13:55):
about whether or not the supporters of Mike Huckaby are
now torn because they're often very patriotic people at the
same time. So was there some cognitive dissonance for these
people as they see a guy they like, Mike Huckabee
down there in a place they support Israel, now associating

(14:16):
with a person who was convicted as one of the
worst spies in American history. I don't know that these
seem to be battling each other for supremacy, but I'm
sure they'll find a way to smooth everything out, just
like heavily pasteurized milk. So let's get into this one because,
as they say on mediaite, prominent supporters of President Donald

(14:39):
Trump demanded answers on Thursday after it was revealed that
US Ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, had held a secret meeting,
or at least what they tell us was a secret
meeting in Jerusalem with Jonathan Pollard, a convicted spy who
sold American secrets to Israel. So I put together some

(14:59):
notes about Jonathan Pollard in case maybe you weren't born
at that time or anything like that. So Pollard was convicted,
it was discovered in eighty five. I think he was
convicted in eighty six. And not only did he provide
all sorts of secrets, including nuclear secrets, to the Israeli government.
He was born in Texas, raised by a Christian Zionist family.

(15:21):
But in addition to that, he got hundreds of thousands
of dollars from them, and the Israelis gave secrets to
the Soviets in exchange for prisoners because of the information
that Jonathan Pollard offered. So I had tertiary effects for

(15:42):
people who are very patriotic as well. And of course
the Jonathan Pollard's story is actually tied to a number
of other people, and one of them is a US
senator who and I'll let you put your guesses in
if you want to get your on the screen, is
a US senator currently in office now. And this Mike

(16:05):
Kuckaby Jonathan Pollard meeting is tied to this man who
recently was embarrassed in an interview with Tucker Carlson and
is a hardcore big time I'm for the State of
Israel occupying that place and I'm overlooking genocide. So let
me know if you can, if you know who it is.
We discussed it last night. But yes, yes, this person

(16:27):
who went with Mike Kuckaby to meet with mister Pollard
has been long associated with this senator. So, reacting to
news of the July rendezvous, which reportedly raised concerns at
the CIA, former Fox News host Tucker Carlson said, this
is shocking behavior from the United States Ambassador. Is Huckabee
going to explain it? Well, I've got some further information

(16:51):
for you about the Pollard story, So let me give
you some of these details about Pollard. But I'll tell
you who the assistant was first, So, as Chris Minahan writes,
he is over at Information Liberation Ambassador Mike Huckabee, together
with David Milstein. Mark Levin's step son, held an off

(17:13):
the record meeting at US Embassy Jerusalem, which shouldn't even
be there, with Israeli spy US trader Jonathan Pollard. The
New York Times reports Pollard confirmed it was a friendly
meeting and trashed Donald Trump as a madman. So well,
you know, I mean a stop clock is right twice

(17:35):
a day. Right here, of course, is the headline from
the New York Times. Jonathan Parlor looking also stylish. And
here's a bit of information about David Milstein, because yes,
he was a former assistant for you, got it, Ted Cruz.
Milstein worked on the Vandenberg Coalition advisory Board until April

(17:56):
twenty twenty five, at which point he assumed his due
and you got to pay for it as senior advisor
to US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee. Why should we
Why should you be forced to pay for any of this?
You might have some other things on your mind, like
trying to fight the inflation of the money supply, and
by Thanksgiving dinner. Milstein worked in the executive and legislative

(18:19):
branches for seven and a half years. But he's not
parasitic at all. Remember that now. As as a political
appointee in the Trump administration, David served as special assistant
to the US Ambassador to Israel, David Friedman. David Friedman, Yes,
David Friedman. Will hear a little bit about David Friedman

(18:42):
in a moment. He worked at the US Embassy in
Jerusalem with David Friedman. David provided research, expertise and analysis.
This is Milstein on policy initiatives that supported and facilitated
a stronger than ever US Israeli relationship, which of course
help cement the three point eight billion dollars that goes

(19:03):
to Israel automatically in every budget and offers them more
money in almost every National Defense Authorization Act. In fact,
David previously worked as a legislative aid for the OsO
classy Senator Ted Kruz, Republican of Texas, otherwise known as
the Israeli Province of Texas, working in the US Senate

(19:25):
for five and a half years. There you go, you
bought his lunch as part of Cruz's national security team
at wink wink. David focused on economic and trade policy
and policy initiatives regarding the US and Israel relationship. It's
linking throughout the Middle East and international institutions such as
the UN and the International Criminal Court, you know the

(19:49):
one that the United States flo outs when they say
Benjamin Nya, who is a war criminal? You see how
it all fits together. It's just they appoint these people
so that everything will be completely insul related from American eyes.
That's the role of Milstein. It has been for years,
and of course to cobble together legislation to further pick
your pockets and send it to another country. I don't

(20:09):
care what country it is. It's not good to pick
your pocket at the outset. That's the illegal, immoral premise.
David made contributions to a number of provisions, especially get
this as it relates to strengthening US Israeli defense cooperation.
Money money money, and that became law through the National

(20:31):
Defense Authorization Act each year. Oh yes, that's awesome. Let's
get some further information about this and turn to some
of the details that I've got on this particular topic.
The incredible and heroic meeting that we got to have

(20:51):
with Jonathan Pollard through our tax money. So in the
early nineteen eighties, Pollard, who was born in Texas, Texas
as as I said, was an intelligence analyst for the
US Navy's Anti Terrorist Alert Center, So you know he's
got to care about American security because of course terrorism
is a word they use for anything. He was recruited

(21:12):
in nineteen eighty four and over roughly eighteen months, Pollard
delivered and estimated one thousand, five hundred classified documents to
Israel and unredacted. Yesterday, Natalie Morris mentioned that they could
the eight by eleven pages were so voluminous they could
fill a six x ten room satellite imagery. He provided

(21:36):
along with technical intelligence on Arab armies, Soviet weaponry supplied
to Arab States, and Iraqi Pakistani nuclear and chemical weapons programs.
He also gave signals intelligence manuals from the United States
that the US Navy and US Marines need to keep secret.
He gave those to the Israelis, including radio signal notations

(21:59):
manuals that detailed much of the US global ease dropping
collections capabilities. Guess what he then sold some of that
or the Israelis did to the Russians. To the Soviets. Yes,
we all know the Trump administration is very trustable. Yeah,
Mike Kuckaby has no problem with that, evidently because he

(22:21):
was a big anti communist, Mike Kuckaby, so now he
doesn't care. Much of the material was reportedly far beyond
what Israel even needed for its own defense, and was
allegedly traded by Israel to third countries, notably the Soviet Union,
in exchange for Jewish prisoners who were sent back to Israel.
Pollard was paid up to one hundred thousand dollars for

(22:44):
the period. In eighty six, Pollard reached a plea agreement.
He pled guilty to one count of conspiracy to deliver
national defense information to a foreign government. And there's supposed
to be the Allies. Of course, there's no declaration of war,
so technically that term ally and enemy shouldn't exist. And
despite the plead deal, Tasper Weinberger, who was Defense Secretary

(23:06):
at the time, submitted a damaging classified memo to the
judge arguing that Pollard's leagues caused exceptionally grave damage to
the US. Pollard was then sentenced in nineteen eighty seven
spring of eighty seven, late winter to life in prison
with no possibility of parole, and and Pollard his wife
received five years because you know, why not share it

(23:28):
in the family till death do us part? Right? In prisoned, well,
that started in nineteen eighty seven. He served thirty years,
mostly in maximum security federal prisons, and he repeatedly appealed.
The appeals were finally denied until July twenty fifteen. The
US Parole Commission granted in parole after he had served

(23:49):
thirty years. Who was released November twentieth, twenty fifteen. He
had to wear a lovely GPS ankle monitor. They're very
good for dancing. He had a curfew so like Epstein,
you know, and had to do some computer monitoring. And
the prohibition of leaving the US until December of twenty
twenty actually started in twenty nineteen during the Trump administration.

(24:12):
Attorney General, yes William barr And he has no association
with the CIA, neither did his dad. No deep state
ties to the masade in any way whatsoever. He and
the Justice Department lifted the remaining parole restrictions, allowing Paula
to leave the United States. Now he's a big hero.
He lives in Israel with let's see a lot of money. Yes,

(24:35):
he lives with a lot of money that he gets
from people who are big fans of his over in Israel.
For a little more amplification on this, let's turn to
a little more background from Judge Andrew Neapolitano's program yesterday
with the great Max Blumenthal of the Grey Zone, because
Max covers additional amplification here.

Speaker 3 (24:55):
Hey everyone, Judge Adrawin Neapolitano here for a judging freedom.
Today is Thursday of number twentieth, twenty twenty five. My
dear friend Max Blumatho joins is now Max a pleasure.
Thank you very much for your time and for accommodating
my schedule. But let's start with this unrecognized and to
me bizarre You can probably shed some light on it.

(25:17):
Meeting back in July between Jonathan Pollard and Mike Huckabee.
Huckabee is, of course, these Zionist US ambassador in Israel.
Pollard is the notorious theft of American national security secrets.
Is Pollard a hero to the Israelis.

Speaker 4 (25:38):
Well, he is.

Speaker 5 (25:39):
And he's a settler who is sort of a local
celebrity among the religious nationalists world. I remember there's this
bookstore I used to walk by in central Jerusalem where
a lot of settlers would frequent when they came into
Jerusalem to get to go shopping and so on and yogurt,

(26:01):
and had a giant picture of Jonathan Pollard over the
front door, because at that time he was considered caused
celeb to the religious nationalist movement and kind of a
political prisoner in Israel.

Speaker 2 (26:12):
And that was the.

Speaker 5 (26:13):
Main bookstore where settlers could get Messianic.

Speaker 2 (26:19):
Texts and so forth.

Speaker 5 (26:20):
So he's a hero to a certain constituency in Israel.
And through the Adelson bribery network Miriam and Sheldon Addelson,
Donald Trump was basically paid to release him.

Speaker 6 (26:35):
He was sentenced to life in prison.

Speaker 5 (26:37):
Jonathan Pollard was sentenced to life in prison for some
of the most damaging intelligence thefts in US history. He
was a naval intelligence analyst. He did this for ideological
reasons because he believed he was an Israel firster, and
he handed over the methods that the NSA used to
collect intelligence to the Mosad, as well as a list

(27:01):
of thousands of intelligence contacts, collaborators, undercover spies, the knocklist
that US intelligence used to Tel Aviv. He did this
in exchange for money, but for ideological reasons. Ultimately Donald
Trump released him and Sheldon Addelson flew him back to
Israel on his personal jet, where he is now sort.

Speaker 6 (27:24):
Of a hero.

Speaker 5 (27:25):
And for some reason, Mike Huckabee last July, the what
I call the Israeli US reciprocal Ambassador, decided to meet
with Jonathan Pollard in his office. And this came as
news to me, but it also came as news to
the White House and of the CIA. None of them
knew about this, and this should be a fireable offense

(27:48):
considering what Pollard did to the United States. I mean,
this is aldrich Ames level spying. This is treachery. He
is a trader. What was huck could be doing with him?
Ambassador has previously met with him, But it does appear
that Huckabee has ideological kinship with John Hollard.

Speaker 6 (28:08):
Huckabee is a Pollardite.

Speaker 5 (28:10):
And if Huckabee isn't fired for this, we have to
ask in what world and what political movement in what
White House does he not get fired. It's one that
believes in Niga making Israel great again.

Speaker 3 (28:22):
Well, it wasn't on his schedule, and the press knew
nothing about it. I didn't know about it until you
told us a little while ago, and then I looked
it up and it just came out, I guess in
the past a few days. So Huckabee must have known
he needed to keep the secret from the CIA, from
other embassy employees, and from the White House. I bet

(28:44):
he didn't keep it secret from Benjamin Netanyahoo.

Speaker 5 (28:48):
Well, he didn't keep it secret from other figures in
the Trump administration, because they went it looks like they
went to the New York Times. Three current senior officials
confirmed this to the New York Times. So it looks
like this is an internal problem, and it's something that
I've been seeing from inside the Trump administration. There are

(29:09):
still forces in the Trump administration that are deeply uncomfortable
with the personnel in control of the policy because they
consider themselves to be Israel firsters, or, as one Trump
administration source Tod called them to be Mossad stenographers.

Speaker 3 (29:24):
You know Mike Huckabee, and I know him well, Max,
because he was full time at Fox for about two
or three years during the much longer time that I
was there, But I didn't know now.

Speaker 7 (29:36):
What I now know about him.

Speaker 3 (29:38):
He is what Tucker Carlson is being excoriated for condemning
a Christian nationalist who puts Israel above the United States
an arch zionist. Now, I don't know how a human
being nominated by the President, confirmed by the Senate, the
official government representative of another country, can put that other
country first and expect to get away with it.

Speaker 5 (30:02):
Well, all the other previous US ambassadors that I can
think of were Israel firsters, even under Joe Biden. Tom
Knyds for example, I mean after October seventh he went
and lobbied on behalf of the Jewish federations for more
money to support Israel during its genocide.

Speaker 2 (30:20):
Before that, you know.

Speaker 5 (30:21):
Under Obama, Daniel Shapiro, he stayed in Israel with his
family when his term ended and went on to lobby
for the NSO group, which produces Pegas's spyware.

Speaker 2 (30:35):
And that is in a lot of phones in addition
to possibly explosives. Who knows. And that point that Max
brings up with the Judge, and just the Judge has
just been firing on even more cylinders than I always
thought he had. He's just amazing. But the idea of
Israel first versus America First, again, I do think this

(30:58):
is going to bring up some cognitive dissonance. You let
me know whether you think that the MAGA supporters, who
are also supporters of Christian Zionism, will have any problem
with this whatsoever, if these two differing positions will cause
them some stress. But when it comes to the term
America first, I do want to mention that that term
is being used by various subgroups of political pushers in

(31:22):
the United States to try to push for their agenda
to either try to get back to a sort of nativist, protectionist,
tariff backing pro so called American economic policy, which is
actually destructive to Americans, or it's don't give money out

(31:42):
to foreign countries and have the government go out and
have bases all around the world. It comes in various
shades and colors. But I do think that the term
itself is a bit of a problem philosophically. So if
I were in the class with the students, I would say,
is there perhaps a conflict with America first and the

(32:05):
concept of individual rights? And there might be a number
of answers from the students that actually might go along
with that prompt, and I would invite disagreement as well.
But in my eyes, I need to bring that up
because if the idea is America first, then that subsumes
the very so called reason that the United States Constitution

(32:28):
was written, because, as I said, that term is highly malleable.
It's one of the plato terms of politics. It can
be turned into virtually anything. It's one of those humpty dumpty,
you know, sort of Carnival Barker words to mean anything,
you know, a barnum word, as Charlie Robinson would say.
But the problem is that philosophically, the establishment of America

(32:53):
or any political institution requires that someone who doesn't want
to be part of the political institution must pay for it. Now,
the founders they made of grievous error, and they tried
to provide for some safeguards because, as they said, they
were going to establish a government without your consent. And

(33:15):
this is one of the things that many patriotic people
don't really discuss that often, and it's very worthwhile to
discuss it because it gets to the heart of the
illegitimacy of any statist political institution. They said, essentially, we're
going to get together in a room and not only
assume for all the people out there that we are
we the people of the United States of America, which

(33:35):
is illogical and philosophically unsound and immoral. But they assumed
everybody else was part of them, so they grabbed everybody
up with tentacles. And again this is not slamming the
colonial and revolutionary Americans who fought for a liberty from
the British, but it didn't equate to true liberty. It

(33:57):
just meant a different government from the British government, with
perhaps more safeguards for certain of our rights. But the
only way that the state can exist is by commanding
you to pay for it. And not only is it
commanding you to pay for it. These are people who
never ever could have asked for your consent and just said,
we're going to write up a document and we're going

(34:17):
to create a machinery of governance or political threats against
people to make them pay for this government. But we'll
install some safeguards that we will claim are written into
it that if you want to change it, you have
to amend it. And everybody who enters this machine that
we're setting up, this machinery of theft and coercion, will

(34:39):
have to swear to abide by that. That's what we
get to. Now, what's curious about that is it brings
us to our next topic, which is these six Democrat
congress people and senators who try to remind people of
their oath in the military and who are getting utterly

(35:00):
slammed around the tennis ball court or the pick a
ball court for actually just stating the obvious, and in fact,
they understated the obvious in what has been a generation's
long attempt to try to get people to think that
the oath for the military is to abide by lawful orders,
which it is not. It is to abide by constitutional

(35:21):
orders to protect and defend the US Constitution. And I'll
give you an example of how bad this is. When
John McCain first ran for president. McCain said, when I
reigned for president, I swear an oath to protect this nation.
And I could tell that he was not paraphrasing, like
he had used that line many many times. And they

(35:43):
often do this as a way to deceive people into
thinking that just nationalism, just support of the military for
whatever the statute allows them to do, whether it's an
authorization to use military force, which is not a term
in the Constitution, and Paul called them out for that
and offered them a declaration of war and showed that

(36:04):
every one of those people very clearly and very seditiously
plotted to make sure that they circumvented the Constitution. They
were all enemies of the domestic enemies of the United
States Constitution in the Senate very clearly, there's no denying it.
And every member of the military if they accept an
order after they read the Constitution and there's no declaration

(36:27):
of war and they're put into some combat role or
they're occupying another nation, they too are domestic enemies of
the US Constitution. That also, regardless of how one feels
sentimentally about whether or not these guys knew or didn't know,
they are enemies of the Constitution, there's no denying that fact.
They're breaking the Constitution, they're taking your money, and they're

(36:50):
acting in a way contrary to what the Constitution says.
And it's easy to argue about what the Constitution says.
And also we can look at historical precedents like the
authorization to use military force to invade Iraq and Afghanistan
as examples of the people in DC very clearly knowing
So let's now turn to what some of those senators

(37:13):
had to say. If we go into my news notes
from yesterday's program, I want to show you this. Trump
attacks Democrat vet politicians who published a video advising soldiers
to disobey unlawful commands, and again that's a tepid watering
down of what the military oath actually is. First, I said,

(37:36):
let's look at Trump's reaction. He's calling for their death
as punishment for making the video. And actually, of all people,
Chuck Schumer, who has broken the Constitution many times, offered
some very salient words about this, So I will say
what he said was right. He's a towering hypocrite, but
what he said was right, and he has supported genocide,

(37:58):
so he doesn't have much of a moral like to
stand on because he himself has broken the constitution many
times and supported mass death with your money. But let
me show you this. Here's what it says. This is
quite interesting. Gavin Newsom, of all people, called him out.
He said, the President of the United States of America
just called for the death of democratic as he uses

(38:20):
the term lawmakers. This man is sick in the head
and he has here seditious behavior punishable by death, and
Gavin Newsom also posted in an earlier one, he says
Trump just reposted this. This came from someone with one
of the Knights Templar symbols says it is a call

(38:42):
to hang Democratic lawmakers who broke out against Trump. Hang them.
George Washington would so if that doesn't give people some
pause to ask if Donald Trump even thinks about things
that he puts out there, I don't know, but after

(39:04):
he did that, it might be worthwhile to actually show
what these people said, because everything they said not only
was appropriate, it actually was inappropriate for a different reason
because they didn't actually look at what the code says.
Six Democrat veteran lawmakers, writes. Geopolitics Monitor released a joint

(39:28):
video opposing the Trump administration, urging US military personnel to
refuse unlawful orders without specifying is the Is this one
of your congress people or senators? Well, one of them.
Good Lander comes from the New Hampshire. Of course, she's
married to Jake Sullivan, who didn't stand up against the
genocide and unconstitutional actions of the Biden administration. But here

(39:51):
we go.

Speaker 8 (39:52):
I'm Senator Alissa Slockin, Senator Mark Kelly Representative Chris Deluzio's
Congress Representative Christy Who.

Speaker 4 (40:00):
Congressman Jason Crowe. I was a captain in the United States.

Speaker 8 (40:03):
Navy, former CIA officer, former Navy, former paratrooper and Army ranger.

Speaker 9 (40:07):
Former intelligence officer, former Air Force.

Speaker 4 (40:10):
We want to speak directly to members of the military.

Speaker 5 (40:12):
And the intelligence community to take risks each day to
keep Americans safe.

Speaker 9 (40:16):
We know you are under enormous stress and pressure right now.
Americans trust their military, but that trust is at risk.

Speaker 4 (40:23):
This administration is pitting our uniform military.

Speaker 9 (40:26):
And intelligence community professionals.

Speaker 4 (40:28):
Against American citizens.

Speaker 1 (40:29):
Like us.

Speaker 4 (40:30):
You all swore an oath.

Speaker 9 (40:31):
To protect and defend this constitution.

Speaker 5 (40:34):
Right now, the threats to our constitution aren't just coming
from abroad, from right here at home.

Speaker 4 (40:38):
Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders.

Speaker 9 (40:42):
You can refuse illegal orders. You must refuse illegal orders.

Speaker 8 (40:47):
No one has to carry out orders that violate the
law or our constitution.

Speaker 4 (40:51):
We know this is hard and that it's a difficult
time to be a public servant, but whether.

Speaker 9 (40:55):
You're serving in the CIA, the Army, or Navy.

Speaker 4 (40:57):
The Air Force, your vigilance is critical.

Speaker 9 (41:00):
And know that we have your back because now more
than ever. The American people need you. We need you
to stand up.

Speaker 10 (41:07):
For our laws, our constitution, and who we are as Americans.

Speaker 4 (41:11):
Don't give up.

Speaker 6 (41:12):
Don't give up.

Speaker 9 (41:13):
Don't give up, don't give up the ship.

Speaker 2 (41:17):
Okay. Now, every one of those statements, as they purport
to be very constitutional, Probably, I don't want to be
too assumptive, probably brings up an avalanche, a niagara falls
of thoughts for you about all the things, all the
ways that they've broken the constitution. Even as they discuss

(41:39):
the United States government being used against American citizens, referring
to Ice and trying to use the National Guard inside states,
and that is a good point, they don't go far
enough to mention that the word immigration is not in
the US Constitution. It's a state issue. They don't go
far enough to mention, oh, by the way, I supported
this or that or the other agency which also reaches

(41:59):
the Constitution. Let's look at some comments as we roll
into this, because we've got a great one on kick
from Pezovente seventeen seventy six says, where were these Democrats
when Biden was forcing the poison jab, making felons out
of gun owners, and allowing invasion. Well, here is the
first two. I agree with the invasion part. If there

(42:21):
is an invasion, if they claim it's an invasion, that
term is used for state actors, and you have to
declare war against the invading state. If they're not state
actors under the constitution. If anybody bothers to vote, then
they're voting on the offices that are created by the Constitution,
so they hopefully will make themselves familiar with this. If
they're non state combatants, then they issue letters of market

(42:43):
reprisal and the president can hire mercenaries to go against
these people. The word naturalization is in the constitution how
you become a citizen, but immigration is not in the constitution.
It was left up to the states. When Texas entered
the Union in eighteen sixty nine, they had a Bureau
of Immigration in their state constitution. The Feds would never

(43:03):
have allowed that if it were a federal purview. It
wasn't until eighteen seventy five with the Supreme Court decision
that was as bad as Roe, where they actually just
invented it out of whole cloth in a case called
Chilong v. Freemen and literally you can read the document
of the Supreme Court decision. They didn't even once refer
to any line from the Constitution. You just said, oh,

(43:24):
it's a congressional purview. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison sevente
seventeen ninety eight both wrote that it was a state perview.
There are numerous examples of states coming up with their
own legislation regarding the presence of foreigners. Kentucky Resolution number four,
that's a really good one to read from Jefferson if

(43:45):
you want to see it, where he says resolved that
aliens on the soil of any of the signatory states
are under their control, not the federal control. And he
mentions the ninth and tenth amendments as well. So it's
very clear. It's a very simple thing to sort of
look at, but a lot of people and want to
because it makes them feel uncomfortable because since eighteen seventy
five there's been this mass build up of tarnish of well,

(44:06):
it's got to be controlled by the federal government. What
you have there is a Soviet style central command and control.
Whoever's in office is going to dictate the immigration policy.
And what we're seeing now is a reaction to the
over inflated number of people who were brought in unnaturally
under the central control. So the Maga people now have

(44:26):
central control, but it could fall into the other hands
just as well, you know, just as easily. So that's
something to bring up, and it's a very fruitful conversation
if you can get into it. I've had mentioned before.
I've had great conversations with Pat Buchanan and Tan Tan
Credo and jas what a congressman from Arizona, JD. Hayworth
I think his name was, and they all agreed. You're like,

(44:49):
they said, you know, you're right your historical argument, and
there's a logical argument to it as well. You're correct.
But then they would just march on to say we're
being invaded, and then you have to come up with
that answer about it invasion and say, look, if there
is an invasion, then how is there a constitutional provision
to protect against invasion. You can't just allow the president
with the Alien Enemies Act that's subservient to the Constitution.

(45:11):
You have to look at the constitution and the constitution.
And I'm an anarchist. I don't believe in the validity
any moral argument for any state entity. I would be
satisfied if they could get closer to the Constitution. But
I do try to remind people in classrooms of you know,
let's look at what the wolves are and have a
conversation about that, you know, and it doesn't mean, like

(45:32):
I often tell the audience at Liberty Conspiracy, I'm never
going to win a political argument here. But just providing
the information and trying to be truthful about it and
asking other people to be as fair inside their own
minds about it, I think is fruitful to do that.
So we've got that video from them. Trump freaks out
and then he's called out for it because of course,

(45:54):
people say, this seems a little unbalanced. You're calling for
these people who were just asking the soldiers to remind
them of their oaths, and they actually watered down the oath.
You're saying these people are seditious. Well, Caroline Levitt doubled
down on this and she completely flipped it. Let me
show you what Caroline Levitt had to say, and this

(46:15):
is do they really think they can get away with this?
Ed Crasenstein write's breaking White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt
completely gaslights Americans, claiming that Democrats have told our military
it's ours it's yours, whether you want it or not.
You got to pay for it. They'll go anywhere in
the world whoever's in charge, defy lawful orders from President Trump.

(46:39):
Watch this full video. If you still believe her, then
you were completely brainwashed. Do you believe what you hear
with your own ears or what she tells you that
you heard? Cult much? So here we go.

Speaker 11 (46:55):
You have sitting members of the United States Congress who
can inspired together to orchestrate a video message to members
of the United States military, to active duty service members,
to members of the National Security apparatus, encouraging them to
defy the president's lawful orders.

Speaker 4 (47:16):
You can refuse illegal orders.

Speaker 9 (47:18):
You can refuse illegal orders. You must refuse illegal orders.

Speaker 8 (47:23):
No one has to carry out orders that violate the
law or our constitution.

Speaker 12 (47:27):
They are literally saying to one point three million active
duty service members not to defy the chain of command,
not to follow lawful orders you have.

Speaker 2 (47:37):
It's amazing, it's incredible. Literally, people have screens, Caroline, They've
got them in the White House. They can play it
for you right now. It's amazing. I just it's flabbergasty
that they can continue to get away with that. So
I just want to stress that, in my opinion, the
most important fact out of this whole baggage story that

(47:58):
we can carry with us to gain some you know,
some valuable lessons out of this as they dispute this
is the fact that both Trump's gang and the Democrats
in the video use the term lawful when it's supposed
to be constitutional. Lawful pertains to statutes, and there are
many statutes that Congress rights, and many executive orders pushed
by various presidents that operate under color of law but

(48:20):
are wildly unconstitutional. Here's the meat of the military oath.
So here we go. We go to Title ten US Code,
Subsection five two, enlisted oath. Quote. I do solemnly swear
that I will support and defend the Constitution of the
United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and that
I will obey the orders of the President of the

(48:42):
United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me,
according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
So that is the problem, because this is verbal ledger domain.
This is the continuation of a canard that they have
to follow lawful orders, because as I said, you can
have lawful orders that are patently unconstitutional. Let me show

(49:06):
you a little bit from Ed Crassenstein as Chuck Schumer
spoke about this, and again towering hypocrisy from Chuck Schumer
as a person, but the lines are correct. Here's what
Schumer had to say.

Speaker 6 (49:20):
Blear Today.

Speaker 13 (49:21):
Donald Trump shared a post on truth Social calling for
Democratic members of Congress to be hanged. He also posted
a message that said, seditious behavior punishable by death. Let's
be crystal clear, the President of the United States is
calling for the execution of elected officials.

Speaker 6 (49:44):
Blear today, Donald Trump.

Speaker 2 (49:46):
So let me just ask you. Did Chuck Schumer oppose
Barack Obama drone striking people on the advice of war
criminal John Brennan. Did he oppose rounding up journalists under
the ESPIONA and trying to imprison them? Did he truly
speak up for the guys who were held in Guantanamo

(50:06):
without habeas or is this more of a political stunt? Right? So, again,
I think one can question his motives. The statement itself
is one hundred percent correct, and in fact, as I said,
it doesn't go far enough. We've got great statements over
on Kick Pezivante seventeen seventy six, asks should Trump not

(50:26):
be prosecuted for war crimes and COVID crimes and crimes
against the Constitution, and be subject to the punishment for
such which is death and defy tyrants. Hello, says seventeen
seventy six on kick says everything Congress, the military, law enforcement,
intel agencies, and all government departments carry out unconstitutional, illegal

(50:50):
laws and edicts. Yeah, thank you so much, by the
way for being here as I fill in for David.
And remember, if you do want to donate on Rumble,
if you want to help out over the David Night website,
I want to make sure that I do my due
diligence for David and everyone who are taking the day off.
I'm Gardner Goldsmith. If you're just joining us, I do
Liberty Conspiracy Monday through Friday at six pm. I used

(51:12):
to write for the MRCTV people, and as the Israeli
battles started to crop up with the occupying force really
expanding its occupation in conducting genocide, they still allowed me
to be critical of Israel. But I'm no longer with MRCTV,
and you probably saw they had the little star up

(51:33):
on their website. I just do want to mention that
Mark Levin is very closely associated with MRCTV. I have
massive disagreements with Mark Levin. I think he supports a
towering hypocrisy and immorality, and I've never met him. Just
as a little disclaimer there, I've written about Mark Levin

(51:53):
and had many problems with him for a long time.
I want to show you Alyssa Slotkin's response to this
as a way to round this off and give you
some of her opportunity to talk to us from Michigan.
She's a former CIA officer, in fact, she mentions it
in this video, and she has a response to all
of this. Let me show you what she has to say.

Speaker 8 (52:15):
I'm Senator Alyssa Slopkin, Senator from Michigan, former CIA officer.
Earlier today, President Trump threatened myself and a number of
other service and veteran lawmakers with arrest, trial, and death
because he didn't agree with a video we put out
this week. This really isn't about those of us who
made the video. This is about who we are as

(52:37):
Americans and how we're going to engage with people who
we disagree with. I would hope that people of all backgrounds, Democrat, Republican, independent,
would agree that threatening death for people you disagree with
is beyond the pale of who we are as Americans.
I love this country. It has given me everything, everything,

(52:59):
and I refuse to believe that this is the new normal.
I refuse to believe that we're going to use fear
and intimidation against people we disagree with. And I'm not
going to be forced away from speaking up on behalf
of my country. I swore an oath to the Constitution
many times, most recently less than a year ago as
a Senator, to the Constitution, not to any one man,

(53:22):
not to anyone president, and I abide by that oath
for me. I believe in the power of this country
and that we are better than our current politics represent
and I refuse to be intimidated out of defending the
country I love.

Speaker 2 (53:39):
Okay, So a lot of deceptions there, And in fact,
one of the big points that perhaps you bring up
to people, I try to bring it up to people
in classrooms is the term lawmaker. Regardless of whether one
believes in a higher power, Christian God, or a lawmaker

(54:00):
from logos, which I do, the term lawmaker runs completely
contrary to natural law. So some people who aren't even
religious understand that they don't write the laws. They write
the statutes, the edicts of the state. The etymology of

(54:20):
this is a very profound difference. It provides a very
profound difference in a lesson if one breaks this down,
they're not lawmakers, they're statute writers. And oftentimes, even she
from the CIA now in Congress, in the Senate, oftentimes
they're writing statutes that run contrary to natural law. And
this is where I want to sort of round things off.

(54:41):
As we get ready to welcome Eric Peters of Eric
Peters Autos, and we start to look at a number
of subjects that are over at the Eric Peters Auto's website.
I hope you'll check that out. I'm going to display
one of my Eric Peters baseball caps in just a
minute to promote a store, which is awesome. But the
idea of America for I want to return to that

(55:01):
to round this off, whether it's the Pollard story or
it's this story about these people who were softening the
actual oath for the military and then got roundly attacked
for that by literally that radio host from Boston was
doing the same thing day before yesterday, calling for their deaths.
The punishment with death, and then again today now he's

(55:23):
saying that it's the people who don't like Donald Trump.
It's these Democrats who are trying to cause a civil war.
It's just you can't make it up. It's like they
play a game of twister just to figure out where
they're going to put their brains today, put right on red,
put it over here. Just they twist themselves into any
intellectual pretzel that they can. But the idea of America

(55:45):
first runs parallel and echoes the canard of the general
Welfare clause of the Constitution, which is often used by
people like her and others to try to promote whatever
thing they want to get passed in the United States.
And they'll say, and it's even in the preamble of
the Constitution to promote the general welfare. If we look
at the preamble of the Constitution, this will show you

(56:06):
where really breaking things down linguistically and logically tells us
that it strays from real philosophical support of individual liberty.
It's supposed to provide some backstops, but as Lessanders Spooner
pointed out in the nineteenth century, they've long since broken
those backstops. They don't care about the Bill of Rights.
They don't care about what the enumerated powers. They'll come

(56:28):
up with anything. And one of their leverage points is
the general Welfare clause. And it gets into this. I
support the constitutions, sort of flowery rhetoric general welfare, what's
good for Americans and America first. However, the groups want
to define it. The problem here is that echoes the
general welfare clause, same thing as so called public health.

(56:50):
Welfare can only and this is where economics comes into it,
the Austrian school of economics and subjective marginal utility theory
which I teach. So welfare can only be defined by
you someone else assuming for you what your welfare is
means you're that person's vassal. You're his puppet, you're his plaything,
you're his pet. He has control over you. Only you

(57:12):
can define your welfare. And in a market that has
to be reflected with free markets allowing you to buy
what you want and assess things based on your needs,
which can vary even during a day week to week,
your needs and your satisfaction. As you discover your satisfaction,
the price point changes based on what you're interested in buying.

(57:33):
Resources are then allocated to what people like most. We
become more productive, all right, But it's individual decisions as
calculated through the marketplace, through the price system. When people
interfere with that, through terrorists to steer things towards favorite people,
and even people who generally think that tariffs are a
good idea that well, they're just not being controlled properly.

(57:56):
You are assuming for someone else what they should be
able to buy because you think you know what the
economy of the United States it is best to be.
You are the one engaged in essential and non essential thinking,
just like the COVID lockdowns. You're in the supreme Soviet.
That's a very dangerous room to be in. It also
assumes that you know better than your neighbor, which can

(58:18):
then be turned on you. And this is where we
reach the logical impasse of the general welfare clause. If
the state can define for other people what their welfare is,
that immediately means that those individuals are at threat from
the state. It immediately assumes a damage to the individual
stealing from them their ability to define for themselves what

(58:39):
is in their best interests in a peaceful way. So
it's an act of aggression. It says, no, we are
going to steal that from you, just like we steal
money from you to fund the state. So that assumption
the General Welfare Clause runs with the America first term,
which again it's malleable. But what you're doing is you're

(59:01):
even undercutting the very logic of it. It becomes a
qed or an roborous or a tesserak, you might say,
because what you're looking at here is by the government
taking away the opportunity for the individual to define his
own welfare, you then eliminate the very concept of welfare

(59:22):
that the General Welfare Clause assumes the government can come
up with to use as its little protective shield or
its mask. Same thing with public health, as David has
often mentioned, there's only individual health right, and someone else
claiming that they have the power to define for you
what is your health is an immediate injury to you.

(59:43):
So the General Welfare Clause assuming that even in the
preamble of the Constitution is a big mistake. And it
even opens with we, the people of the United States,
in order to form a more perfect union, ensure domestic
tranquility and security, and the general wealth. So again they're
assuming we the people of the United States. So they

(01:00:04):
wrote that in seventeen eighty seven. Were you there? Now
we may have very very positive sentimental thoughts about the
Revolutionary War and the attempts that these people made to
hash this out, but the underlying assumption that precludes it
is never addressed, which is they were assuming for other
people their consent, which is immoral, and there's no denying that.

(01:00:27):
Now people can try to shade it to say, well,
I think there is a necessity for a government, so
this is probably the best form you could get. Again,
historical examples show us that that is not the case.
So I often bring up Brehon law from ancient Ireland
or the Viking Age, the Iceland, people who didn't have
official states and taxes, who didn't have written constitutions. Even

(01:00:50):
there they went tribally and clan wise. The ancient Hebrews
who escaped from Egypt, if only Mike Kuckaby could understand this,
did it by trial. And they're not the the the
Zionists who came down from from Europe either, and they
did it with the family elder becoming the sort of head.
That's how, that's how kings and so on sort of developed.

(01:01:12):
But it's a very interesting point, and Travis has brought
this up. If you want to do some very interesting reading,
explore the readings of let me see Hans Hermann Happa.
There's a really good book by Hoppa. It's h Oppe.
He's very closely associated with the Mesa's institute. Uh called
democracy the God that failed. And of course we all

(01:01:36):
know that democracies just gang rule. But more than just
two sheeps, two wolves and a sheep voting over what's
for lunch. Uh. He goes into historical examples of even
so called constitutional republics, which is really just a step
back version of democracy with some supposed safeguards. But people
don't really question this idea of oh, the the founder

(01:02:00):
could do this. They had no moral prerogative to do
that at all. I mean, you can't deny it. They didn't.
And Thomas Jefferson sort of referred to this when he
said he kind of thought a revolution would be necessary
every few years. Right. But again, that doesn't really get
to the numb of it. Let's get to the number
of a couple big issues that are over on some websites. Now,

(01:02:22):
get some more of your opinions about this take a
break here some music from David Knight, some great stuff,
and remind you if you want to donate to the show,
please do so. That would be a wonderful thing to
see as we approach the end of the month. If
I can help out the Knight family coming in as
LG grand as they would say the big G in Spanish,
some of my friends from high school, I would love that.
That would be a fantastic thing, So feel free if

(01:02:44):
you want to donate. We're going to check out some
of the great stuff that David Knight has created on
his program, and let's go with one of my favorites
for the Last of the Mohicans.

Speaker 1 (01:04:26):
Making sense common again. You're listening to the David Knight Show.

Speaker 14 (01:04:36):
Voladimir Zelenski. I'm so tired of wearing these same T
shirts everywhere for years. You'd think with all the billions
I've skimmed off America, I could dress better. And I
could if only David Knight would send me one of
his beautiful gray mcguffin hoodies or a new black T
shirt with the mcguffin logo in blue. But he told

(01:04:59):
me to get lost. Maybe one of you American suckers
can buy me some at the David Knightshow dot com.
You should be able to buy me several hundred. Those
amazing sand colored microphone hoodies are so beautiful. I'd wear
something other than green military cosplay to my various gallas
and social events. If you want to save on shipping,

(01:05:20):
just put it in the next package of bombs and
missiles coming from the USA.

Speaker 15 (01:05:34):
Oh, I love that so much. It's just so terrific,
just genius, genius stuff. The music, the rush is just great.
Everything's fantastic in that video.

Speaker 2 (01:05:45):
Well, everyone, let's discuss some big issues with a man
who has often appeared on The David Night Show. I'm
Gardner Goldsmith filling in for David and welcome to our
number two of the program. Great comments from so many
of the people, and we'll check in on the rumble
chat and read some of your comments as well. If
I've missed anything, please just you know, copy and paste
or something like that if you do want it seen,

(01:06:06):
if I've missed it. In the flow of information in
this river is a stream of information that flies by us.
But let's welcome the man right now to the stage.
He is Eric Peters of Eric peters Auto's Eric, welcome
and thank you for joining me as I get to
fill in. Great to see you.

Speaker 6 (01:06:24):
Oh.

Speaker 7 (01:06:24):
Likewise, Guard, I really enjoyed that clip from David that
was that put a smile on my face, which of
course I think all of us can use these days.

Speaker 2 (01:06:32):
That's for darn shoe. I often tell the people on
Liberty Conspiracy, we're going to try to turn their political
frowns upside down in Washington, DC. And it's interesting because,
as you know, you and I try to, you know,
remember the lessons that come out of these things, the
evergreen stories that you know, we can pass on to people,
and those are positives and you you often do that.
You go into the articles on your website and you've

(01:06:55):
got a real vast knowledge of libertarian philosophy and economics
and understanding of the gold rule. And I'm always amazed
by the various topics you bring up in addition to
your really cool items about automobiles. And you were years
ahead of people warning people about the evs. And of
course that entire system is dropping in the economy big time.

(01:07:15):
So if I could you had one, and I texted
you this morning over at Eric peters Otto's I'd like
to show this on the screen, Eric, and you get
your opinion about this in just a minute as a
little preview. But i'd like to get your opinions about
some of this Mike Huckabee and some of this information
about the military oath as well before we go into that.

(01:07:35):
What do you think about some of the things we
discussed over the past hour or so, ranging from the
Huckabee issue with Pollard into this statement of Donald Trump
to hang these people? Well, I like, I really appreciate
your distinction between mauful and constitutional to begin with. I
think that's one of these fine distinctions that is important
to make. We kind of live in this era of

(01:07:57):
I call it etymological jiu jitsu. Our minds get manipulated
by words, and it happens unconsciously. They will use terms
to prevent people from identifying and thereby discussing the true issue.
It's a kind of way of like a railroad track,
if you can picture. They shunt the conversation from going
this way to overt to this way. And if you

(01:08:19):
let them do that, you've already lost. You know.

Speaker 7 (01:08:22):
The discussion is then on their terms, and they get
to define them. So it's very important when these kinds
of conversations come up to say, wait a minute, let's
I want to understand exactly what you're talking about and
identify the point the particular thing, and let's define that
before we move forward. So I want to thank you
for doing that.

Speaker 2 (01:08:41):
Now, as far way it's a it's a form of
the Hegelian dialectic. They give you the options and they
tell you it's a choice. You know.

Speaker 7 (01:08:48):
Now, as far as the other stuff, you know, the
thought that immediately popped to mind was, I remember when
Richard Nixon supposedly said if the president does it, then
it's not illegal, right. I mean, essentially, that's the kind
of thing that these people are now asserting. And the
difference is that, well, I don't know that it's a
difference actually, because when Nixon was drunk and on a tear,
he came across like a maniac, and Trump is coming

(01:09:10):
across like a maniac at this point. He comes across
as a man who has lost control of himself. He
apparently has plenty of time to just post angry all
caps tweets all day. I thought he's supposed to be president,
and the presidency is apparently a challenging and difficult job
that requires full time and attention. But it seems he's
sitting there on his phone. I mean, I'm assuming he's
doing it as opposed to a staff of people. And

(01:09:32):
if it's a staff, it's even more embarrassing, right, you know,
it's illiterate, it's ungrammatical, it's garbled, utterly chaotic and embarrassing.
It's infantile to think that this guy who's the president,
this eighty year old man, almost is thundering around like
some angry hippo complaining not in a you know, in
the way that an adult would look. I disagree with

(01:09:54):
his policy because X y Z. He basically just engages
in these ad hominem attacks. A great example of that
being the way he went after Thomas Massey again because
he got married apparently too soon. You know, Massey's wife
died about a year ago. So now somehow you know
Massy is a bad man because he got married again.
What's that got to do with.

Speaker 2 (01:10:14):
Anything beyond the pale? And you know, I think nine
times out of ten, when you're getting backed up by
Laura Lomer, you're probably not in the right spot. Sure, Yeah, the.

Speaker 7 (01:10:23):
Thing that worries me the most about the most recent
developments is the thing that's been troubling me about the
way the ICE goons have been driving up on people
who are primming shrubs in somebody's lawn and grabbing them
and throwing them into the back of these they're using
unmarked minivans. Now it's not even a police type vehicle.
It's just a random civilian looking vehicle.

Speaker 2 (01:10:44):
And by the way, in by Way, you probably saw
just as many people predicted I mentioned it, and other
people probably thought of it too. There are now civilian
criminals who are posing as ICE agents because they can
wear masks, and they're going around trying to one They
tried to kick that one woman in Michigan about four
or five days ago.

Speaker 7 (01:11:04):
Yeah, I mean, this is goon squad tactics. And unfortunately,
there are a lot of people who are supporters of
Trump who are countenancing it because they have bought into
this thing about, oh, we have to get rid of
all these illegals that are in the country. But it's
kind of fatuous in my opinion, because you're never going
to be able to round up how many is it
ten million people something like that and throw them into

(01:11:24):
the back of minivans and cart them over the I mean, logistically,
it's just it's something that can't work. Leaving aside whether
it should work, it can't work. It's not the way
to do this. You know, if you have a problem
with the illegals, and specifically, if you have a problem
with people coming over here to avail themselves of services
that are paid for by tax dollars, Trump could simply

(01:11:45):
issue an executive order saying that, you know, if you
can't prove that you're in the country legally, then you're
not entitled to receive any benefits whatsoever, either at the
federal or the state level. I think there's people would
support that. I don't think that that's necessarily a bad thing.
In fact, I think it would sort of separate the
week from the chaff. I don't think any reasonable person
objects to somebody coming here who wants to work. I mean,

(01:12:07):
I've got a buddy who's you know, who's a small businessman.
Is he has a roofing business and his crew his
guys are Mexicans, and I personally can attest those guys
work hard. Yeah, no problem with those guys.

Speaker 2 (01:12:19):
You know.

Speaker 7 (01:12:20):
The problem that I have though. You know, I've got
the problem with anybody, whether they're legal or illegal, you know,
filtering my hard earned dollars to subsidize their sushi at
the Bouquet supermarket. And I've seen that personally. I've been
standing in line and seeing a guy younger than me
standing there who clearly can work, getting sushi and using
his snap card. That's irritating.

Speaker 2 (01:12:39):
I get that, And it would be a good way.
It would be a good way to introduce eliminating welfareism,
and you know, addressing the problem of the assumption that
welfareism through the state is somehow charitable when it's predicated
on theft. So you could start it and reduce that
incentive by getting rid of all those welfare payments for

(01:13:00):
the migrants. That would be a great way to start, absolutely.

Speaker 7 (01:13:02):
But instead, what they've done, on the one hand, is
to generate understandable resentment and anger among a lot of
Americans about this issue, and then they present as the
solution the goon squads. You know, this this, and I
see this as an attempt to normalize goon squattery, you know,
And I think these people are whistling past the graveyard
who support this stuff. That they don't seem to get

(01:13:25):
that this is going to get turned around against them.
Did you know I just caught this news item this morning.
I don't know whether you saw it, but I mean
I was. I thought this was an onion piece at
first when I read this, But I'll get you the name.
Trump has put forward somebody named Rabbi yehudah Kaplan to
be the special Envoy to monitor and combat anti Semitism

(01:13:45):
in this partry.

Speaker 2 (01:13:46):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I heard about that.

Speaker 7 (01:13:49):
So, you know, you and I, if we dare to
mention something about, like, you know, us being upset about
what's being done to people in Palestine, maybe the minifan
is going to roll up to our house and drag
us out to disappear us someplace. And if you don't
think that that is a possibility, I really suggest that
you think about it again.

Speaker 2 (01:14:06):
Well. Absolutely, If we look at this presidential memorandum, National
Security Memorandum number seven that he issued very early on,
Judge Napolitano just wrote part of included that in part
of a very good piece. It's over at the Ron
Paul Institute website. Daniel McAdams and Ron Paul discussed it
yesterday on the Liberty Report at noontime. I always switch

(01:14:28):
over there after David's show and watch them live. And
they said, well, we're going to have the Department of
Justice investigate, and they're talking about possible prosecution under what
terms I don't know, but possibly under the Espionage Act.
I'm not sure people who are expressing anti Christian you've

(01:14:49):
heard about this. I know, anti capitalist, which is not
real capitalism. Their version of capitalism is worcantilism, it's fascism,
it's not real free markets. And just the term capital
itself has been so sullied that it's not really worth
using that anymore. And any any anti Christian terminology they're

(01:15:09):
using really mixes in Christian Zionism, because if you speak
out about Israel, then clearly you're against the Bible as
the Christian Zionist see it, so they'll categorize that as
anti Christian. And again, you know, it just goes to
what Lewis Carroll said and Alice through the looking glasses,
Humpty Dumpty was the politician. She said, how do you
have this power to make words mean anything you want

(01:15:31):
them to mean? And he said, no, you don't understand,
it's not where what how do I have this? You know,
what magic power do I have? It's who is in power?
That's the question.

Speaker 7 (01:15:41):
Yeah, yeah, absolutely, And it's not a new thing either.
Many people listening might not be aware that this goes
back a long time. For example, during World War One,
the federal government went after people who dared to question
US involvement in the war and who expressed even oblique
sympathy for Germany. It got really, really bad, you know,
people were dragged away for saying something that contradicted the

(01:16:05):
narrative about the evil hunt. And again, you're allowed to, supposedly,
in a free country, have opinions, you know, thoughts are
not supposed to be criminal. Actions are another matter. But
to be able to speak your mind is one of
the most fundamental freedoms there is, even if other people
don't like it, even if almost nobody likes it. In fact,
even if the majority of people hate it, you know,
and this is the problem, is that a lot of

(01:16:26):
people let their feelings override their judgment and because they
don't like something, and they find a particular person, and
they always put this in an extreme way, you know,
the classic example being the neo Nazis, shouting racial rants,
you know, walking around with the swastacaus. Nobody likes that, obviously.
The point is, if you don't allow those guys to
speak and to have their views, however much you may

(01:16:47):
not like them, you've accepted the principle that your speech
can be restricted and you can be punished when the
government doesn't like what you have to say.

Speaker 2 (01:16:55):
And that's it. Echoes a Manuel Kant, you know, he
used the term universalizability where he would explain to people,
even if you don't believe in a god, if you
just look at it logically and you want to be
selfish about it, then just remember that if you're not
willing to allow people to freely express their opinions, then
your opinion can be stifled and the whole system just

(01:17:17):
breaks down. If people think that theft is acceptable to
steal from other people, that means that other people can
steal from them as well, and it just becomes totally
predatory and we're all jackals, and that's all it is.
And you know, you bring up an interesting historical point
that pops to mind. Eric. Our guest is Eric Peters.
Everyone on the David Knight Show, I'm Garden Goldsmith filling
in for David and Travis and Lance and the Alien

(01:17:42):
and Sedition Act period. I referred to this a little
bit earlier, was with Thomas Jefferson and James Madison seventeen
ninety eight, and the Alien Enemies Act is one that
sort of is this long ancient holdover that the MAGA
people have used in reference to say, oh, yes, the
pre can claim there's an emergency and you can use
the Alien Enemies Act. Well, if we actually look at

(01:18:05):
that act. That was one of the reasons why Jefferson
and Madison wrote about that in the Kentucky Resolve for
Jefferson and the Virginia Resolves for Madison in seventeen ninety eight.
They released them within a couple days of each other
to explain to people, look, first of all, the Sedition Act.
The Sedition Act was the other part of this, which
was you can criticize Jefferson, the vice president, but you

(01:18:28):
can't criticize the President John Adams, or you'll be put
in jail, which is essentially an echo of what we're
seeing today or what you mentioned in World War One.
These things keep popping up with different eras, and it's
the same. Kingly mindset, and in fact, at least with
a monarch, we would know the difference and we wouldn't
be told that the government is us right.

Speaker 7 (01:18:51):
Well, it goes back a long way, and you know, Adams,
to his great credit, recognized that he'd gone too far
and that he let his emotions carry him away, and
that he was wrong of out the alien and sedition acts. Unfortunately,
the president now is not a reflective man. He's not
a thoughtful man. You know, He's not the kind of
man who will allow his temper to cool and recognize
I made a mistake, let alone admit he made a mistake.

(01:19:14):
I can't think of a single instance when President Trump
has acknowledged he made a mistake and apologized for it
and said, look, I messed up, and I'm not going
to do it again. That's one of the more troubling
things about this guy. There's a problem when you can't
own up to errors that you make, which is the
first step to not making the same thing, making the
same mistake again. I mean, he has yet to atone

(01:19:36):
for his behavior during the last year of his presidency,
in the twenty twenty, that whole year, for everything that
he did with regard to warp speeding the beautiful vaccines,
which he still continues to insist publicly saved millions of lives.
You know, and I should have, you know, I really,
I deeply regret, frankly, I'll say it publicly that I

(01:19:58):
voted for the guy I did. You know, I feel
like an idiot, you know, I feel like Charlie Brown.
I tried to kick the football again. I did it
for frankly cynical reasons because I thought that on balance,
he's the lesser of two evils. Well, when you vote
for the lesser of two evils, you still end up
with evil, and sometimes you end up with a worse
evil because you thought it was good.

Speaker 2 (01:20:17):
Yeah, and I think reaching that conclusion, and you know
I've reached that conclusion a while back. So I don't
vote to put people into offices, but you know, I
will express an opinion about whether, you know, for example,
Thomas Massey is a heck of a lot better choice.
If you're going to try to put somebody in that office,
then you know his opponent or whatever. But there's a

(01:20:38):
there's a very clean feeling, there's a there's a breath
of fresh air feeling that comes in knowing, Okay, I
disconnected from all of that, pulling a Gary Newman me.
I disconnect from you, you know.

Speaker 7 (01:20:49):
And also there's a really important undercurrent there, which I
know you're aware of, but I think it's worth us discussing,
which is that you have not involved yourself in something
that entails the abuse of other people. You have your
hands are clean. I didn't vote in the recent governatorial election,
so you know I don't. I'm not voting for some person,

(01:21:09):
even if I think that they are aligned with me
in a general sense, who will then have essentially unlimited
power to act and to do things to other people
that I don't approve of. I don't like things being
done to me, especially by somebody else voting for some
politician to do them to me, So I'm withdrawing my
consent from all of that. I don't like coercion. I

(01:21:31):
don't like collectivism, you know. I want to be free
to make my own decisions in life, and I respect
the right of other people who have the exact same
equal right that I have to be left alone if
I'm not bothering, hurting anybody, causing harm, and to keep
what's mine that I work for and so on. And
that's how we recover things. You know, we stop using force,

(01:21:53):
which is what we're doing when we're voting. No matter
what you think you're saying, I endow this figure, whoever
you're voting for, with the proxy power to impose things
on other people, and they will. Yeah, I don't like that.
You know, I'm not looking to rule anybody. I'm looking
to rule myself perhaps, but that's my own business.

Speaker 2 (01:22:11):
Well, that's a great point, you know, you remind me.
In some of the classes, Eric, I would have conversations
with the students and I would show them examples because
there were a lot of erroneous assumptions thrown out by
these videos that PBS produced called crash course, this crash
course that they would add crash course Science, crash Course Economics,
or crash course crash Course Philosophy. And I would focus

(01:22:36):
on the economics and the philosophy videos as examples and
show them to the students and say, you know, where
do you find some problems or different differences in your
thoughts here? And one of them was on that classic
and I think you and I might discuss this previously
on David's show, That Classic Jungle warlord scenario where a
group of tourists is in the jungle, and this goes

(01:22:58):
towards the government problem where people they give you this
a Galien dialectic or this assumption that you have to
try to act in some way that actually is an
immoral act, but you think it's the best of the
possible choices. So essentially what it is is a group
of tourists gets captured by a warlord. There are twenty
tourists and the host of the show says, you know,

(01:23:20):
don't you. So he says, the warlord pulls one person
out and puts a gun in his hand, makes him
pointed at somebody and says, you've got to kill this
person or I'm going to kill all other eighteen people,
and say, you know, what would you do? And the
assumption here is that you kill that person. And if

(01:23:41):
we even pull out the idea that the warlord could
be lying to you, I ask the students, I say,
what is the actual correct answer? And so the correct
answer is you let him kill you. You don't become
party to the evil because you still have some sort
of control over yourself, you still have agency over your

(01:24:03):
own life. And just because and this is where we
get the political sphere where people say, well, I don't
like that choice, but I really got to do something
because the other one's a lot worse. No, you don't
have to vote for evil. You don't and you shouldn't,
and I think it's important to you know. That's why
I feel very very refreshed to think I don't touch
that world, I don't participate. If enough of us did that,

(01:24:25):
you know, people often talk about, g I wish we
had a third party, so I wouldn't have to vote
for the Republican A or the Democrat B.

Speaker 7 (01:24:33):
Well, rather than a third party, what if it were
just none of the above, then I vote, you know,
because then we'd have an opportunity to delegitimize the system.
You can imagine in an election when none of the
above won, you know that that would be quite telling.
Then it would be out in the open. Then we
would know, and people couldn't deny that we're run without

(01:24:53):
our consent, by force by a relative minority of people.
And that's important because it would make it much more
difficult for them to govern us.

Speaker 2 (01:25:01):
Because it is interesting. Oh sorry, I was gonna say,
be clear what it is.

Speaker 7 (01:25:07):
I think, you know, a lot of people are passive
or accepting of the system because oh, it's a democracy.

Speaker 2 (01:25:11):
We had our chance to vote.

Speaker 7 (01:25:13):
It's legitimate, you know, so it's okay to rob somebody,
you know via a letter in the mail, you know
that says you owe a certain amount of money as
opposed to some thug showing up at your house and
you know, pointing a gun at your head.

Speaker 2 (01:25:24):
Exactly, exactly exactly. It's great to have here. This is fantastic.
Oh and let's check in and check in on some
of the comments, and then I'd like to hop over
and ask you about one of the pieces at Eric
Peters Auto's giving us back some stolen money. And there's
another one that's right up at the front. But this
is on the front page. And so let's head over

(01:25:44):
into Rumble. Say hi to Bulldog is there, don't frag me?
Bro is there?

Speaker 13 (01:25:51):
Uh?

Speaker 2 (01:25:52):
Flower Sewer is there? And Flower Sower says, I held
my nose and voted from the first time and voted
the pro life candidate the other time. Stop voting in evil.
Well stated, let's see we've got let's see over here,

(01:26:13):
We've got this okay, yeah, okay, yeah, oh over on
on kick let me check check some of the statements
on kick Let's see this. Oh, Assyrian girl is there?
She says, I vote for none of the above. Way

(01:26:33):
to go. Oh that's terrific. And in a way, the
decentralized nature of the Constitution is not exactly, but it
was the founder's attempt to provide carve outs and walls
for none of the above on this subject, On this subject,
on this subject, government's not supposed to be involved. The
Bill of Rights? Is there to be a a de

(01:26:56):
facto none of the above. Nobody's going to be touching
any of this stuff in your life. But they breach it.
And so that gets me back to Lysander Spooner who said,
you know, the Constitution either was built this way to
allow this, or it was incapable of stopping it. Let's yeah,
let's use that as a as a leap point to
talk about this piece over at Eric Peters, Otto's giving

(01:27:18):
us back some stolen money and this is just phenomenal. Eric,
tell us a little bit about this piece at.

Speaker 7 (01:27:26):
Eric Also, yeah, am I the only one whose teeth
ache when I hear about Trump trying to assuage are
our increasing impoverishment by promising at some indeterminent point to
hand us another stimmy check. In this particular case, it's
supposed to be our refund. To say it like doctor Evil.

(01:27:47):
For all of the tariffs that Trump has collected, and
people don't seem to connect the dots and understand that
they've already paid an enormous amount in taxes, because that's
what tariffs are tariffs. To get back to that whole
thing we were talking about earlier, about the way they
shift the conversation through etymology, a tariff is attacks. The
only difference is that it's applied to the manufacturer instead

(01:28:09):
of you as an individual. Use an individual pay for
it though when you buy, if you can afford it,
whatever the product is that the manufacturer is trying to sell.
Cars for example, so you know Trump imposed all these
tariffs on vehicles that are made outside the United States, Well,
what does that mean to you as a car buyer.
It means that the car now costs more. And it's
not just the car that was made in another country,

(01:28:31):
it's also the domestically manufactured vehicle. Because what happens every
time that this stuff goes on is that the domestic manufacturers,
they don't reduce their prices, they just raise them to
an equivalence and you've got a parody there. So everybody's
paying more and Trump you know this, We're supposed to go, oh,
look we're getting some money back, you know. And it's like,
it's how illiterate and foolish do you have to be

(01:28:52):
to accept that this is some kind of benefit to you.
It's again, it makes my teethhirt when this sort of
thing goes on.

Speaker 2 (01:29:00):
Before we hop into some of the meat of the
text that you wrote over at Eric Peters Auto's Eric,
I do want to mention you know that was manifest
and we saw the different layers of it manifested in
the auto industry in the nineteen seventies when they imposed
massive terroriffs on foreign cars, and the unions and other
people within the auto industry saw that new leeway, that

(01:29:21):
new space that's where they could sponge, and they became
even less efficient, they became even more top down with
retirement schemes and even higher salaries, and they couldn't compete
against these foreign car makers. This is a really good
point to bring up, in addition to the fact that

(01:29:42):
as we often bring up in economics or I'll mention
James Bouvart's book The Fair Trade Fraud. The point of
productive economy or the point of a tool, is to
allow people to get work done more easily. And if
someone is standing there telling you, no, you can't buy
that in the I'm right here next to you, I'm
your buying buddy, You're going to buy that instead, then

(01:30:06):
that is costing you more. That means that you can't
spend money in a way that you would preferred and
save that money, and you're going to have to work harder.
But in addition to that, someone else who could have
received your patronage is no longer going to receive it.
That part of the economy is now squandered and stifled,
and that life giving sustenance, that liquidity no longer goes

(01:30:28):
to them. And it's Oh, I was going to.

Speaker 7 (01:30:31):
Mention as an underlying thing that it's important to bring
up in this context, and it is that Trump is
very disingenuous about this particular subject, in that the reason
vehicles and other things are expensive to manufacture or expensive
to sell in this country has to do with compliance costs. Okay,
the reason that it is less expensive to manufacture a

(01:30:52):
vehicle outside the United States is because compliance costs are lower,
you know, in places like China, Vietnam and what have you.
So my point point is that the core issue here
is not the trade and balance, it's the compliance cost.
If Trump really wants to make American industry competitive again,
what he's got to do is figure out a way
to reduce the costs and post by the regulatory regime

(01:31:15):
at the manufacturing level. That's so god awful expensive. Talk
to anybody who's in business to try to make anything
in this country. Yes, so that's the problem. And he
has to know that this guy supposedly graduated from the
Wharton School of Business. How can he not know that?
It's basic fundamental economics exactly.

Speaker 2 (01:31:33):
And I'll give you example. Last night on Liberty Conspiracy,
I brought this story up Eric, this one coming from
let me see scripts News. Holiday shoppers face higher costs
amid tariffs, of course, and there's much more, much more.
There's this one out of Alabama. Let me see. Yeah,

(01:31:58):
here it is Alabama faces largest closure in years, resulting
in four hundred plus job losses. Then and there's they're
they're all over the place. We've got target with of course,
Target you know screwed itself up with its wokeism. But
let's see there's another one. Home Depot is running into problems,

(01:32:18):
also partially because they're being boycotted because of their support
for the ice people to come in. There's so many
of these stories about the economy. Here's this one companies
eight tariff costs, but your price hikes are coming next.
And again, you know, it's central planning. If people are

(01:32:40):
unwilling to look at the economic drawbacks of it, at
least they could look at the moral darkness of it
to say, I know best, I know what is the
correct form of a US economy. It's just it, really,
it blows my mind. It's a breathtaking assumption.

Speaker 6 (01:32:56):
Yep.

Speaker 7 (01:32:58):
Yes, absolutely terrible, and it's insidious because it enables the
political class to hide what they're doing to us and
to shift the blame and to make it seem like
it's those awful foreigners you know, who are flooding the
country with their cheap goods and taking away our jobs.

Speaker 2 (01:33:16):
Yeah, it's just another.

Speaker 7 (01:33:17):
Example of this dialectic of us being pitted against one
another rather than understanding who the real enemy is. I
think you lay it out well over on the side
at Eric peterz Otto's Eric, your writing is great, He said,
Trump is once again promising to give Americans back some
of the stolen money from them by money stolen from
them by the government, by Trump himself in this case,

(01:33:40):
because it was he who imposed massive taxes on Americans
who were told they were merely terriffs and so wouldn't
cost them any money.

Speaker 2 (01:33:47):
And I'll mention, if anybody's new, this is the largest
tax increase in seventy years. This tariff amount. These tariffs,
which of course are taxes applied to the manufacturers of
things that are then passed on the buyers of things,
have increased the cost of new vehicles by at least
as much as the paltry two thousand dollars checks. Trump
says Americans may receive sometime two thousand checks that they

(01:34:10):
might receive sometime next year, by which time it is
likely so he hopes everyone will have forgotten the promise
and moved on to some other thing. I was covering
some stories yesterday, Eric that discuss how some of the
people tried to forward date their purchases in sort of
predicting that Trump was going to come in with a

(01:34:30):
lot of these tariffs, and now they're running out of
that stock, so their next purchases are going to be
even more expensive, and we're going to get hit even harder.
And I'd like to ask you a little bit more
because this has sucked already three hundred billion dollars out
of the economy, and people like Treasury Secretary Scott Besson
are applauding it. They think it's wonderful, and regardless of

(01:34:52):
Trump's claims that it's twenty one trillion dollars. We'll look
at an example of their argument, which is, well, we're
bringing in America, We're bringing jobs to Americans. And they'll
look at as you and I've discussed this Honda Electric plant.
Then originally the plant was in Mexico. Now they're going
to have to come to the United States to manufacture
in the United States at higher production, higher production costs,

(01:35:15):
and they are doing so and moving they're having to
spend extra money that they should not have had to
spend at all just to build a new plant. So
Somebody's going to have to pay for that, and it's
going to be the consumer.

Speaker 7 (01:35:29):
Of course. You know Trump, I think his dissonance, if
it is dissonance I might give them the benefit of
the doubt. Here is that for a certain small slice
of the population, things are just going swimmingly if you're
of the Wall Street class, the corporate class, because they're
once again squeezing every dime out of us that they
can via the grift, via the federal government's machinations. I mean,

(01:35:54):
from that standpoint, oh, it's wonderful. You know, I can
buy another one hundred thousand dollars evy to sit next
to the one that I arelready have in my garage.
But for everybody else, it's obvious that things are off
the rails. And you know, Trump to the day said
he actually said that inflation is under control. Oh and
I mean that shows that he's either delusional or something

(01:36:14):
far worse. Did you know say something like that outBut I.

Speaker 2 (01:36:18):
I'd like to play something for you, Eric, And this
goes back a couple of days from my Liberty Conspiracy Show,
because there's this guy Hassett who came on CNBC and
Joe Kernan, one of the hosts over there, called him
out on this claim that inflation was going down, and
he said, no, year to year were still three percent

(01:36:39):
more expensive than last year. And as you and I know,
this is an additive functional equation. You take the three
percent that it measured last year was over and above that.
You take that amount, add the new amount to it,
and then multiply that by three percent, and you're getting
what the new price is. And you know it's algebra, right.

(01:37:01):
So what's interesting here is this CNBC host called them
out on that, and if I can't, I'll bring your
your mic down for a minute and just play this
for you and bring this up. So here it is,
and this is a very interesting call out. Here we go.

Speaker 16 (01:37:19):
Now inflation is still three percent. It's still too high. Now,
oil prices, energy prices, there are certain things where they
have come down. But when you keep saying prices are falling,
that's not true because inflation is still it's the three
percent is on top of all the inflation we had.

Speaker 6 (01:37:37):
During the Biden years.

Speaker 16 (01:37:38):
So we got all that inflation plus an additional three percent,
and we should I think you should admit that.

Speaker 10 (01:37:44):
A more precise way to say it, Ojo, is that
purchasing power has gone up. It's so real wages that's
w divided VIP for our technical people of the audience
have gone up by about twelve hundred dollars this year.

Speaker 2 (01:37:56):
And now that's really where I wanted to go, Eric,
because that is a lie and that brings me.

Speaker 7 (01:38:03):
Yeah, you know, what do you even say? I posted
an article the other day that kind of gets into this,
a little bit about Honda announcing that they're bringing back
the Prelude.

Speaker 2 (01:38:13):
You remember the pre luguees. Yes, that was the one
I was going to go to next absolutely.

Speaker 7 (01:38:17):
Yeah, for twenty twenty six, and it's going to start
at forty three thousand dollars. The last time the Prelude
was available, which was back in two thousand and one,
it was about twenty three thousand dollars. Now, when you
talk about inflation, are you making roughly twice as much
money today as you were in two thousand and one
to adjust for the near doubling in cost of a

(01:38:38):
car like the Prelude, which isn't really that different from
the original, and in some ways it's actually worse. The
point is this thing which used to be an affordable
car no longer is. You know, we are getting habituated
in a kind of Patty Hurst way to ordinary vehicles.
I mean, it's a prelude what's so special about a
prelude costing, you know, not too far away from fifty
thousand dollars when all is sudden.

Speaker 2 (01:38:58):
Done, it's an unbelievable And you make this point here.
You say Hondas and Toyotas were once the affordable and
generally better alternatives to Fords and Chevies. We talking about
those terriffts from the seventies. Whether they are better now
is harder to say, but it's not difficult to say
that none of them are affordable anymore. Some of the

(01:39:21):
near doubling of the twenty six preludes price is of
course what is called inflation. But this does not address affordability,
because most people's incomes have not inflated in tandem with
the costs of things. And that is something that brings
up a point that I brought up on Liberty Conspiracy
the other night, it might have been Monday. I went

(01:39:42):
into what Austrian economists explain is the Cantalon effect. And
so when you have a central bank, whether it's a
central bank that's licensed by the central political system, and
it's given a monopoly on the issuance of currency, which
of course they use to buy the bonds to pay
off the debt because they can't tax enough, or it's
the treasury of that political institution, like ancient Rome calling

(01:40:07):
back their coins, shaving off bits, creating new money, and
then claiming those coins were still worth as much. It
doesn't matter any political connection to the monetary system. A
fiat system forced on people will incentivize the government to
play with the money to give them more to pay
off some of their special favors people. If you have
a competitive banking system, you can't do that because the

(01:40:29):
bank would be recognized as ripping people off and nobody
would accept the little slips. But what's interesting is the
Cantalon effect tells us about this pyramid or in class,
I would describe it to the students as a train
where the people who are closest to the engine are
the very wealthy, politically connected corporate stock market types, banking types,

(01:40:51):
and they'll get the money first. And the Cantalon effect
is basically a descriptor or a normative normative term to
apply to the people who get the money first can
spend it on assets and invested in things before the
buying power has been diluted by seeing the money bid

(01:41:13):
up all those prices over time as it goes through
the various strata to the people at the end in
the caboose. And what's interesting is I added a little
bit to this. There's actually a separate video about this
over at the Liberty Conspiracy Rumble channel. Is what ends
up happening, of course, as you know with the boom
bus cycle, is once the people on the bottom end

(01:41:34):
realize that their prices are going up, they pull back
their expenditures. But what's already happened is inventories have been
increased on the expectations that there's going to be big
sales because they are low interest rates. They've hired new
people because there are low interest rates. A lot of
natural resources have been turned into things that should not
have been turned into things because they had expected big

(01:41:55):
sales because there were low interest rates. And so it
ends up happening is all that stuff has to be liquidated,
turned into liquid or currency that can be spread around
at much reduced prices. They get to drop just like
the Wizard of Oz, you liquidated or and so in
the end, what ends up happening. The final point of
it is these people who purchased assets and are connected

(01:42:17):
to the government government money system. They then not only
have been insulated from losses, they can buy up those
resources at discount prices, and so it becomes a new
form of colonialism, just like the old enclosure movement with
the Brits, where they were taking the land from the
locals for the royally connected people. We still have the

(01:42:38):
royally connected people, but it's supposedly our government, and it's
really it's quite an insult to human dignity.

Speaker 7 (01:42:46):
It's serial victimization. That's particularly devilish because the victims for
the most part, don't see that they've been victimized. Yeah,
you know, they recognize that things cost more, you know
that they have less money available for things, but you know,
they attributed to this sort of numinous force called inflation.
You know, the work of inflation. It's the natural force.

(01:43:06):
You know, things just cost more. They don't understand that
it's it's a machination, that it's an engineered thing, which,
as you say, is designed to extract wealth from people
farther down the train for the benefit of those at
the head of the train. And in the double way
that you mentioned. You know, they initially have the sounder money,
the stronger purchasing power, and then they are in a

(01:43:27):
position to lap up all of these extraneous resources at
at bargain basement prices when the whole thing collapses, and
so now they're doubly enriched at the expense of everybody else's.
It's really it's really despicable.

Speaker 2 (01:43:40):
Yeah. And one of the one of the most despicable
characters involved with that is Scott Besson. You know, he
worked with Soros as they broke the Bank of England,
sucked up tons of resources. That was one of his
claims to fame. You know, I don't know if he
still wants to claim claim fame on that now, but
he's still spouting nonsense. In fact, I've got a piece, uh,
I've got a piece over here. Trump and Treasury Secretary

(01:44:02):
Besant are talking nonsense on inflation. This comes from MarketWatch,
of all things. And he's just utterly clueless. You know.
He's telling Maria Bartaromo that he expects the price of
beef to go down, and then he made a fatuous
claim that the reason that the beef prices were going

(01:44:22):
up was that beef stocks, beef herds, cattle in the
United States were getting sick because migrants had smuggled cattle.
They had brought their cows with them over the border. Like,
you can't make it up. It's like it's like Monty
Python putting the cow in the in the tribute, in
the catapult in in Holy Grail. What are they throwing

(01:44:45):
them over the walls of This is absurd.

Speaker 7 (01:44:48):
I'll take issue with one thing that you said, which
is that he doesn't know. He does know. He's not
a stupid man. They all know. They're you know, I
don't want to be crashed, but they're farting in our faces.
You know, they just think that we really are stupid
cattle and we don't know any better. And sometimes they
just want to smear our faces in it just to
show who's in charge. Yeah, you know, it's a segue,

(01:45:10):
just a little bit. You know, this whole thing with
the Epstein stuff. Yeah, you got Trump running for office
in one of his big campaign promises was We're going
to get to the bottom of the Epstein thing. You know,
he gets elected and then all of a sudden it's
not a thing. Never mind. You know, Pambondi standing there
with all the reams of documents and files. Oh no, no,
there really was any I mean, the effrontery of it,

(01:45:31):
the hoods that they do these things, and it's just
it scales across the border. They know every single thing
that they're doing is nonsense, but they have to say something,
so they get out there and they say it, and
they expect us to go, Okay, sure that sounds good
to me.

Speaker 2 (01:45:45):
Yeah, that really hits the sentiment that I feel as well.
And I was speaking I mentioned the other last night.
Actually on the show last night, Eric I mentioned one
of the members of the Free State Project. I've been
in touch with them. They live real close. I was
talking with his daughter, and she's about fourteen, I think,
and we like she is totally aware of what terrifts do.

(01:46:09):
She's aware of the breaches of the constitution. And you know,
she's fourteen. And I do think that sometimes when you
talk to younger people, they don't come in with all
this effrontery. They they're much more open to saying, yeah,
that person's lying. You know. It's the child who called
out that the emperor has no clothes, right.

Speaker 7 (01:46:27):
I think that's a you know, that's a function of
the fact that we live now in an era where
the line has gotten cartoonishly buffoonish, and it's so omnipresent,
it's so blatant. You know, maybe one of the good
side effects of the whole COVID thing. You know, these
this girl's fourteen, so she know a large part of
her early adult life was spent during that period. You
could just see how you know, deliberate and malicious and

(01:46:50):
egregious the lies were, and it just kind of separated.
It made the veil part for a lot of people.
And you begin to realize that. And I don't think
I'm being a little bit hyperbolic here when I say
we're ruled by monsters, really really bad people. You know,
it's not a question of oh they're misinformed, Oh they
meant well, they're malicious, they're monstrous, they're evil people. They

(01:47:14):
don't care. You know, their whole point and purpose is
to exploit and control us. And if you start with
that as the fundamental premise, you begin to see things
a lot more clearly.

Speaker 2 (01:47:24):
Yeah, And I think it allows us to see historical
figures in a different light too. If you look at
Abraham Lincoln or Alexander Hamilton or Henry Clay, you know,
the further off in history, they are oftentimes the more
polished the statists can make them. And you also remind
me on contemporary grounds. I was sort of struck this

(01:47:47):
morning when I was listening to that radio host suddenly
claiming that it was the people who were calling out
Donald Trump for lawlessness who were the ones who were
calling for a civil war, rather than Donald Trump engaging
in aggressive threats against those people, telling them you should
be hanged, you know, I mean, it's just beyond belief.

(01:48:07):
But it really hit me, and you know, you might
have thought of it many times yourself. I've thought of
it a few times, about how they've leveraged that reaction
of many normal people who didn't like and didn't appreciate
the fact that they were breaching the constitution with the lockdowns,
all the lies and stupidity and canards, of the claims

(01:48:29):
they're making about the jabs, and how obvious it all
was that the emperor had no clothes for so many people,
and the stark difference between those people who were trying
to get their voices heard and the people in the
pop media who were suppressing them, or the actors and
actresses who were being hired in some cases not all
to promote the Canards, And it really struck me how

(01:48:51):
the MAGA leverage, the MAGA movement has leveraged that to
get them to think that they're still on the right
track when they're calling for the utter destruction of due process,
half of the Bill of Rights, Christian Zionism, overlooking genocide,
suppressing free speech on college campuses, all of these things

(01:49:13):
that if they were to just put the word COVID
or lockdown in there, they'd be on the opposite side.

Speaker 7 (01:49:20):
Now there is a silver lining to the star cloud,
and it is that there has been a cleaving of
the MAGA movement. Yeah, there are people, and I'm among them,
who are sympathetic to the idea of making America first again,
putting Americans first more, you know, more finely that the government,
if we've got to have a government, it ought at
least to operate in the general interests of most Americans,

(01:49:40):
you know, would that would be a better thing than
what we have got right now. But the propagandizing and
the dishonesty has gotten so extreme that even half of
the people who supported Trump, I think, and it's probably
more than half, can't swallow it anymore. You know, the
movement has fracked. You know, you've got the clapping Seals

(01:50:02):
who are just as bad as the people on the
left during COVID, you know who, whatever Biden did, whatever
the gazund Heights fears said, we had to do, yep,
we have to do it in lockstep. And if anybody
else disagrees, you know, they're awful. They want to kill Granny,
you know. So now you've got people on the Trump
side who are a lot like that in every way.
You know, they have a mask on. You just can't
see it. You know, it's it's fundamentally the same attitude.

(01:50:24):
But I think for the first time ever, there is
a huge cohort of people in this population who've just
had enough. Whether it's from the Republicans or the Democrats,
right or left, they've had enough and that's what it's
going to take. It's always sort of an awaken critical
mass minority. And if you go back to the Revolutionary period,
to the colonial period, it wasn't before the war was

(01:50:45):
won that a great bulk of the American public, the
colonial American public, wanted to separate from Great Britain. In fact,
probably the majority was still Tory at that time. Yeah,
you know, the revolution only got to be popular. Everybody
was a revolutionary after the revolution was won. But you know,
there was a committed cohort of people who said, no,

(01:51:06):
we can't deal with this anymore. There's no negotiating with
the king and with Parliament. This isn't something where we
can come to some kind of a reasonable, amicable understanding.
We have to separate. That's the only solution. And I think,
you know, we've got a cohut like that right now
that could form the nucleus of something perhaps better in
the years, in the years ahead.

Speaker 2 (01:51:27):
I hope so. And I hope even just intellectually, you know,
because I find it's a much more fruitful ground and
much more comfortable for me to be able to. I mean,
nobody likes conflict and disagreement and descent and so on,
and the more government does, the more we get conflict
and disagreement and descent, and just that ought to be
a lesson to people, you know. But I think you

(01:51:48):
put a fine point on it, eric In, you know,
in mentioning that it should be Americans first. You know,
I brought up that term America first, which is easily
used for political reasons, but Americans. First, maybe there isn't
as much wiggle room because that sort of could be
focused more on the individual. I think it still possibly

(01:52:10):
could be misused. But hey, before we go, Eric, I
want to check in on some more comments from people.
But I also want to ask you about your most
recent piece that was published about the hybrids over at
Eric Peters Auto's and so let's get some Let's get
some comments from people inside rumble. We've got Bulldog is there,

(01:52:31):
and we've got let's see since back in the Linkedny's
when oh yeah, okay, okay, I'm going to go down here. Okay.
It says if you speak truth to power, then you
have entered the world of politics. When you challenge this
is from Don't Frag Me, Bro, When you challenge the priests,

(01:52:54):
class and bankers, you have entered the world of politics. Yea,
And I think, well, there's a distinct obviously, because the
world of politics is always attacking us, and so there
is a degree of defense there. The question is whether
one is trying to participate by actually getting hands on
levers or indirectly getting hands on levers of the institutions.

(01:53:17):
But that's a very interesting point, and I love to
ask you about this hybrid piece that you've got here. Eric,
close things off, tell us about this one just out,
literally just out this morning.

Speaker 7 (01:53:26):
Yeah, it dovetails on the announcement by Toyota that the
twenty twenty six Ra four, which is the first and
probably the most popular of these small crossovers that you
see everywhere, is henceforth going to be hybrid only. And
it's of a trend. You may have noticed how many
vehicles now have hybrid power trains. Why is that, Well,
it's not because of market demand. When hybrids were available,

(01:53:49):
you know, for example, the Prius, which is sort of
the archetype of hybrids, and it's been around for more
than twenty years, it was available, and there were some
people who really liked the idea of an ultra fuel
efficient vehicle and they would buy a Prius. But for
many years there was not many There weren't many others
on the market, which kind of demonstrates that there really
wasn't that much more demand from the market for these things. Now,

(01:54:10):
all of a sudden, pretty much every vehicle that you
can shake a stick at has a hybrid drive frame,
and the only reason for that is because of government
demands I make the distinction between buyer demand and government demands. Hybrids,
of course, are a kind of half electric car. The
idea is to shut the gas engine off as often
as possible to slightly increase the gas mileage and to

(01:54:31):
reduce the emissions of that dread awful gas that feeds
plants carbon dioxide. So it's a regulatory compliance cost that's
being sold to people as a gas savings. But how
are you saving money if you end up having to
spend as in this case, about thirty five hundred dollars
more for the vehicle at the time of purchase, and
then you're going to be paying more to own it
because it's going to cost you more to ensure. Because

(01:54:54):
insurance is based on the replacement and repair costs of
the more expensive vehicle. It's it's probably going to cost
you more down the road because it's a more complex system,
and the more complex the system is, statistically speaking, the
greater the odds are that at some point something expensive
is going to fail and you're going to end up
having to pay for that probably, so you're not saving

(01:55:15):
any money. What's happening again, for our earlier discussion, is
that these costs are being hidden and offloaded onto us.
The manufacturers are faced with having to figure out, how
are we going to comply with federal gas mileage requirements
and the CO two emissions requirements. Well, we'll hybridize everything.
We'll take away the choice. We won't leave it up
to people to decide whether. Toyota has offered a hybrid

(01:55:37):
version of the Raft woor and a number of its
other models, but it's always been a relatively small portion
of the people who buy the raft who won't chose
the hybrid. So what does that tell you? Now they're
making it so that you have no choice. If you
want a Raft four, you have to buy a hybrid.
And they've done this with other models. And I'm not
picking on Toyota. All the other manufacturers have done it
as well. Honda has done it with the you know,

(01:56:01):
all the other manufacturers are diving into this because they
have to, you know, I mean, they could fight, I think,
and I've counseled them off the record. I've suggested to them,
you know, rather than spending all this money to figure
out how to comply with the government, why don't you
explain to people what's going on. Why wine item in
your window stickers, for example, that you see on the
car costs of compliance, and then have each line item

(01:56:22):
direct injection, ten speed transmission, hybrid drive trame. Let people
see what they're paying for. Make it plain. Maybe buy
some ads, you know, have some ads at the Super
Bowl explaining to people, you know what, the reason your
car costs fifty thousand dollars now, and that's the average
price people are paying for a new car is because
of the federal government and all these regulatory requirements that
it imposes. That's why you can't find a new car

(01:56:44):
that costs fifteen thousand dollars, which there's no reason you
ought not to be able to have.

Speaker 2 (01:56:49):
Yeah, the sheer insult of that, you know, oftentimes I
think people get normalcy biased they hear these terms, but
just the affrontery of that to say, hey, you know,
we're not going to participate in the market at ourselves.
We're the politicians. We're going to tell you we're not
going to offer our own product and just peacefully compete.
We're going to tell you who invested all this into

(01:57:10):
all these things, and we're going to come up with
all these insulting so called rationales and justifications to say, oh, well,
you know, we got to protect against the gaunt, giant climate. God.
You know, it's just so insulting and insufferable. It's ridiculous.
And you know, I'm looking at the rat fourum thinking
about that cost. I was like, you know again, how

(01:57:32):
about just something cheap, something cheap, That's all I need.
And I got a question for you, Eric. You know,
as you've pointed out in numerous times, the evs are very,
very bad in cold weather, as we know, you know,
they don't hold their charge. Is there's anything to be
concerned when we talk about hybrids with that sort of

(01:57:53):
thing as well.

Speaker 7 (01:57:55):
Yeah, but less so because the hybrid system is essentially
designed to be a part time system. You know, the
vehicle is generally speaking, usually being propelled by the power
of the gas engine, which operates as a generator as well,
and it feeds electricity to the battery as you drive.
And the way the thing is set up, the battery
never discharges beyond a certain point. So that's good for

(01:58:16):
the battery's long term longevity in that it never, you know,
is heavily discharged and then subjected to heavy charging. It's
maintained in a sort of homeostatic state for the majority
of the time. And of course it's not responsible for
predominantly responsible for propelling the vehicle. It's sort of there
as an adjunct. You know, it powers the accessories when
the engine's not running, and it sometimes in some cases

(01:58:38):
provides a little more motive power when you get going,
So it will last longer than an EV battery would end.
Because it's smaller, significantly smaller. You know, it's not as
expensive to replace. It's about fifteen hundred bucks, give or
take fifteen hundred or three thousand, depending on the vehicle.
And that's not totally out of hand. You know, if
you had to replace a transmission in a car, you

(01:58:59):
might have spend two three thousand dollars to put a
transmission in a typical car. It's not a deal killer.
In other words, you know, if you have a twelve
year old hybrid and you know the battery is starting
to wane and it's starting to lose its charge capacity,
and the guy says, well, you know, you're going to
have to buy a new battery for it, and it's
going to cost you fifteen hundred or two thousand dollars.
It's still worth doing that. Because you know, the vehicle

(01:59:19):
at that point probably has some life left in it,
and its value as such is probably around five grand
at that point. Have an EV a pure EV after
say ten years, that's already lost, depreciated massively, and you're
facing having to put fifteen or twenty thousand dollars into
it for a battery. No, it's untenable, you know. Leaving

(01:59:40):
aside most people simply can't do that. I mean, you'd
have to have another financing scheme, you know, to buy
the battery, which is equivalent to buying another car. It's
not most people are going to be able to write
a check for or even put on their credit card,
because most people don't have fifteen thousand dollars worth of
credit available on their credit card. Yeah, it's much less
of worry with a hybrid.

Speaker 2 (02:00:01):
To answer your question, well, it's very interesting to think
about these things, you know. Luckily, I think people have
started to wake up a little too late. For some
of the large auto manufacturers, whether it be GM or Volkswagen,
just you know, billions just dumped right down the tubes.
But there is at least some hope that people are

(02:00:22):
starting to wake up to these things. I wish they would,
as you have on the piece, Eric, look into this
regulatory state and just even just the term regulation is
an insult, you know, It's just it's just so frustrating.
It's like, no, this is a dick tok. Mussolini would approve.

Speaker 7 (02:00:39):
It's just and they really need they need to address
what I think is the Achilles heel of all of this,
which is the premise that absent these regulations, we would
have unsafe vehicles, we would have dirty vehicles, you know,
because they've been able to manipulate and play on people's
reasonable worries about you know, the commons, you know about
the idea of having vehicles that are viewing toxic stuff

(02:01:01):
into the air and you know, making us all sick.
Stuff like that. There's an era, there's an aura of
moral legitimacy to that, you know, even if it could
be handled in toward court. But setting that aside, the
point is that neither emissions have not been an issue
in any meaningful sense since the mid late nineteen nineties, so,
you know, thirty plus years now it has been a

(02:01:23):
non issue. We're talking about fractional reductions that are meaningless
in the grand scheme of things, And this just malicious
lie about carbon dioxide, which has nothing to do with
air pollution at all. It doesn't it doesn't smell, it doesn't,
it doesn't make the sky's cloudy, nothing, you know. So
the idea that they have to frame that as an emission,
you know, implying that it's a pollutant, it's dishonest. And

(02:01:46):
then the safety stuff. I mean, if I want to
drive a car without airbags, it doesn't mean it's not
a safe car. Maybe it's less crash worthy if I
get into a crash, but that's you know, that's a
different matter. And as you say, how dare they it's
my choice, Yes, if I want to run the hypothetical
risk of being potentially injured or more injured in a
car without airbags, if I have an accident, if I

(02:02:08):
run it into a tree, and I prefer to not
have to spend thousands of dollars more for a car
with the airbacks, that's my choice. I'm not an adult
human being who's able to make these decisions. Just like
I choose to go to the gym to work out
so keep myself in shape. It's my choice. I don't
have to do that. I do it because it makes
sense to me, and we all should have the right
to make the decisions that are sensible as we see it.

Speaker 2 (02:02:32):
In my opinion. I know, I'm a kind of I
don't need Elizabeth Dole to be buying my car with me,
you know, and putting in. And you know, there are
a couple of things that brings to mind, whether it's
through coercion or deception, the means by which politically interested
people or power interested people get other people to do things.

(02:02:54):
And you brought to mind how Thomas Massey had explained
that some of these people that Epstein brought in, you know,
as thirteen fourteen year old kids, that they then were
told that they could get out of it if they
recruited other kids. And Massey just said, just think of

(02:03:16):
the evil of that, you know, and the weight that
that puts on those kids. And I thought, you know,
in a way, these lies about things like carbon dioxide,
which have been spread by even the Supreme Court, just ridiculous.
The EPA all these lies in a way that's not coercive,
it's deceptive. It is coursive in a way because we're

(02:03:36):
forced to pay for all those political institutions. So that's
you know, that's the coersion, and then they use it
to create new legislation. That's coercive. But the acidic, insidious,
deceptive way is another means, maybe not through coercion, but
through deception to get younger people who the politicians often

(02:03:57):
know very well that they're lying about carbon dioxide. You know,
they know that it is not a pollutant, and yet
they spread the canard. They know that it's not entopogenically
destroying the earth through climate change, but they spread the lie,
and they through deception, get young people to perpetuate the lie.
And how evil is that, you know.

Speaker 7 (02:04:19):
It's particularly evil because of obviously the naivete of the young.
And in the second place, the instinct that most young
people have that you know, wanes over time as you
get old to do the right thing. You know, kids
are generally more interested in justice than you know, than
older people who've tended to grow cynical. You know, kids,
that's why kids, you know, tend to be revolutionary more

(02:04:41):
so than older people, who get set in their ways.
They see something that is that is wrong to them
and they want to correct that wrong. So they have
been manipulated into believing that you know, the older generations
are befouling the earth. They're causing the climate to change,
and they're ruining their future. And it's understandable. You know,
you're a fifteen year old kid and you're look down
the road and thinking, I'm going to be around for

(02:05:01):
the next sixty seventy years potentially, and I'd like to
live in a habitable world. So you know, I'm opposed
to these polluters and you know, these people who are
out to despoil the earth. It's horrific.

Speaker 2 (02:05:13):
Yeah, it's amazing. Well, Eric, thank you so much for
joining us on the David Knight Show, and I'll look
forward to talking to you. It's funny because if folks
aren't aware, I had texted Eric to see if you
wanted to join me on Liberty Conspiracy last night, and
then Travis contacted me to see if I could fill
in for David and Travis, and so I said, hey, Eric,

(02:05:34):
how would you like to pop on on David Show tomorrow?
So thanks for accommodating the schedule very very much, And
as Angel Paul Tana would say, thank you, my good
friend for accommodating my schedule and thank you for coming
on here. It's just terrific. And the website, of course
is awesome. And before we go, I will display the

(02:05:55):
mighty BA cap that you can get at the David
Knight Show, thee the BAH Cap, and I hope at
the Eric Peters Auto's website. So check it out everybody,
because you're gonna love that website. It's awesome. Sign up
for it and you really enjoy it. Eric, thanks man,
great great stuff. And we didn't do the Vulcan mind meld,
but we'll do it on Liberty. You got it, You

(02:06:18):
got it again. Thanks, take care of man all right,
and we'll take a little break and hear some music
from the Great David Knight and Travis and the gang
will be enjoying the rest of the afternoon. And thank
you so much for being here with me as we
take the opportunity to look further at some of the
major stories that are out there, and one that Eric mentioned,

(02:06:43):
let's talk about immigration coming up at Truckers.

Speaker 1 (02:08:21):
Liberty. It's your move and now the David Night Show.

Speaker 2 (02:08:29):
Well again, big thanks to Eric Peters for joining us.
Remember the BA cap head on over there. He's got
so many great things. In addition to the articles, you'll
love them. And I really appreciate the comments from everyone
as well. We've got this from Peusidan Vante seventeen seventy
six has great interview Guard and we have this from Doug.

(02:08:51):
Thanks well. The hour power is over. Thank you so much.
You guys are just terrific. I love it, and so again,
if you want to join me on Liberty Conspiracy, that's
Monday through Friday at six pm and you can hang
out live there on Rumble or on my ex feeed
and that's at Guard Goldsmith, and if you are interested,

(02:09:13):
you can also go to the Gardner Goldsmith substack. That's
Gardner Goldsmith Substack and you can find the news notes
there every Monday through Friday. I produce those for the
paid subscribers over there, as well as the Sunday News Assembly,
which is available to anyone who wants to check it
out on of course Fridays. Now it's on Sundays. Now,

(02:09:33):
let's take the opportunity to check out the next big
item and then about ten minutes from now, Jason Barker
will be joining us to chat with us about some
major items coming up for Nights of the Storm. But
I want to discuss the immigration issue and truckers, because
this is something that I think needs addressing. You know,
we discuss this a little bit about ice invading states

(02:09:56):
without any invitation that runs contrary to Article four, section
four the US Constitution. Donald Trump supposedly using the Alien
Enemies Act, which is unconstitutional. You either have a declaration
of war against an invader evading state or you issue
letters of market reprisal. Very important to remember that the
only way that the federal government can go into states

(02:10:19):
is upon the invitation of the legislature of the state
or the governor if the legislature is out of session.
It's an Article four, section four of the Constitution. Now,
they might try to use an excuse that under the
Necessary and Proper Clause of the Constitution, the federal government
can go into say protect federal courthouses. But as I've

(02:10:40):
brought up with people also in the Constitution, there's a
conflict there because the Constitution only delineates three forms of
land that the federal government can run a ten square
mile area for the capital of the nation state Washington,
DC territories before they become states, and military garrison. So

(02:11:01):
although the Congress is licensed according to the Constitution to
create a court system above the state supreme courts and
subservient to the Federal Supreme Court. They can't actually put
it on any federal land other than those three types
of land. So the claim that they're going in to
protect these federal courts, which would be the only closest

(02:11:25):
valid one if they have not been invited in, is
actually not that valid because those courts, if they wanted
it to be truly federal courts, would either have to
be on military garrisons in Washington, DC or on a territory.
And that's just the way that it is. You can't
have it any other way. Otherwise they're going to have
to rent land from the states and it would be

(02:11:48):
state land. I'm just saying that, and again that's irrefutable.
There's nothing you can do to argue against it except
try to come up with different rationales to say, well,
I don't mind it, but hopefully if you're voting and
you're voting on offices created by the Constitution, you will
mind it, or one will mind it. Maybe not you,
maybe you understand it completely and you agree. I don't know,

(02:12:11):
but hopefully it's a valid argument, and it's a ripe
area of exploration for you, because if you want to
deal honestly with the Constitution, that's a very important point.
The other point that I bring up often, and I've
got it in my book Lift Fore or Die, which
is right over here. I've got many many pages on it,
is the research on the fact that immigration is a
state issue that is irrefutable. I will be able to

(02:12:34):
win any argument, and so will you, but you might
not win politically. So just to keep it in mind,
it was part of federalism, as Jefferson and Madison brought up,
and so all these invasions into the states. In Illinois,
where Pritzker correctly brings up, we don't want you here,
where Gavin Newsom correctly brings up we don't want you here,
We're local correctly brings up we don't want you here.

(02:12:56):
And a court just ruled that in New York the
State National Guard does not have to comply with the
FEDS to police immigration, and New York cops don't have
to comply with the FEDS to police immigration. And by
the way, they're going to go into New York City

(02:13:16):
probably in the next week. They just announced that these
are very important matters of federalism, and they're not being addressed.
One other thing that's not being addressed is the economic
side of it. So let's give you one more court
case and then we're going to talk economics. And this
canard about the foreign truckers. Yes, let's talk about that

(02:13:37):
right now. Yeah, you got it. My friends a little
Perry Mason ha ha. Great books by Earl Stanley Gardner,

(02:14:15):
if you get a chance, they're wonderful. They're short, wonderful stories, right,
which reminds me, actually I should mention if you're interested,
you can join me over at the former Star Trek
Writing Fellow channel on YouTube because they're not censoring that,

(02:14:37):
and on Rumble. That's my alternate channel to talk about
books and television and film production because I worked at
the scriptwriting department of the Outer Limits and at Star
Trek Voyager. And I've also had a novella's published and
I've had a novel accepted, but they wanted me to
change my name so that it wouldn't be associated with

(02:14:57):
my political works, so I denied the contract. I said
no thanks, So that has yet to come out. So
I've got a lot of prose writing. So that's former
Star Trek Writing Fellow Channel. Would love for you to
find that over at YouTube, and love for you to
find it at Rumble. We would really enjoy having more
people join us at the channel. I talk lots of books.
We talked about Earl Stanley Gardner, talked about the creator
of Fu Manchu, talked about e Er Edison who really

(02:15:21):
influenced Tolkien and C. S. Lewis really interesting writers and
I love talking about that. And on Friday nights on
Liberty Conspiracy we always read a short story or almost
always read a short story for fiction Friday. On Wednesdays
on Liberty Conspiracy Live on Rumble and on my ex
we do Wordsmith Wednesdays where I try to highlight a

(02:15:42):
particular author. The most recent when we did was a
friend of mine who's passed away named Brian Lumley. It
was a real big writer in HP Lovecraft, Cuthulu Circles
and did a whole series of books called the Necroscope Series,
a lot of vampire stories and stuff. Great guy, British guy,
very interesting guy. So find the former Star Trek Writing
Fellow channel over there. It's my opportunity to sort of

(02:16:03):
promote it to the audience. You folks here and we'd
love to have you there. And I also want to
open it up to people to get their ideas when
we go live on Liberty Conspiracy about stories that really
were spooky for them or movies that they really love,
that sort of thing. So we'll do that tonight on
Liberty Conspiracy. You can join us tonight on Rumble. I
want to give you a couple items that are in

(02:16:24):
the news on immigration that I think are pretty important.
First off, Alligator Alcatraz the legal access to it. That's
been in the news big time. So let me give
you this one. Okay, these are some of my backnoes,
and here it is Judge pushes for resolution in lawsuit
over legal access to Alligator Alcatraz. One of the things

(02:16:44):
that I mentioned to the Liberty Conspiracy audience is this
top down money funneling fascist system for corporations and military
industrial contractors where even members of the EU you can
see that they're going to get their bread buttered by
either continuing the warfare and you crane because they have
either stocks or friends in the military aparatics over in Europe,

(02:17:06):
or they have connections to heavy industry and cleanup crews
and they're going to have them get involved as well
with the cleanup in Ukraine. That also is manifest in
the federalist system of the United States, where, for example,
the FEMA folks are now trying to incentivize governors to
build detention centers in states, giving them hundreds of millions

(02:17:29):
of dollars to say, oh, and of course the governors
will say, we're going to employ all these state residents,
isn't it wonderful? Well, the money comes from debt servicing,
of course, or not even servicing from debt. And so
here's this story in Orlando where they set the template
with Alligator Alcatraz. A federal judge in Florida is pushing
for a resolution in a lawsuit over whether detainees there

(02:17:52):
shouldn't even be a term like that in an immigration
center in the Florida Everglades known as Alligator Alcatraz are
getting adequate as access to attorneys. US District Judge Cherry
Pollster Chapel last Friday ordered a two day conference to
be held next month in her Fort Myers courtroom with
attorney's president, who have the authority to settle. The judge

(02:18:16):
asked for an update at a hearing next Monday. Now,
if in the Constitution, it's up to Florida as to
whether or not they're going to go after immigrants, Okay,
but if they do, they have to afford them all
the protections under the Bill of Rights. Those protections aren't
just for Americans. The First Amendment doesn't just apply to Americans.
Needed to the fourth, fifth, sixth, and eighth Amendments. The

(02:18:38):
Court will not entertain excuses regarding leaving early for flights
or other meetings, the judge wrote. The lawsuit filed by
detainees against the FEDS and state government over legal access
is one of three federal cases challenging practices in the
immigration detention center that was built this summer as a
remote airstrip in the floor Ever Glades at a remote

(02:19:02):
airstrip by the administration and governor on DeSantis. Of course,
they have to ship in the water. It's incredibly expensive.
The third lawsuit claims immigration is a federal issue and
Florida agencies and private contractors hired by the state have
no authority to operate the facility. That's going to be
a big one to watch because they'll probably double down
on the eighteen seventy five Chai Lung decision. That's a

(02:19:25):
big mistake. Okay, Now I want to mention the trucking story.
As we know, the Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy is speaking
nonsense about a labor shortage that at salary levels that
really are restrictive, Americans won't fill. And that's in trucking.

(02:19:52):
Let me give you a little bit more information about this.
Duffy is saying truckers from a saving truckers from illegals.
He says, there's so much hope now. So as I've
done for years at MRCTV, for years, I have been
covering the onerous regulations on truckers that increase the costs

(02:20:16):
of the trucking lines. They can't be as efficient, they
can't make as much, their profit margins decrease. As those
margins decrease, they have to shift and try to cut expenses.
One of the only ways that is left for them
to cut expenses is to go black market drivers. This
is just something that we've seen coming for years. Let

(02:20:38):
me give you an example. This is what Transportation Secretary
Sean Duffy says. He's helping the trucking sector. He's helping them,
He's helping them recover from the damaging flood of illegal
migrant drivers. Well, guess what, Yellow Trucking went out of
business last year because of the regulations, because of the lockdowns,
and how they couldn't afford anything anymore because of all

(02:20:58):
the expenses. The tariffs have increased expenses. You're not going
to help the trucking lines by saying one way you've
been able to decrease expenses by hiring cheaper labor, is
now closed off to you. Just over the past few days,
mister mister Duffy was able to get the California government

(02:21:20):
to revoke the CDLs of seventeen thousand truckers who are
not American truckers. Part of the argument is that, well,
they're much more dangerous. They're very, very dangerous. So I
went through some of the information about the dangers of
the truckers and that's over at my sub stack. So

(02:21:44):
if you go to the Liberty Conspiracy News notes for
the eighteenth I believe I've got that information in there.
So let me go into this and see if I
can find it. I think it's in there. Let mes
just make sure I've got it. It might have been

(02:22:05):
on Wednesday Yeah, it was probably on Wednesday, So I'll
find it again for you, just to give you the information. So,
and there's a separate podcast all about this that runs
through whether or not the domestic truckers or the foreign
truckers are the most dangerous. Let me see if I've

(02:22:28):
got this for you here. Yeah, it must be from
another day. I'll just give you the quick information on
the side here because I've got it elsewhere. So basically,
there are three million truckers who are American truckers on

(02:22:48):
the roads, and there are two hundred thousand truckers who
are foreign truckers. Of the American truckers and the foreign truckers,
there have been two thousand, five hundred and ten accidents

(02:23:12):
associated not caused by, but involving truckers. Of the two thousand,
five hundred and ten over the past year, two thousand,
five hundred and five were caused by American truckers. Five

(02:23:33):
were caused by foreigners who hold licenses. But since there
are so many more American truckers, we have to look
at proportionality. What proportion of the truckers is represented by
the numbers of people who have been involved with fatal accidents?

(02:23:53):
So let me see if I can find this over
for you here. Yeah, see if I can get it.
In fact, I've got it on my podcast, but i'll
get that to you later. It turns out that the
percentage of truckers who are involved with associated with dangerous

(02:24:20):
crashes is much smaller for the foreign truckers. Let's see
if I can go over here to get this for you,
all right, and I'll show you an example of some
of the problems that the truckers have run into that

(02:24:43):
have cost these expenses to go up so much. Here's
a piece from MRCTV from twenty nineteen showing truckers engaging
in slow rollout protests and Trump was president, but they
were upset that Donald Trump wasn't changing things quickly and
they were going out of business.

Speaker 17 (02:25:03):
Here's something that didn't get a lot of pop media
coverage last week. Trucker's nationwide engaged in a protest of
onerous federal mandates that have been hobbling them for years.
Hi folks on Gardner Goldsmith for MRCTV and Yes. On Friday,

(02:25:25):
April twelfth, long haul truckers nationwide engaged in what they
called a slow roll protest of federal regulations, something that
really only got brief or slightly curious mentions and a
handful of media markets.

Speaker 18 (02:25:40):
A lot of big riggs in New York City today
blocking traffic, all part of a planned one day protest.
A number of large trucks were parks in front of
our ABC building on the Upper West Side. This was
just a few hours ago. Other truckers conducted slow roll
protests on highways all across the country. They are upset
over what they call excessive regulations controlling their hours. They

(02:26:01):
want rules relaxed on electronic logging devices, and we're truck
parking along expressways. They help industry leaders will get their message.

Speaker 7 (02:26:10):
But this is actually much bigger than those reports indicate,
because the trucking industry is being crushed by heavy federal
regulations that have really been piled on since the start
of the Obama administration. See The Feds impose their mandates
primarily through three agencies. That would be the EPA, the

(02:26:31):
Department of Transportation, and a very little known monster called
the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, all of which are
excused by misreading the Interstate Commerce Clause of the Constitution, which,
as James Madison said was not meant to let the
FEDS regulate anything that crosses state borders. So the Obama

(02:26:54):
administration hit American businesses with over four thousand men, and
many of those were applied to truckers. For example, Obama
imposed new fuel efficiency mandates on truckers, forcing them to
change their loads, the physical makeup of their trucks, or
buy new trucks altogether, and if they didn't comply to

(02:27:17):
the fuel mandates, they were fined. The Obama administration imposed
restricted hours of service mandates, cutting by twelve hours the
time that truckers could work over a seven day period
and compelling them to stop for a half hour every
eight hours. The Obama gang wanted to impose actual speed

(02:27:38):
limits on truckers, but they had to settle with something
that is called the Electronic Logging Device or ELD, an
intrusive monitor that actually monitors trip times, allows police to
offload the data, and essentially works as a de facto
speed monitor. Anyway, Obama wanted to force all truckers to

(02:28:00):
undergo tests for sleep apnea, but ended up settling with
a consolation prize to prohibit what are called glider kit trucks,
where old engines are used in new frames and chassis.
So so yes, and there's a lot more there. You know,
I've been writing about this for years and it's very
very obvious. Now some people will look at those examples

(02:28:22):
of the accidents and they'll say, but these foreigners, they're
getting into these terrible accidents, and you know, we just
can't have that.

Speaker 2 (02:28:29):
So let's look at the statistics. If we go to
my Liberty Conspiracy news notes at the Gardener Goldsmith substack,
this is from the news notes from let's see the
nineteenth So if you want a reference to it, if
you want to the paid subscribers, you'll find it. But
I'll just give you this information. In fact, I'll show
it to you on the screen right now, from the
nineteenth The statistics are very very clear, as I mentioned,

(02:28:54):
based on the numbers, if you actually break it down proportionally,
the foreign driver are actually safer than the American drivers.
So I'll put this up on the screen for you
so we can read it together and you can check
it out. If we go down here. You'll see here
I said, I said, so you talked about Sean Duffy
upset about this. I said, by the way, Thus far

(02:29:17):
in twenty twenty five, non domiciled CDL holders comprise less
than point two percent of all CDL holders involved with
not necessarily causing fatal crashes in the US. So far,
domiciled CDL holders have been involved in twy five hundred
and five fatal crashes of the total twenty five hundred

(02:29:39):
and ten for the year. According to the Federal NHTSB,
only five crashes are cited as involving non domiciled CDL holders.
To measure that with more precision as percentages of the
domicile than non domiciled who are on the roads, non
domiciled who have been involved in fatal crashes this year
represent five of the two hundred thousand recorded with CDLs.

(02:30:03):
That's their population. The non domicile five of the two
hundred thousand that is zero point zero zero two five
percent involved with fatal crashes. Domiciled who have been involved
in fatal crashes comes to two thy five hundred and
five of the three million license holders, or approximately zero

(02:30:25):
point seventy five nine percent. So when you hear the
canard that foreigners on trucking routes are causing a spike
in fatal crashes. Please consider this. Also, please consider that
the normative aggregate CDL related crashes leading to death has
actually been going down from eight point three percent in

(02:30:46):
twenty twenty three to twenty twenty four, and the numbers
indicate that twenty twenty five will see even fewer CDL
related road deaths. Now, again, that could have could be
borne upon by fewer truckers out on the roads, fewer
packages being sent around. There's something that I would have
to investigate there as well. And on liberty conspiracy, somebody

(02:31:07):
brought up a point, Yeah, but they can't read, they
can't read the lines. Well, first of all, most people
are using direction things on their trucks. But let's say
there's an emergency and they can't read a sign. Hypothetically,
if we go into some you know, speculation, very quick speculation,
there are a lot of American truckers who can't read either.
Most likely. Just look at the number of illiterate people

(02:31:28):
who are graduated from schools. So that's something that really
becomes sort of a fungible point. But the facts remain,
the statistics are clear, regardless that somehow they're doing a
better job than the American truckers are as far as
safety goes, and you're not going to hear that from
Sean Duffy. He says the exact opposite, just like they
said about these politicians talking about the military oath, talking

(02:31:51):
about the military oath. Let's get a little opportunity to
talk about a guy who is a great host. He
is with us right now. He is Jason Barker of
Knights of the Storm and he's popping in to be
a guest right now to give us a little information
about what might be coming up on Knights in the
Storm tomorrow at two in the afternoon on Rumble. Jason,

(02:32:14):
Welcome to the David Knight Show. Thanks for coming in.
I know it's a little bit after what we had discussed,
but I appreciate you being there. Man, it's great to
see you in that legendary beard brother.

Speaker 19 (02:32:26):
Well, thanks Gard for having me on. It's an honor
again to be on with you and on the David
Night Show. Yeah, we got some exciting stuff coming up
on Knights of the Storm tomorrow at two pm Eastern.
We're having what's her name? Holy crap, I had it
written down here. It's Michelle Spencer. She has another name,
so I had to figure out if that's a maiden

(02:32:46):
name or what. But yeah, Michelle Spencer is a pivotal
figure right now. She is a whistleblower, medical whistleblower. So
this is kind of a good follow up to having
Zoe on. We had two episodes with Zoe. He's also
a whistleblower. But Michelle's coming on to talk about the
skyrocketing what is it miscarriages and stillborns and death, you know,

(02:33:10):
inside and outside the womb, Like the numbers will blow
you away. And she's actually being protected right now, so
she hasn't lost her job. She still works where she
works because of the whistleblower status, but there's a humongous
lawsuit going on that nobody's talking about. She's been on
a few podcasts and the story will break your heart.

(02:33:32):
I probably won't say much because it's it's kind of
near and dear to my heart when it comes to
children like this, So I think Karen's going to lead
that one up. But she's actually being backed by Children's
Health Defense, And I think we couldn't talk about it
before because Zoe I think may or may not be
an expert witness in this case. To back up some

(02:33:52):
of these facts, these numbers and statistics that they're hiding now.
So that's who we have coming on, and then in
a couple of weeks after that, we have Scott Helmer
coming on.

Speaker 6 (02:34:03):
I don't know if you know who Scott Helmer is.

Speaker 2 (02:34:04):
Yeah, yeah, I'm going to be a I want to
get him on Liberty because I love Sky's great. Oh yeah,
let email. Yeah, we're gonna be getting him over. I
love him.

Speaker 19 (02:34:11):
Yeah yeah, let me know his booking agent. Me and
Herb been going back and forth. He's a really nice lady.
But his story is a phenomenal story about standing up
for the right thing throughout COVID. He's a live performer,
opens up for some really big bands. He refused to
do the mask mandate, he refused to do the COVID

(02:34:32):
jab and lost about I want to say, like thirty
five thousand dollars in that year the supposed plandemic was
going on. But he stood his ground and he was
scrubbed from every platform, and I think at one point
he may have been back. I have to clarify that
with him because I seen I writ an article on
it somewhere. But because of the AI music stuff that

(02:34:55):
he went ahead and voluntarily pulled his stuff back down
to stand up against.

Speaker 2 (02:35:00):
Yeah, I believe he was part of that group that
is pulling his music down. And I love his music
first of all. And sometimes he's in the chat in
David's chat, which is just terrific, you know. And yes,
I've been in touch with his person who helps out
on media as well, and just wonderful people. And you

(02:35:20):
think about I don't know if you're familiar with the
Reverend Horton heat he's a rockabilly performer. Just awesome, great, great.
He was in an episode of Homicide Life on the
Streets actually in a motel. They never actually he just
basically sat between two areas where the story was happening
on the show and they would move the camera pass
and he was in his little motel room, but he

(02:35:42):
would he said, look, I'm going to play. He said,
my band is reliant on live play to make our living.
So you can try to stop us, you can try
to arrest us, We're going to do it. And just
like Scott, you know, just amazing courage on the part
of these people, whether it's them or it's you know,
Van Morrison or Eric Clapton or others speaking up. You know,

(02:36:02):
this old, this concept of truth to power. The more
people who do that, how much more comfortable do you
feel living in a world like that? You know, that's wonderful,
That's great. So I'll look forward to that. And and
you know, Jason, I was I was curious to ask
you because we first heard about you after you know,
you were so integral in getting the exemption for military

(02:36:25):
members to not have to take the JAB and you know,
it was it was that was I was. I was
curious because I've never really asked you about what went
through your mind as you were approaching retirement time. And
you know how stressful was that for you to say
they want me to do this, uh, and before you

(02:36:46):
really figured out a way to do it, you know
what was going through your mind of I'm either going
to have to stop or I'm gonna have to take
this thing and it's you know, supported by abortion. It
could hurt me. You know, how was that? How did
that play on you emotionally, especially looking at your finances
knowing I can't leave now I'm this close to retirement.

(02:37:07):
Could you describe any of that to us?

Speaker 19 (02:37:09):
Well, for me personally, I wouldn't care much, but I
have a family, and that was the hard part. And
I'm telling you right now, I was talking to some
people offline about this, about specifically about Scott, and that's
why I'm excited to have him on because he took
that stance as well. So we have a lot in
common there. But you know, people said, it's not as
easy said is done. You know, people, we are wrapped

(02:37:31):
up in these you know, you had Eric on talking
about these car loans, trying to get car payments, your
mortgage payments. Houses are stupid expensive. Now healthcare. You can't
just lose your job because your family relies on you
for that job. So it really was a family decision,
and I probably would not have been able to hold
out if my wife did not stick with me and say,

(02:37:54):
you know, whatever you want to do, let's do it.
We'll figure it out. And that's a real hard step
to make, especially as the provider. I was the only
provider of the family at the time. I had We
had our second grandchild coming that lived with us, and
one of my daughters living with us. So we're talking
about a whole household here that relied strictly.

Speaker 6 (02:38:13):
On my income.

Speaker 19 (02:38:15):
And you know, the retirement thing that actually worked out
pretty good.

Speaker 6 (02:38:21):
God God will see you through. If you see it through,
he will see you through. I promised that.

Speaker 19 (02:38:27):
I promised that because right now the Army hates me
because they're paying me more than I used to make
watch my grandson and that's because of what they did.
So anyway, yeah, it wasn't so much hard on me
as it was hard on for me.

Speaker 6 (02:38:41):
It was a simple decision, you know.

Speaker 19 (02:38:44):
But when you have family, I do understand how people say, well,
some people just didn't have a choice.

Speaker 6 (02:38:49):
Yeah, you had a choice, but.

Speaker 19 (02:38:50):
It comes with consequences, and those consequences could be dire.

Speaker 2 (02:38:54):
I'm always amazed by the dynamism and the elasticity of
people to be able to move and do something different
and take on another job and acclimate themselves to doing
something new. And for example, when my father left Washington,
when he was working with Charlotte down in the Education department,

(02:39:17):
and he said, you know, we're just waiting and they
left at the same time. They're like, we're not going
to get rid of the education department, and so Charlotte
is a beating my dad. You know, They're both they
talked and he said, I'm going to leave. You know,
he was so close to getting his retirement, but he left,
and he ended up working on cars for a while,

(02:39:38):
and you know, he had a family. I was still
in high school, you know. And it is amazing because,
as you say, God provides, And one of the things
that I think, Jason, God provides us is an ability
to recognize that we've done the right thing, and that
provides incredible satisfaction. And I think it's fuel to allow

(02:40:00):
us to take some chances, try a different job, you know,
deliver milk or you know, get into landscaping, or you know,
do something anything, any job that is productive. And I
don't know what it is about contemporary society, but I
think for quite a while, maybe from the fifties, sixties
and seventies through the nineties, people just thought that there

(02:40:22):
was just a track. You had to go to college,
get a job, and what am I going to do?
I got to keep this job, And it really ties
them into the corporate systems. That's a real shame, I think.

Speaker 19 (02:40:32):
Yeah, And going back to the trusting in God thing,
I think it's important that God gives us the wisdom
and discernment to have a plan as well, and my plan.
So we were a little fortunate because my dad had
passed away, not saying that that's fortunate, that was horrible,
but he had passed away and left us a little
bit of something like some stocks, you know, that got
divided up between the family, and so we had a

(02:40:55):
little bit of wiggle room to last us a couple
of months should they, you know, decide to deny my
exemption and boot me out with no retirement. So, you know,
my plan at the time was to go back to
Illinois because when I entered the military, I was working
in a car factory making bumpers for cars, which is
why I love Eric because I'm in the car thing

(02:41:16):
and I'm wearing his hat. By the way, epist Yeah, yeah,
But you know, I think it's important that we do
try to have a plan, but don't try to force
the plan.

Speaker 6 (02:41:26):
Just have a plan.

Speaker 19 (02:41:27):
And that was our plan, was that I would go
back to Illinois, which I do not want to live there.
I did want to talk guns today, but we probably
won't get to it, but Illinois is not very friendly
on guns, as you know, so I didn't want to
go there, but for the sake of the family, I
would go back there because our policy was that if
you left that job to go into the military, you
promised your job back. And that's one of those jobs

(02:41:50):
that you know, for the first year or two you're
kind of in the layoff cycle. They paid really well,
the work wasn't too terribly hard, but you would be
in the layoff cycle for the first couple of years,
like when they had to scale down or whatever. But
then after two or three years you were no longer
in the layoff cycle. Well, when you come back from
the military, you bypassed that layoff cycle, right And I

(02:42:14):
only worked there for like eight months, so that's a
pretty big jump. I can go right back into my
old job at the same pay, low cost of living
area there. I was down south Illinois, not up by
Chicago where it's crazy, and you know, you can get
you a nice ten acre plot of land and a
double white home on there or something pretty cheap. Maybe
not today, but back then you could. But that was

(02:42:35):
you know, I think that I made my plans, and
I said, you know what, I feel like I have
a good enough plan, so let's just roll with this.
Let's stand our ground. The family supported me. They said Okay,
we like your plan. We'll do what we got to do,
and God just gave us something better on the back end.
And that's what I'm seeing with a lot of my
friends that actually did the same as me. You know,

(02:42:58):
they PCSD on different locations and stuff, but we still
keep in contact and a lot of them we were
talking the whole time, and that was a huge It
really bolstered me to stand my ground because other people
were doing.

Speaker 6 (02:43:12):
It as well.

Speaker 19 (02:43:14):
So you either stand together or you hang separate, right,
or you hang together, you hang separate. I don't know
how the saying goes, but that communication with people who
were of a similar mindset, and these people were also
sixteen seventeen, eighteen years in Yeah, he said, no, I'm
not doing that. And it also was important to me
to stand that ground because I really cared about my soldiers.

(02:43:35):
My soldiers are like family, and I tried to show
them that you can stand up. You talked about the constitution, constitutionality,
lawful orders, unlawful orders. I looked at it as an
unlawful order, yes, and outside of the oath that we take.
And I'm pretty sure the last time I read the oath,

(02:43:56):
the word lawful was in front of presidential order.

Speaker 6 (02:44:00):
I'm pretty sure.

Speaker 19 (02:44:01):
I tried to find that document before I came on.
I couldn't find it. It's packed in a box somewhere.
But I'm pretty sure that we were required to obey
the lawful orders of the President of the United States
and officers appointed over us.

Speaker 6 (02:44:16):
So I'd have to confirm that.

Speaker 19 (02:44:17):
But the thing is, there's other regulations that talk about
lawful versus unlawful orders from the President and your commanders,
And that's what I based my whole thing on, was that,
and then I wrote it up differently. But I didn't
expect to talk about this thing.

Speaker 2 (02:44:34):
No, I didn't expect to ask about it, but I
was just struck by it just popped into my mind
what you must have gone through. And you know, I
remember at the time hearing about what you were doing,
and it hit me then, you know, just the stress
of it. It must have just been unbelievable, and yet
you pulled through, you know, and it was just and
you helped so many people with what you did that

(02:44:56):
you know, it stands as a moment in American history
that you know, a few people can say that they
were able to pull through for that many people and
really save them, you know, from such dire consequences, whether
it's professional or its medical ethical as well, you know,
with as you say, breach of the oath, the use

(02:45:17):
of fetal fetals cells. You know, just terrible things all
involved with that, and just the massive deception of it,
you know, being are lies.

Speaker 19 (02:45:29):
They were lying to us, and we knew it because
we have scientific documentation that shows that what they were
saying was not true. And and that s deception right there.
It's not informed consent. And you know it's it's not
that I did anything.

Speaker 6 (02:45:42):
I had. My sphere of influence was so tiny. I
had some some.

Speaker 19 (02:45:48):
Other leaders I knew that were out in other bases
and they were trying to help their soldiers. I had
my twelve soldiers or so I was trying to help
at the time before they moved me where I had
no soldiers. David Knight was the one who got that
out there. So praise God for David Knight getting that
out there. And if people were helped, it's not because

(02:46:08):
of me. It's because David put it out there. And
I do pray for him and his family because I
know Karen lost her brother. Yeah, a twin brother and
they're taking a little time off. There's a lot to
deal with, so prayers for them, and yeah.

Speaker 2 (02:46:21):
You know, sometimes I'm reminded Jason of just the strength
of David in his show and how God brought him
through two Info wars. Then saw the dissension between him
and Alex, who obviously was putting forward things that were

(02:46:42):
totally unbelievable, and David had noticed these things and was
just going to keep trying to get the truth out
as long as possible until he was fired. And you know,
that sort of integrity in one's life is remarkable and
it's something that any family can see. But the family
members of the Knight family are just wonderful people. They
also recognize the goodness in David and also just on

(02:47:04):
a personal note, as you and I know, seeing David
recovering from the strokes the way he has, you know,
full bore, going at it, doing an awesome job. And
now the way that they've been able to juggle things
during that time period when Travis took over and Lance
was on the production side of things. Now it's an
even stronger program and it's so dynamic that they've been
able to add new things. It really is terrific, and

(02:47:28):
I'm just so pleased that I've met you and Tiger
and Karen and Tony and you know, Don Jefferies and
Bill Ray Valentine and Eric Peters and so many wonderful folks,
even folks just within the chat who communicate with me,
Skunk Hollow and so many other folks who are so kind,
Harry and Eye Handy and wonderful people. And it's a

(02:47:52):
great thing. It feels like family. But at the same time,
sometimes I almost forget of the strength of David's voice
to be able to communicate to people. And I love
the fact that he has a good, good audience and
they've they've been finding him and we have a good
viewership going today over at X on David's X. We're
not streaming on my ex over at guard Goldsmith right now.

(02:48:14):
But I want to remind people that, you know, one
of these offshoots is Knights of the Storm, and your
website has a lot of these folks who are associated
with us over there. Why don't you tell people what's
over at Nights of the Storm.

Speaker 6 (02:48:27):
Oh yeah, Nights of the Storm. You know.

Speaker 19 (02:48:29):
The landing page just kind of talks about us a
little bit, and we were born out of David Knight Chat.
And by the way, I want to give at tip
to all the folks over in chat today. Chat chat
was pretty amazing. We were talking tariffs and constitutionality, a
lot of really good conversation. It's like a second show
that you're watching, So we're watching you Guard and we're

(02:48:49):
watching the chat and sometimes we'll get some trolls in
there that'll kind of disrupt, but it was really good
today and I was like, this is great, and.

Speaker 6 (02:48:59):
That's how we were born.

Speaker 19 (02:49:00):
Nights of the Storm, we were in the chat talking
about things and we're like, let's expand on this beyond
the show. We'll do our own show. And that's how
we were born. And we have a lot of great
guests on. Some of them are David Night listeners, some
are organic to us now and we reach out recently.
We've been booked out about a month out, so we're

(02:49:22):
really Since I have a little more time now, I'm
actually trying to be more productive on the scheduling and
production side. Yeah, and then we have Ashley and Karen,
amazing co hosts.

Speaker 6 (02:49:33):
I think I think it's a hostile takeover. Guard I
think it's a hostile takeover.

Speaker 2 (02:49:38):
But you can see I was calling up the I'm
getting the Rumble channel going over there, Nights of the Storm. Yeah,
they're awesome, and you all have such very strong backgrounds
in various things that it's just in the research is
just great. So I know you you wanted to talk
a little bit about guns. Let's go a couple more
minutes before I wrap up the show. Talk about guns

(02:49:59):
and things like that that you want to bring up
because you've been you and I've been communicating a little
bit about this on text.

Speaker 6 (02:50:05):
Yeah.

Speaker 19 (02:50:06):
So one of the things I've been looking at, and
I actually went to my gun shop recently, gun shop
Slash Shooting Range. Recently we talked about the glock debacle.
I don't know if you've heard about the glock debacle
in California.

Speaker 2 (02:50:19):
No, So.

Speaker 19 (02:50:22):
Short of it is that California did some legislation that
banned the sale of new glocks of all but like
three of their models.

Speaker 6 (02:50:31):
Because you can put the switch on it, you know,
to make it FOLLI auto.

Speaker 2 (02:50:34):
Yeah.

Speaker 19 (02:50:35):
And the concerning part about this is that right after that,
so this goes in effect. Is it July first of
twenty twenty six, they can no longer sell any glocks
of certain models. And there's some far, far reaching implications
to this. Because I got to talking to my gun
guy here, I was actually picking up a lower matter

(02:50:57):
of fact, do a little show and tell here, this
is the three D three D printed.

Speaker 2 (02:51:04):
That's three D printed.

Speaker 19 (02:51:05):
It's three D printed in multiple pieces, about fifteen pieces
that are now glued together. But I did it as
as that article series I did for Substack, to show
the fallacy of that you could just buy a fifty
dollars three D printer and crank out guns all day.

Speaker 6 (02:51:19):
It's completely bogus.

Speaker 19 (02:51:21):
But they're basing a lot of legislation on this false narrative.
So I printed that, I tested it, actually surged, the
purge went out with me, and we got video on
his channel shooting it.

Speaker 6 (02:51:33):
But it fell over and broke.

Speaker 19 (02:51:36):
So I ripped the guts out of it, and I
built an actual, you know weapon with it, a metal one.
And then I just clued this together as a training
tool for my grandson, so he can run around and
pretend to shoot squirrels in deer and we teach him
don't point it at people.

Speaker 6 (02:51:49):
Anyway.

Speaker 19 (02:51:50):
The point is getting back to the glock thing. So
the glock switch thing was passed in California. It's going
to take effect in July of next year, and Glock
folded and they said, you know what, We're going to
discontinue all of these models, all but three. Now Glock
has hold on. I got it here on the forget

(02:52:10):
how many models. It was like, oh, geez, crazy amounts
of models that they are discontinuing, fifty four variants in total.

Speaker 2 (02:52:19):
So I heard something about that. I didn't know what
the cause was.

Speaker 6 (02:52:23):
Well, the cause was because of California.

Speaker 19 (02:52:26):
So they're like, okay, we're going to discontinue these models
that are easily modified for this glock switch to make
it fully auto. And this is completely different than what
Magpole did. So Magpool, if you don't know, as a
company who makes aftermarket parts and magazines and stuff like
that for AR fifteen's and other.

Speaker 6 (02:52:44):
Types of platform.

Speaker 19 (02:52:46):
Yeah, but I was I think I was in Colorado
at the time, but they were a Colorado based company,
and Colorado had slipped in some legislation.

Speaker 6 (02:52:55):
By a very ignorant lady that had slid in.

Speaker 19 (02:52:59):
It was a high capacity the magazine ban, so they said, Okay,
after this certain date, this is probably back around twenty fourteen,
twenty fifteen, something like that, somewhere in that era. They said,
magazines made after this date are no longer going to
be for sale in Colorado if they're over like ten
rounds or something. And so they pressured Magpool to redye

(02:53:24):
their systems, to stamp a manufactured date on their magazines
so that they could prove whether or not it was
made before. Because you're still allowed to keep the old ones.
It was a grandfathered situation. Magpoole said no, they picked
up and they moved. That's what Glock should have done, said,
go stuff yourself, because we're talking about freedom here. You

(02:53:45):
had Eric on freedom of transportation. This is freedom to
keep them there arms and there is no restrictions on it.

Speaker 6 (02:53:53):
Anyway.

Speaker 19 (02:53:53):
So but no, Glock folded the real concern that I
had with it as I'm researching, because you know, California
could do what they want whatever. If you don't like it,
move out of California. The problem is I got to
dig in into it a little bit deeper. So they
tried to save face. Glock tried to save face by saying, well,
we're looking into a new generation model, and we don't

(02:54:15):
need to produce all these other guns anymore. We're going
to move into a new generation model, which people have
already figured out how to install these switches on already, right,
But they said, we will still continue to sell the parts.
And I have another show and tell. This is a
glock slide that I purchased. So you can't buy the
glock frame in California, Well, it won't be produced anymore,

(02:54:39):
but you could still buy the parts. And I got
to looking into other things, so I ordered a PSA
poal metto State Armory Dagger, which is a glock clone.

Speaker 6 (02:54:50):
I started questioning. I said, I wonder if it's just
glock or is it the other models that are.

Speaker 19 (02:54:57):
Glock clones, because you could easily just buy an aftermarket
frame that's not on the band list and then order
these glock parts to throw on it, and you could
essentially have a glock that you could essentially put a
switch on if you wanted.

Speaker 6 (02:55:12):
To, sure illegally in California.

Speaker 19 (02:55:14):
Well, and I got to look in and sure enough,
it is not just glock. I got into a Reddit
post here and discon models that will be banned as
part of this glock band also include several models of
shadow systems, FMK firearms, Smith and Wesson, and a company
called dere Rayah. I don't know who that is, but

(02:55:39):
and I was like, why would they ban certain ones
and not other ones?

Speaker 6 (02:55:43):
Well, this is why.

Speaker 19 (02:55:44):
If you take a look at the glock frame, what
they're actually banning is this. There's a little bar in here. Yeah,
as part of the trigger mechanism. So anything that has
that kind of a bar system for trigger will be banned.
And maybe after the fact, so you could legally purchased one,
they could add it to the list and you become
a felon. And I got to look and I said, oh,

(02:56:06):
I think my Springfield x D nine as the same system.
It's not on the list. Guess what as the same system.
So you can expect to see a lot of firearms.
This is just one of those things we're going to
creep in. They're gonna say, well, we're just banning these
guns the frames only, not not the parts, but the frames.

(02:56:26):
We're banning these only. But then they slip in more
and more and more.

Speaker 2 (02:56:31):
The utter contempt, utter utter contempt, and lack of respect
for their neighbor and you know we're talking, of course
the Second Amendment, very clear and no expost facto law.
And then the immorality of saying no, you can't possess
this thing. You're the dangerous one for possessing something. Is

(02:56:54):
possession harming anyone? No, who's making the threat the government.
They're the ones with the guns pointed at people, not
only to take their money, but to take that money,
put it into a policing system to further point government
guns at people who want to own a gun peacefully.
It's incredible the doubling and tripling of aggression that the
state does. And people will accept it, they'll justify it.

(02:57:18):
It's just ridiculous. Listen, we're just up against the clock.

Speaker 19 (02:57:22):
I got one Can I throw one more thing in there?

Speaker 6 (02:57:24):
Guard?

Speaker 19 (02:57:25):
Sure, and I'll send people over go to the units
of the storm over on Rumble and look at my repost.
So Toby Leary, which I know you know Guard Toby
Leary just did I think yesterday he did a show.
Guy's been in jail for six hundred and eight I think,
and ten days now, not jail house arrest.

Speaker 2 (02:57:43):
Yes, and this is terrible. The Air Force guy.

Speaker 19 (02:57:46):
Yeah, and and the reason I wanted to bring this
up is because talking about the glock stuff and how
you can still buy the parts. They got him it
was a targeted for disarmament because of something he bought
on eBay, So.

Speaker 2 (02:57:59):
It was he was just traveling through Massachusetts.

Speaker 19 (02:58:02):
No, I think in this case he actually bought a
part on eBay and then they came. I had to
watch it a second time to get the story down.
But if you buy something that is one of these
parts that the gun is now banned, but you can
buy the parts, guess what they're gonna You're inviting them
into your home to come check. And that's where I'm

(02:58:23):
worried about this going. And I had more to talk
about three D printing guns and all this other stuff
I always overprepare, But no, this is it's going in
a very dangerous direction because they're sliding in. Oh, it's
just this model of glock, these couple models of glock
next to you know, it covers a myriad of clones
of guns that operate in the same function. If you
order a replacement part, all of a sudden, now they're

(02:58:45):
coming up to your home to see if you're building
a new one, which is prohibited you can still own
an old one and repair it. But now you're opening
the door. This is getting really, really dangerous. And we
start talking about AI and tying into your financials and
looking where you're shopping. You know, I worry about that too.
I order stuff online. They can tell that I'm buying parts.

(02:59:05):
So they even if they don't know the serial number
of the gun, or they don't know this or that
or the other, they know I'm building a gun. Yeah,
so what if it's a prohibited gun or it becomes
prohibited tomorrow and I don't even know.

Speaker 6 (02:59:16):
Now I'm a felon, you know.

Speaker 2 (02:59:18):
And just the fact that they're breaching the Fourth Amendment
looking into the shops or online purchases. There's so much
dark activity on the parts of these people, and they
seem to think they're doing the right thing. It's just
all right, better run. Thank you so much, Jason Knights
of the Storm. You are the man. You've got the
best team out there. Thanks Jason. I would be giving

(02:59:41):
you the Vulcan mind meld, but we'll do that on
Liberty Conspiracy sometime next week, all right, brother, and we'll
watch for you tomorrow. Thanks Jason. I talked to you
soon Jason Barker Knights of the Storm two o'clock tomorrow.
Watch for them on Rumble and check out the page
of course over there on Rumble Land. And of course
you can check out Liberty Conspiracy Live over at the

(03:00:02):
Liberty Conspiracy Channel tonight and you can of course participate.
And one of the things that we're going to discuss
tonight that I think is going to be fairly important
is going to be the latest on the Ukraine so
called peace plan, and we'll give you that information tonight.
I'll just let you know that it's a twenty eight
point plan and one of the key points in fact,

(03:00:27):
i'll read to you from my notes here. It has
not been rejected, but it has not been accepted by Zelenski.
The plan requires Ukraine to see Dunetsk, Luhansk and Crimea
to Russia, to freeze frontlines in other areas and adopt
permanent neutrality without NATO. And they're supposed to limit their

(03:00:47):
military to six hundred thousand troops when they could get
that many sometime after the slaughter that the US has
helped push and hold elections within one hundred days. That's
a big one for Zelenski. In return, Russia pledges non
aggression sanctions will ease, and two hundred billion dollars in
aid from those frozen assets that the Europeans are already

(03:01:10):
saying they're going to steal. So this is going to
be probably a big money maker for the United States
corporate interests to go in there and do the cleanup
along with friends of the EU. But it remains to
be seen whether or not Selenski accepts it accepts it,
So we'll discuss that tonight. If you'll join us, you'd
be so kind. We'll have fiction Friday. We'll read a

(03:01:31):
great short story as well over at Liberty Conspiracy Live.
And remember it's because freedom is out of fashion nowadays.
You can follow me Guard Goldsmith at Guard Goldsmith and
you can go to the Gardner Goldsmith substack. Please sign
up there if you want to support what I'm doing.
That's a really beneficial thing. And please remember you can
still donate today to the David Knight Show. I want

(03:01:52):
to thank you so much. If you have done so,
head on into Rumble please feel free to do so,
and of course go to Thedavidnightshow dot com and you
will see ways that you can contribute I want to
thank dougalug and Harps coming in. He says, thanks Guard,
thank you so much, thank you. Ah, yes indeed, yeah.
And we've got a lot to discuss about the Ukraine

(03:02:14):
information tonight and the corrupt US government involvement with the
overthrow there. But I want to thank everybody over and
Rumble as well. David will be back Monday with Travis.
I hope everybody's getting all geared up for a fantastic
week as we approach. You know what, Yes, it's going
to be a wonderful Thanksgiving, even though of course it's

(03:02:36):
going to be a little bit more expensive. So I'm
going to give you a little farewell for the David
Knight Show. Let's go off with a piece of music
for the David Knight Show once more, and let's talk
about Let's go with a little something from the Peanuts Christmas.

(03:02:58):
How's that? Great afternoon? God, bless you ever, thank

Speaker 1 (03:03:02):
You you're listening to the David night Show.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang

Crime Junkie

Stuff You Should Know

.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;}Fri Episode #2143: The Shooter Story PsyOp

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;}Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang

Crime Junkie

Stuff You Should Know

All Episodes

Fri Episode #2143: The Shooter Story PsyOp

Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang