The David Knight Show - 5Jun23 Vicious New Green Scheme to Confiscate Private Property

Episode Date: June 5, 2023

OUTLINE of today's show with TIMECODESJets scrambled over Washington for rogue plane — what does this tell us about 9/11 and even about eyewitnesses to an event? (2:16) Supreme Court Affirms: IRS is Above the Law & ConstitutionAs GOP & Dems argue over whether to make the IRS 7x's bigger or 9x's bigger, the Supreme Court, in a UNANIMOUS decision, says IRS can get records of people unrelated to a case they're investigating except having the same accountant, lawyer or employer. (20:18)4D Ultrasound shows same baby, same smile — BEFORE and AFTER birth. So NOT a lump of tissue? (34:37)Shangri-La & the "Shadow Agenda": Spymasters from Every Nation Meet in Secretive Conference Davos? Bilderberg? How about ALL major nations' chief spies meeting secretly? What is the "shadow agenda" as Reuters calls it? (37:15)New Zealand's new Ministry of Truth — and the massive fines for not being "truthy" enough (49:53)EU "Truth" Dictator flexes his new muscle in boasting tweets (56:16)Yet another Microsoft tool for censorship, this time using AI to detect free speech they hate (1:14:14) Cambridge University now is trying to sell the idea that Anglo-Saxons never existed. No such thing as "British, English, Scottish, Welsh, or Irish" people. They call it a myth (1:24:49)South Africa acknowledges white people exist but the Marxists want to kill them by withholding water from white people — race quotas for water access. (1:30:17)Yet Another Farmland Confiscation Scheme — in USA South Dakota farmers face eminent domain BY A CORPORATION feeding at the trough of Green Crony Capitalism — for a CO2 pipeline to store the gas underground! We've seen the confiscation plans for the Netherlands. GOP Senators are concerned about China buying farmlands. RFKj includes Wall Street hedge funds in concerns about farm consolidation. But this scheme in South Dakota is the most egregious of all… (1:41:58)Former Biden economic advisor admits that the "Inflation Reduction Act" is an open-ended, unlimited entitlement program for green crony capitalism. Says it's a good thing. (2:11:15) LaLa Harris & the Magic School Bus Fantasy: By the Numbers Do you realize how fantastic, impractical, and unaffordable Lala's idea of EV school buses is? The property taxes alone would make us all homeless, not to mention the safety issues. Here's how expensive school buses are and how much MORE expensive LaLa wants them to become (2:16:16)Mr. Bean (Rowan Atkinson) says EVs are a joke — the joke is on us (2:30:44)California state assembly votes to ban driverless trucks. (2:39:33)Biden is coming after ALL your appliances (not just cars, HVAC, ranges, etc). From Dark Winter to Dark Ages. (2:47:16)Trump-appointed federal judge overturns Tennessee restrictions on lewd drag shows with minors. Engaging kids in your pedophile sexual fantasies is apparently what the First Amendment is about. Who knew? (2:55:29)Find out more about the show and where you can watch it atTheDavidKnightShow.com If you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here: SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-showOr you can send a donation through Mail: David Knight POB 994 Kodak, TN 37764Zelle: @[e-mail] App at: $davidknightshowBTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7Money is only what YOU hold: Go to DavidKnight.gold for great deals on physical gold/silverFor 10% off Gerald Celente's prescient Trends Journal,go to TrendsJournal.com and enter the code KNIGHTBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-david-knight-show--2653468/support.

www.microsoft.com www.microsoft.com www.microsoft.com www.microsoft.com www.microsoft.com www.microsoft.com www.microsoft.com www.microsoft.com

www.microsoft.com www.microsoft.com www.microsoft.com www.microsoft.com Using free speech to free minds. Using free speech to free minds. You're listening to The David Knight Show. As the clock strikes 13, it's Monday, the 5th of June, year of our Lord, 2023. Well, today we're going to begin by taking a look at an incident that happened in the Pentagon. Very interesting. I think that 9-11 is something of a litmus test for truth-telling, don't you?

And we'll talk about that, but of course we have lots of news in terms of what is happening with gun control, what is happening with the IRS. The Supreme Court has given the IRS a green light to do whatever they wish, and it was unanimous. Nine to zero. We don't need any search warrants, as Biden is about to expand the IRS by a factor of nine times bigger than it currently is. We'll be right back. Well, we're getting a little bit of a late start today. I apologize, but we had some technical issues as we were getting started. But let's take a look at this story that I thought was very interesting.

We had an unresponsive small plane over Washington, and they scrambled a military jet to intercept it. And they authorized a military jet to go supersonic and create a big boom. And so people all over Washington were concerned about it. They said, is there an explosion? Right? On edge with that. Well, it was Gore Vidal who said about 9-11, he said, I immediately knew that something was wrong because he had had,

I forget his father, I think it was, uh, father, uncle, but I think it was his father who had put together NORAD. He knew how it worked. He said, why didn't they scramble the jets? Now, of course, in Washington, the official story was that that plane took off and then immediately turned around and hit the pentagon and um you know it was i thought it was a very interesting interview with john kiryaku i really do enjoy talking to him i appreciate the fact that he told the truth about the torture stuff very important and he paid a penalty for that. But the question is, you know, what do you say about 9-11? It's one of the reasons why I brought it up. I'd like to know exactly where he is. And John is a very observant person. And he understands, he sees details,

and he understands the agenda behind it. As a matter of fact, a few months ago, I saw when I was looking, trying to find john i saw that he had gone on a program with somebody and try and put up uh they talked about the spy balloon the chinese spy balloon and he was laughing about it i guess come on come on spy balloon everybody's got satellites they can read the license plates on your cars where did this story come from? It came from the Pentagon. Where did the plane crash, John? It crashed into the offices of the people who are investigating trillions of dollars that were missing.

And, you know, to say that, and of course, this narrative that they have now focused on about the Pentagon, it was done with, they dramatized it. They had a priest saying, you know, I'm stuck in traffic right there in front of the Pentagon, and I hear this rattling and shaking, and it goes right over the car, and I look to the side, and I see this plane that goes flying right into the Pentagon. And, of course, they dramatize that, and they have a model of a plane CGI showing a plane.

Now, I just got to say this. I don't know whether that priest is lying or not. You know, John talked about a nun who said, no, no, that was a missile. It had to be. There was no plane parts on the ground. I've showed the clip just a couple of weeks ago. The reporter who was first one there, he said, this is really strange. There's no plane parts on the ground. I showed the clip just a couple of weeks ago. The reporter who was first one there, he said, this is really strange. There's no plane parts around here anywhere.

I've covered a lot of plane crashes and there's no plane parts around here. Then they brought some in later. But, you know, I have a personal experience in terms of how you can imagine things that are not real. We had opened up our first video store, and it was just a 1,000-square-foot store, the first one that we opened up. And I really opened it up just to test some software that I had intended to market.

I'd written a relational database on a Macintosh, and I thought it had a big advantage over what was in the IBM PCs in terms of user interface. And I was going to. And we set it up really as a test bed for it. But right as we set it up. They released. All of the catalog.

And we just got so busy with the other stuff. And it's like why would I. I was also having a hard time. Trying to explain to. Mom and pop people that it was better to have a graphical user interface than 12 function keys across it, you know, and things like that. Look at it. It doesn't have color. It's got a small screen and all this kind of stuff.

So it's like, all right, I'm not going to try to get into the computer wars of this stuff. It's just like, it's like banging my head against the wall to try to explain to people the advantages of graphical user interface, being able to put up charts on the fly and be able, you know, all the rest of the stuff. So we just went with a, with a video thing, but, uh, we started out really small and we were only opened for a couple of weeks and the rest of the shopping center wasn't open. We got in there to open up our store. The first one, we really pressured them to get our shell finished so we could do our fit up. And we really pressured the people to, uh, to get the fit up going. And, um, Karen and I were the only ones there. When we first started up, she was just operating the store. I was still working as an engineer. And so it started snowing.

And they let everybody go home where I was working in Research Triangle Park. And so I went there. She said, we're incredibly busy. And so I went there to help her. And the two of us worked it until nobody else was coming in the door. And then when nobody else was coming in the door, we realized why they stopped coming because we couldn't get out ourselves. And so we had this little cars, had a couple of little sports cars. There's no way we're going to be able to get through the snow. And it was, like I said, nobody was open yet. There was a big 18-wheeler that was stocking the grocery store that had not opened up yet.

And he got stuck right in front of our store because there's a little bit of an incline. He couldn't get it up, the incline. So we watched him, and we were going to be spending the night there. So I went out, and I said, you know, we've got heat in here uh so you don't have to sleep in your in your truck if you want and uh so he came in and he was uh you know we locked everything up we're sleeping on the floor and then in the middle of the night we hear this banging on the wall and it woke us all up and uh i went over to the source of the banging and it's like what is going on I mean it's like 3 in the morning it can't be construction I'm still kind of

foggy I'm half asleep and I walked over to where the banging was coming and as I walked over there this thing came through the sheetrock. And, you know, and I'm looking at it, and it was my mind saw an auger coming through. I can vividly see it to this day. There was no auger. It was an electrical conduit pipe. And I thought, why did I see an auger and then i went back and i saw where they had come through and it right next to this brian the palmer film which i'm sad to say we watched take one of the things i take back but there was a murder in it i think it's body double or something like that the killer killer chases this victim. And somebody's coming into the house.

And they're upstairs. And he gets the victim. Is on the floor. Takes an auger and drills through the victim. And it comes through the ceiling. And that was what my mind saw. Because I saw this thing coming through the wall. Next to the Brian De Palma film that had that in it.

So you can't always trust eyewitnesses. That priest could be telling you the truth about what he thought he saw. Because it's like, whoa, you know, he would think that it was a plane, first of all, instead of a missile. And then, most likely, because, you know, you don't think of missiles being there but especially after everybody said it was a plane and not a missile and um so that's why i said but what about the what about the cameras cameras everywhere cameras in private buildings across the street that the fbi went in and confiscated just just like they confiscated records and other things like

that after Flight 800. We had a missile, cruise missile, take out a commercial airliner. You had a lot of eyewitnesses who saw a cruise missile. Well, maybe they did, maybe they didn't. However, the FBI confiscated air traffic control records and other things like that and confiscated all the evidence with that. There was still physical evidence, and that also pointed to the kind of rocket fuel that would be on that. But I say that because clearly we have to understand what the agenda was. And 9-11 has taken on all new importance,

if you really understand what's going on. If you understand that Dark Winter was the other shoe to drop, they were a matched pair at the beginning. Dark Winter, two months before 9-11, then there was a false flag anthrax attack. People died. Of course, I'm not saying, you know, this is the other part of it. Steve Pchenik and people like him running through with Sandy Hook and then trying to do it with a Las Vegas thing again.

Trying to make the claim that every mass shooting or event is nobody died. Nobody died. That's one way for them to discredit it. But no, people died 9-11, obviously. People died with the anthrax attack. It was a false flag because it was carried out by our government and blamed on others. First on a foreign government that had absolutely no capability to do that. Iraq had no capability for the anthrax attack. And then to blame people working at a lab that did not have the capability to create that kind of anthrax. That kind of anthrax was only created at two labs that were being run by the CIA.

So when we look at that and the fact that it was two months later that they put in all of the rule that passed out model legislation to all the states and said, here, do this in your states, and then practiced their germ games for two decades. And who did they practice it with? The CIA was always in there. As a matter of fact, I think the former CIA director played the role of president in the first one of these in Dark Winter. So the bottom line is that when you look at a situation like this,

what happened on Sunday is what you would expect to happen. What happened, and this isn't because they've changed the procedures after 9-11. These were the standard procedures at the time of 9-11. And the question is, it's kind of like the dog that did not bark, right? The Sherlock Holmes thing. But the other part of it is, if you rule out everything that is not possible, what is left, no matter how improbable, is the truth. And that's the way we look at this thing.

It's not just that they have the motive, the opportunity, and how they used it, but their narrative is impossible, and there's an extensive amount of cover-up that was done. In the same way that Giuliani covered up any investigation in the materials that were involved with 9-11, and he killed people doing it. He killed people because he sent them in without any protective masks in a situation where the masks would have been effective, larger dust particles, and should have been required.

A wayward, unresponsive business plane flew over the nation's capital Sunday afternoon, caused the military to scramble a fighter jet before the plane crashed in Virginia, said officials. The fighter jet caused a loud sonic boom that was heard across the capital region. Everybody was calling news organizations saying, you know, what is going on? It was a Cessna Citation, took off from Elizabethtown, Tennessee on Sunday, was headed for Long Island's MacArthur Airport. Inexplicably, the plane turned around over New York's Long Island and then flew a straight path down over D.C. before it crashed over mountainous terrain near Montebello, Virginia, about 3.30 p.m. It was not immediately clear why the plane was non-responsive, why it crashed,

or how many people were on board. The plane flew directly over the nation's capital, though it was technically flying above some of the most heavily restricted airspace in the nation. The military jets scrambled to respond. It wasn't responding to radio transmissions and later crashed. So we now know who was on board. It was registered to Encore Motors of Melbourne, Florida. John Rumpel, who runs the company, told the New York Times that his daughter, his two-year-old granddaughter, her nanny, and the pilot were all aboard the plane, returning to their home on East Hampton on Long Island after visiting the house in North Carolina. So this is a situation where he said, he's a pilot.

He says, I don't know, maybe they lost a compression or something. Because you have to look at this, if the pilot first, I thought, well, maybe it's a pilot who had a heart attack, right? That's happening a lot now however there's a lot of other people on board two other adults and the fact that nobody responded nobody picked up a radio nobody did anything the military jet approached them fired flares uh to try to get their attention. Nothing. So we don't know why everybody on board passed out. I mean, I can think of other explanations. Perhaps it was some kind of a carbon monoxide leak or something.

I don't know if that's the type of thing that happens on a plane. I mean, it doesn't have a tailpipe that's running underneath it or anything. I don't know. And they don't know either. He said, I don't think they found the wreckage yet. It descended 20,000 feet in a minute. Nobody could survive a crash from that kind of speed. And so it's a tragedy, but I mention it simply because it tells us a great deal

about 9-11, really. SCOTUS, the Supreme Court, has allowed the IRS to carry out secret warrantless searches of innocent taxpayers' bank accounts. People who are not even suspects. This is kind of like the six degrees of separation between Kevin Bacon and everybody else who's ever worked in Hollywood. So they just keep jumping it. This is nothing new. separation between Kevin Bacon and everybody else who's ever worked in Hollywood, you know? So they just keep jumping it. This is nothing new because this is the kind of logic that the NSA has used to eavesdrop on people, right? Well, I got this person here who is a person of interest. And I think that, you know, we need to also look at the other people and then the

people who talk to them. And so it just keeps spreading out from that. They've used this kind of stuff in the past. And this is also something that has been there since the 1960s in terms of PIN numbers, going back to why you had the church committee hearing and of course the Pike committee hearing in the Congress and why they came up with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, FISA, in the first place was because from their inception, the CIA and the NSA were spying on people and listening to their phones, tapping into their phones. And of course they only had one, you know, phone company, Monopoly, and they were two sides of the same coin. AT&T had these sites that were set up, various places. I've talked about the one that was too far from where we lived in North Carolina.

They called it Big Hole. But as part of this Raven Rock, again, excellent book, Raven Rock, the plan to save the government, the government's plan to save the government, save themselves, and let everybody else die. And so AT&T was always a big part of that. They had these underground facilities. They had, you know, there were nuclear bunker type of things. And so they were a partner with the government on all of this.

And so if the government wanted to get something on somebody, they didn't have to get a search warrant. They just called them up and said, you got their records. Would you like to give them to us? Why? Of course, we would be so happy to. We're partners, you know, we're friends. And so that was challenged. And people said, wait a minute, that's my information. They said, well, no, you're doing business with a phone company, which had a monopoly. And you're doing business with a phone company, a government-granted monopoly. Wasn't that driven everybody else out of business so much as it was a government-granted monopoly. So you are doing business with a phone company, and the phone company's got this data.

That's their data. And they can give us their data if they want to, if we ask them. You know, if they don't want to do it, then we'd have to get a search warrant from them. But they're more than happy to maintain that relationship with us. And so this has been these two tactics of saying that if it is information held on you by a private company, they can just turn this stuff over. We saw this happening with Bank of America on January the 6th. The FBI didn't even have to ask them. They voluntarily turned over to the FBI all records of anybody that had used their Bank of America credit card anywhere in Virginia or Maryland those couple of days.

Here's all the information. We sorted through all this stuff for you. Do you like us better now? Yeah. Maybe we could be the biggest bank instead of JP Morgan. You know, that type of thing. It's been there for a long time. So now with this particular situation,

this is a test case. It went before the Supreme Court, and they voted 9-0, unanimous decision, saying that the bank owns these records and they can turn it over to the IRS considerable power, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled to decline to restrict the IRS's authority under the Constitution. The IRS is above the Constitution. And so apparently it is the Supreme Court who ignores the Constitution in their ruling. They don't have to have probable cause. They don't have to get a search warrant because they're the IRS, and this is important, you see. Now, we've seen this type

of thing done all the time about national security, haven't we? Oh, it's national security, so forget about the Constitution. This is too important. We don't have the time to waste. We got this terrorist, and he's got a ticking time bomb, a nuclear bomb. It's going to go off. And look, we've got a cartoonish clock there with wires coming out of it tied to sticks of dynamite or some kind of a metal box. It's a, you know, a uranium bomb or something, dirty bomb or better yet, you know, it's got a digital counter that's there.

You know, it's going around. We don't do the analog clocks anymore. So there's no time to go through this stuff. And, of course, there's no time ever to go through and be bothered with getting a search warrant, whether it's national security or if it is the IRS. Now, this is a very troubling situation because, as I said at the top of the program, Biden is going to be adding 87,000 more IRS agents.

They're not coming after Elon Musk. He's got an army of tax accountants and lawyers anyway to defend him. He's fine, okay? He doesn't worry about that stuff. And he's got the best lawyers and accountants money can buy. But you and I, on the other hand, are the targets. They don't need every 87,000 people to audit the few billionaires that are out there. And there's a lot more now after Trump's stunt in 2020, locking everybody down.

Because those of us who aren't billionaires are as he put it let's see non-essential yeah that was what he called us trump called us non-essential businesses so they don't need it for all these billionaires they need it for the middle class because that's where the vast amount of wealth is anyway, when you multiply that out. And so right now, as a matter of fact, I thought it was $16 billion was the IRS budget. I looked it up. 2023, their budget was $11 billion.

And so if he wants to give them another $80,000, I understand Biden wants to make the IRS nine times bigger. Now the Republicans looked at this and they said, are you kidding me? You're going to make the IRS nine times bigger? How dare you? We're going to cut that. So they cut it from 80 to 60.

So now it would only be seven times bigger, according to the GOP. So that's the difference between the Democrats and Republicans. Nine times bigger, according to the GOP. So that's the difference between the Democrats and Republicans. Nine times bigger IRS under Biden, seven times bigger under McCarthy and the Republican Party. Don't you feel good? Aren't you proud to be a Republican? I'm not.

I'm not a Republican, and I'm not proud of them either. I understand what they're doing. This is not the first time we've seen this type of thing either, of course. It was also that strict constitutionalist, Antonin Scalia. Oh, he took the Constitution very seriously and literally. He was a literalist, we were told. Well, it was when the TSA came around. It said, no, we get to put our hands all over your body. We get to look through everything that you've got.

We don't have to have a warrant. You're all guilty until we prove you innocent by running you through our scanners or scanning you with our hands, okay? So you're all guilty. All of you are a bunch of terrorists until we vet you, right? And Scalia said, yeah, that's okay. Government has a compelling interest to do that, right? Well, they have a compelling interest to tax us. They have a compelling interest to do that, right? Well, they have a compelling interest to tax us. They have a compelling interest to keep secrets from us.

They have a compelling interest to spy on us, to go to war, to steal from us. And, of course, they said, you know, as the Korean court said, nine to nothing. All power is subject to abuse, and we've given all power to the IRS. Hmm. So, therefore, that's what we call a syllogism, right? Let's see. All power abuses, and we've given all power to the IRS. Therefore, not a problem, they said.

Not a problem. She's made of wood, you know, the conclusion from Monty Python in terms of the witch. If she floats, she's made of wood. So anyway, this was pushed back. People pushed back against this was John Whitehead at the Rutherford Institute and the Cato Institute had both filed a friend of the court brief arguing that the sweeping investigatory power wielded by the IRS to circumvent the Fourth Amendment

by carrying out warrantless searches of bank accounts and records of innocent people who are given no notice and no right to object to the search merely because they might be associated with a delinquent taxpayer. Well, the Rutherford Institute and the Cato Institute said this offends every constitutional sensibility on the right to privacy. What does this have to do with abortion? I don't understand, right? I thought right to privacy just meant abortion, right? Yeah, these people don't care about anything other than, wait, I want to kill my baby? That's my private business.

Get out of my business, right? They don't support the right to privacy. They don't support your right to choose your health care or the health care of your children, this gender-affirming stuff. It is such cynical hypocrisy and lies that we see from these people all the time. Now, this is real privacy that they're taking away. These are real constitutionally protected rights. You see, the Constitution didn't give us these rights.

We have these rights because we're human beings endowed by our creator with these inalienable rights. Endowed by our creator with freedom and dignity that people like B.F. Skinner and the Supreme Court and the IRS despise that. Freedom and dignity? Ha! We'll take all your freedom and your dignity. This practice of investigating the bank records of innocent taxpayers because they may have family members or associates who are delinquent on their taxes, said John Whitehead, is merely a perverse form of guilt by association. He says at a minimum, Fourth Amendment protections should not disappear

just because sensitive information is shared to third parties, such as banks and attorneys. The IRS agent did not notify the wife or the attorney of the person who is being investigated. The banks did it voluntarily. And so the amazing thing about this is how unanimous this is, not just on the Supreme Court, but how unanimous this is at every level of the judicial system, from the district court to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court. They all agree that the IRS is a law unto itself, and it must be that way, and that there is no restraining authority on them.

And let me say to you that all this regulatory state stuff where the agencies are a law unto themselves, and then they create rules that they use as if they were laws unto us. And then to make it worse than the fact that we have regulation without representation, they, um, say that because it's a rule and not a law that they don't have to follow the constitution. Now that was not part of the Supreme court decision, but that has been a part of these, uh, typically what is done for,

she had the tax court. We saw during the, the Trump COVID pandemic that you had the FAA handing out tens of thousands of dollar fines for people who didn't want to wear a mask and argued with a flight attendant or something over it. And so the FAA can do come up with these rules arbitrarily or any of these agencies. And if you then violate their rules, you don't get any presumption of innocence, you don't get any due process, and you don't get any protection against excessive fines.

And so from the district court to appeals court, to the Supreme Court, they all sided with the IRS. Rutherford Institute and Cato had argued that the statute should rather be interpreted consistent with the Fourth Amendment's privacy values and protections against unreasonable searches, so the IRS cannot sweep up sensitive information of innocent people who coincidentally happen to have the same employer, right? Oh, so you got somebody, you got co-workers in trouble with the IRS? Well, hey, you know, these two guys work together. Maybe this other guy's guilty as well. Let's take a look.

You might have the same employer. You might have the same employer. You might have the same lawyer. We're not even talking about somebody like Saul Goodman, right? You know, you got to have a criminal lawyer. No, we're just the same lawyer, same employer, or the same accountant as a delinquent taxpayer. In other words, it doesn't have to be any problem with your employer, any problem with your lawyer, any problem with your accountant. They just happen to have another employee or client who is a delinquent taxpayer. Therefore, you're guilty by association. We get to do

whatever we want to with you. Now, sometimes the government doesn't have a problem with theft. And not just when it's the IRS. They don't have a problem with theft. And so many of these Soros district attorney run places, they're shutting down any law enforcement, so much so that Walgreens has now opened an anti-theft store with every item held behind protective cases. And every item.

There's just a few items that they call essentials. Essential items. There's the terminology. So anything else, something like a bottle of booze, a deodorant brand, those are deemed, even those are deemed to be non-essential. I guess, you know, Trump has popularized that in the vernacular here. So if you want to get one of these non-essential things, then you have to go to the kiosk, place an order and pick it up at the counter.

So the, and even the essential shelves are shorter than the normal ones. So the employees can look over them and see what's going on. Uh, so good luck though, getting the government to, um, do anything about it. Uh, they're absolutely not interested in that. Uh, we're going to, uh, take a break and we'll be right back. I've got an interesting picture of a baby, ultrasound as well as after birth, side by side. It was so compelling that you had people contact Snopes and said, is this real? We'll talk about that when we come back. Stay with us. The Common Man.

They created Common Core to dumb down our children. They created Common Past to track and control us. Their Commons Project to make sure the commoners own nothing. And the communist future. They see the common man as simple, unsophisticated, ordinary. But each of us has worth and dignity created in the image of God. That is what we have in common. That is what they want to take away. Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation.

They desire to know everything about us while they hide everything from us. It's time to turn that around and expose what they want to hire please share the information and links you'll find at thedavidknightshow.com thank you for listening thank you for sharing if you can't support us financially please keep us in your prayers. TheDavidKnightShow.com A break here from attacking the IRS and the CIA. And we wonder why I shut down immediately on YouTube.

Anyway, let's talk a little bit about something else that's non-controversial. Abortion. Snopes is forced to concede that, yes, unborn babies do smile. Here is the picture. And it was so powerful that many people complained about this to Snopes. This can't be right. It can't be right. This was tweeted out, by the way, by LifeSite News on June the 1st this year,

showing a smile on a baby that hasn't been born yet and a similar smile on the same baby after birth. The only difference really is just the quality of the picture, isn't it? Understanding the potential to undermine the logic of abortion, somebody wrote so-called fact-checkers at Snopes, left-wing progressives. It must have pained them to admit this, but they said yes. They said in response, despite this reader's skepticism

we soon found data that showed both of these images were real and that neither of them had been doctored to begin figuring this out we performed a reverse image search to find other stories that featured these same pictures and they found that this was actually goes back to 2014 in the UK and Manchester Evening News I don't know the context of it but I think from what they're saying is that this was talking about 4D real-time imaging that is able to be done by ultrasound, a GE machine. And so I think that was the point, that they were talking about how good the imaging had become. But again, anybody who argues for late-term abortion, says this article on American Thinker, has to explain why the two images of a smiling child

are of two completely different creatures, one of which may be exterminated without penalty, So at least they told the truth about it. Audi, MRR, yeah, you're right. The government is a system of criminals protecting other criminals, and that's what we really do see. That is the right way to describe what is going on between the judiciary who says, oh, the Constitution doesn't apply here. Because we have a superior interest, and that is stealing your money. So, hey, if we want to steal your money or start a war,

constitution doesn't apply, right? And of course it doesn't apply when you got gangs of thieves now that have been trained to take whatever they wish. And of course the, the companies that are doing this and, and customers are not happy with this at Walmart, but they have to do what they have to do. They have a situation where they can't turn it into an armed encampment and the government isn't going to follow through on what it should be doing, which is to keep order. It has a duty to protect. It isn't going to do its duty. Getting back to the spies here again, the world's spy chiefs

met in a secret conclave in Singapore. Now, this is kind of interesting. You know, we have Davos, we have these intelligent agents, intelligence heads, and you have the heads of media and heads of big corporations that work with government and heads of state and their representatives and so forth. So big business, big government, big spies, big media all get together at Davos, and then they do it again at Bilderberg. They don't like to talk about Bilderberg, but they do talk a lot about Davos. But now here's one where you've just got the spies getting together. Isn't that nice?

And to think that we always had this idea. It's spy versus spy. Well, it's just another big club, isn't it? And this might go a long way to explaining why during this most recent globalist scheme we had during the lockdown, all governments around the world with the same agenda and these little figureheads that are up there, regardless of what their putative political philosophy or party is about or what this candidate says he's going to do or not do, it really didn't matter. There's a hidden hand that is running all this stuff. In my personal opinion, at a human level, of course, this is running through the spy

agencies. But of course, it is satanic. And you can understand that it is a satanic agenda because the central issue of all of these MacGuffins, whether you're talking about the pandemic MacG issue of all of these MacGuffins, whether you're talking about the pandemic MacGuffin, the COVID MacGuffin, or the climate MacGuffin, you're still talking ultimately about depopulation. You're talking about sterilizing people.

You're talking of whether you, you know, and it's not just those MacGuffins. It's also the LGBT stuff, right? Sterilizing people, playing mind games with them so they don't want to have a family and that kind of thing. But, you know, literally killing people or sterilizing them, you know, mutilating the kids and the rest of this stuff. And so these were senior officials from about two dozen of the world's major intelligence agencies having a secret meeting on the fringes of the Shangri-La dialogue security meeting in Singapore this weekend.

Five people told Reuters. Wasn't that interesting? This one in Singapore now. So we've got Davos, or the economic forum Bilderberg. And now we have Shangri-La where the spies all get together. And I mean, they're all the spies on all these, they're supposed to be totally opposite from each other. And one of the tax of Reuters, this Reuters article is, well, it's a good thing that they're getting together because these spies can get together and say things that the politicians we can't you know when things get tough these guys

can get together they can speak frankly with each other especially you know when they're in a small private club that nobody else can see and they can say all kinds of stuff to each other same thing we heard about davos and bilderberg you know these conclaves where the elite power brokers of the world get together and discuss things. It's just, it's nothing to be concerned about. It's actually not a bug. It's a feature, you see. And they're not doing any business.

And like I've told you the story before about the guy who, Ed Balls from the UK, Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, coming in and his suitcase pops open and Karen catches it and it's nothing but papers. Oh, this is, we don't do any business here, but suitcase was nothing but papers. So they said such meetings organized by the Singapore government and have been discreetly held as a separate venue alongside the security summit for several years, but the meetings have not been previously reported. So why are they doing it now?

Well, I don't know why they're doing it now. The U.S. was represented by the Director of National Intelligence, Avril Haines, the head of her country's intelligence community, while China was among other countries present, despite the tensions between the two superpowers, the head of India's overseas intelligence gathering agency, Samant Goel, also attended, said an Indian source. The meeting is an important fixture on the international shadow agenda. That's their term, not mine. The shadow agenda. Hmm. The shadow, you know, like I said,

the CIA has been a part of every one of these germ games that happened from dark winter for the next 20 years until they pulled the COVID lockdown under Trump. CIA was always a big part of every one of those germ games. And they call the first one dark winter. And these people are bragging about their international shadow agenda. It is not a festival of tradecraft, they said. In other words, they're not getting together and saying, hey, you see my heart attack gun here?

Isn't this cool? Look at that guy. His bow tie is really a camera in the quote, Simon and Garfunkel, right? The man in the gabardine suit. You have to look up what a gabardine suit is. Anyway, it's not a festival of tradecraft, but it is rather a way of promoting a deeper understanding of intentions and bottom lines. It's to coordinate globally what is going on. They don't even try to hide it anymore.

There's an unspoken code among intelligence services that they can talk when more formal and open diplomacy is harder. It is a very important factor during these times of tension, they said. Well, I don't know. Politicians are used to doing things in smoke-filled rooms and that type of thing. It's just that they're concerned that there might be some level of accountability for their puppets. Nobody, no matter what happens, these spy chiefs are not accountable to the public. So if the public doesn't like the fact that they're meeting together and the fact that they've got a quote shadow agenda.

Well, what are you going to do about it? Right. What are you going to do about it? Spy and other spy versus us. That's right. That's what it is. Not spy versus spy. The Mad Magazine.

It's like both of them. You know, the guy in black and the guy in white. And they're both against all of us. Globally as well. You know, we're talking about the IRS. Aaron Moss says, how long does it take to hire 87,000 people? Well, I guess that depends. If you don't need any qualifications, you can just, I mean, how long did it take to find this Sam Britton and put him in charge of our nuclear waste program?

I mean, you could pick that guy out of a crowd and just say, he's hired. I like the way he looks. He's hired. That's probably going to be one thing. Don't be surprised if the IRS agents who show up to audit you are trannies, is all I can say. They're going to drag you to court. To their court.

And there's a reply from Angus Mustang. Amazing how, amazing most of my customers can't get five people, you to court to their court. Um, and there's a reply from Angus Mustang. Amazing. How amazing. Most of my customers can't get five people, let alone 87,000. That's a good point. That's a really good point.

We're seeing, as a matter of fact, not too far from where we live. There are some people, they've got, um, uh, they got a great barbecue and they just set it up temporarily and they would show up like on weekends or something like that to do the barbecue they bottle building and they're trying to fit it

up and make it into a restaurant the problem is that they can't they did the fit up and everything but they can't find any employees and so they're still stuck doing it on weekends only and that's the thing you see everywhere. So where are we going to get these 87,000 people? Maybe they'll bring them in from India or Mexico or Central America or China or something like that, right? And that's, is that what the open borders are for? Got to bring in some MS-13 gang members so they can turn them into IRS agents. Yeah. So maybe instead of a tranny, maybe your IRS auditor will have MS-13 tattoos all over their face and arms and everything. I don't know.

Yeah, it is. It is going to be interesting. Wonder how much they're going to pay them, says Angus Mustang. Well, you bet they're going to pay them pretty well. So anyway, getting back to the World Spy meeting, all the sources who discussed the meeting declined to be identified because of the sensitivity of the matter. Now, is it that sensitive, the very fact that they're just having a meeting? And it's actually a very big meeting.

They had more than 600 delegates from 49 countries. But that's really pretty small compared to the geospatial intelligence meetings that they've had. And again, going back to the 1990s, geospatial intelligence is where James Clapper rose to prominence inside the intelligence community. Geospatial intelligence purpose of that was to spy on you without search warrants and to map out people's religious and political beliefs so they could be identified as extremist terrorists. Like you see the people at the PTA meetings, right? That was the purpose of geospatial intelligence, you know, not just to wait for people to show up and commit a crime by speaking out at a PDA meeting. No, they can identify you in a pre-crime way based on profiling you, looking at who you know, just taking one hop, just in the same way the IRS is doing this kind of stuff. They just keep doing the same things over and over again for slightly different agencies doing these things. And the geospatial intelligence meetings that they had prior to the lockdown stuff, they were getting about 4,000 people a year.

And yet Reuters never reported that and still hasn't reported that, you know, this is a big meeting, international in scope, and 600 people from 49 nations. But as I pointed out, larger meetings of the intelligence community are rare. They're rare. And almost never publicized. And so the question is, this is kind of being put in the context of, well, let's kind of smooth things over.

The politicians have really messed this stuff up. So maybe we'll bring in the spies now to smooth it over. Maybe the spies are the ones running the operation. And maybe the spies are not trying to stop a war. Maybe they're trying to start a war. Who knows? Maybe they've got this all planned out. Anyway, I had three days of plenary sessions, as well as closed-door bilateral and multilateral meetings

at the Shangri-La Hotel. I mean, that's where Bilderberg got its name. It was the Bilderberg Hotel where they had it. So as they continue these meetings, I would imagine that even if this group goes to a different venue, they'll still call it the Shangri-La group. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese gave the keynote address, while U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin and the Chinese Defense Minister

and their counterparts from Britain, Japan, Canada, Indonesia, South Korea also spoke there. As I point out in this, we have known for the longest time that Five Eyes is a group of the English-speaking countries. The UK, US, Canada, New Zealand, Australia. This is much larger. And it seems like they can all just get together and figure out the next MacGuffin that they're going to pull on us. New Zealand government releases a proposal to set up a ministry of truth. Because we have to have a ministry of truth because there's so much untruth that is out there. The proposal will include the appointment of a chief regulator who will be empowered to decide whether online content,

including social media posts, is quote-unquote harmful. Harmful to who? Harmful to the government. To do so, he'll be empowered to make up his own guidelines without any input of Parliament. He'll be the truth czar. The proposals will allow for fines exceeding 200,000 New Zealand dollars. That's about 121,000 U.S. dollars.

You see? Levied on those who don't comply with his idea of what is true. This is the way this is going to continue to work. Again, no protection against excessive fines. No free speech, all the rest of the stuff. It's all being wiped out across the world. Is this part of the shadow agenda? Spies have never really been too big on constitutional rights.

It's always about pragmatism, about getting your way and about getting power. So what is that really about? Uh, in terms of abortion, I had a couple of comments here, uh, from, uh, a one. Ben golfing, um, Ben, you've been golfing, uh, no, it's G a L F a N. Um, David noticed Trump told Hannity that he's not-A-L-F-A-N. Um, David noticed Trump told Hannity that he's not for states rights on abortion. That's right. And ignore the question.

What is the Republican stance on abortion? Crickets. And Hannity never asked again. Yeah. So the thing is they would love that. They don't want to have anything again. It's, it's about power. They don't want anything that is outside of their jurisdiction.

Lindsey Graham, Donald Trump, and even some of these pro-life organizations like the Family Research Council and the Susan B. Anthony pro-life organizations want to pull this power back to Washington. Why? Well, because that empowers them. It doesn't protect life. They say, well, we have to protect all life and we have to do it. Well, how has that worked out for everything else? Everything else that we have run out, just from a pragmatic standpoint, everything that we have sent to Washington to be fixed, who took it over? The left took it over. The left has taken over all

institutions. They've taken over all educational institutions. They've taken over all big business. They've taken over all big government. And the only place where you're going to be able to get something done about this is where you got smaller government. And that's not a given either. And so it is better to save lives in 20 states than it is to take lives in all 50. And that's the choice. It's not about protecting life in all 50. And Lindsey Graham and Donald Trump have signaled that they are more than willing to split the baby into multiple pieces at a much later term than the states are. So you're already killing babies that would not have been killed to federalize it. And Lindsey Graham is fine with that. Trump is fine with that. But it's about power. And it's also, Lindsey Graham and Trump

have no more respect for the Constitution than does our judicial system, which says, no, you don't have to have a search warrant to system which says no you don't have to have a search warrant to go after people you don't have to have probable cause they have no respect for the constitution no respect for human life especially babies that's everything you need to know about these people and quite frankly it's not just a republican party problem of course either you notice how there's been total crickets from RFK Jr. He's not going to talk about that. You know that he's going to be on the side of abortion.

The Democrats are 100% in favor of abortion without limits. It's only within the Republican Party that you even have this discussion. And that's unfortunately not even the majority position amongst institutions that exist to preserve the family and to save life. They didn't even take that position. Now, then when you talk about the Constitution, the Constitution is clear and the Supreme Court got it right. And so instead of building on that decision and saying, okay, well, the Supreme Court is now going to recognize that the 10th Amendment exists after we've had 50 years of spineless politicians at the state level refusing to say, the Supreme Court's made their decision about when life begins. Let's see them enforce this. Let's see them stop us from protecting innocent life.

No, they all just bow down to the Supreme Court. And now the Supreme Court has opened that up. The proper approach ought to be from these politicians. Well, that means that we get to go back and revisit a bunch of these things, but they're afraid to say that. All of them are afraid to say it. It's not just Trump. It's all the Republicans.

DeSantis and the rest of them are not saying, well, that means that since the Supreme Court doesn't have any authority to define when life begins, they also don't have any authority to define marriage because you understand that homosexual marriage was created by the Supreme Court. Even in California, even with tens of millions of dollars

from just Apple alone in California. That redefinition of marriage failed even in California every time it was put up to a vote. And so the Supreme Court and the federal government defied the wishes of the people, defied the Constitution, defied the laws and the constitutions of the states, and imposed their definition of marriage, their definition of life on us. And the Republicans are not going to do anything about it. And of course, neither are the Democrats.

And you're not going to see anything by RFKJ about that either. Narrow Way, Narrow Gate Ministries. The GOP has no position on abortion other than to support that which makes them money. Yep. And since banning it doesn't make them money through kickbacks, bribes, and payoffs, they leave it alone. That's exactly right. Well, the EU is threatening Twitter over quote-unquote disinformation.

They've got a ministry of truth as well. You've got to have a ministry of truth in order to understand what misinformation is, right? And so this guy is really, this theory, Breton, is really feeling his power now. He is taunting people over this and taunting Twitter. You can run, but you can't hide. The European Union's Internal Markets Commissioner, Thierry Breton. This is the guy who went to Austin.

I showed you the clip of him saying, you're going to comply with this new rule we got, the DSA rule. And Elon Musk is bowing and scraping to him. A lot of people are talking about Elon Musk bowing and scraping to the Chinese commun lot of people are talking about Elon Musk bowing and scraping to the Chinese communist. He does that to every government. That's why he's the richest man in the world.

He bows and scrapes to them. He does what they want. And yet conservatives think that he's some kind of a magnanimous hero. You know, he's a philanthropist. He's spending $45 billion to get free speech. Look at how much money he's lost giving us free speech on Twitter. Really? That truly is an amazing blindness.

But you see, same kind of blindness they had and still do with Trump. And that's why Musk is doing it. This guy who is a transhumanist wants to turn us all into cyborgs and wears a Baphomet costume as part of his life. Conservatives don't see anything wrong with any of that. That doesn't raise any alarms or any flags. I mean, just on the surface of this stuff. Anyway, so they confirmed that Twitter had ditched the EU code of practice on disinformation. So does that mean that Elon Musk is really going to make it a free speech platform?

Well, no. It actually is just a head fake. And here's why. Robert Kogan had the article. I had this on thedailyskeptic.org. I had this last week to talk about it, as a matter of fact. Elon Musk's claim to be defying the EU's censorship code is an empty boast. Word has it that Twitter has withdrawn from the EU's code of practice on disinformation,

the Ministry of Truth, a fact that appears only to be known thanks to a couple of pissy tweets from EU officials. Because, again, this Theory Breton guy is just so full of himself. You know, he's like, he's boasting on social media as if he was Judge Dredd. I am the law you know that's that's what he's doing everywhere i am the law i've got the power uh so um he says i can't help but wonder if this is not finally musk's response to the question i asked in my daily skeptic article several weeks ago namely how can a self-styled quote-ununquote, free speech absolutist, unquote,

be a part of the permanent task force on disinformation that is precisely a creation of the EU's code? So Twitter was a part of this. And so, you know, Elon Musk says, well, I'm a free speech absolutist, so I'm going to get out of this thing. He says it's a meaningless gesture because it doesn't matter. Withdrawing the signature is just theater, an empty gesture, because the effect of the EU's DSA, the Digital Services Act,

is to render hitherto ostensibly voluntary commitments obligatory. So you could have signed on to this thing, and Twitter did sign on to it under Jack Dorsey. And so we're going to voluntarily censor people. You tell us at the Ministry of Truth, what is truth? It's like Pontius Pilate. And we will shut down everything that is not truth. And so it was voluntary.

But now it's about to become obligatory. And so it doesn't matter whether they are a signature, whether they sign on to it or not. Everybody's going to be forced to do this. And this is what this guy, Theory Breton, is doing. Twitter is in no different a position than Amazon, Apple, Wikipedia, none of which were ever signatories of the code, but all of which will be expected by the EU to comply with its censorship

requirements on the pain of ruinous fines. And they even have a little, they have four lines of code here. Oh, actually not so much code, but it's a data types, a safety level type that misinfo civic, uh, another one, misinfo crisis, misinfo generic, misinfo medical. And so these are lines of code that are embedded into the Twitter algorithm for this very purpose. Safety levels. Safety labels, not levels. Safety labels for civic information, for generic information,

for medical information, for crisis information. And so these things have been hard-coded into the platform. And then beyond that, you have this guy, Theory Breton, saying, I am the enforcer. Judge Brett. Judge Dredd. I am the enforcer against disinformation. So he is Mr. Minister of Truth.

He wants everybody to know that. He's putting that out on social media. Anybody have a problem with somebody like this, this kind of attitude, being given that kind of power? Yeah, you can run, but you can't hide, says the Ministry of Truth creator. They're really leaning into this whole 1984 thing, aren't they? That's what he said. Yeah, they really are. And of course, they always do. Again, you give them power, and they want more of it, and they brag about it after a while they're you know it becomes um the motivating factor for them you know it's just like money people get addicted to this stuff and uh anything else you know money and power and oh look you know it's

just like they brag about their power in the same way that you know donald trump does this ostentatious display of wealth in his homes and other things like that. What good is it for these people to have this stuff if they can't show how rich and powerful they are to everybody else? Look what I've got that you don't have. The Internal Market Commissioner will travel to California next month to carry out stress tests to see how social media companies are preparing for the new content rules, stress tests. He's going to put them under stress to see if they will obey the minister of truth. And so this is what he said. I am the enforcer.

I represent the law, which is the will of the state and of the people. Really? So he is the will of the people. He is the state. He is the law. He is everything. And quite frankly, if you can dictate speech to people, take away people's free speech as a dictator,

then you do have that kind of power. He's telling you the truth about that. That's the one bit of truth that the minister of truth is actually telling you. The rest of it's going to be a lie. But he is telling you the truth. He's the law, the enforcer.

He will define what the will of the people and the state is. It all resides in him. It is a voluntary basis. So we don't coerce anybody. He says immediately, right? You don't volunteer. What we will do is, um, I just just reminded he said musk and twitter that by

august 25th it will become a legal obligation to fight disinformation this truth uh so who gets to side that right uh well he does because he knows what the will of the state is. And the will of the people. It is a sad day when U.S. corporations take marching orders from EU politicians on what constitutes the truth. Well, that's true. But it's a sad day when U.S. corporations take marching orders from the U.S. government as to what is the truth as well. Yeah, let's not miss the big picture here. And, you know, who gets to decide what is the truth as well. Yeah, let's not miss the big picture here. And, you know, who gets to decide what is truth

and what is disinformation? Is it going to be Hunter Biden? Is it going to be Joe Biden? Is it going to be Fauci? Is it going to be Hillary? And it's kind of interesting because in this article, they don't say, do you have Trump gets to decide? See, it goes both ways.

And when you only come out and you say, well, and you list a whole bunch of people on the left, now the left is saying, yeah, I like that kind of thing. Well, you better start telling the people on the left who hate Trump. Guess what? Trump could be deciding what is truth under this. See, I wouldn't even want Thomas Massey or Ron Paul to be making that kind of decision. But of course, Thomas Massey and Ron Paul would not want that kind of power. They would reject that kind of power.

They're not Trump. So you want to create a ministry of truth? Well, it could be run by somebody. It could be run by Trump or by somebody like him. That's what we need to be telling the left, because they need to be joining with us. They need to understand the danger of this as well. Yeah, the deputized state is a mercenary force. They're guns for hire, guns for hire to anybody. And so it isn't just U.S. corporations taking marching orders from the EU.

These people are guns for hire to anybody, as we saw with Elon Musk and the Chinese communists. Brother Ma, China fets pioneer Elon Musk with a 16-course dinner for promoting trust in communists. It's amazing to me. Again, people just bow down and scrape to billionaires. And part of this is what happens with media. I remember when I was at Infowars, how Alex Jones would always bow and scrape and grovel to Musk like he would to any billionaire that he meets,

hoping that he's going to get something from it. But of course, as he got slapped down by Musk, he's not on that train anymore. But it takes a lot of slapping down to get him away from the feeding trough when there's a billionaire around. I've seen it many times, the many different billionaires, and some of them not all that well-known. Musk culminated a trip to communist China on Thursday after meeting with a parade of China's most powerful communist party members, including Politburo members, enjoying a 16-course dinner. And I wonder what, you know, when you think about 16, my son's here on the board, when you think about a 16-course meal in China, that would give me some pause.

Because, you know, you got to have a wide variety of stuff. And one of the things when we were there, we saw some really crazy stuff on the menu. I wonder if they had fish lips, um, uh, even stranger things than that. We actually made up a little song to the tune of, uh, 12 days of Christmas. And the last one was, you know, and, uh, uh and a partridge with some congee. That was actually on the menu. You know, it was all menu items in China. That is the craziest stuff.

So, yeah, I'd be kind of worried if I was going to be eating at a 16-course dinner. I would say, well, you know, I'm actually, I already had something to eat, and I'm pretty full here, I think. Prior to his departure, Tesla faced a new scandal as an unknown whistleblower leaked a trove of private files showing that the company was struggling with, not fires, but phantom breaking and other dangerous glitches. He visited their gigafactory in Shanghai, took pictures with the team there. some of the 16 dishes

included geoduck with pickled cabbage now what is the difference with the geoduck it's like geofencing this is a duck that got out of the geofencing and got hit on the road by tesla i don't know um and a traditional noodle dish topped with rich soybean paste okay well you see it's not being the world's richest man sometimes ain't all it's cracked up to be on this chinese state control site a search for his name in chinese revealed a flood of laudatory comments declaring him, quote, comparable to Einstein. Well, no, he's actually probably more like Edison, who stole other people's ideas, including Tesla himself, right? And a friend of the Chinese state, Musk reclaimed the title of the world's richest man on Thursday. He's one of the most enthusiastic promoters of business with the Communist Party on the planet.

Repeatedly praising China as a trustworthy partner. The official Chinese newspaper, Global Times, repeatedly used the word trust. And its analysis of Musk's presence in the country. You know, quite frankly, I don't envy Elon Musk at all. I think he absolutely is clueless about the meaning of life. He just, in fact, I was talking about this with some friends at church, about how I just read this thing. He works 120 hours a day.

He said people who want to work from home are immoral and they need to be at the office and they need to be sacrificing like he does and all the rest of this stuff. And it's like, well, what's the purpose of this, right? What is the purpose of life for Elon Musk? You know, uh, what does it profit? What does it profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his own soul? Does he even know that he has a soul? Does he even acknowledge that there's a God? It's absolutely sad to see it, actually.

But that's where he is. Must display of trust is particularly important. What does he trust in? Well, We trust in his money, of course. Um, I said 120 hours. I thank you for, yeah, for correcting that. Yeah. He doesn't work 120 hours a week. Thank you. Uh, yeah, it's not, not possible. We would definitely know he's lying about that. I don't know how it's possible for him to work 120 hours a week. I mean, I work about a hundred and I don't know how I keep doing it. But, um, again, you know, we need to pull back and say, what is important in this stuff?

Um, so, uh, myself included. Must display of trust is particularly important after China's brutal lockdown and quarantine camp policies implemented during the COVID MacGuffin led many companies to consider outsourcing business from China to neighbors such as Vietnam and India. And so now he's there and now he trusts us. He's going to put more business here as all of you are pulling this back.

And yet the Chinese have started with the white lab coats and masks and tests again in Beijing and another area. They're not going to give this up. Why? Because there's so much power to be had. Going out and testing people with PCR stuff, you can find anything that you want. You can use that to exercise power over anybody. They did that in Shanghai. I think that was a big part of the turning point as well.

Where people finally see what I saw. In January of 2020, people saw that, what was it, last summer? Or I think where they were doing that in Shanghai or maybe the summer before that. They pulled it back again. I think it was last summer. Anyway, so one of the things he liked, he says, China rocks, in my opinion. The energy in China is great. People there, there's a lot of smart, hardworking people,

and they're really, they're not entitled, they're not complacent. Well, see, like all the rest of the globalist billionaires, one of the key things that he likes about China, a key part of China's, the China price and China's being able to compete, is slave labor. He loves slave labor. All able to compete is slave labor. He loves slave labor. All these billionaires love slave labor. Look at Jeff Bezos, how he treats his employees.

Oh, they love to have slave labor. And they're going to slit your throats as soon as they can get some machine to replace you as well. When you've been winning for too long, you sort of take things for granted. He said the United States, especially places like California and New York, you've been winning for too long, you sort of take things for granted. He said the United States, especially places like California and New York, you've been winning for too long. And when you've been winning for too long, you take things for granted. That's right.

We take our freedom for granted. We take our dignity for granted. And these people are going to take it away. And they have no problem telling us that. Um, yeah, my son says the energy in China is great. Yeah.

They don't have to work within the green nonsense. That's right. Yeah. They got lots of energy. They got electric energy. They got coal energy. They got oil energy. They got a lot of that stuff and they're building more of those to take

advantage of that kind of energy. Uh, but meanwhile, you know, Musk has said that Twitter has quote, no actual choice, unquote, but to comply with the government

censorship demands. That's right. Well, Microsoft is also going to be a part of that. They have, I've talked many times about the CCPA,

the Chinese Communist Party of America. No, actually, what it is is the Coalition for Content Providence and Authentication. And an adjunct to that, Microsoft put that together. It's hardware companies like Intel processors and things like that, as well as software companies. Adobe is at the lead. And then having as part of their ministry of truth adjuncts, they're going to rely on the New York Times and the BBC to tell them what is true. And then the people who are enemies of the state. And then they will mark with the software and also with the hardware.

Anybody who is an enemy of the state so that you can't upload stuff, make their job of censoring easier. Everything that you create, whether it's a text document or whether it is a picture, a meme, whether it is audio or whether it is audio and video as a video clip, all of that will have the ID on it. So if they want to censor David Knight, it'll be a lot easier. They just, you know, look at my computer, they associate that

with me, and then any of my content in any form can be stopped even before it's posted. That's where these people want to go with this stuff. And so Microsoft already has another tool. They've launched a new AI-powered censorship tool to detect inappropriate content in texts and images. They call it the Azure Content Safety Tool. It's been trained to understand many different languages, English, French, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, Chinese, and Japanese. It'll flag content with a severity score from one to a hundred, which will help moderators know which content to address. You see, the real minister of truth will be deep thought, a big artificial intelligence computer program that'll be ruling over all of us. It will look

at everything that we have to say and shut it down. As a matter of fact, they're already talking about how artificial intelligence will be used to shut down podcasts, which up to this point has been the hardest thing for them to shut down. You want to get on radio, things like that, of course, they can shut down your sponsors and make it difficult, if not impossible, for you to advertise. We're getting some of that now. But the other part of it is that they can just keep your podcast from even being propagated to some of these things. The only thing that's missing from that now is the fact that they don't label it. And I was just looking at a speaker where we log on.

I look at the different podcasts that they feature down at the bottom and they're all LGBT. You know, they have, um, uh, well, there's like one, I can't remember the title of it, but it's, uh, obviously, uh, Mormon lesbians, right. It was the podcast and stuff like that that's that's where it is it's all um uh left wing lgbt marxism racism all the rest of this stuff that's what they feature and so i'm looking at this and i'm saying as soon as they figure out what my content is i'm gone yeah nobody there that has uh anything that that says the same, you know, over the controversial topics of politics, religion, and things like that. Now, I'll be gone in a minute as soon as they figure out where that is. So again, The David Knight Show. Someday the podcast just disappears and no comment.

It isn't, as Alex said, hey, it just disappeared. It doesn't exist anymore. Well, you can disappeared. I don't know where, you know. It doesn't exist anymore. Well, you can always find me at thedavidknightshow.com if big tech does that to me to that extent. Azure AI content safety

is a commercialized version of the system powering the Bing chatbot and GitHub's AI-powered code generator copilot. And of course, they're going to put this out and charge the companies who want to censor.

They get charged 75 cents for 1,000 texts and $1.50 for 1,000 images. Spokesperson for Microsoft said, Microsoft has been working on solutions in response to the challenge of harmful content appearing in online communities for over two years. You see, they have NewsGuard, and they also have ElectionGuard.

They don't want any harmful information or any harmful politicians elected either, right? And, of course, both of those are tied in with the military-industrial complex. They get a lot of funding for both of those from DARPA. Yeah. Being AI runs on OpenAI's GPT-4. Yeah, that's right. Says my son. Yeah.

So there you go. There's your meet the new boss. Essentially the same as the old boss, but now it's going to be this deep thought computer. It'll be the ultimate in science and authority, the ultimate last source of what is true. It'll be a tyranny that'll be directed, you know, the czar of information and the czar of science and the czar of morality and all the rest of the stuff.

That'll be an AI robot, AI model. New AI models are able to understand content and cultural context so much better. They're multilingual from the start, and they provide clear, understandable explanations, allowing users to understand why content was flagged or removed. Now, as a matter of fact, just as a joke, we had this cup here, First Coffee, Then Save the World. And as a joke, I went on to chat GPT. I said, write a commercial for me about how coffee is a way to push back against climate change

and how everybody ought to drink more coffee because that'll expose the lies of climate change, or something like that, right? And it comes back, oh, climate, I can't do that. Climate change is real, and we can't joke about that and all the rest of this stuff, right? I just wanted to see what it would do. And it immediately comes back with this lecture, like it's some kind of Marxist professor in college,

because those are the people who put the biases in, the Marxist professors. That's what we're looking at here. We have a team of linguistic and fairness experts. Fairness experts. They're fairness experts. They don't say they're truth experts, but that's what they mean. That work to define the guidelines and then train the AI models to reflect these guidelines.

You know, these fairness experts are making less than minimum wage. They're the ones that are going in and labeling stuff. I had one of these tech sites was talking about that. I said, look at this. They're not even paying these people minimum wage and they're, they're the ones that they couldn't get this thing to work without them because they're going in and labeling the stuff. Well, some of the labeling is necessary, but that's also how they put in their bias stuff, right? Or they might go in and label, this is an orange, this is an apple, this is an orange,

this is an apple, you know? And, and so, apple. And then it shows it, it looks at this stuff over and over again, and that's how they train it. But they do the same thing to put the bias in. So, you know, when they have, you know, this is a person to be banned, they have my picture there instead of an apple or an orange. Billy Garr, thank you for the tip on Rumble. I appreciate it. Save the world. Support the David Knight Show. Well, thank you very much. I appreciate that. But these AI tools have been proven

to be flawed time and again, sometimes showing blatant bias that was deliberately put in there. It isn't like these things just organically came out. But anyway, they did have blatant bias that did organically come out. Some of these things in the past, and that's why they started putting people in to put their bias in, because they didn't want just any bias. It had to be my bias.

And France, they're going to be coming after influencers. Influencers. So this broadens this out to anybody on social media that they don't like. Influencers. Touted as an effort to ensure online personalities face the same advertising rules as

traditional media, the bill has made its way through Parliament with across party support since March. The bill has made its way through Parliament with across party support since March. The Socialist Party said the law of the jungle is over. I guess this guy must be the lying king. He is if he's out of the Socialist Party. We can be proud of this unprecedented agreement, said many of the parties who all agreed. France is estimated to have about 150,000 influencers, many of whom have a modest audience, but some have millions of subscribers and help to set trends. And so their commercial activities, they said, have to be declared.

But I think that this is really about speech. This is another tool, another justification for them to track and to punish certain speech. And you know how this is all going to be used. The party is over for those of you who think that you can cheat on the Internet. In the same way that when they come out and they say look you know we got to have uh we got to have id for people to go to adult websites on the internet it's like look i don't want kids going to those sites either but you understand this isn't going to do that. And it isn't even about that. This is about creating a justification to set up a structure to have ID in order to be able to use the Internet.

They want to get rid of anonymity. They don't want to protect kids. If they wanted to protect kids, they wouldn't be grooming them in the schools that they operate. Come on. It's ridiculous. So the French are coming after anybody who has any influence. And Cambridge University in England is now saying that Anglo-Saxons never existed. It was self-denial of a different kind.

They never existed as a distinct ethnic group. So do we have to dismantle the myths of English nationalism? They have to dismantle nationalism everywhere. They have to attack any organization, any tribes that they think are opposed to them. And they want to subsume everybody under this gray, uh, you know, um, as I've said many times, the people who call themselves multiculturalists. When I went to Europe, when I was in high school with a music group, I thought it was just amazing how varied all of the different cultures were not just in language, but in architecture, music and dress and all this other kind of stuff.

And you can already see a lot of homogenization, of course, especially in things like dress. But these tiny countries, by our standards, you go travel just a little ways on a bus, and all of a sudden you're in a completely different world. Well, the whole purpose of all this stuff that they say is about multiculturalism is to take everything down to, and I call it a gray culture because it is like China, you know, where everybody would walk around in pajamas, you know, because they don't own anything. But they want, it's a leveling of everything and it's a racing of multiple cultures. And so they're very intent. And they've been doing this now just for a couple of years. Cambridge's Department of Anglo-Saxon, Norse, and Celtic will now seek to dismantle itself. If only the federal government had some agencies that would do that. We have to dismantle the basis

of myths of nationalism. There never was a British, English, Scottish, Welsh, or Irish people. How about that? They just don't exist. You want to talk about 1984 and flushing things down the memory hole. Oh, let's just say there never was a British, English, Scottish, Welsh, or Irish people, never. And they have to do this because they have to be anti-racist. Well, I think they're anti-British, anti-English, Scottish, Welsh, and anti-Irish, all of those. They said one of the academics has now resigned from the back going back to 2019. Dr. Mary Ram Baron Olm.

She has a hyphenated last name that starts to tell you where she is. Resigned from the International Society of Anglo Saxonists over the inherent whiteness of the field. And she is not white. She went on to write that Anglo-Saxon myth perpetuates a false idea of what it means to be native to Britain and that the term is historically inaccurate. That's right. Britain itself is a figment of the imagination.

Britain itself must be erased, all of it, the geopolitical, the culture, the language, the music, the people. Everything has to be subsumed under a world government. And we'll call that multicultural after we erase all the cultures. There was no British people. You want to talk about what is not a myth? After we erase all the cultures. There was no British people. You want to talk about what is not a myth? What is not a myth is this idea of the Great Replacement.

They have a world governance of corporations and governments. Yeah, probably run by these spy creeps that just met in Singapore. The Shangri-La crowd. And they want to take us Singapore, the Shangri-La crowd. And they want to take us to their imagined Shangri-La, their utopia, where they run everything. Historically, the Anglo-Saxon period denotes the time between 450 and 1066 A.D. What happened in 1066 A.D.? The Battle of Hastings. The Norman conquerors came in.

During that period, Germanic peoples, Engels, Saxons, and Jutes arrived in Britain and established kingdoms that were consolidated into the kingdom of England in 927. This saw the development of the first iteration of the English language and the creation of epic poems like Beowulf. And so, again, that doesn't exist. That has to be flushed down the memory hole as well. I mean, if you can flush down, you know, Britain, the British, but there's no British people. Yeah. You can just flush down everything there, including the, um, the writings. So

influential were the Anglo-Saxons on modern British and American culture that the French and Russians used the term as shorthand for anybody who speaks English on both sides of the Atlantic. And so I guess then we can dispense anymore with this hatred of WASPs, right? White Anglo-Saxon Protestants. They don't exist anymore either, right? They hate the whites. They hate the Protestants. They hate Christians in general.

They hate Anglo-Saxon as well. So just erase all these things one at a time. They'd already taken off the white and the W and the P. South Africa, this is where we're headed. South Africa introduces race quotas for access to water. Again, you know, this is, um, yeah, Jack Lawson was, um, uh, he spent time in, in Africa. He knows what the Marxists and the communists are like. It's one thing Jack hates as communist. One of the reasons why, you know, he said that, Hey, this had come anywhere.

This, uh, civil defense manual civildefensemanual.com. And, of course, he's got a free chapter there on how to make sure that you've got access to water because that's the fundamental thing that you need to have. And so that's one of the reasons why the South African Marxists are coming after water, trying to take it away from white people. That's the way you kill them. They make no bones about it.

Of course, Anglo-Saxons don't exist, so I guess maybe the Marxists in South Africa say, well, the Boers don't exist. And of course they won't if they can, as they say in their rallies, he has these rallies chanting, kill the Boer, kill the white man. Seems the South African government is not satisfied with merely seizing land from white farmers stealing it.

They now have weaponized water, using it as a tool of hatred and of division. Introducing racial quotas on something that is literally a cornerstone of life. And it's so crazy of the people who have put this out on social media, on articles, even Newsweek, put pictures of the legislation there. And Twitter pushed back in their community notes thing and says, well, this hasn't been enacted yet. That's a defense. That's a defense. So, um, Newsweek said last month, this is Newsweek, uh, last month, the ruling African national Congress government published draft regulations that would implement race quotas for the allocation of water use licenses for businesses. I say, this is Newsweek, not because they have some kind of a monopoly on

truth or something. They're mainstream media, so you don't trust them. However, this is pushing them back against the kind of position that they would normally take. This is not something that aligns with their agenda. That's why it's important that Newsweek is saying this. They go on to say the proposal requires all applicants for consumptive water use where water is removed

from available supplies without return to a resource system. And what does that mean? I mean, if you are using this in your farm, it's going to be returned. I mean, it's going to be returned in the form of plants

and the water that's not used is going to go back down in the table and be reclaimed. Anyway, they say that they're going to allocate shares to black people based on the size of the land. Business owners wanting more water usage would need to have a higher share of black ownership. So is this retribution or is it reparations? Is there a difference?

No. On Thursday, the opposition leader of the Democrat Alliance said it's beyond all doubt that the ANC, led by Cyril Ramaphosa, is reintroducing racial discrimination across all sectors of society on a scale not seen since 1994. And this is not the way that you're going to fix a racist past. You're not going to fix that by putting in racist policies. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Bottom line. And I've talked to a guy who's in South Africa many times. I can't remember his name right now, but I've talked to him with the Boers and he was somebody who actually supported the ANC when they were fighting apartheid. And then he was amazed to see that, actually they weren't against racism they just wanted to be on top and uh you know so it's very much like you see with the feminists as well you know they're not against sexism they just want to be the ones in charge we'll take a quick break and be right back. Thank you. You're listening to The David Knight Show. Audi MRR says,

As a black man, even I'm sick of the perpetual anti-white narratives that the predator class is trying to make a thing. When I moved to Nashville in the 70s, I made my first white friends, and darn it, white folks are awesome. I'll add that conservatives are far more consistent in their values. Well, I agree. It is sad to see this. It is not a healing thing. It's about division, and that's the sad thing about it. But of course, there's an overarching agenda about all of this. They want us fighting against each other so they can steal everything from both of us. They want us in a civil war. They want us in a race war. I've said many times that going back to Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dorn, the Weather Underground, they realized that

they were not going to have a successful Marxist revolution based on economic divisions and class warfare, but they could with race war. And so they started to popularize white skin privilege. Now they just call it white privilege. But that was what they went to. And then after, you know, his politically connected daddy got him off the hook for the bombings and things like that, they decided that they would move into education. And so right there in Chicago with Obama and the rest of them. Anyway, that's the bigger background of all this stuff.

Now, U.S. farmland became a battleground in the fight against China. China has been spending trillions of dollars to take over the crown jewels of the U.S. economy, said Trump in a campaign video. To protect our country, we need to enact aggressive new restrictions on Chinese ownership of any vital infrastructure in the U.S., including energy, technology, telecommunications, farmland, natural resources, medical supplies, other strategic national assets. But again, understand that both the left and the right in this country are pushing real hard to demonize China in every way. And of course they deserve it,

but you have to understand there's an alternative motive here that is not in our best interest. It isn't like they're trying to protect us. They're trying to get us into a war is what they're trying to do. Governor DeSantis signed multiple bills this month that prohibit Chinese citizens from purchasing land in the state. Last month, the North Carolina House passed a bill that would ban the governments of foreign adversaries from purchasing agricultural land, as well as any land within 25 miles of a military installation. And look, I'm not saying that I disagree with that. I'm just saying that, you know, when you talk about the Chinese spy balloon, for example. That's a good example of how they are manufacturing a threat. This, I think, however, is a real threat.

We do not want to have the farmlands picked up by the Chinese, but it's bigger than that. And RFK Jr. talks about how it's also Wall Street. Because why? Because right now they're flush with cash. The Federal Reserve has been, you know, they run their quantitative easing and all the rest of this stuff. They run it through the stock market. So these people got a lot of cash.

What are they going to invest it in? Do they want to stick it in the banks that may fail? No, they want to buy land with it. As I was saying last week, the number two investment that people have turned to, in other words, the safety, is gold. What's the number one? Land. What is Wall Street doing with all their massive amounts of dollar bills? They want to convert it into land. And that is as big a threat to our country as foreign governments buying that land.

Chinese ownership of U.S. farmland has increased five-fold over the past decade, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture data. From 69,000 acres in 2011 to almost 384,000 acres in 2021. That amounts to about 1% to 3% of U.S. farmland owned by foreign nationals. The rate of increase has not been even. A large portion of the increase came from a single purchase in 2013 when the Chinese company bought Smithfield Foods, the largest pork producer in the U.S.

And that was a concern, and remains really, a concerning interest, interest really about that. But then there's something else that hits closer to home. And that is the Green New Deal in terms of, you know, sequestering carbon dioxide. The most ridiculous thing out of a slew of ridiculous things that I've seen over 50 years, the idea that we need to sequester carbon dioxide, the very source of life for plants. I mean, if you want to stop plants from going to take away the carbon dioxide. And that's what they're going to do. And there's a company that is going to feed at the trough in Washington, D.C. with green subsidies. This company is called Summit Carbon Solutions. They want to seize property and use it

to build a carbon capture pipeline that will transport CO2 emissions from Iowa to North Dakota to be stored underground. What an amazing waste of money and time and energy and engineering when we have roads that are collapsing. Of course, they don't want us to have cars. And when they're telling us that we have to shut down our farms and the rest of this stuff, you've got one guy whose farm has been in his family

for four generations, now in trouble with this company, Summit Carbon. Because, and listen to this, this is so egregious. This is, again, far worse than anything that is being done by China. Will Trump or the rest, or DeSantis or any of these people, will they come out and oppose these green Grinches or whatever you want to call them that are going around? They're actually

going out and surveying the property that belongs to these farmers that has been in their family for generations. They're surveying it to see if they want to steal it. And I mean steal it with eminent domain. The government is going to just let this corporation, the corporations out there sniffing around, shopping around, surveying, deciding which parts of whose property they want to steal. And then the government's going to steal it for them and hand it over to them from these people. And so in one of these instances, and this was posted by Greg Price,

and he put up the video on it. The men in the video are surveyors from Summit, the corporation. They entered his home and his shop before going onto his farm to survey the land, all without permission, while only his wife was at home. They later falsely accused him of threatening to kill them. He talked to them for six seconds on a speakerphone about how the sheriff should be there when they do it. And they're taking him to court to get a restraining order so he can't be on his

property when they come back. Can you imagine that? And this is in South Dakota, where Kristi Noem is. So what's she doing about this? Nothing. She doesn't care. Who's going to talk about this, even? The presidential candidates. So the farmer, says Greg Price, tells me that surveyors from the company

have shown up to South Dakota farms without permission, some of them with armed security guards, like something straight out of blazing saddles and have threatened the land owners who haven't agreed. To give up their property. The Republican leadership in South Dakota has also abandoned them in the last legislative session bills to protect landowners from eminent domain from summit failed governor Kristi Noem has done nothing. Why? Bills to protect landowners from eminent domain from summit failed.

Governor Kristi Noem has done nothing. Why? Because summit has connections to massive GOP donors. They're also bankrolled by large investments, some of which are foreign, as well as benefit from massive federal tax credits for carbon capture expanded by Biden's Inflation Reduction Act. Meanwhile, South Dakotans whose farms have been in their families for generations, who have put their blood, sweat, and tears into their land, are now facing them being seized and ruined for the green energy grift.

Hmm. Seems like I remember Donald Trump doing that in 2020, right? People put their blood, sweat, and tears on their small business. They were told it was non-essential. And we're going to shut you down. There's nothing you're going to do about it. And so that's what they're doing with this. We don't want farms.

And we've got to capture all the CO2. You see how it's really the same agenda that's happening in the Netherlands. It's just on a different end of it. We're going to all the CO2. You see how it's really the same agenda that's happening in the Netherlands. It's just on a different end of it. We're going to capture the CO2. We're going to pump it here. And we got to get you to get out of the way for a pipeline. See, that was a problem that I had with the Keystone XL pipeline. The fact that they were giving a company the right to go through and take farmland for their pipeline.

But at least that I was in favor of the pipeline. It was a safe, effective way to transport energy that we need to have. But I didn't like the eminent domain aspect of it. It was a few years ago that we had the Kello case in Connecticut where they said the government can confiscate property, not for common use of building a road or something like that. And that's bad enough. I don't, you know, I don't like eminent domain mainly because they typically don't even give people compensation for their property, even at a fair market value, but certainly not for any additional compensation for inconvenience or things like that. But I don't support an

eminent domain because of issues like that. But when you talk about taking property from little people and giving it to big business simply because you can. I think that is a special kind of evil. And then what they did was they ramped it up with a Keystone XL pipeline. Said we'll give that power to condemn to this Canadian corporation. What? And so now here we are with something that is a totally useless use of the land to pump CO2 across.

Just let the plants have it. Just give it to the plants. They'll convert it to, they'll grow with it. They'll give off oxygen as a by-product. You don't need to store it underground. It's the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen out of this whole farce of saying, we're going to capture unicorn farts and all the rest of us. We're all going to die.

We got to take away everything from you. We're all going to die. All the CO2 or methane or whatever. It's like, come on. It's so ridiculous. Anyway. Meanwhile, South Dakota and Seuss farms have been in their families for generations who put their blood sweat and tears on the land are now facing having it seized and being ruined for this green energy grift and that's exactly what it is Greg Price is right

so when you look at what is happening it's also a new American has picked up the story and South Dakota farmers face carbon capture land theft. They just do it differently here. And the Netherlands, they just steal it. We're the government. We can do whatever we want. And we're getting pretty close to that here. But they'll typically use corporations to steal the stuff from you. That's why I said people say, well, you know,

the difference between Trump and Biden is that Biden will mandate these vaccines for you. And it's like, and you think that the Republicans won't do the same thing, coercing you through corporations. Sorry, you can't go anywhere, have anything, do anything, be out in public. If you don't do what the corporations say,

we're going to run it through the corporation. So anyway, farmers in South Dakota facing egregious intimidation tactics. And they picked up the story from Greg Price and went a little bit further back with it. So they went onto his property, started setting up their surveying tripod. By that time, he was on the phone, confronted them, asked them to leave. And he said the sheriff should be present if the company wanted to be on his land.

So they left. His wife called him back later in the day to say that a detective had just left the farm. They had left the farm and said, he's threatened to kill us. And so they took him to court. What happened in court? In the county court, the judge ruled in favor of the landowner, but he warned other farmers don't interfere with this corporation. They're going to do whatever they want to do.

Threatened sanctions if they do. See, we've got to organize at the local level. State's not going to do anything to help these people. Washington, they don't care. He's one of more than 80 landowners in South Dakota facing eminent domain lawsuits from Summit, the corporation. In April, a Fifth Circuit judge granted the company's motion to conduct surveys of all land along their planned pipeline corridor, even private property. And so, as part of the testimony, some of the farmers who showed up, one of them said,

why do they, the corporation, why do they have armed people standing in the middle of the road with guns so that people can't go onto their own property? I served 32 years in foreign countries, so this would not happen in America. I understand that when a car comes down the road, this bunch of mafia, or whatever they are, with guns, unsnap their guns and put their hands on their guns.

This is America. That crap should not be happening here. It's almost like we're turning into a communist country. Well, no, it's actually fascist. A merger of corporations and government. And the global governance will be corporate, fascist, a public-private partnership to put you into permanent poverty. Pick a peck of pickled peppers.

Anyway, carbon capture is a process that traps carbon dioxide produced by ethanol plants and pipes it to remote locations for underground storage. I mean, this is insanity on top of insanity. The ethanol stuff, right? Oh, well, you know, we're going to force everybody to put ethanol into their cars. And even the green grifting crazies like Al Gore said, this is not a good use. We should be using that stuff for food. But that is what is happening. So they, out of the greenness of their hearts, they create ethanol plants. Now the ethanol plants are going to take the carbon dioxide, which is a good thing. And they're going to spend all this money and effort to

transport it to another state and pump it into the ground to store it there. Absolute insanity. These companies are for-profit enterprises, and they stand to gain a federal tax credit of $50 per ton of CO2 sequestered. One of these companies alone, Navigator, is looking at a $750 million tax credit for what it plans to transport. See, these people are stealing us blind, not just the land. They're stealing money from the government. And because there's so much power in Washington and so much money in Washington,

it has become a black hole of corruption, and all these green grifters are going there. But it has definite consequences for these farmers, like Bosley and like Robinson, the two that spoke up. They see through the smoke screen. They call it what it is, one of the largest private land grab schemes in American history. The judge refused to get to the heart of the issue, even though he, some people look at

this and said, all right, he didn't do it. They accused him of threatening to kill them. And the judge says, no, we're not going to do anything about that. But he warned all the farmers, you better let them on your property. Get out of their way. Let them do whatever. It's not your property anymore. And, of course, it isn't our property as long as we've got to pay property taxes.

We're just renting it from the government. The government is the landlord, and the government says, hey, these people get to do what they want. My son says the people who want the government to control every aspect of our lives call themselves anti-fascist. The most racist people call themselves anti-racist. That's right. That's right. That's right. Because that works. You got a really stupid little car. What do you do? You call it a smart car. You got a city that you've got an idea of a city that's going to surveil and control everything

everybody does. You call it a smart city. Well, it's a smart city for people who are going to be dumb slaves. That's what it is. Virtual Gypsy. So they took people's farms for this back in like 2021, and they're only going to pay them like renting them for a limited amount of time. Yeah. Yeah, they'll destroy it and say, okay, here it is. It's yours now. Yeah. And I guess I have to pay property taxes on it too.

Anyway, the judge refused to get to the heart of the issue. The fact is that Summit lied about the threat. They committed breaking and entering. Summit and its surveyors are the ones who should be charged with crimes, but they got off. The judge also warned us, all landowners in the room room not to impede his order to allow the surveyors to continue so why are landowners getting lectured and not summit now we landowners are left with having to deal with summit which is allowed to break laws without being held to account which takes us to this story about the revolt of the farmers.

Like I said, in Netherlands, the government just doesn't use the beard of a corporation. They don't have to use the deputized state. They just do it themselves. So Jamie Blackett is writing for the, it's thefp.com, Freedom Project, I think it is. Anyway, the Dutch have a particular horror of fascism, he says. They bravely resisted the Nazis during the Second World War as a German occupation of the Netherlands. They cut off food and fuel shipments.

And they had what was called the Hunger Winter, which lasted from 1944 until the Allies liberated the Netherlands in 1945. During that time, at least 22,000 Dutch people died from malnutrition. Well, guess what? Now the Nazis dress in green, not in gray. And if you look at this plan for world domination, it is a war, no doubt about it. We had the COVID war, the climate wars,

all these different wars against us. But they're economic now. They're economic. So the World Economic Forum, Bilderberg, all the rest of these people. So he says that experience branded the national character of the Netherlands with a strongly libertarian streak. It also explains why post-war the Netherlands created the most successful

agricultural economy on the planet out of the ruins. Well, of course, you know, when you look at was a strongly libertarian streak, but there can be had just like anybody else. I remember back in the 1990s, Netherlands was one of the first places where they started putting license plate readers for the tolls. And the people in Netherlands said, no, we're not going to have that. We don't want the government tracking our whereabouts.

That's a violation of our privacy because it's a surveillance system that you're setting up here. And this was the early 1990s. At the time, they said, you know, when the Nazis came in, our government had this habit of keeping records on everybody about everything, and they had three-by-five cards where they wrote down everything they knew about everybody. And they were packed so thick in these drawers that when the Nazis came in

blitzkrieg lightning fast, people ran in because they didn't want that information to get in the hands of the Nazis. So they would know the types of things that our government is doing now with geospatial intelligence. We're going to identify the politics and the religion and everything else of people. You know, that's what geospatial intelligence is about. Well, the Netherlands had already done it.

They didn't have any sinister reasons for using that. But of course, if it's there, somebody who has a sinister motivation can make use of it. So they went there to burn the records, but they couldn't do it. You know, set fire to the records facility, but the records were so packed. They were like a log. And so the Nazis got all those three by five cards and they started rounding people up. And so they said, we don't want that to happen again. And so they fought it for a couple of years and then they gave in. And this is the way that it goes throughout Western civilization. We understand a few people understand what the issue is and they'll fight it for a short period of time.

And then they wind up giving up because the vast majority of the fellow citizens don't get it. That's why we have to persist. Though smaller than the state of West Virginia, the Netherlands became the world's second biggest exporter of food after the United States. And despite the temperate climate, farmers have developed a thriving fruit and vegetable industry,

including growing bananas in greenhouses. Not even damp lands have held them back. Dutch engineering has allowed productive farming to flourish below sea level. There is a floating dairy farm in Rotterdam Harbor that provides the city with milk, butter, and yogurt while shoring up flood resistance. And the person writing this article, Jamie Blackett, says, as a dairy farmer myself in Scotland, I'm inspired by what my fellow farmers have pulled off.

Initially, the Dutch were enthusiastic early members about what became the European Union, driven by determination that a war on the continent should never happen again, but they're in the midst of a war. This is an economic warfare. This is economic warfare of the neo-Nazis, of the New World Order, of Bilderberg, of Davos, of the EU, which was its creation. And that's what they're in right now. Farmers feel that they're being scapegoated, even though they farm efficiently. Nitrogen emissions in the Netherlands have fallen 50% since 1990, while airlines and other emitters show little resistance in the face of climate change.

I'm sorry, not resistance. They show little restraint. In other words, the airlines and other people who are as big or bigger than the farms are not doing anything. Farmers have actually tried to comply with this. What's the lesson here? The lesson is you can't comply your way out of tyranny. That's what this is about. These people can't see the forest for the trees.

They can't understand that this is not about emissions. This is about omissions. They want to omit ownership of property. They want to omit food because they want to omit people. This is about killing people everywhere. This, uh, these unicorn farts are just an excuse, and they don't understand it. This is why, again, we can talk about it from the standpoint, you know, this is going to actually, you say that this is what you're concerned about. Do you realize that this is actually counterproductive?

And we should have that discussion, but we should never talk about any of the stuff that they're doing without saying, I know, by the way, this problem that you're trying to solve isn't a problem. All your predictions for the last 50 years have been dead wrong over and over again. You're worried about carbon dioxide? All sources, natural and man-made, that is only 0.04% of the air. So what about the other 99.6%? 99.96%. RFK Jr.

One more thing before we take a break here about the farms. And he's right about this. He said, Wall Street and China are turning American farms into corporate fiefdoms and let me just say this the bigger threat to us right now is wall street it's a bigger threat than china is when it comes to this stuff um so it's uh it's interesting when rfk jr talks about climate he pulls back and says well you, the problem with all this pollution is that we're subsidizing oil companies and fossil fuel companies

and all this kind of stuff, right? And we just need to stop that. Well, what about all of the green subsidies that are out there? They're pretty much unlimited. And, you know, Democrats will look at this and say, corporations are evil. And so that's an easy call for RFK to make as a Democrat. No, it's corporations, they're evil.

But it's also corporations that are on the green side that are getting unlimited subsidies from this Inflation Reduction Act, as we will see here in a minute. But corporations, and then of course the libertarians and conservatives will say, well, corporations are not evil. They have to please their customers, right? Yeah, greed is good, right? They tell us. Because even if they're motivated out of greed, they will still do things to maximize their product or service for the greatest number of people. And they will be held to account by the marketplace and the consumers.

Is that what we're seeing now? Is that what we see with ESG? All this pride stuff. Is that what we saw with the vaccine mandates? You know, these people were going to shut the hospitals down if the staff didn't get the vaccines. How does that make any sense? How does that serve anybody's interest? How does that serve the corporation's interest in terms of even making a profit, let alone providing medical care to people. But no, after operating in the so-called COVID pandemic for a year and a half,

they were going to then, almost a year and three quarters, they were then going to require all of a sudden, nobody could work in a hospital unless you had the new vaccine. Gotta have it, or we're just going to shut the whole place down. Their stated purpose for existence, to provide a service or to entertain, to give something to the customer base, to the market that the marketplace wants, that doesn't apply anymore. They've got one customer. That one customer is government. The only customer they're interested in serving is government.

How does a vaccine mandate that's going to shut down the hospitals and fire the nurses and the doctors, how does that serve their agenda to even make a profit, let alone to provide medical care? It doesn't. But they're serving the government. The government is the only one that they're concerned about serving. So we have to understand the corporations are evil once they become deputies of the state and we have seen that over and over again we saw it even before the lockdowns we saw it with speech that type of thing

and of course now we're seeing it with all the pride stuff you know why is bud light and target and all because that's what their customer, the government, wants. So RFK Jr. says this is a farmland buying spree. Wall Street hedge funds in China are turning American farms into corporate fiefdoms. Yes, it is a new kind of medieval servitude that they want to get us into. They want to take everything away from us so that we're just sharecroppers on the land type of thing. Own nothing.

And of course, take your property, North Dakota farmers, multiple generations. You know that quote, and I don't know who said it. Some people attribute it to Jefferson, but there's questions about that. But regardless of who said it and when it was said, it is absolutely true that if we allow central bankers to run, to operate, we'll wind up homeless on the continent that our forefathers conquered.

And that's what you see right here with this. In 2021, as Breitbart News reported, Chinese investors bought up $6.1 billion worth of U.S. housing, real estate, and land. And so RFK Jr. said, Farmland buying spree by Wall Street mammoth hedge funds and China are turning America's and globe's agricultural landscapes into corporate fiefdoms and farmers into serfs. Many people do not understand that small farms actually outproduce large industrial farms.

That's what you see happening in the Netherlands. And that's why they want to shut them down, because they want to starve us. That's why I played, I think it might even still be pinned. No, it's not pinned on my Twitter account. But that interview that I did with a farmer out of South Africa, actually he's out of, I think, Zimbabwe. And the guy was looking at it, and he had typical industrial farming techniques, and he goes, this just isn't working.

And he was a Christian, and he said, you know, God, show me another way. And he's looking around, and he notices how fertile the area is and how all these things are growing. There's nobody planting or tilling and doing things like that. And as he looked more, he realized that he didn't need to do as much to disturb the land as much, that his intensive farming was actually counterproductive. And so he started doing less intensive farming and his yields went up significantly. And then the communists came along and said,

we're going to confiscate your farm because you're white. And he said, well, there's a couple of different ways you could respond to it. Most people either fled or they fought. And the ones who fought died. But he said he decided that he would stay there, give them his farm, and then show them how to farm it. And then he used that to talk to them about Christ. And a perfect example of what Christ said.

You know, if they ask you for your cloak, you give them that, shirt off your back type of thing, right? And so he was very successful in a lot of ways. Anyway, China owns nearly 384,000 acres of American farmland. And yet I think that the bigger issue, of course, is Wall Street and Big Agra. Senator Tom Cotton and Katie Britt have filed legislation months ago that would ban Chinese nationals and Chinese companies from buying and owning real estate in the U.S. The legislation and its nearly identical bill in the House does not have any Democrat co-sponsors.

Isn't that interesting? So RFK is right to talk about this as being an issue. He's also right to include the bigger issue of the hedge funds being in this. And that should be something that could get the attention of at least the grassroots Democrats. The Democrat politicians are all going to be owned by these hedge funds uh so we're going to take a quick break and we're going to come back before we do uh talking about these farms a syrian girl said the south african marxists who are trying to kill the whites are really plotting to kill the black people do you right and starve them to death uh the farms and businesses that they're

shutting down sustain blacks as well as whites. They want to be the only ones left after everyone dies. And that is really what we, that is a microcosm of what we're seeing globally, isn't it? Right? They really want,

when they want to shut down the farms, they're doing that to kill everybody. They may use racist justifications. They may talk about unicorn farts or whatever, but they want to kill people. That's the bottom line. Uh, a woots.

Thank you very much for the tip on rumble. I appreciate that. I suspect that Bill Gates purchased a significant amount of farmland for future carbon sequestering contracts. Probably. Yeah, probably. Cause he doesn't like farming.

He wants people to eat bugs and lab meat, you know, that type of thing. And Lone Wolf, they need to run a pipeline out of D.C. We could warm every home for free with all that hot air. Yeah, you're right. We'll be right back. ¶¶ In a world of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. You're listening to The David Knight Show. Well, we have an ex-Biden economic official.

In terms of talking about the Inflation Reduction Act, which doesn't reduce inflation, doesn't reduce government spending, it actually is going to be an unlimited entitlement program for any corporation that wants to get into the green bucks that are going to be flowing out of Washington. This is one of the reasons why I think it is now RFK jr. Says, yeah, there's a lot of crony capitalism going on with a fossil fuel industry and we need to stop that. And then everything will take care of itself.

No, it's actually even worse and it's going to be much, much worse with a green, uh, crony capitalism. On MSNBC, you had a former Biden White House National Economic Council director, Brian Deese, reacted to projected cost overruns in the Inflation Reduction Act's green provisions. He said, quote, people have been fundamentally asking the wrong question when they ask how much will it cost? The question should be how much clean energy investment can these incentives actually produce in the country? He said the only way the cost of the

Inflation Reduction Act goes up is if we have significantly more investment in clean energy projects and solving climate change and creating jobs. But see, the government doesn't invest. The government taxes. The government redistributes. The government makes us indebted servants. They always talk about this as being an investment. No, no, it's an expenditure.

It's just a big expenditure. Anyway, so the more that we can build clean energy infrastructure, the better. In other words, the more money we can spend, the better, because this is a cloward and piven welfare state. That's why the borders are open. They want to bankrupt us. But of course, in this particular case, they want to channel money to their green sponsors, their green patrons. Chris Hayes said, well, there's no limit to these things. The credits are just there. And if more people want to use them, we have more investment. How worried are you about what's happening in terms of those incentives and that investment? You see, it's just like any other welfare program. It's a gigantic welfare program for anybody who wants to get into the green game. It's an entitlement program. You just have to, there's no limit. They don't say, well, you know,

we're not going to spend more than X amount of dollars. We've earmarked this amount. First number of people that get to that thing, then we've got to cut it off. No, it's just like, if you, if you have a project that qualifies within these broad guidelines, then we will fund it, right? If you come, we will fund it. So he says, so what's the deal with it? There's no limits on this. Anybody who shows up with a plan can get the money. And so Brian D says, well, yeah, you're right.

People have been fundamentally asking the wrong question, though, which is how much will it actually cost? That's the wrong question. We don't care about how much it costs, you see. I have to tell you, over the course of the last nine months, I've been surprised. The top end of my expectation, in terms of what we're seeing around the country, you said that you haven't seen this, and I haven't seen this in my professional lifetime either. The opportunity is much greater than we anticipated when we passed this law, which is good news, because the only way the cost of the Inflation Reduction Act goes up

is if we've got significantly more people investing, no, taking, taking money for energy projects. The appetite is only limited by how much clean energy investment can we attract to the United States. You see, this is not even for domestic corporations. Anybody. Any takers. Come on in. Yeah, we're open for business and we're handing out wads of cash. There's no other limit than that, he said.

So you see, there's no limit on green spending. This is how Musk became the richest man in the world. You see, the problem I have is that RFK is disingenuous when he ignores this part of the green stuff, when he ignores crony capitalism and green projects and only focuses on crony capitalism and these other things.

And oh, by the way, at least the crony capitalism going to the so-called fossil fuels, and again, that's a nonsense construct that was created by the CIA and their peak oil nonsense. But, uh, at least those people are producing energy. Uh, the green people, energy that works, energy that is really sustainable. Uh, because, you know, if your windmills turn on and off and they fall over and just like, you know, just like, like anything else, it doesn't last forever. People look at this. Oh, well, we put up solar power. We got free energy forever.

No, your solar panel doesn't last forever. Your windmill doesn't last forever. And now we've got Lala Harris. And I played the clip of her just getting all excited about school buses. Yes. The bus, the school bus. Yeah. yeah, that's a thing, yeah. Well, you know, the $200 billion electric school bus bust. This is from the Epoch Times. Again, Lala Harris wants electric school buses everywhere. She loves buses in general. And, you know, we have this massive fleet of school buses,

which I thought was really kind of strange. That for the longest time, nobody ever talked about what a squandering that is of money and of fuel and of our students' time, you know, to have the buses constantly busing people from one end of the district to another. They'll kill the cows, but they won't kill the school buses. How about that? Maybe that's it.

We should paint the cows yellow. Because, you know, school buses don't have to have airbags or seatbelts or any of that other kind of stuff, right? You just paint them yellow. And you say it's against the law to hit them. And you're done. No problem at all. But now they're concerned about it because now it's an opportunity for another green grift. And so this is an interesting article from the Epoch Times because he does some of the math in this.

And I've always wondered about how many school buses there were. Well, he says there's about a half a million school buses transporting children to and from school to and from ball games and other events, nearly every school day. Uh, they want, they said with a billion dollars, they want to purchase 2,500 electric school buses and 391 school districts.

Okay. Well, 2,500, we're talking about 500,000. That's just the tip of this iceberg. He said, by simple calculation, this suggests that if you want to spend a, if you want to do this everywhere, it's going to cost you $200 billion to go with an electric school bus.

Just to replace the currently existing, currently working school buses. And, um, if you don't do that by 2030, Lala Harris says the kids will die. We're getting really close to this doomsday dateline that they've got here. Uh, it's only seven years off. They're going to do something drastic. Seriously. They're going to do something drastic. this doomsday dateline that they've got here. It's only seven years off. They're going to do something drastic. Seriously, they're going to do something drastic.

Try to speed this up. So he writes, do factories, batteries, and other raw materials exist to build or even to retrofit 500,000 school buses and every other vehicle in America today by 2030 or even by 2050? Does that much money exist? Does that much electricity exist? Well, again, the intention was never to get you to comply with this because this is simply a MacGuffin to get what they want. And you have to ask, what is it that you really want?

The demand for mostly leftist school boards is out there. Nearly 2,000 school districts applied for the free money last year, pushing the demand so high. Again, they're going to help 391 school districts, but they had 2,000 of them that wanted this. Pushing the demand so high that the EPA had to double the amount of funding from its initial pledge of $500 million. Well, what is the EPA doing out there designing and building school buses?

See, this is mission creep by a bunch of creeps in Washington. The EPA's Clean School Bus Program awards a total of $5 billion over the next five years. So that could get them up to 12,500 buses. They've only got 487,000 left to go, right? 12,000 out of 500,000 buses. Uh, but again, they're only going to do some of this. The rest of the charge is going to be paid by local taxpayers. And it's another way to push us off of our land, right? You know, what's happening when a company shows up with surveyors and, um, yeah, $4 billion over the next five years is what it is. Um, so, um, well, actually it says here $5 billion over the next five years. Anyway, um, the, um, when you, when you see somebody out there surveying your land and they got guys with

guns and they're threatening you that they're going to take your land, and you better leave them alone, well, that's right in your face about it. But if you're going to spend trillions of dollars on school buses, not all of this money is going to come from Washington. A lot of it is going to be sourced locally. Washington can say, you've got to do this, or we're going to take money that you've gotten used to away from you. And so then what they'll do rather than have that happen, they'll steal more money from the local people to pay for it,

because that's where schools are typically mostly funded from, is local property taxes. And you don't see that itemized if you're renting, but you're paying it nevertheless. So that means that even if you're not a homeowner, you're going to see the cost go up significantly. And so what are we talking about here? This is why I think this article is interesting. Even the smaller school buses cost $50,000. The big ones cost $100,000. And they said, however, when you,

this is the diesel school buses that we have now, $50,000 to $100,000, depending on size. The electric school buses are going to be $250,000 for the small ones, and they're going to be $320,000 to $440,000 for the big ones. So the big ones are going to be three to four times the cost of a diesel bus. And the smaller ones are going to be five times the cost. So what are we looking at here? Remember he said there's about a half a million school buses, 500,000 of them. Well, if you multiply 500,000 school buses by 50,000.

That means that over a period of time, we've already spent $25 trillion on these things, but we're going to, they want to buy the more expensive ones, the ones that are going to be three times, four times, or five times that amount of money. So we could be spending up to $125 trillion just on school buses to make them

electric. Even though we've already spent $25 trillion to get them. Those all have to be just scrapped. And now let's spend another $125 trillion to get all new models. And we had to do that in seven years by 2030, according to Lala. And thank you, Lone Wolf. That is really kind. That's very generous on Rumble. I appreciate that.

And it says, David, God bless. Well, thank you very much. You've been a blessing to us. So where's all this money going to come from? And then there's other issues. This article from Zero Hedge says, well, you know, it's not just the cost of the buses themselves, but it's also the charging infrastructure that has to be put in.

There's also the fact that these things weigh, these big buses weigh 36,000 pounds because of all the batteries that are there. So the tires are going to have to be changed more frequently. The tires on the buses are about $3,000 per set. And these things are going to have to be changed a lot more frequently because it's a lot of extra weight on these buses. But they don't even talk about, in this article on Zero Hedge,

they don't even talk about the fire issue. on Zero Hedge, they don't even talk about the fire issue. I think that's the biggest issue of all. You know, even though they've painted them yellow and covered them with laws, you still have school buses involved in accidents. What happens when you have an accident, the battery is compromised, and it starts a fire? With that many and large batteries, are you going to be able to get all those kids out in time before they burn to death?

And we've seen this is not theoretical. We have seen over and over again cities that have gone to electric buses and they have stopped that. France was one. Germany was another one. Germany, as a matter of fact, they had, uh, both of them having bus fires. I've shown videos of spontaneous combustion of a French bus. This happened several times and they just said, all right, we're done. We're done.

We're not going to do this anymore. In Germany, they had spontaneous combustion at a bus depot, burned all the buses and all the buses catching fire. It burned down the entire depot. And that was in Stuttgart, I believe. And they had another big fire in Munich and they said, okay, we're done now. In Canada, they had electric buses put in in one city and they said, no, we're having problems with fires. So they retrofitted them back to diesel. And so here we go. Virtual gypsy.

Wichita electric transit bus just caught fire with people on board. So that is the biggest issue right there. These lithium batteries. And we've seen it over the years, right? We've seen Samsung had an issue with this for a while, you know, and it was very dangerous even though it was a small battery the size of a phone. When you scale this thing up to the size of a bus, it's a really big issue, and they don't even talk about that aspect of it. They're talking about replacing the tires.

They're talking about the infrastructure in Dallas, in the Dallas Independent School District. They have about 860 buses. To replace the entire fleet with large diesel buses, it would cost them about $86 million to get the electric models. But those 860 buses, I'm sorry, it costs $86 million for the diesel ones. To get 860 battery-operated ones, they'd just trash that $86 million they've already invested, and they'd have to spend another $275 million.

And that doesn't include the cost of charging stations or of retraining mechanics and on and on. So it's over three times as many taxpayer dollars that the school district will have to extract from voters. And this is a way of making us homeless in our own country. Yeah, taxes are so high I can't afford even renting an apartment anymore because, again, the taxes are going to be passed along by the landlords to you. You're just not going to get an itemized statement about it. In Ann Arbor, Michigan, they learned recently that the electric school buses they bought have a lot of downtime

and performance issues and, quote, aren't fully on the road. Moreover, the infrastructure upgrades that they need for these buses, which were estimated at $50,000, are going to wind up being more like $200,000, but they're not yet done yet, so they don't really have a figure on that yet. And so the electric buses, they said, well, Lala Harris is silent, but so we got to do this to save the lives of the kids. Yeah. Money is no object for the people in Washington. Uh, but what about the kids that are losing their lives mining these things, right? Like the cobalt mines in Africa. Of course that doesn't matter to Lala Harris because, you know, those kids are just in Africa. Who cares? That's the way these people think. The amount of energy needed to keep children warm, again, could exceed the amount of energy

used to move the bus along on cold days. So you say, all right, we'll just make them dress like they're going to be outside the whole time they're in a school bus. Well, what about a basketball or hockey team that's going to take a trip across the state? Charging the battery for an electric school bus takes up to eight hours using AC power, but with a diminished range in cold weather,

taking kids on long bus trips for any purpose might require an extra day on the road in each direction. Well, you may not even be able to charge it. We've had a couple of reports about that. Eric Peters did one. Somebody else did another one. They said, well, it was cold, and I know, I plugged the thing in even at one of these supercharger stations.

And it says, well, we're waiting for the battery to warm up so I can start putting the charge in and it could never warm the battery up. And so he didn't get any charging. And Eric Peters had the same issue. So again, this article by Dugan Flanagan, but he forgot about the fires. He forgot about the bus fires. And I guess, you know, so did Lala, but she forgets about a lot of stuff. We'll be right back. Let me tell you the David Knight show you can listen to with your ears. You can even watch it by using your eyes. In fact, if you can hear me, that means you're listening to The David Knight Show right now.

Yeah, good job. And you want to know something else? You can find all the links to everywhere to watch or listen to the show at thedavidknightshow.com. That's a website. Well, Rowan Atkinson. You know who Rowan Atkinson is a British comedian, does Mr. Bean. He thinks that electric vehicles are a joke. And he said, I really like them, but you know, there's all these problems with them. He said he got them early on.

He said, I was eager to jump in and get some of the hybrids. And for him, it was kind of an engineering curiosity. Narrow Way, Narrow Gate Ministry says, when the bus gets stuck in traffic and runs out of power due to air conditioning, heat requirements, what will the people do? Yeah. Oh yeah. There's just so many problems with it. So Rowan Atkinson says, and I didn't know this about him, Mr. Bean. He's actually got an engineering background. He got a degree in electrical engineering, and then he got a master's degree in control systems.

And so he says, because of my background, he said when he saw electric cars, he was drawn into being an early adopter. He thought it was very interesting. He said, I bought my first electric hybrid 18 years ago, and my first pure electric car nine years ago, and notwithstanding our poor electric charging infrastructure, have enjoyed my time with both of them very much.

Electric vehicles may be a bit soulless, but they're wonderful mechanisms. They're fast, they're quiet, and until recently, very cheap to run. But increasingly, I feel a little duped. When you start to drill into the facts, electric motoring doesn't seem to be quite the environmental panacea that it is claimed to be. Oh, well, Mr. Bean looks at this carefully. Here's the thing, okay? He's got a master's degree in control systems,

but he doesn't seem to know how politicians control you, right? We're not talking about hardware here. We're talking about hard orders and he doesn't get the bigger picture. Again, the bigger picture is this is about controlling the people. This is not about controlling emissions. As you may know, he says, the government has proposed a ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030. The problem with the initiative is that it seems to be based on conclusions drawn from only one part of a car's operating life, and that is what comes out of the exhaust pipe. And we've been saying this for a long time.

He said in advance of the COP26 climate conference in Glasgow in 2021, Volvo released figures claiming that greenhouse gas emissions during production of an electric car are 70% higher than manufacturing a petrol one. And we talked about this as well. It arrives on the showroom floor with a lot more energy invested into it. And that's the bottom line, you know, forget about, uh, you know, forget about the gases and all the rest of the stuff. If you've got an engineering degree, as he does, it ought to offend your senses that

this thing, you know, that they're so heavy and that they use so that they're so energy intensive, they're so resource intensive. I mean, as an engineer, you ought to be trying to make things efficient. And the real issue is how much energy goes into this and how much does it use to move this thing around. You know, even after you get, if it's going to be, what's the multiple? Three times, two, three times the weight of a gas car. You are spending a lot of energy to move that every time you move it, a lot more energy than you're going to be spending

moving a car. And so that's why they make this about the emissions. But we ought to be concerned about the energy because the energy has to be produced somewhere, somehow. He said, furthermore, they only last about 10 years. And you know, the average age of a car here in America is now over 12 years. So on average, you won't have a car. And that's what Mr. Bean is missing. Oh, is the fact that the plan was to control your transportation, making sure that you have to rely on the government, that the government will have control of your every movement. That was what it was about.

This will be used to ban all cars. And I mean banning all cars, including EVs. They will come out and say, well, you know, we just don't have the resources for it. We just don't have the charging stations for it. We just don't have the energy inputs into the power grid. That just uses too much energy. You can't have one. But, you know, I can because I can afford one and I'll get a special pass because I'm important and I can fly with my private jet to these climate conferences and all the rest

of this stuff. See, the problem is Mr. Bean is missing the joke. Because the joke is on us if we buy into their justification for stealing everything from us. And for killing humanity. He went on to say, the lithium ion battery is an imperfect device for electric cars. It is a complete non-starter for trucks because of its weight. For such vehicles, hydrogen can be injected directly into a new kind of piston engine. A company that makes yellow diggers has made huge strides with hydrogen engines

and hopes to put them in production in the next couple of years. If hydrogen wins the race to power trucks, and as a result, every filling station would stock it, it could be a popular and accessible choice for cars. And again, any engineering problem can be solved like this, right?

And the problem with hydrogen is that it is not under centralized control. If you can go pick up hydrogen at any filling station, it'll be just like gasoline, and they won't have that control mechanism. And so they've created this imaginary problem, this MacGuffin, and just like it was with the COVID MacGuffin, they demand a single solution. Everything else is forbidden.

Cannot have it. Cannot have it. It's got to be that one solution. This particular case, it's not a vaccine. In this particular case, for the climate MacGuffin, it's the EV car. Battery car. Because that means that they're going to control you through the control grid. And then, of course, the other part of this is that this is an existential crisis, they tell us,

just like they did with the COVID MacGuffin when it wasn't. And so this is now an existential crisis. We're all going to die any moment now, just as they've been telling us for the last 50 years. But now we've only got seven years more left, and we've got to do this. It's all going to be done at warp speed. There is no time for anything else, no evaluation of anything else. And there is no time to get the thing that they want, the one thing that they're going to allow you to do. There's no time to test that to see if it actually works. Well, they know that it doesn't work. That's what it was designed to do. They've

got a different agenda completely. Lone Wolf says, I think once hydrogen catches on, the electric craze will go away like the dodo, God willing. Well, I certainly hope so. Narrow Way, Narrow Gates Ministries. I doubt hydrogen will catch on. Cars with the technology will become instant Hindenburgs on the highway. Hydrogen is extremely flammable. But this is something that's been talked about for a while. And I remember a demonstration that somebody set up where they had a hydrogen car and

they had a gasoline car and they shot the thing from a distance and they were able to get the gasoline. They had a source there of fire. So they shoot the gasoline um oh they had a uh they had a a source there of fire so they shoot the gasoline can and you know blows up right because some of the uh uh gas gasoline gets out hits the fire and it follows it back to the main tank and the thing explodes same thing with a pressurized hydrogen tank you shoot it and um it catches fire, but it just goes straight up. It doesn't explode the whole thing. So, you know,

bottom line is, is that it isn't of the same, uh, even concern as gasoline is because gasoline is a liquid that's going to stay on the ground and cover whatever it hits while it's on fire. Whereas the other is a gas and we'll go up. And that was the amazing thing about the Hindenburg was how few people actually died on that. Um, yeah, my son says, I remember that video was done by either Honda or Toyota.

That's right. Yeah. And of course, uh, diesel is the least flammable of those things. And in that, uh, California state assembly votes to ban driverless trucks. And again, the autonomous aspect of this is one of the selling features to push people into the battery cars. That's why I've been so critical of why Elon Musk was doing that. You know, it said, hey, we're going to, the government says,

we're going to give green subsidies to people who build EVs. And the real insight, the real genius of what Elon Musk did was to sell the sizzle of the autonomous self-driving car in order to sell the battery operated car that nobody was really willing to pay a premium to get. And so then he gets his subsidy from the government for doing that. A 54 to 3 vote banning autonomous vehicles in California. Vehicles over 10,000 pounds, the big trucks. And in this particular case, which is kind of surprising that it's in California, this is really being driven by the Teamsters Union because they're trying to protect jobs.

And so you've got a lot of the trucking entrepreneurs are based in California. But what this article does not talk about on Zero Hedge is the fact that the self-driving thing has been abandoned by many of the car companies already. We had a situation like GM, Cruise, and others, and they had San Francisco was a good example of it. They just said, you can do whatever you want with these self-driving cars.

We're open to it. We want to be on the cutting edge of technology. They had so many problems with these things getting stuck at four-way stop signs and other things like that. And then at one point, they all

went to one intersection, all of the cruise cars, self-driving cars, and just stopped there. And, you know, it wasn't too long after that, I said, okay, this thing just ain't working. And it's back to the drawing board. And after investing so much money in all this, you had so many of these companies say, well, we're just going to not pursue this anymore. Except now as they see autonomous cars are not working. Now they want to go to, you can't get an autonomous car to work, but we can get the autonomous truck to work. Wow. Wow. And this whole idea of having a driver there who's going to take over an emergency, we know that doesn't work, right? You're sitting there for hours. Nothing is happening. All of a sudden you're in an emergency situation and it throws you the wheel. It's like,

what? What's going on? You know, you can't react at times. It's ridiculous. And we've seen this with a person who died in Phoenix as well. Aramasa says, hydrogen is great looking at storage solutions. It has to be kept super cold for liquid hydrogen, more energy in than out, or high-pressure vessels. Solid-state hydrogen changes that. Well, again, this is a matter, and we can negotiate these things, right? And this is what Toyota and Honda and some others have done. They said, okay, your problem is emissions? We can fix that.

And they come up with some engineering solutions. And yes, they may need to be refined one way or the other. But the reality is that's not the issue. You're chasing their windmills, and you're on a quixotic quest to satisfy them. Because that's why the government keeps pulling the rug out from under the people who try to come up with anything other than the single approved approach which is a battery operated vehicle you got to understand that this emission thing is just a mcguffin

and if you're out there spending a lot of money, you know, stuff, uh, the government is still going to stab you in the back, pull the rug out from. Pick your analogy. You know, uh, they're going to throw you under the electric school bus because that's what they want. That gives them the most control of all this stuff. And, um, so, uh, anyway, Biden's, uh, green rules mean that appliances will cost even more and do less. You see, it's not just about taking our food and our transportation. They want to take all, and it's not just our heating and air conditioning.

It's not just our cooking ranges. No, they want to take everything. So you're going to pay more for products that do less manufacturers are warning of shortages of supply chain breakdowns they said you're seeing in just a few months new rules from the biden administration about clothes dryers clothes washers dishwashers other kinds of kitchen appliances and of course that will also include the clothes dryers and in every case you're talking about a tightening of already very, very tight standards. Everyday things that people want are going to become more expensive,

or they're going to disappear completely, and the products that will be available will be more expensive, but not better. And people are going to wonder why life is worse. Well, it's because we allow the federal government to issue orders for which they have no authority to issue those orders. And these orders are not being even issued by our elected representatives. It's being issued by the unelected bureaucracies where we began the program today, yet new rules from the Biden administration. We have regulation without representation.

Do these rules fit in the constitution? Who cares? Right. Who cares? Uh, this is just a symptom of bureaucratic overreach and corruption and the federal government. And it's not just Biden.

You know, when people talk about this, they typically want to make it all about one particular party. This has been going on progressively through every republic, whether Republicans are in charge of the Congress or the White House or Democrats are in charge of the Congress or the White House. It continues to go. The speed at which it moves may change.

But it continues to move forward. New regulations coming from the Department of Energy and from the EPA are going to be used to shut down washing machines and dishwashers and your heating and your cooking and all the rest of this stuff. has surpassed its goal to take 100 actions in 2022 to strengthen energy efficiency standards for a range of appliances and equipment to lower costs for American families. No, it won't. It'll be just the opposite. They touted 110 new regulations enacted by federal agencies. No new laws from Congress.

And again, it's the regulatory state. If we don't get a handle on this, if we don't understand what the problem is, this is something that the GOP candidates ought to run on. But what do we get from them? Well, we have occasionally they will have a dog and pony show, but they don't do anything at all about it. RFK will likely not care or would cheer these new additional regulations. And so he's not going to do anything about it either. The announcement touted 110 new regulations from federal agencies on quote.

And this is what the Biden administration is bragging about, we've regulated everything from air conditioners and furnaces to clothes washers and dryers to kitchen appliances and water heaters, as well as commercial and industrial equipment. They're going to put us back in the medieval dark ages. We're going to go from dark winter to dark ages, aren't we? According to the Biden administration, quote, once finalized, these standards will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by an estimated 2.4 billion unicorn farts. How about that?

Let's just call it. Oh, this is all nonsense. And so this article on Zero Hedge said it follows a familiar pattern. First, you see rumors of new directives, followed by official denials, and then that is followed by draconian new diktats. And that's what we're saying. For years, not for years, but for example, we had a report that they were going to ban gas stoves.

And so you had a big public outcry in January. And then remember that came out, the commission denied it, and then the media mocked it with ridicule. And then within a couple more weeks, they said, no, it's real. It's here. This is what it is. And so one GOP representative said, your attempt to ban gas appliances has no basis in law or within your jurisdiction,

they said to the Department of Energy. The Department of Energy has enjoyed bipartisan support. Your actions to appease the Biden administration's radical climate agenda does not reflect well upon your department well there you go how about that boy is that a harsh tongue lashing or what that ought to put them back in their place they didn't say anything to the epa did they so you get these house republicans give them a severe tongue lashing followed by oh nothing nothing. Nothing at all, as usual. Just like a Benghazi committee run by Trey Gowdy or something.

Oh, look at this. It's awful. Okay. Next show. Time for another show. So, anyway. Guard Goldsmith says, I love how the politicians want to shove us into autonomous electric rigs that they will control. Yeah, not real autonomy.

You're absolutely right, Gardner. Good to see you there, too, by the way. As in the U.S. being in charge of ourselves, it's consistent with their paternalism. Yeah, that's absolutely right. Liberty Conspiracy. Ketch Gardner, he's got a program on RockFan every day. Liberty Conspiracy. Amongst what one industry executive called an avalanche of new rules are regulations that will force dishwasher and washing machine manufacturers to cut water use and energy consumption by a third. The new Department of Energy rules would effectively eliminate 98% of all top-loading washing machines

on the market today. And it would mandate that machines be larger and it would remove the central agitator that increases cleaning performance. Manufacturers say it's going to add $200 to the cost of the washing machine. It would be bigger, it will be more expensive, and it will work poorly, right? That's one of the things that we used to always say in engineering, right?

Good, fast, and cheap. At best, you're going to get two. Yeah, if you do a really good job, you know, those are the things that you've got to trade off. Or, you know, if you do a really good job, you know, you got, those are the things that you've got to trade off. Or, you know, if you are like the federal government, you can mandate that people get none of those things with new products. It's not going to be good, fast, or it's going to be worse. It's going to be, uh,

it's going to be real expensive and everything else. Okay. Okay. So they're even going to extend this to microwave ovens. If you like microwave ovens. Uh, so there is a pushback from 21 state attorneys general. Think about that. That's 42%. That means that 58% of the States are fine with all of this.

That's what's really scary. 60, 40. Yeah, that with all of this. That's what's really scary. 60, 40. Yeah, that's good. Yeah, let's take all of the modern appliances and make them too expensive. And even if you can afford to pay for it, it's not going to work as well. So this is a lawsuit by 21 state attorneys general led by the Tennessee attorney general, uh, writing a letter to department of energy secretary, Jennifer Granholm to quote, register their concern with the department of energy's new attempt to control what appliances Americans can buy. You know what it really needed. Let's not get caught up in the courts and all the rest of the

stuff. You know, Washington is dead. Congress doesn't want to do any of this stuff. When Nancy Pelosi said about Obamacare, we've got to pass it to find out what's in it. What she was saying was we're going to create a new program, hand it over to the existing agencies or new agencies, and then they will determine how this is all going to work. I don't know. You know, we've got this thousand page bill or 5,000 page bill who we don't have time to read that. We're just going to create this thing and let them work out the details and the devils and the details and the devils and the bureaucracy. And they're not going to do anything to pull back that regulatory state. The administration's plan to micromanage people's choices of everyday kitchen

appliances will result in fewer choices, less functionality, higher costs, the costs and all the rest of this stuff. And, uh, as they make this and I started looking at this and it's like, are these attorneys general, are they simply going to say, this isn't going to work well. You know, if you really want to cut down carbon dioxide, you got to do this and that. No, no. Fortunately they did get into the fact that, oh, by the way, this has a constitutional problem. This kind of bureaucratic overreach, they said, lies far outside the scope of the federal government envisioned by the Constitution.

And so right now, this is not a lawsuit. This is a letter. So I have to see if anything comes of it, but it may. The letter criticizes, among other things, the Department of Energy's blind reliance on estimates by the interagency working group of the social costs of greenhouse gases, that is a bureaucracy somewhere, that's all uppercase, said in addition, the attorneys general charge that the Department of Energy orders violate

constitutional principles of federalism. It ignores consumers' reactions and preferences, In addition to that, you see how they're twisting people's arms to get into EVs, for example. Stellantis, which owns Dodge Chrysler Jeep brands, said that it will reduce shipments of gas-powered cars to states including California, New York, Massachusetts, Vermont, Maine, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Rhode Island. Well, those all have New Jersey, all the Northeast. Then the Northwest, Washington State, Oregon. all the northeast uh then the northwest washington state oregon um you know then maryland colorado minnesota nevada virginia and new mexico oh there you go maryland and virginia the areas around washington dc in order to comply with new emission rules in those states that seek to force consumers to switch to EVs over the next decade. Well, that's exactly what this thing is about.

They really don't care what people want. And, yeah, and they'll use more water because added cycles get clothes clean. It's like the toilets, you know, one and a half gallon toilets and 1.6 or whatever and then you know some depending on the toilets especially in the early years you'd have to flush them more than once uh two times or more uh as we um reminds me of the uk politician says my son who thought an electric tea kettle with a more powerful heating element would use less energy because it heated the water faster. That's right. That was really a thing.

That really was a thing, which is really funny. Since I got a little time left, I'm going to talk about the Second Amendment today. LGBT stuff because we had a federal judge overturning Tennessee's ban on doing drag shows in front of kids. And that's what we're talking about here. And it's amazing to me because the Tennessee law was perfect, in my opinion, because what it said was, we're going to classify these things as cabaret shows, adult cabaret. So it's going to be like all these other activities that are not prohibited, right? You can have strip joints, you can have bars, you can have casinos where people are gambling and all, but those activities are restricted. Kids cannot be there.

And if you're owning one of those establishments and you have kids there, then you lose your license. It's just that simple. Or maybe there'll be criminal charges, but typically it's losing your license. Well, that's the way they structured the law in Tennessee, one of the early laws to come in. And you had a federal judge who immediately put a halt on it and said, well, it's not going to be enforced until I rule on it. And now he ruled on it on Friday. And this district court judge, this federal judge, Thomas Parker, said, well, this is what he said, quote,

despite Tennessee's compelling interest in protecting the psychological and physical well-being of children, this is an unconstitutional restriction on the freedom of speech. What? So just like you look at the IRS and say, well, you know, Supreme Court, the judicial system from the district court all the way up through the appeals and Supreme Court said, well, we have the Fourth Amendment, we have the Constitution and privacy and things, but you don't have to get a search warrant. You don't have to have a reason to survey people, uh, surveil people. Uh, you can spy on them without a warrant because we want to have taxes out there.

But this guy looks at it and says, well, you know, you do have, the state has a compelling interest in protecting the psychological and physical wellbeing of children. But you know, Hey, uh, you're going to be restricting the speech of these drag queens. Is that really what Thomas Jefferson and James Madison had in mind when they talked about free speech? Not at all. As a matter of fact, the interesting thing too, which is typically not talked about,

Breitbart, to my surprise, did mention it. The first thing I did when I saw this was, who is this judge? Who put him in? He was put in in 2018 by Trump. By Trump. So you don't get to talk dirty or act dirty in front of kids. That's the whole point.

And you don't have a free speech right to talk dirty to kids. That's not free speech. That's pedophilia. And this judge, this Trump judge, can't see that. He says this is unconstitutionally vague. No, it's not. It's very specific. And this is taken.

Matt Drudge put it up at the top. Oh, big victory for freedom. Look at this. The drag queens get to do this. And it happened in Pride Month. Isn't that wonderful? Isn't it interesting that this judge waited to the first day of pride month in order to release this decision no there wasn't any activity of any adults that was being restricted the sole purpose of this

even though it was broad it said nowhere are you going to engage in this pedophile activity with kids. But it was very specific about protecting the kids. And this judge knows it. And we know it as well. I wish Tennessee people would just say, stuff it, we're going to do it anyway. That's it for today's show. Thank you for listening. The common man. They created common core to dumb down our children. They created common past to track and control us.

Their commons project to make sure the commoners own nothing. And the communist future. They see the common man as simple, unsophisticated, ordinary, but each of us has worth and dignity created in the image of God. That is what we have in common. That is what they want to take away. Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation.

They desire to know everything about us while they hide everything from us. It's time to turn that around and expose what they want to hide. Please share the information and links you'll find at thedavidknightshow.com. Thank you for listening. Thank you for sharing.

If you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers. TheDavidKnightShow.com. Thank you.