The David Knight Show - 9Oct23 War in Middle East; Leftist Uses Pumpkin Spice to Attack Columbus Day

Episode Date: October 9, 2023

Gard Goldsmith, Liberty Conspiracy, hostsWar breaks out Israel/Gaza. Historical background to current politics (11:33) Latest woke screed attacking Columbus (for Columbus Day) invokes — PUMPKIN SPICE! — in rant over colonialism (51:49) INTERVIEW Massachusetts After Bruen Gun Case, and a Flood of Child Trafficking Toby Leary, Cape Gun Works of Hyannis, Massachusetts. Toby has his own program, Rapid Fire Like other Democrat northeastern states, Massachusetts doesn't like the reality of a flood of illegal aliens. One wealthy Massachusetts island doesn't have room for even 24 migrants. Toby Leary joins Gard Goldsmith to also look at child trafficking and gun control in Massachusetts after the Supreme Court's Bruen case (1:05:27) INTERVIEW James Bovard: FBI Expands "Terrorist" Definition, Targets Trump Supporters (2:09:48)In the process of expanding the FBI's reach against political enemies, ancient protections against tyranny like Habeus Corpus are being jettisoned. And, James and Gard discuss the case of Ian Freeman sentenced to prison for crypto James Bovard is the author of ten books, including Public Policy Hooligan, Attention Deficit Democracy, The Bush Betrayal, and Lost Rights: The Destruction of American Liberty. He has written for the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Playboy, Washington Post, New Republic, Reader’s Digest, and many other publications. He is a member of the USA Today Board of Contributors, a frequent contributor to The Hill, and a contributing editor for American ConservativeIs Habeas Corpus too old to be of interest? Should it be ignored as US Govt is increasingly doing? Here's where it came from and why it's a vital check on tyranny, especially in the modern technocratic form (2:31:47) California's new "climate change" weapon, imported from the UK (2:50:02)Find out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.comIf 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 throughMail: 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.

Happiness. We all know what it feels like, but sometimes it doesn't come easy. I'm Garvey Bailey, the host of Happy Enough, a new podcast from The Globe and Mail about our pursuit of happiness. We know people want to live more fulfilling and positive lives, but how do we actually do that? Is there a happiness code to crack? From our relationship with technology to whether money can really buy you happiness, we'll hear from both real people and experts to demystify this thing we're all searching for and hopefully find ways to be happy enough. You can find Happy Enough wherever you listen to podcasts. Using free speech to free minds. You're listening to The David Knight Show.

The David Knight Show. As the clock strikes 13, we get together on the David Knight Show. It's good to have you here one and all. Thank you. I'm Gardner Goldsmith filling in for David Knight on this Monday, October 9th, 2023. Year of our Lord, 2023. Amazing. And many thanks to David, to Travis, to everyone involved for welcoming me to the program. Check out the show Monday through feed, at Libertarian.

And of course, on DLive. We've got a lot to discuss today. Our guest today will be James Bovard in the 11 o'clock hour. And at the 10 o'clock hour, we'll be speaking with one of the proprietors of Massachusetts Cape Gunworks. Great time talking to Toby about immigration and the right to keep and bear arms. James Bovard is going to be giving us a little bit of encouragement for freedom as we look at the landscape out there and we try to defend liberty, one and all. My utmost thanks to David, to his entire family, and to you in the David Knight audience for welcoming me today on this Columbus Day for some people celebrating Columbus Day in the United States. If you have the day off, I hope you will sit down with perhaps a steaming cup of coffee or some other very warm breakfast beverage and enjoy the

program, soak in the information, and feel free to join us in the Rockfin chat or the Rumble chat and tell us your thoughts. I will be checking those out very soon. And, you know, since today is Columbus Day for some, you always have to put that little asterisk up there, Columbus Day for some. And perhaps since you are sitting down with a breakfast beverage that might be pumpkin spice Well, that is going to be one of our subjects today in the program Let's look at what we're going to be talking about today on the show The David Knight Show, Monday, October 9th, 2023 Happy Columbus Day for some And then we'll be getting into, of course, the war in Israel.

We'll be looking at Palestine, Hamas, U.S. warmongers, tax theft, which is perpetual war and plunder on us, and proponents of peace. And yes, we'll be looking at the words of one of the great exponents and proponents of peace in United States history the past half century, that being Ron Paul in just a little bit. We'll also be talking about the immigration conflict, as I mentioned, in Massachusetts, plus the issue of the right to keep and bear arms with guest Toby Leary of Cape Gunworks of Hyannis, Massachusetts. He has his own program called Rapid Fire, and he does fill-ins for the syndicated, nationally syndicated radio host, Grace Curley, who's based out of Boston. And Toby is one heck of a good guy, really knows his stuff on gun parts, gun history, and legal gun issues as well. And we'll be looking at history and heroes for freedom with guest James Bovard, a little release valve from all the things that we've had to see recently. And Jim also had a very good piece on the United States government. Yes, the FBI being revealed once more to, I know, crazy, to be unjustifiably targeting conservative and libertarian Americans, not just Trumpers out there. And of course, if it were Trumpers, that would be bad enough.

But yeah, you know, and perhaps if we look at the history of the FBI, we can say most everything that the FBI does would be considered unjustified in the eyes of the founding fathers. So thanks for joining me one and all. I hope you're having an absolutely wonderful day. And I want to mention to you that if you get the opportunity, please go to thedavidknightshow.com and check out what is available at the website. If I can attract a few more people to head over there today and pick up some items like the new MacGuffin shirt, that would be great. And also if you go to davidknight.gold, that will connect you with of course,

Wise Wolf Gold and Silver Exchange and the great system that Tony Arteburn has set up to allow you to become part of the Wolf Pack. Every month you can get gold and silver based on what you would like to invest every month to stave off the destructive attack of the inflated central fiat money supply. And you can also buy spot if you want to on any of the precious metals. And Tony can also help you if you want to get involved with crypto as well. The whole team there at Wise Wolf, they are wonderful people. And I want to thank everyone who is in the Rockfin chat already. Jason Barker is there.

A Syrian girl is there. General McGuffin, you are. And you've got the Scottish. I was thinking, Angus Mustang. Yes, indeed. He is awesome. And I'm so glad to see you all there. Really appreciate your support for the David Knight Show. And don't forget, if you want to donate to the David Knight Show and help keep the gas gauge full, that is always, always appreciated. I want to make sure that I mention that as the fill-in host, because I don't want to drop the ball. They've been so nice and so sincere to me. And I also want to mention you can donate at Rumble. And I do believe that still until the end of the year, Rumble is not taking a cut. So Rockfin, Rumble, either one is great. And of course, there are other ways to donate to David. If you want to get involved with his subscribe star, that's a great way to just get hooked in every month.

And that's something that I do every month, along with other folks. I always support the Tenth Amendment Center. They are fantastic people as well. So thank you, one and all. Let's get into some of these stories. As I mentioned, we'll review real quick once more. Let's talk again about this Happy Columbus Day for some. And then we'll talk about, yes, the Israel-Palestine-Hamas story. Now, the Columbus Day story is just going to be a brief one.

I'll give you more on that in a little while. But if you saw my sub stack, which is, of course, the all-famous Gardner-Goldsmith sub stack, and we have a lot of folks who signed on recently. We always get a lot more when I get to fill in for David and his great audience out there. They say, Hey, I think I'll check that guy out. So I appreciate that very much, everybody. And by the way, also as another quick aside, if you know my work from MRC TV and you follow me on Twitter and you have discovered David show through that. Generally speaking, it works the other way. People discover me and my work and the sub stack and things like that. Or they find the things that I do for the great MRC TV folks, because I do

fill-ins for David. He's got such a wonderful audience. But if you have come over from MRC TV or you visit mrctv.org, hats off to you. Thank you so much. I'll put my redacted hat on and I'll say hats off to you because I greatly appreciate the wonderful folks at MRCTV located just outside of Washington, D.C. And I have two pieces that I wrote yesterday that should be published very, very soon. And one of them pertains to one of these stories that you'll see on my Substack. Every Sunday, I put out the Sunday News Assembly at Substack, which is typically at least 20 stories pertaining to your liberty.

As you'll see there on the screen, it says, Breaking Liberty Oriented News and Additional Contextual Information to help peel those political onions, as they would say, in Louisiana. And so one of the major stories that I have included in the Substack stack for the Sunday News Assembly has to do with some harsh, woke criticism of one of those wonderful things that you get to drink seasonally. And it has to do with pumpkin spice. Yes, pumpkin spice. Here's the little preview to whet your appetite, we might say. And we'll get into that when we discuss some of the larger issues that are out there, some of the big ones. Often on my program, what I try to do is I give the news flash, and then we go into some of the big ones often on my program what i try to do is i give the news flash and then

we go into some of the breaking smaller stories but today on the david knight show the news flash is going to be all about the major stories let's hit it right now yes one and all. There is the pumpkin spice, but here is the bigger story. Of course, we're going to go with a little theme, one and all. Edwin Starr with some very unfortunate footage that was tax-funded. The United States invasion in Vietnam. Here we go.

War. War. Yeah. war Absolutely nothing. Say it again, y'all. War. Who? God. What is it good for? Absolutely nothing. All right, everybody. Yeah, it's quite a morass to slog through. Cause it means destruction of this land. And I've got to thank Edwin Starr for putting up such a great anti-war theme back in the Vietnam era when the United States was involved fighting the domino effect, as we know. And that's not to say that there is valid criticism of the communist mindset and collectivism, but the collectivism of the U.S. war machine might be something that people might

want to pay attention to right now, as we seem to see a lot of the same mistakes that saw the deep state pushing war in Vietnam repeated, and they have been repeated for quite a while. Let's turn to Newsweek right now, and the headline from Newsweek, Hezbollah Issues Threat to Israel, U.S. as Hamas War Escalates. All right, so you probably heard about this one, of course, and I think we're going to take a close and a broad view of this war in Israel and Palestine and see that the Democrats and neocons, they're ready to scroll down the image from, I support the latest thing, from the flag of Ukraine to, as they put on number 10 Downing Street, the Israeli flag. And there is a lot mixed into this. And, you know, last night I had the great opportunity to be a guest on Billy Ray Valentine's primetime at Billy Ray, Billy Ray Valentine's show last night. And it was terrific. Joined him around eight o'clock and he and I, and even James Bovard

and I were on the phone last night talking about this. We said, you know, I just don't know what to really say as far as an assessment of this, because there's so many folds and there's so many new breaking parts of this. At first, I was very skeptical. They were blaming it on Hamas. Then I said, what's the story behind this? Is this true? Then I heard things about how Hezbollah was involved. And of course, of course, I started to hear right off the bat, the neocons and even many traditional

conservatives were saying that, well, yes, you know, it's Hamas, but it's actually indirectly ascribable to Iran. And so this is going to open the door. The United States should go after Iran. And they're using it to criticize Joe Biden for giving these $6 billion back to Iran. They say, Joe Biden pays off Iran. It's correlation and therefore causation. This happens before this. I mean, Latin logicians would have an easy time with this right uh and they say well because this this it's like no guess what that money that the united states gave to iran should was originally belonged to iranians was illegitimately stolen by the government of the united states and was handed back to them just just like that money that Barack Obama gave back

to the Iranians. That was not U.S. money. And to say that U.S. taxpayers are somehow being ripped off because they're actually giving money back to money that should belong to the Iranian taxpayers is just a non-starter. It's just not fair. And as much as I dislike Joe Biden, I think he's a war criminal. He's a criminal element and he's despicable on many levels. And I hope someday he can save himself. I don't think that's going to happen. But you hold out hope. That is not part of this calculation.

And even if Iran got the money and then used it for that purpose, you still can't blame Joe Biden for giving the money back. That shouldn't have been taken in the first place. So that's just something to sort of clear the air on that, because a lot of people, especially on conservative talk radio, are really banging the drum on that. And it's just a non-starter. It's just factually incorrect. It's just a way to demonize Joe Biden. And there are plenty of other ways to look at U.S. policy there. But the problem is that they don't want to look at it the way that we peace lovers and constitutionalists might want to look at it. Now, I'm an anarchist. I don't believe that the polis in any way is justified on moral grounds

because it can only operate through the forced expropriation of other people's earnings. I don't want to pay for my police protection by forcing someone else to pay for it. So that is the problem of the polis. But on a constitutional level, the laudable goals, the honorable mentions that we would give to so many people of the founding era never, never saw this sort of thing. George Washington tried to warn people against the entangling alliances. This was exactly the sort of problem that we have seen start up in the late 19th century, whether it be from the Monroe Doctrine all the way through the 20th century with the anti-communist moves and then the so-called war on terror.

And we'll tell you a little bit more on that coming up with a great piece from The Intercept that is just unbelievable, unbelievable stuff. And so we're seeing the United States getting involved here. Here is a little bit from the traditionalist sort of deep state neocon Newsweek. And occasionally they'll bring in some editorialists who are more libertarian. James Rovard has had stuff published by Newsweek recently. That's been very good. But here we go. The Lebanese militant group Hezbollah issued a threat to Israel and the United States on Sunday, suggesting that it could get further

involved in support of Hamas as the war escalates. So we're talking about Shiite and Sunni Islam groups both praising the attack. Hamas is being blamed for the attack. And of course, it's being depicted by the usual warmongers as unprovoked. Yeah, which is quite ironic that the warmongers in the United States are depicting that as unprovoked. And I jotted down, I said, and so in this far off conflict, our great military leader, Lindsey Graham, is ready. He is ready not to get suited up himself, but to suit you up. So let's hear from the amazing Lindsey Graham. To my Israeli friends, do whatever you have to do for as long as you have to do it. To Iran, if this war escalates

with Hezbollah, we are going to come after you. Okay, so here is the great reconstituted John McCain. Instead of assigning blame, let's get it right. I expect Israel to go in on the ground in Gaza. That's going to be a hell of a fight. There is no time limit on this operation. There is no pulling Israel back. To my Israeli friends, do whatever you have to do, as long as you have to do it, to Iran.

If this war escalates with Hezbollah, we're all going to come after you. All right. So I want to watch that one more time, but just with a focus on one phrase there, because when I was preparing for the program, I kept noticing this phrase for however long it takes. And I said, this is not the first step. This is, it has taken a long time to get to this step. And I want to compliment right off the bat, Richard Grove and Tony Myers of Grand Theft World. Because if you were watching their program on Rockfin or any of the other platforms that carry Grand Theft World,

and of course you can find him at Tragedy and Hope on Twitter. Richard and Tony went into documents that show us the history of the displacement of the Palestinians and the push for a Zionist state goes back in history much further than the 1930s, much further than World War II, than 1947, much further than World War II, much further than the lead up to World War II when Jewish people were leaving Germany. It goes back to the 19th century and Richard and Tony have the original documents. I'm going to show you a little bit of their program last night just to show you how wonderful and enriching it was to see this information, to see that what is happening on the ground in Palestine now goes back to the 19th century and organizations and very well-connected

organizations connected to the British Empire and major banking interests, even at the end of the 19th century, were very involved with setting up a Zionist state in the land of Palestine. Now, you can go back further than that if you want to talk about biblical stuff and the Old Testament, but as far as the stuff we're dealing with right now, it is still tied back generations to banking interests and political interests at the wane of the British Empire, whether it be Milner and the Milner Group, or it be people like Rhodes and the Rhodes Scholars in Rhodesia, all of those interests mixed in with the Rothschilds and pro-Zionist forces. And it is amazing to see the work that Richard and Tony did last night.

Sometimes on the fly, Richard would say, wait a minute, there's this book. Let me go grab it. And he's in his library and he pulls it out, puts the camera over the book. He's already had gone through it years ago.

He's got it highlighted. It goes right there. Here it is, 1893. And they've got the original documents. It's amazing. It's amazing. I highly, highly recommend. You can find their show at Tragedy and Hope on Twitter. That's where you can find Richard's resources.

And then if you want to go into Rockfin, they did a two-part show, and they ran for something like seven hours starting on the program. They just went straight through, I think, until it was daylight. They started during the dark hours, and they just kept going and going. It was amazing. It was really, really kudos to them. And again, just absolute approbation, opprobrium for Lindsey Graham, the man who was meeting with neo-Nazis in Ukraine. Literal Nazis had to have been aware that he was meeting with Nazis, members of the Slovodov party, people like Ole Tianybok, people involved with the Azov battalion. And now he's trying to portray himself still as a great lover of the Jewish people, whether it be ethnic or religious, Hebrew, Jewish.

And by the way, with my last name, Goldsmith, I will remind people, even it be ethnic or religious, Hebrew, Jewish. And by the way, with my last name, Goldsmith, I will remind people, even though I went to Boston University, which was at that time, like 80% Jewish, I'm not Jewish. I'm English and Irish heritage. I have no connections to anybody in Israel in any way whatsoever. It's an English and Irish name. So I often say, in fact, I mentioned to Billy Ray last night. I hate myself. I get it on St. Patty's Day. I get in front of a mirror and yell at myself for my own oppression and rebellion. So there you go, or my family's.

So I want to focus again on this line from Lindsey Graham once more. Check it out. See what he says here. It's the however long it takes part. Assigning blame, let's get it right. I expect Israel to go in on the ground in Gaza. That's going to be a hell of a fight. There is no time limit on this operation. There's no time limit on this operation. Yes, we know that, Lindsay. This operation has been going on for a long, long, long time. Anybody who looks at the map of Palestine versus the map of Israel knows

that this has been an ongoing NATO-like expansion, similar to what NATO did, regardless of the promise that James Baker gave to the newly reformed Russia in the 1990s. It was a move of expansion and hegemonic takeover. And that is clear. So now let's take the opportunity to hear the voice of somebody who warned against this a long time ago. And he is. Paul. Check this out.

The United States meddling in the Middle East, going all the way to the creation of Hamas, similar to the creation of Al-Qaeda, similar to the United States government overthrowing the government of Ukraine. Here we go. All the years on the floor of the House of Representatives. What's happening in the Middle East, in particular with Gaza right now, we have some moral responsibility for both sides in a way, because we provide help and funding for both Arab nations and Israel. And so we definitely have a moral responsibility, and especially now today,

the weapons being used to kill so many Palestinians are American weapons, and American funds essentially are being used for this. But there's a political liability which I think is something that we fail to look at because too often there's so much blowback from our intervention in areas that we shouldn't be involved in. You know Hamas, if you look at the history you'll find out that Hamas was encouraged and really started by Israel because they wanted Hamas to counteract Yasser Arafat. He said, well, yeah, that was better then and served his purpose, but we didn't want Hamas to do this. So then we as Americans say, well, we have such a good system. We're going to impose this on the world. We're going to invade Iraq and teach people how to be Democrats. We want free elections. So we encourage the Palestinians to have a free election.

They do, and they elect Hamas. So we first indirectly and directly through Israel help establish Hamas. Then we have election. Then Hamas becomes dominant, so we have to kill them. You know, it just doesn't make sense. During the 80s, you know, we were allied with Osama bin Laden, and we were contending with the Soviets. It was at that time our CAA thought it was good if we radicalized the Muslim world. So we financed the madrasa schools to radicalize the Muslims in order to compete with the Soviets.

There's too much blowback. There's a lot of reasons why we should oppose this resolution. It is not in the interest of the United States. It's not in the interest of Israel either. Well stated, Ron Paul. And, of course, the counter to that is Mr. Lindsey Graham. There is no pulling Israel back to my Israeli friends. Do whatever you have to do as long as you have to do it to Iran.

And, of course, yes, got to mix in Iran. Iran is obviously the target. And we all know that the United States was heavily involved in supporting the Iraqi regime to try to eliminate the Iranian regime after the United States CIA overthrew the government of Iran in 1953. And, of course, chinned up a lot of fear of communists back then when it really was inappropriate. So the United States consistently gives three and a half billion dollars per year and has done so for decades to the semi-socialist, semi-fascist state of Israel. Meanwhile, people like Ron DeSantis, a governor of Florida. DeSantis travels to Israel to sign two bills, basically a year apart, to make it a punishable felony to criticize the state of Israel. Chuck Schumer, a man who's very close to the Israeli government, senator from New York, wanted, and as many others did, wanted to actually have a law that would punish people

for criticizing the state of Israel. They even wanted to get involved with universities and what might be said at universities and whether or not U.S. money would go to universities if they had people critical of Israel at the universities. How about you actually conform to your constitution, Mr. Schumer, and not give money to universities? That would be awesome. How about also, Mr. Graham and Mr. Schumer, you conform to your U.S. constitution, because that's what you tell us you'll do. And stop giving money to Israel. Yeah, that would be awesome. Well, of course, we can't have that. So what do we have?

Biden tells Benjamin Netanyahu that more military aid is on its way because the United States is nowhere at all bankrupt. They're not $33 trillion in debt. They don't have a $3 trillion deficit coming up at the end of the year. They can just send more money out there. More money, more money, more money to Israel. I think we all expected that. So hopefully this breaking information from antiwar.com's Dave DeCamp, who, by the way, I believe he's going to be on with Russell Brand, I think think today. So that should be pretty interesting. And, you know, I'm going to be Dave DeCamp does great work. I'm going to be interested to see what he has to say here. But here is his piece just out last night. for the second time since Hamas launched an operation in southern Israel and said that more U.S. military aid is on its way. So maybe they can just redirect it from Ukraine. Oh,

no, they can't do that. No, they have to keep giving more money to Ukraine and they want to have that one gigantic package that they're going to push next year for that, which is, I think, what McCarthy had negotiated before he got booted out. According to the United States, President Biden, quote, conveyed that additional assistance for the Israeli defense forces is now on its way to Israel with more to follow over the coming days. Secretary of Defense, when has it been defensive in the United States since the end of World War II, and even the drawing of the United States into World War II

was corrupt under Roosevelt. Secretary of so-called Defense Lloyd Austin said in a statement that the U.S., quote, will be rapidly providing the Israeli Defense Forces with additional equipment and resources, including munitions, because, you know, they're the 58th state. The first Secretary Security Assistance will begin moving today and arriving in the coming days because they can just do it. They can just do it. And it doesn't matter what your position is as a U.S. taxpayer or the promises they give you. Israel already receives $3.8 billion in military aid each year from the U.S. It's $3.8.

That's $3.6, $ U.S. It's 3.8, I said 3.6, 3.5. It's unclear what's another 0.3 or 0.2 percent, 0.2 billion, right? It's unclear how the U.S. will be funding the new arms it's sending to Israel, which will likely be pulled from the U.S. military stockpiles. In the call with Netanyahu, President Biden also pledged his full support for the

government and people of Israel in the face of an unprecedented and appalling assault by Hamas terrorists. Yes, anything to centralize stuff, anything to take over land, anything to hide history, and of course, make it seem as if, just as if they have been portraying everything as a Russian problem, it's all the problem of the Palestinians. Or, as we know, Hillary Clinton might actually blame it on Russia. Vladimir Putin has obviously, your friend and mine, he has intervened in our election in the past. It's not something, as you experienced. Yes, right. Absolutely.

Let's start off this conversation between me, former White House spokesperson, prior to that working for television, going to the White House. Now back at television, I'm a great journalist. Wink, wink. And I'm speaking with Hillary Clinton, who in no way could be charged as a war criminal in any way whatsoever. And please, by the way, whatever you do, don't look at those emails that WikiLeaks published that showed that she was very much in favor of overthrowing Gaddafi in Libya and that she and folks in France were going to be really excited about it because they wanted to stop Gaddafi from starting his North African-based gold-based currency. And then, of course, we have the classic appearing with CBS reporters laughter of,

we came, we saw, he died. Ha ha. That is just awesome. It's especially applicable to all of the extrajudicial murder that seems to be associated with people in the White House, especially the Clintons. But just remember, folks, somehow, some way, it's possible that they could even continue to deflect and say, well, the Putin connection here, I'm just joking around about this.

I don't think they're going to do that. I think they'll keep pushing on Iran. But it's the same sort of mindset. It's the same sort of thing. It's a deflection to say, oh, yeah, don't look over here, over there, right? It's viral research is happening in the United States, contrary to the Constitution. Yeah, but China, yeah, but wait a minute, isn't there already a problem? Look, I'm pointing at China. Are you not looking where I'm pointing?

United States is involved with this extra constitutional thing called Russia. Yeah, but did you hear me or not? Are you? Are you? Are you? Do you? You're either with us or you're with the terrorists. You understand? You mean the terrorists that you created?

Quiet. That you funded? Quiet. What's the terrorists that you created? Shh, quiet. That you funded? Shh, quiet. What's the term? One person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter? I think the CIA knows that very well. Very, very well. And don't forget, of course, if you happen to disagree, well, Hillary Clinton has called for, you know it, the deprogramming of you. Just wanted to bring those back as a quick reminder, because this news has been popping up so rapidly that we don't want to forget. A few of the ways that they will ascribe evil motivations to many of us.

And, of course, they'll be trying to shut us down. We'll talk about speech controls coming up in a little bit on the program, probably in the third hour, as we get to chat with James Bovard. And we look at the controversy over Ofcom spreading its tentacles in England into social media and online communications, and the heroic stance of people like Lawrence Fox and people like Calvin Robinson, the preacher in the UK, who are now no longer with GB News and they're standing up for free speech. Now, on this Israeli-Gaza conflict, I want to just bring up again what I mentioned to you is just superb work from the folks at Grand Theft World. I want to play for you a little segment from this, and

this is just one part of the unbelievable knowledge, information retention, and recovery from people like Richard Grove and Tony Myers. And again, if you don't watch their show starting on usually Sunday nights around 9 30, go to Rockfin. It's just superb. It's just superb. They give coverage from other people. You know, I'll play clips from people. They'll play extended clips from people. It gives those people great coverage and attracts folks to find their information, whether it be James Corbett or Jimmy Dore's work or, you know, old things that you might not even have remembered. Very, very good work. They went into some of the documents, the 19th century documents that pushed for the formation of the state of Israel prior to the migration of many Jewish people coming out of the post-Weimar Germany

as the Nazis started to rise in power. They went way back and showed some of the machinations of these folks and some of their ties to very, very large business interests and political interests in the United States and England. So here's a little something that they offer us. The sound here is a little bit low. I could have recorded it and put it into my playback system, but I've got a lot running on the system right now and I don't want to overload stuff. So check this out, turn your volume up,

check out the good work from these folks last night, covering a lot of the information that's not going to be provided by Lindsey Graham. Just like he probably doesn't want you to remember the photographs he took with Ole Tianybok, the neo-nazi as he supports the jews in israel exploration look 67 words that led to the creation of the state of israel interesting this is all pre-hitler this is pre-world war ii this is pre what most people

on twitter are educated to know yeah that's correct let's get smarter than the people on twitter here's lord rothschild's draft of 18 July 1917. His Majesty's government, this is what he wants. His Majesty's government accepts the principle that Palestine should be reconstituted as a national home for the Jewish people. And his Majesty's government will use its best endeavors to secure the achievement of this object and will discuss the necessary methods and means with the Zionist organization. Here's the official history. Many of history's great documents and speeches, not to mention works of art, literature, and music, were repeatedly modified and refashioned before they were finalized.

So it was that on June 19, 1917, British government officials led by Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour, Arthur James Balfour, asked Zionist leaders, Kine Weitzman and Lord Lionel Walter Rothschild, the guy that writes The Tortoise, in that picture where he's writing the giant tortoise, that's him. He's a zoologist, by the way. You can check that. To produce the draft formulation for British support of a Jewish homeland in Palestine, which the cabinet would consider.

The Zionists, along with sympathetic British officials, had already been working on the contours of such a statement. Among those involved were Mark Sykes, Ronald Graham, a whole bunch of other people that aren't actually in the letters. The version seen here dated 18 July 1917 is known as Lord Rothschild's draft. It was based on a rather long and detailed 12 July working draft by the Zionists. Okay? So we've established this is draft one, Lord Rothschild's draft.

Here's Arthur Balfour's draft. Here's Lord Milner's draft. Here's Milner and Amory's draft. And here's the actual declaration. So here's Lord Milner. He has a draft. He made some changes, but it's pretty much the same. It's all explained here on Balfour100.com. You can read it for yourself. Here's the Milner Amory. Leo Amory was also part of Cecil Rhodes round table. So again, folks, this is World War I, and I'm not going to show it here because I don't want to show too much of their content from Grand Theft World. But if you watch, this is part one, the four hours of part one, and then they have a part two that's about three and

a half hours from last night. And Richard Grove was saying, look, some of this we're doing on the fly. We're just getting information in here. And this is sort of what I mentioned to James Bovard when I mentioned to Billy Ray last night. I'm just looking at this on the fly too. And the key thing for me is why should I have to look at this information? What the heck should it have anything to do with me

going to the farm stand a few miles from my house, getting some produce and coming home to do with me going to the farm stand a few miles from my house, getting some produce and coming home to do some work. The reason it is, is because the tentacles of the state have pulled my earnings into funding killing and death and land takeovers and disputes among people there for all sorts of ideological reasons and power, political power reasons, and the people who settle into their positions at the defense contractors and they feel comfortable this is going to be their life, they think they're doing something good. Well, you can't be doing something good if it's predicated on theft from me. Leave me alone.

Leave me alone. I don't want to have anything to do with this. I shouldn't have to talk about this. I shouldn't have to comment on this. Other than, wow, it's really sad and troubling that people fight like that. I just don't want to have anything to do with it. I condemn all warmongers. How about that? Right?

I should have no culpability in sending bombs out there that are going to wipe out human life and yet they attach me to it and they claim it's my government what a farce i mean come on have a sense of morality so this is 1917 everybody again the documents the further documents going back into the 19th century are absolutely essential. Really, really good stuff that Richard and Tony provided, showing many of the forces involved way, way prior to World War I, World War II, the movement towards trying to create a Zionist state in Palestine. A little bit more verbose. They want a national home for the Jewish race and will facilitate to its best endeavor. So there's just a little wordsmithing going on

in these various drafts. And then you get to the final draft and it looks like this. Foreign office, November 2nd, 1917. Dear Lord Rothschild, I have much pleasure in conveying to you on behalf of his majesty's government, the following declaration of sympathy with the jewish zionist aspirations which has been submitted to and approved by the cabinet his majesty's government view with favor the establishment in palestine of a national home for the jewish people and will use their best endeavors it's like verbatim right so it's a little bit more more wordsmith it's an official document but now you understand the history and nature of that. But wait, as Ron Papil would say, there's more. Arthur Balfour, of the Balfour Declaration, he has, I think it's his daughter, maybe it's his niece, Blanche Balfour Dugdale. And her and her husband, Edgar Dugdale, are responsible for bringing Hitler's book, Mein Kampf, into English in 1925. That's right.

That's a weird Zionist connection. Don't you think, Tony, that the people who bring us that also brought us the Mein Kampf book that fails to mention the Rothschilds that we were just talking about? If Hitler had a thing for Jewish bankers and he doesn't name them, how does he not know? I don't understand. There's a lot of conundrums. It seems like they're interested in fascistic style state. A lot of of interesting things so now going back to margaret mcmillan's 1919 an ethnically idealized state because that's what the jewish state represents that they argue that their ethnic jews are the ones that have the right to it of course that gets messy if you consider galad otsman's work but it was good so's 1917. Let's go back to 1906. Balfour met Weizmann for the first time in 1906.

They're talking about a Jewish form of patriotism was unique. Here's David Lloyd George, the great grandfather of the woman writing this book in the story, right? This is all about British Israelism, the British Israel World Federation, because the British empire is built on the British royal family, and they get their royalness and their power to be kings and queens from the Bible. So they have crossover interests, these groups, over time. And are they helping the people who they subjugate? In all cases, no, they're not. Jews, Christians, Muslims, all get in short shrift on this because ruling elites who are independent of ideologies like kindness and freedom and these sort of things that we like

to practice as individuals, they see that as antithetical to their existence. Well stated. Really, really good research on their part. And of course, you know, they misuse the Bible very clearly. And it's really, it's very troubling stuff. That information is absolutely essential to check out. Later, when I do my program, the Liberty Conspiracy Program at six, I might show a little bit more of that. But again, you know, it's their work. I'm only going to show a little bit, maybe what's your appetite, that sort of thing. And I do want to mention that, you know, when we look at the ways that the deep state perpetuates these sorts of things, I really appreciate people like Ron Paul who called stuff out right at the start and say, you know, this is going to blow back against you. And they try to remind some of these folks, look, this is immoral from the start, but it's going to lead to even worse consequences. And you don't want to be a consequentialist, but sometimes that's a way to

try to get the message through to some of these blockheads to say, stop messing with other people. So we don't know what's going to be coming from this. Obviously, as I mentioned here in Newsweek, Hamas, a militant Palestinian group, which the U.S. designates as a terrorist organization, launched a surprise attack on Israel on Saturday. The violence has thus far left hundreds of Israelis and Palestinians dead, with Hamas taking a number of Israelis captive. Israeli media reported on Sunday that the security cabinet has officially declared the country at war overnight. Hezbollah

and a RAN-backed organization that the U.S. also considers a terrorist group. But don't you dare think the U.S. is involved with backing terrorism in any way, or that the United States operates as its own hegemonic terrorist organization. Don't think that. On Sunday, they launched a barrage of mortar shells into Israel. This, don't really know exactly what they were doing there. The Israeli Defense Forces then responded by shooting artillery into Lebanon. No casualties were reported on either side, according to Reuters. Hashem Safi Aldin, the head of Hezbollah's executive council,

suggested on Sunday that the group could become further involved in the escalating conflict. The responsibility obliges all the sons of our nation not to be neutral, and we are not neutral, Safi al-Din said at a pro-Palestinian rally in Beirut, Lebanese news site Nahranet reported. So beyond that, I can't really say much other than I know the strict moral code that I would like to support, which is get the United States government out of this conflict. It has already helped create this conflict, and maybe it would be a better idea to remove the United States taxpayer from any moral culpability within this. But of course, we're seeing Biden telling Netanyahu there's going to be more military aid, even as Biden mulls the $100 billion for an entire one-year package to Ukraine. And United States officials are saying they're expecting a ground invasion of Gaza.

So what's left of the Palestinians in their area is probably going to be wiped out. I just don't see how, I mean, it could erupt into a much larger conflict. It could become something similar to what we saw with the Iraq-Iran conflict and so many of the things that they have engaged in with United States help, all the way going back into the United States, establishing the rulership of you know who. Now, folks, I want to turn to MRCTV as a way to sort of palate cleanse. And I do mean this with a sense of humor. As we approach 10 o'clock and our guest, Toby Leary, will be joining us around that time, talking to us about Massachusetts immigration and also his great fight for the right to keep

and bear arms coming from his shop at Cape Gunworks in Hyannis. You might see this. It was just published at MRCTV. And this is the backside of MRCTV where I can get in and do things and things like that. It's a news story about the Washington Post demonizing drinkers of the colonizer Pumpkin Spice. Yes. And I was going to play some Spice Girls. And I asked, is Pumpkin Spice, you know, one of the Spice Girls that just never made it, you know, sort of like those cartoon characters on the generic cereal boxes. Maybe they went to the tryouts for like Frosted Flakes. And it was like, maybe it wasn't Tony the Tiger, it was Leo the Leopard or something. And they're like, all right, Leo, give us what you got. Leo's like, they're pretty good. And they're like, ah, no, Leo, we like it, but it's just not what we're looking for, for Frosted Flakes. Call me. Hey, who's the last guy? Tony the tiger. Bring him in.

Let's see what happens. Sort of like Lucky the little leprechauns, angry brother who never left Ireland, you know, it was like, ah, oh, my brother, ah, he's been saying he's chain smoking, you know, down in the bar, he's got his whiskey, you know, and he's like, ah, I tried out for that. Yeah. That's stupid. Lucky charms. Ah, look at him. He's getting chased all over Tarnation, going over rainbows. What do I get? Stuck in Ireland eating potatoes. That's what I get. On one of those generic cereal boxes. Stupid brother. Success. So it's interesting because I'm thinking about Pumpkin Spice and maybe she's the lost spice girl just sitting there in bitterness, you know, in some bar in Soho. I could have been somebody.

Nah, you're fine. You don't need to be a spice girl. But Pumpkin Spice, very interesting story. Let me read this to you because it's a nice palate cleanse that I think you'll enjoy. And I'll shoot a video on this later today for the MRCTV folks, because it sort of helps take us away from some of these issues, but also tells us a few things about what's going on with, you got it, the perpetuation of class envy, Marxist, cultural Marxism, and so on. Here it is. Most journalists and readers likely know the difference between an historical interest piece and a preachy, inappropriate attempt to virtue signal, to look holier than

thou, and insinuate that the uninformed are ignorantly attaching themselves to some generations-running immorality. Ah, enjoy paying those taxes. Talk about generations running immorality. team at the WAPO either doesn't understand the distinction, or they do, and they have no problem moralizing, I should say sermonizing, over something that has absolutely nothing to do with any of us alive today. The Post's Mahim Javid, October 6th, saw her polemic about the violent history of pumpkin spice released by the paper, upon which it was republished on other sites, including Stars and Stripes, folks. I think that's the hyperlink to Stars and Stripes. Yep, the Stripes. That's the military. U.S. military gets to read that.

That's awesome. Oh, great. And Ms. what's her name? Javed. She served up a story that acts not merely as an interest piece, but more than that, acts as another brick in the wall of contemporary cultural Marxism in which a certain crowd of sensitives can inform you that you're part of a legacy of lethality. Yes, you are enjoying the fruits of evil. And as a result of your dastardly participation in this, which actually is centuries-old activity, you too are suspect unless you change your white, colonial white supremacist ways.

Yes, the colonial white supremacist stuff. It's always a good go-to. Javade, is that like Javar? Wasn't that from Les Mis? Opens with this darkly portentous line. The invaders struck the island from three sides simultaneously. I didn't mention that she put the adverb in at the end when she should have said the invaders simultaneously struck the island from three sides.

But anyway, that's just my editorial side. Anyway, and then from that dark, portentous line, she rolls into the 1621 state corporate invasion of Indonesia. Yes, folks, get this. She's writing about pumpkin spice, and you know where she's going, to Nutmeg. And she has to go back to 1621. You're sitting there. You got your cup of coffee.

You're like, oh, let me see what's going on in the news. Ah, this doesn't taste so good now. Ah, I was going to have a good day this Columbus Day, but well, anyway. So then she says, yes, the invasion of Indonesia, the Banda Islands, to be precise, by the Dutch East India Company, describing the thousands slaughtered, enslaved, and starved to death due to their flight into mountainous terrain.

And she quotes a university professor who adds reiterative thoughts. Quote, the population of around 15,000 Bondanese was decimated to just a few hundred in a few months, said Adam Clulow, a historian and professor at the University of Texas in Austin. Quote, the Dutch company was later accused of carrying out what some describe as the first instance of corporate genocide, end quote. And I write, of course, those who understand the nature of the polis know that all state entities are corporate in nature and that the Dutch company, so-called, really was an arm of the Dutch government, as are so many so-called private corporations today. Some of us might recall the efforts of

the Boston Tea Party participants to fight the corporate government hegemony of the British East India Tea Company and their parliamentary-provoked lock on American tea sales. But just to be sure you understand your grave culpability in the pumpkin spice issue, just so that you understand that it's okay to drink British tea, but not the shadow-draped pumpkin spice. I mean, look, it's so stupid. Javade, this is the Washington Post, and it's republished in the Army Times Stars and Stripes.

Stars and Stripes. Javade includes Professor Kolo saying that it was all for nutmeg, the Banda Islands being pretty much the sole source of nutmeg at the time. You'd better put down the pumpkin spice and slowly back out of the coffee shop, dear reader. And if you still need your eyes opened by the sensitives at The Washington Post, make sure you know this. Quote, Some spices are part of a natural course of trade, said Sarah Wasburg Johnson,

a food historian. It just happens that the main spices in pumpkin spice are fraught with colonizer histories. I know, I don't even know if I could go on. End quote. I said, we better grasp that, we dastardly spice-soaked sods. Beyond the lame virtue signaling about nutmeg and this long-gone tie to what is seen as the normative term colonialism, what might be most important to grasp here is something that conservatives rarely, if ever, will acknowledge.

That is the fact that all government-slash-state activities are forms of colonization into our lives. Every action of government takes from claiming the authority to make you pay for it or engaging in threats that agents of government call regulations and rules to literal takings of land and other physical property. They all are means by which these agents of the state invade our private lives and attack our natural rights on our property. It is all colonization, everybody. In fact, one of the most pervasive forms of colonial invasion into our rights can be seen in what is called rent-seeking, whereby special interests lobby those claiming government power over us and try to have that government power wielded to help the special interests at our expense and at the expense of competitors.

These special interests often receive from the government monopoly or oligopoly status over a particular field. Hence, in the case of this horrid history of nutmeg, and this is what I thought you might find pretty interesting, everybody, we discovered that the Dutch East India Company saw its origins in the March 1602 merger with the government of virtually, with the government of virtually all Dutch sailing interests, March of 1602, that were headed to the Indies. Almost all those Dutch sailing interests merged under the government, and this ostensibly was done as a form of protection from the Dutch state enemy of Portugal, but also to protect from, you got it, competitors who might try to enter the market of seed trade

and undercut their rent-seeking prices for the people for whom they were selling back home. I said, for more, read volume one of economist and economic historian Murray Rothbard's phenomenal book series, Conceived in Liberty, available free in audio form here. I said, in fact, there as historian Sheila Ogilvie discusses early in her book, The European Guilds and Economic Analysis, and I'll show you the books right here, everybody. This is volume one of Conceived in Liberty from the Mises Institute. Excellent stuff. This is the red version of it. There's now another version with a new cover. And this is Sheila Ogilvie's book. And she's got three volumes covering European guilts. It's unbelievable the work she did. associate with the purity of silver, that's sterling, actually has its origins in a 14th century union of German long-distance merchant guilds called the Hansa or the Hanseatic League. This group soon began trading with British interests. So they were Germans, they started

trading with British, and as Rothbard notes on page 18 of Conceived in Liberty, he says, The trade of the Hansards, or Easterlings, from which the English measure of silver, the pound sterling, is derived, as the Hanseatic merchants were called, was largely in raw materials and agricultural products. I wrote, British wool, mainly exported by an interest from Flanders, Belgium, became a staple good for the Hansards and saw the increasingly centralized English government impose so-called poundage, a tax on the export of wool and the import of cloth, as well as a way to ensure the collection of the duties. So you get the British government wants a chunk of that trade in the wool. The wool becomes a big

staple because the Roundheads started to move sheep in as they did the enclosure movement, starting after the Roundhead invasion. Okay. So they're taking over the British land. They bring in the sheep and they start the wool. They're doing a lot of the wool weaving and so on down in many of the eastern areas of England around London and so on. And they're importing it. They're exporting it to Flanders. And the British want a chunk of those export profits and they want a chunk of tariff import money. And so they impose their poundage tax. So you get sterling coming from the terminology from the Easterlings of the Hansards, the German guilds. And this is all sort of proto-corporate stuff. You can see how these corporations start to form. This is very interesting. This goes straight to the Boston Tea Party. So check this out. As the British started to push for this tax, the government then granted monopoly power to sell wool, giving it to a handful of British merchants who were drawn from the British exporting and

importing centers. I said, these merchants of staple collected the taxes and got oligopoly status, a status that eventually grew in political power and saw many of the same corporate interests, just a few generations later, unite into, you got it everybody, the British East India Tea Company, the very company against which

the Sons of Liberty protested at the Boston Tea Party in 1773. So I said, regardless of this wake up to your own pumpkin spice link to oppression and wrongdoing in history, from regardless of this polemic, one can see that our reality is filled with terms and products that at one time in history might have been connected to colonialism or corporate favoritism, against which many of our forebears even fought. And that's it's nearly impossible to untangle the threads. The fact is, we're not responsible for those historical wrongs. We can only try to end the government corporate rent seeking abuses we see today, i.e. what's going on with the deep state and the warmongering. And we can try to teach people about the moral and economic benefits of peace and free trade. One thing is for sure. We need not feel guilty sipping a pumpkin spice latte while reading this fascinating world history. So you get the Boston Tea Party, you get the Sterling, the Poundage, all that stuff,

all connected with the rise of these guilds being formed into corporations. And as I mentioned, there is a question as to whether or not these guilds actually formed as counterbalances to royal power, whether they formed as ways to try to take advantage of royal power or it was a mixture of the two. Sometimes they would form in Europe. For example, there were baking guilds because a lot of people didn't bake in their own homes. They just had little shacks. So there were bakers and you would be able to buy your bread from the baker because you couldn't really cook it in your own place. You didn't have a stove. You had an open flame. You could cook on

it, but you couldn't cook in a stove. So they had bakers in towns and they had baker's guilds. Well, there's a question as to whether or not the baker's guilds formed to gain power or whether they formed to fight the royal power. However it works out, it's very interesting European history, and it has a lot to do with the formation of corporate status and the granting of corporate status for, you got it, political reasons. And so when we think about these things, you know, why people should feel guilty about this, I don't know, but I think the reason that they were pushing this was because it's a cultural Marxist stepping stone to continue to perpetuate the idea that there's white supremacy and we all have to feel terrible about it and so on and so forth. So with that, let's change over into another area, folks.

Let's talk about one of the areas where the colonies began, Massachusetts. In a moment, we'll be joined by our guest, Toby Leary, a great freedom fighter based out of Hyannis, Massachusetts, and Cape Gunworks here on the David Knight Program. this is the david night show all right everybody we got that coming up This is The David Knight Show. All right, everybody. We got that coming up. Coming up so soon. I can't wait for the holidays. I'm really looking forward to it. Now, I want to draw your attention to a very, very cool website.

It's Cape Gunworks. And I've got to make sure that i call it up properly here and uh the amazing things that they do at cape gun works our guest is toby leary toby comes to us via hyannis massachusetts and he has been on my program he has been a fill-in host for grace Curley. He has his own program called Rapid Fire, and you can reach them if you call 508-771-3600. Do I have that right? 771-3600. Toby, is that correct, my friend? Yes, sir. Thank you, Garth. It's great to see you again, and I appreciate you shouting us out. So we'll take care of anyone who calls as a result of you. How about that?

Yeah, that sounds great. If they mention me, that sounds great. Toby, you're a kindred spirit. And like I said, I can't wait to get down and visit you. If people go to the website, this is what they'll see right on the front page. They can find out about the classes, the deals, the range where people can go. And tell them about what you do on Tuesdays at the range, Toby. Tuesday is free rental day. You can come down and use whatever firearm that we have for rent, uh, when you rent the lane and, uh, you know, try them out, try before you buy type of thing. And you can switch them, switch out guns as many times as you want on two, a Tuesday,

which is free rental day at Cape gun works. So, um, yeah, come on down and see us. We'll be happy to help you out and get you shooting and get the right gun in your hand and, um, you know, get one fit to you. So that's, that's part of what we do. Just amazing, amazing stuff. And you're there so much Toby. And, uh, I remember, you know, uh, when you came program on Liberty Conspiracy one night, you were heading out for a vacation up in Maine and, you know, you're in a cabin and you're so dedicated. And I really, really appreciate it. Also, will you tell people, Toby, while we have the chance on the David Knight show, if part of his audience wants to find your rapid fire show, what day and where can they find it? Yeah. So we do a live, uh, two hour show every Wednesday from four to 6 PM, uh, Eastern, and you can go to rapid fire radio.us and you can sign up to be alerted whenever we go live. Sometimes I adjust the time, but depending on life, uh, but, uh, for the most part, that's the, the time that we

go live and, uh, you can always catch it on a replay too, on wherever you find your podcasts or on our social media sites, you know, wherever you get your social media, it's at Cape gunworks and at rapid fire, uh, radio. Um, we, we post to about eight different social media sites. So, um, yeah, you can, you can definitely, um, get involved there. We put some specials of the week on the rapid fire site, uh, GOW at checkout for gun of the week. We do a special review of a certain gun every week, and you can get a special deal on that if you if you're a radio listener or a podcast listener um and if you if you do it live with me from four to six you can actually interact in the chat and i'll get to your questions and whatnot so that's one of the advantages of

listening live but it is it is remarkable that i was mentioning beforehand trying to sort of uh coalesce all the different things that your knowledge base handles and your drive and so on. And, you know, not to sort of blow smoke or whatever, but you are you have a lot of energy, Toby. And I really love the fact that you are always on top of the latest court cases, plus the technology, plus the history. And you respect the history of the founders. You respect the principle of individual liberty. And coming from Massachusetts, it's sad to say that there are so few people in Massachusetts who do that. It's crazy. My family came over on the Mayflower. Gardner Mass is sort of connected with our family. And I just say to myself, I, what happened, you know? So Toby, while we have that

opportunity, I'll, I'll, I'll ask you, uh, I know on Tuesdays with Grace Curley, you do two, eight Tuesdays. So people can call into her program, uh, two o'clock, two, eight Tuesdays at two o'clock with you joining Grace, answering questions that phone lines are always on fire when you're there, no pun intended. But it's been very interesting to see your work in defending the right to keep and bear arms in Massachusetts, and also your excellent commentary about the migration problem, which is really coming to a head in some areas around your area, and also around Foxborough, where the Patriots Gillette Stadium is located and all over the place with hotels being booked for extra money because the governor

of the state, Maura Healey, has declared an emergency. And based on a 1986 Michael Dukakis era statute that was passed, anybody who asks for asylum in Massachusetts, I could pretend to be a foreigner. I could live in a hotel there for as long as I want and get free legal and food. Tell us which one you might want to hit, the right to keep and bear arms in Massachusetts or the migration problem and what you're seeing with Maura Healey and your take on some of the national problems and connections with it. Either one is great, Toby. Sure. Well, let's start off with the migration issue. I'll speak to the extent of my knowledge on this, which I don't like to do usually, but

I actually think it is a very, very important for places like Massachusetts, places like New York, places like New Jersey, places that have constantly virtue signaled that, you know, we're sanctuary states come, you know, or there's no judgment here. And we're not even going to cooperate with immigration and naturalization services like our state stopped working with ICE to deport people. If they were going to be deported, we would house them or give them sanctuary so that they couldn't be deported. Well, now the roosters have come home to roost. You point out that we're a right to shelter state like New York is, which is this 1980s era law that basically says, hey, if you come here, you're under duress, you'll get put up.

And that is the roosters coming home to roost. So my governor, Maura Healey, declared a state of emergency when 60,000 migrants came to Massachusetts. That is a drop in the bucket of what has come across our border on our southern border. Think about Texas and Arizona and California, which has been dealing with this for decades. And I mean, 60,000 is a couple of days worth of border crossing, you know, in some places. And for us to sit in our ivory tower and say that Texas, need to deal with it or you should have to deal with this. right to housing law. I think it was really put on the map when Ron DeSantis shipped 24 migrants or illegal aliens up to Martha's Vineyard, which is a local island right off the coast of Cape Cod here that I've done a lot of work in in my prior adult life as in my construction company but um the funniest part of that was the people came out with their signs we love you we love you now leave uh and there's no room for

you so uh thanks for coming but get the heck off my island and within 24, they were off the island. They were put on a boat headed right back to the mainland. And I heard that they were being stored or housed at the Joint Base Cape Cod, which is our big airport. That makes sense. I didn't know what happened. And, you know, it's interesting because there's this debate about one of the airports in New Jersey. And I couldn't understand, you know, there's there's always this federal encroachment into the airports. And the governor of New Jersey now all of a sudden doing the same sort of thing. Wow. You know, we're all in favor of migrants and so on and so forth. And a lot of it. Yeah, I think a lot of these people

claiming there is an emergency is because they want to get federal money. They want money. That's what it is. But in addition to that, they said, oh, we can't control this. It was at LaGuardia or something. I can't remember which airport it was. And they said, we can't control them bringing in the migrants. And I found out that part of it is it's part of the airport is a military airport. And so they're housing them on hotels on the U.S. government controlled section of this. And it's interesting, Toby, because, you know, I went into the constitutional side of this and I've often mentioned this to listeners on The David Knight Show, viewers of The David Knight Show and on my little show, Liberty Conspiracy, that if you actually look in the Constitution, the word immigration isn't even in it. Immigration was supposed to be a state issue.

And it was 1875 with this ruling in a case called the Chai Lung v. Freeman ruling that the Supreme Court basically created it out of whole cloth. And it's been this massive central government football ever since then. It's a hot potato. And I find it quite interesting because there is a clause in the constitution that allows for if a state legislature or the governor say that their Republican form of government is under duress, is in danger, they can call on the federal government to come in with the militia to assist. It's really the only area where the United States government is allowed to go into the states, but they have

to be called in by the legislature or by the governor if the legislature is out of session. This is exactly what Abbott has done. He has tried to do this, and not only has he not gotten a response he's seen those agents opening up the uh connor connor tina wire they're they're they're they're they're having and they're having encounters with these people and claiming and they're passing that off my orcas is is passing that off as if they're handling those people they're moving them further into the country the center for immigration studies and i have a lot of differences of opinion with them. They discovered that 200,000 migrants were moved into the United States using an airplane app that the Biden administration used these apps to give them free travel to any airport within the United States. And then they just disappeared. And then there's that other story about 85,000 children, parentless children coming across from Guatemala, Chile, you know, through Panama, Mexico, all over the place,

coming into the United States without parents. They're housed in these places. They call them homed. And then they've lost track of the kids. They don't even know where they are. And then you just say to yourself, my God, this is an absolute mess. And you still have these people like Maura Healy who moralize, as I mentioned, sermonize in a way and talk about how great it is to have this migration. What do you think about the term, you know, we often hear this replacement migration thing. I've been looking at what's been going on with Israel

and Palestine and the way that a lot of that area was already populated before the creation of Israel. There were a lot of people who really wanted that state formed and they already had moved a lot of people over there. Now, whether that's nefarious or a template that people are using nowadays, I think there is something to be said to groups of people who want to try to change demographics in certain areas, using their levers of power over government policy to get new types of people into those areas who normally wouldn't be able to afford to go there. I don't get my moves subsidized, but for some reason, these people get free housing and the government supports them all the way from the Central America, all the way to Hyannis.

It's nuts. So what do you think about that terminology? Do you think it's intentional or do you think it's just them with their hearts on their sleeves throwing out money to people that that is the there was a historical birthplace of israel you know 2 000 years ago and it was the first time in our world history where uh there was a diaspora of people from a certain region that came back and re-instituted government and spoke their common tongue and and had um uh um, uh, you know, uh, formed a nation again, that's never happened where a nation has ceased to exist and then come back to their homeland, spoke their native tongue and, and, you know, reestablished a, uh, um, a country.

So I, I would say, I would argue that there was actually a birthright to that place. Whereas the people coming to America right now, um, don't necessarily have that same birthright now. Yes, we're a nation of immigrants. You mentioned you came over on the Mayflower. So did my family. Yeah, my middle name is Winslow. And they came over for, you know, a couple of different reasons, but largely was freedom, right? To establish a country without the king being lording over them and to raise their children in a way that wasn't going to be influenced by government and state-sponsored religion. So all that being said, here we are, you know, 400 and something years later, we're the greatest country in the history of mankind. I think what the nefarious action of what's going on right now is that they are flooding our country with people from all over the world with no intent of assimilation or becoming a productive member of society here to for the greater good of our country. I think there's people here for all different reasons, for, you know, personal reasons, for maybe even some state sponsored reasons. We have no idea who has come in this country that is a sleeper terrorist or or a government actor spy type of situation that has come in because the door is wide open.

And so, you know, there's everyone's going to take advantage of that. Good people, bad people and indifferent people. And so that's that's where we're at. And if you were trying to destroy a country from within. You know, that's the roadmap right there. How else could you do it? You know, you'd weld those doors open literally and figuratively, and you would make it so that people could just come in and infiltrate. And I have been personally trying to get an employee or a person I'm trying to hire for my company who is a very qualified professional who speaks multiple languages, is licensed in six different countries for the profession that I'm trying to bring them in for. And we've spent over

$15,000 over the past two years to try to get visas and immigration papers for them to come work for my company. And it's still being held up. It's still being, and I'm like, man, if I had told them to just swim the Rio Grande, they'd be here by now. And they follow the rules. They're professional people. They come over every once in a while because they have a lot of family here.

And they leave after two or three weeks because their visa expires, their immigration visa expires. And, you know, here we are trying to do the right thing. There's someone who won't be a liability to the system. They'll be able to work and produce income. They'll pay their taxes. They won't be a burden. They have family support here and I can't get them into the country. So, uh, it's, it's unbelievable. It's mind boggling. It's amazing the way the barriers work. Um, you know, Toby, I worked up at, uh, up at the outer limits TV show back in 1996. And, um, uh, I, I took a trip as an American,

I took a trip down to Seattle, just outside of Seattle to go to an X-Files convention on a particular Saturday. So I drove back over the U S border, went back into the United States from Vancouver and, um, where I was staying. And in fact, I lived just down the street from where Cam Neely's family, uh, lived, which was kind of fun. Cam Neely and Michael Fox, Michael J Fox, you know, a lot of hockey up there, big time hockey fans. And so on the way back up, I almost couldn't get back into Canada. And I was warned by somebody, some guy who was just there. He said, oh, you heading back? I was like, yeah, you know, I'm doing a, I work for the Outer Limits. It's a fellowship. And he said,

he said, you be careful how you phrase that. And I was like, what do you mean? He said, because they have quotas. And if they find out that you're working, if your salary is being paid by an institute, an institute, a think tank in the United States. But, you know, I'm like my toothbrush is back there. You know, you think about all these things. And here you got a guy who wants to do good work for you. He's got skills and he's being blocked by this Byzantine ridiculous set of rules at the same time that other people are getting your tax money to support them to live in hotels. It's insane. It's absolutely nuts. And I don't see any end of it at all. It seems very clear that what Joe Biden is doing with this border wall thing, that's not really going to do anything. What do you think could be an answer about this, Toby? Well, I think the only answer that I like to believe is going to happen, that I think will happen, is if there's some irregularities going on in our country right now, and that is our National Guard is operating in every state, from state to state, and as if they've been federalized. And, you know, Trump, one of his executive orders that he signed before he left office was to make him a wartime

president, basically. And that, you know, that that would nationalize the National Guard, if you will. So if you look at it, they're all over the country. And you'll see planes from Maine down in Florida or vice versa. So if you are paying attention and keep track of this, it looks to me like the military has pretty good tabs on what's going on. And I believe that the military is the only solution to the problem. Like if, uh, if you look at, um, all the, all the issues going around in our cities, we have rampant drug use and homelessness and, uh, it's growing. It's really bad. You look at all the places like LA and, and, um, uh, San Francisco, not to mention it's even hitting us up here in Massachusetts on Mass and Cass Avenue. We have tent cities cropping up and it's literally like a zombie, a zombie ville.

Yeah. I know the area you're talking about on Mass Ave. It's terrible. Right. And so how do we get these people help? How do we get our country back under control? I believe the military is the only way. And so, you know, if you get a president in power, again, that is willing to do what needs to be done, then we could, you know, possibly get a lot of people rounded up. And I hate to say it like that. So pedestrian terms, but that's really what it comes down to and actually get them some help. And I think that's really what's going to have to happen because otherwise, you know, our country is going to continue to grade into third world status. And that's really what we're up against

right now. You know, we're going to have human sewage flowing in the streets in a matter of time because of the amount of people living on those streets and not having facilities to use and whatnot. And so the human result is going to be catastrophic. You know, the humanitarian result will be catastrophic unless someone steps in and does something. And the only one who can do it on that largest scale is the federal government. And I hate to say it as a small government guy. But at this point, they've created the problem that will now need to be fixed. And so that's the only way I see it. The military is going to have to step in. Unfortunately, you know, this is this is where unfortunately the the focus on the central government doing this this whole time now puts the guy who's causing all the problems in charge of fixing the problems.

You know, and I just don't I don't see the current guy doesn't have any desire to fix the problem. I actually are creating it. There's no other way to put it than it's being done on purpose. Yeah. And this is one of the things that sort of closed this bit off with this question and feel free to add anything after this, but Toby, do you have any idea, you know, we often hear about, oh, it's the drug cartels. They're funding these guys. Not necessarily. I don't know. I don't know enough about this, but I don't know where these people are getting this money. And there's been coverage. You know, the folks at Redacted have, you know, they've gone to live coverage down in Panama, watching the buses coming up from South America, going through Central America, dropping people off.

And where are they getting the money to be able to go on these giant caravans, whether it's on the trains or there? I don't understand how these people who are fleeing dire circumstances in places like Venezuela and so on, how can they have the resources to travel all that way? I don't know where this money's coming from. Do you have any knowledge on that or speculation? Well, my hunch would tell me that we are now the largest consumer of child sex trafficking in the world. America is. And so I just have to assume that this is the conduit for child and human sex trafficking operations throughout the country because there's really no other explanation for it. Why you would take unaccompanied minors that come into our country with a slip of paper that has a name and a phone number on it. And then they call that person and they say, oh, I'm up in Chicago or whatever. They put the kid on a plane and ship them right to the guy and

he picks them up at the airport. That's what's happening. And so, you know, if that's the case, that's the funding mechanism because there's huge money in it and it's, it's horrible to think, uh, think about, but yeah. And I should mention while, while we were chatting, Toby, I should mention not to just jump in real quick, but I do want to mention again, kudos to the folks at Muckraker. And I saw an interview on Muckraker. I think it was the redacted team spoke with someone from Muckraker and he was down there. He had footage, he had drone footage. They've been going to the airports. They've been going to these places where these kids are getting dropped off and they're asking questions to some of these people. Some of them, they've been going to these places where these kids are getting dropped off and they're asking questions to some of these people. Some of them, they've been able to get shots of their name tags.

They seem to be CIA affiliated in some cases, smuggling kids. And, uh, you can see it up on the screen here. Uh, they've got a ton of footage that they've, uh, now some of it is speculation, but, um, you know, for example, they, they talk about how so many men are coming in here you see a man with a woman but they're saying men are crossing the border with kids who just look like they're drugged now anybody who's been with a little kid on a long journey knows that the kids are going to look like they're knocked out after a while anyway um but they're really investigating this and they're finding a lot of very dark human spuggling stuff they think is going on. And that's muckraker.com.

They've got quite a number of exposés and they've been looking at these places where literally just thousands of kids, only kids, are being put into these places around Texas. And they've got razor wire around them, two layers of razor wire. They've got these Walmarts that they've, they're putting kids into, you know, people used to speculate about what's going on with the Walmarts, you know, now they literally are using Walmarts to house these kids. It's very, very disturbing stuff. And, you know, I just don't, I agree. I don't see how there's going to be any answer for it. I think it's going to be up to the states to try to recognize the constitutional nature of it. But they're not going to get responses from the feds.

That's the problem. And, of course, you get governors like Maura Healey who, rather than actually doing the right thing, which is to say, hey, maybe we shouldn't incentivize people to come here. They're doing the exact opposite thing. They're actually paying people to come. It's nuts. It's, you know, it's crazy. Toby, yeah, final thoughts on that one. Then I want to ask you a little bit about the status of things on firearms in Massachusetts.

And of course, talk about Cape Gunworks. Sure. Yeah. Just to close the loop on that, I know several people who are very involved in Ukraine have sold some medical kits and stuff like that that were being sent. And, you know, this point isn't about where you work. And I was talking with one of them who has funded a lot of operations there that, um, he went there, I don't know, probably a year ago at this point. And, um, they were on the ground and they were walking, uh, some of the, uh, the forest, if you will, along the, border. And they stumbled upon a huge child operation where they were packing kids on buses. And these were obviously Ukrainian kids

that were being taken from the war zones and forwarded up to this loading. It was very clandestine. It wasn't an official operation. And they had to literally stay hidden or else they probably would have got whacked in the process for for knowing about it. But they had eyes on on it. They took pictures and they have evidence and they've been dealing with the State Department about it. But the you know, everybody's got eyes wide shut when it comes to that. But there was, you know, hundreds and hundreds of children being loaded onto buses and being shipped out. And, uh, that, that is just

one of the many, many places where they can get kids from. And, and that, uh, ultimately are being, uh, you know, moved around the world, uh, anonymously because they probably don't have a birth certificate or any type of ID whatsoever. So no one knows if they're alive or dead. And, you know, that's the sad state of affairs and where we're at. And, you know, God help us as a global population that to anyone who facilitates that, because Jesus had the most strong words in in the bible about people who will harm a child and uh he said it's better if you weren't even born or a millstone hung about your neck and cast into the sea so uh there's going to be a day of

reckoning whether it's on this side of eternity or the next side of eternity but um i thank god for those organizations like you just pointed out. There's a lot of them out there doing a lot of good work. We support a bunch. And so hopefully they'll be exposed for who they are and can be brought to justice. Boy, that's a great point, Toby. And, you know, it rings in with, I mentioned on my streaming show, the perverse way that the Ukrainianrainian government right now is bringing teenage girls into hospitals to soldiers as prostitutes to i mean it's just it's to come for the guys who are convalescing and you just think you know you get these destabilization

forces that are out there whatever the sources are of theseescing. And you just think, you know, you get these destabilization forces that are out there, whatever the sources are of these things, whether it's, you know, a, a, a, a so-called authentic conflict between cultures that's been arising for so

long. And you bring up the, the great point about the old Testament and so on with Israel and Gaza, or it's a United States involvement or other nation state involvement or multinational involvement in disposing, displacing the elected government somewhere. We just saw this happen in Pakistan with Victoria Nuland's involvement in Pakistan. And then they pick up the pieces, you know, they blow everything to shrapnel, then they pick up the pieces and they sell the human beings off like little nuggets of gold. It's awful. It's so terrible. Uh, Tony, I mean, uh, uh, Toby, why don't you tell us a little

bit, uh, about, uh, where things stand? You know, last time I spoke to you, we were talking about how, uh, Massachusetts sort of was ground zero for the fight on post Bruin, the government forces throwing everything they can up against the wall to try to make it more difficult for people to buy and sell firearms in Massachusetts. And you had gone up against HD 4420 with just absolute fervor and great, great power. You're still involved there. And in fact, getting more involved with the political world there to try to stop these people. Tell us a couple of things you might want people to know if they're from outside Massachusetts that you're seeing either in

Massachusetts or nationally that might be important to them regarding the right to keep and bear arms. I'd love to hear it. And if I'm putting you on the spot, just let me know. No, it's good. I like being on the spot. Keep me. Keep me on my toes, you know. Okay. So the bottom line is HD 4420 was an act modernizing firearms in Massachusetts that was introduced last, I believe, June by Michael Day, who is a legislator from Stoneham, Massachusetts. And he is on he's the chair of the House Judiciary Committee. So he did this state listening tour for 11 stops. It lasted about six months, five or six months, and went around to different communities in the state and had a listening tour where he said, nothing is on the table. The speaker of the house has tasked me with modernizing our gun laws in a post-Bruin world. So NYSERPA v. Bruin came out in June of 2022, and it changed the game. It really didn't change

anything, honestly, other than the court put the smack down on the inferior courts and said, you guys have been getting it all wrong since Heller. Heller was a landmark case. But yet when there were challenges in a post Heller world, they were not very successful. So the amount of court challenges in post Heller world were, I think, maybe less than 20% successful. So the court system or the inferior courts were still using a interest balancing approach or a tiers of scrutiny approach to gun laws. And Justice Thomas was, you know, had said several times after Heller, but before Bruin, that the Second Amendment has become a disfavored right.

And it is treated in a way that no other right is treated. And nothing could be more true than that. So NYSERPA v. Bruin came along that no other right is treated and nothing could be more true than that. So NYSERPA v. Bruin came along and it was a licensing situation where it was a May issue license state and you couldn't buy a gun without a license, but they yet wouldn't give you a license unless you could show some sort of need for it. So if you didn't have a trained assassin following you home from work every day, then you couldn't give them a good reason why you needed the license. So the bottom line is the Supreme Court struck it down, but they took it a step further and they said, we've been looking at all gun control through this tiers of scrutiny, interest balancing,

two-step approach. And that is one step too many. Because the Second Amendment is an enumerated right, the government took great care to put it there, and it should be treated with a strict level of scrutiny. In the text is the first lens at which you look at all gun laws through. Then you can look at history and tradition at the time of the ratification of the Second Amendment in 1791. So those are the three lenses that you can look at gun control now going forward. So that put that put the burden on government to prove that all of their gun control laws are consistent with our nation's text, history and tradition. That's a hard barrier for them to to meet a heart. That's a very high wall for them to climb. And they know they can't. As Hunter Biden's defense team knows very well now, since a portion of the 68 gun control

act seems to be highly in question because of exactly that standard where back in history, they might've pulled a gun away from a drunken person who was waving it around while they threw them in to cool off for a while. But that was not something where somebody who is an alcoholic and is not displaying any sorts of signs that he's drunk and dangerous at the time, they wouldn't take his gun away. So I think that's quite interesting. And these barriers have a much stronger connection. This new standard under Bruin has a much stronger

connection, I think, to the real sentiment of the founders. Right. And as it should, if you think about it, this is what strikes at the root of the argument for me. The Second Amendment is the only one that says shall not be infringed. So if you've cleared a couple of hurdles as far as text, history and tradition, and you can point to something that's, you know, consistent with our nation's history and tradition, like you just said, disarming the drunk guy who's waving the gun around like, OK, but that's that's consistent. And then if you're an extremely dangerous person, that's consistent with our text, history and tradition. And then look at any other right in the state of Massachusetts for me to exercise my right to keep and bear arms.

I need to take a four hour state mandated class, pay a hundred dollars for that class, or at least a hundred dollars for the most part. And, uh, in that class, I'm told where I can carry, what I can do with it, which gun I can buy, uh, you know, basically the who, what, why, when of gun ownership in Massachusetts. And that's a state mandated class. Once I'm successfully completed that class, I get a certificate. Now I can go down to the local police department and I can apply and I fill out an application and pay another hundred dollars and then give them the application where I'm promptly fingerprinted, photographed, background checked. And prior to the Bruin mandate, I had to give a reason why I had to give three character references and the state could still limit where I was able to carry a gun. They could say, well, you don't have a need.

There's no ninjas following you home trying to kill you. So we're just going to grant this license for any law. Instead of any lawful purpose, we'll grant it for target shooting. So now you can take it to and from the range and that's it. Don't stop at the gas station. Don't stop at the convenience store to pick up bread, milk and OJ. You know, you're you just go to and from and that's it. That's what the government could do.

Yeah. And then now substitute Second Amendment with Fourth Amendment. All right. And so this puts the burden upon the police to issue that license to me. And if they didn't think I was of suitable character, they could deny that license. Now, why don't we have a license for our Fourth Amendment? Right. Why don't you know, if I don't want my house illegally searched and my goods seized upon by the government, I don't need to get a license in order to make sure that doesn't happen. It's just a right. It doesn't happen because it's a right. And so if I had to subject myself to that same standard that we put on the Second Amendment for whatever right, First Amendment, if I needed a license to go to church or if I needed a license for a peaceful assembly, you know, or to protest or to, you know, make a speech, then I think people would be like, wait a minute. No, I have a right. Well, the same thing is true with the Second Amendment. I have a right and liberty is without

license. We have a Murdoch v. Pennsylvania case that came down in 1943. That was a First Amendment case, but the government, the Supreme Court said government cannot charge a fee, sell a license, or issue a permit for the free exercise of a constitutional right, a federally protected constitutional right. So because of the interest balancing tiers of scrutiny threshold that the courts have been meeting for the past few decades uh they've been getting away with murder literally yeah yeah and and so um they've had all these these uh potholes and roadblocks set up in front of peaceful, law-abiding, reasonable people that want to exercise their right to keep and bear arms. And Gard, it actually goes a step further

in my mind than that even. If you go back to the Declaration of Independence, you know the thing, it says, we hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal and are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable or unalienable rights. Right. Right. What is unalienable? What is unalienable? Part of your nature. Well, it means you can't attach it. You can't put conditions on it. There's nobody that can make a claim to it. Right. So it is a right is exactly that. It to have a gun in the house, but you're going to have to get a permit. You're going to have to tell us what it is. You're going to have to put serial numbers on it. You're going to have to get a special license.

You're going to have to lock it up a certain way. Uh-uh. None of that. It's unalienable. It is a right that our founders acknowledged. And they said, what are the three things they said right after that? They said life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Right. Without life, you can't have happiness or the pursuit of happiness or liberty.

Right. So you've got to be able to protect life. And that's exactly what firearms do. They enable you to defend and protect yours and your loved ones. If you can't do that, then you don't have that right. That's why the government is so adamant at wanting to take away Second Amendment rights because they know that that is the one right that protects all the others. It is the tyranny. It is the tyrant safety relief valve for the citizenry. And, you know, Toby, we're speaking with Toby Leary of Cape Gunworks, folks.

And remember, rapid fire. Hit the rapid fire tab at Cape Gunworks dot com and check out the resources there. Just amazing stuff. And of course, you can hear Toby every Tuesday at two in the afternoon on Grace Curley's program, syndicated from the Grace Curley Show and the Howie Carr Network. And the analogous nature of two strands of thought here, Toby, comes to mind, which is, I think, being able to draw the analogy of what would

the founders have done during, say, the Stamp Act, as you draw out that Fourth Amendment example, is excellent. It's a great way to tell people, look, you've got the immediate logic of this. You've got the words themselves. But just if you can go back to when you were a kid, when one was a kid, and you heard about the affront of the Brits saying, imagine them saying, well, you've got to prove to me that there isn't a reason for me to go into your house. You've got to prove to me that there isn't a reason for me to take your gun. I mean, just that is the mindset that we're dealing with. And the redcoats have just been replaced by the DC coats, by the more Healy coats, you know, by the politicians who will try to draw and of course, manipulate statistics.

John Lott has done great work to show the beneficial nature. If people don't even want to go by the morality and the principles of it, they can look at the consequential outcome of it, which I wouldn't do necessarily to say that that is the answer, but it undercuts even their argument of, we need gun control to pursue this end of safer streets. We need to restrict your right to be able to defend yourself as a law-abiding citizen. When they know that the prohibition will not stop the criminally minded people. They've got a financial incentive and they got a mindset that says, why should I bother paying attention to these people? I'm engaged in criminal activity in the first place. Right. So it's quite interesting to see how all this goes. And I love the way that you defend

these things. I know we're up against the clock now and you have taken great time. I know I came in like four or five minutes after 10 o'clock. So I want to make sure that we give you the opportunity to tell people again, as we sort of close off, if there are any other thoughts that you want to mention about things they should be watching in Massachusetts, because that HD 4420 is still going to be popping up. They're doing everything they can now to try to challenge Bruin, challenge Bruin with all these different things to create lawfare to make you guys have to spend money to try to stop legislation. And I'd love to sort of pick your mind a little bit about what you see

on the state level or the national level and, of course, where they can find you. Yeah, absolutely. And thank you for pointing that out because I got off on a little tangent there. But HD4420 has now become HD4607. So it was reintroduced last week. And the same thing they tried to do this summer when they introduced 4420 was push it through as quickly as possible.

Right now, everyone's clapping and applauding Maura Healey's tax relief bill, which I've done as well. Anytime there's tax relief, I'm on board. I don't care who signs it into law. So she's getting all the attention for that right now. But what they're doing quietly behind the scenes is trying to ram 4607 down our throats. Tomorrow at the Gardner Auditorium, there is a hearing on this, a public hearing. We need everybody who is interested in protecting the right to keep and bear arms in Massachusetts to show up in person or virtually. If you want to speak today, there is the deadline to register to speak. I will be speaking hopefully tomorrow. Everyone gets three minutes. I've registered already. But this is of paramount importance. pouring of the people. We have 600,000 gun owners in the state and we need to up those numbers,

number one. Number two, we need all of them to get activated and involved in the fight and call, email, write letters, and troll their social media of any of their representatives, the governor, and the state reps, as well as the state senators and also those who introduced the bill and, uh, those who are on the committee that's going to hear this. So tomorrow we have a hybrid joint committee at the Gardner auditorium at 11 AM. And it's going to be, it's got to be action-packed we need everybody to mobilize we need everybody to show up and we need our voices to be heard they didn't listen to the 11 uh listening tour stops they came out with this uh pre-written bill 141 pages long now it's been whittled down to 122 pages of gun control

where they're trying to restrict the the masses because of the evil deeds of a few and also because of their own inadequacies in keeping our cities safe. So that's the most important thing going on right now in my world. And I know, Toby, when it was 4420, we went through some of the specifics on that. And I assume many of them still remain as they are basically just going to put as much out to in the face of ruin. Do we still have um and restrictions on sales of certain types of firearms that would eventually winnow down the types of firearms that you could sell in massachusetts and again this is regardless of the bruin decision they're just they're just doing this what sort of facets would you like to bring to mind to people if they're watching from outside massachusetts or if they're watching inside mass Massachusetts and they can go to Gardner Mass and check out, it is the Gardner Auditorium in Gardner

Mass, right? Or is it? No, no. It's the Gardner Auditorium at the state house. Oh, it's in the state house. I didn't realize. Yeah. That was stupid of me. Um, so yeah. Um, so, so can you tell people a little bit about a couple of these, uh, these, these facets that still remain that would be really alarming? Oh yeah. There's a, there's a million of them but one is they're trying to ban an entire category of firearms which heller said you can't do any gun that is in common in ordinary use cannot be banned period and they're trying to ban all semi-automatic rifles um that have detachable magazine and at least one other feature like a pistol grip or a vertical foregrip or a detachable stock, whatever the heck that means. So there's a new features test. And

from my count, I'll be able to sell about three semi-automatic rifles out of the thousands of available commercially right now. So that's basically an entire categorical ban on semi-automatic rifles in the state of Massachusetts. Um, you mentioned the, the kids, I don't know, um, if that, that provision still is in there, but they do have anyone under 18 cannot possess or, or shoot a, um, a handgun if they're non-residents in the state of Massachusetts, period. Yep. And which is absolutely ridiculous. But it is a massive expansion on red flag laws. And the one the biggest thing on red flag laws is the due process element of it. So we just talked about the Fourth Amendment.

Well, that's that's the problem is and you aptly pointed out that the Brits used to talked about the fourth amendment. Um, well that's, that's the problem is, and you aptly pointed out that the Brits used to have it the other way. You prove your innocence and that's what happens with red flag laws. And also with people who are denied, um, the license to carry for suitability reasons, uh, they now are denied and then told, well, you can appeal in court and show how we got it wrong. So the due process is so out of whack with our American jurisprudence and our history of this country is you're innocent until proven guilty. So that's a that's a huge thing. But anyway, there's also they did give back a couple of things that they knew they were going to lose on. But the bottom line is it's one hundred and twenty two pages of unconstitutional law. It's a total temper tantrum in response to the Bruin

decision. I predict predicted it right after Bruin happened. I said, Massachusetts is going to make this worse before it gets better. They know their days are numbered. This is a stall tactic. This is them, uh, you know, putting out something that we're going to have to spend money and time on to get our rights restored and back. The worst part of it, Gard, is I believe that they've committed malfeasance in their official capacity just by introducing this bill. That point you brought up, I had never thought of that, the way you describe malfeasance. I'm jumping in. Please go ahead. Yeah. Yeah. No, it's just they put their hand on a Bible and raised their right hand. Ironically, they want to change the oath of office that they swear as well. That's another conversation for another day. But they they did swear to protect the Constitution as soon as they introduce this bill.

And because it is unconstitutional, they have three major court cases to that have told them that Heller, McDonald and Bruin now. And they still. Feel like they have constitutional authority to do this. They don't. There is constitutional limits on their authority and they do it anyway. So Madison wrote in the Federalist Papers 44 that they don't have the right to do this. There's limits on the constitution. There's limits on their official capacity as legislators. And so yet they do it anyway. So that is the definition of fraud is knowing If a police officer did that, they would lose their qualified immunity and could be personally and severably liable and sued personally. The legislature has protected itself and can't be sued. But if you can prove that they are violating rights, then they will lose their constitutional, uh, their protection. Yeah. Their protection. It's you, it's code, uh, USC 18, I think two 42, I could actually look it up

for you, but, um, for the sake of time, uh, I will, yeah, here it is right here. I got it. It's Title rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution laws of the United States shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year or both. It gets better. And if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or in such acts include the use of or attempted use of threatened of a dangerous weapon, explosive or fire shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 10 years or both. And if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section, I want to point out that the people who need to protect themselves with firearms and if those rights are deprived of them by these unfaithful

legislators, the implications are life and death. And right here, if the acts result in death committed in violation of this section, such act include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to kill shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years for life or both and may be sentenced to death. So this carries the death penalty if you get it wrong guard. And now I know that they basically sit in their ivory towers and they're untouchable, but the bottom line is if they willingly and knowingly conspire to violate your and my constitutionally protected rights, I don't see how 18 USC section two 42 doesn't apply. That's excellent. Yeah. Yeah. That research is so,

so key. And there's so many things that you can bring up when you speak. And I was thinking the Gardner auditorium there again, uh, over in the state house. Um, and you've got only three minutes, so it'll be interesting. You know, there's so much you could pack in there, Toby. I don't know what you choose to be able to discuss. It's like, you've got, uh, you know, such a bounty of stuff. It's, uh, well, we'll see how it goes, but I hope people will check it out. And, um, and you know, so what time is that again? Tomorrow at 11, 11, 11 AM. And I believe you can watch it virtually as well. If you go to, uh, go to gun owners action leagues website goal.org they have all the links right there it's kind of the yeah the basic page where it compiles you know i'm just it makes me think about all the time because you're down in hyannis you

got to drive up to boston now to do this all the time that they take from a, I mean, you know, we know that we know the score. We got to keep fighting for freedom. Toby, you are remarkable. And I'm so glad I was able to fill in for David and, you know, introduce you to his audience again here and tell people about what you do at Cape gunworks, what you're doing in Massachusetts, as I think, an example of some of the fights that other people must engage in other states and other localities and other countries, whether it's England or Australia. The examples abound where the gun grabbers are harming people and putting them at risk. And so, you know, I mean, to close it off with sort of that grandiose statement, I really

appreciate you coming on and your work too, Toby. Really, thank you. Anytime, Gard. I appreciate you having me on and thanks for sharing the listeners from the show. This is great. And hopefully people will start to get activated and get involved. It's a great way to start my Monday. I appreciate it, Toby.

And I'll be listening to you tomorrow with grace, buddy. Okay. Great. Well, I hope I can get on because I might be still at the state Monday. I appreciate it, Toby. And I'll be listening to you tomorrow with grace, buddy. Okay. Great. Well, I hope I can get on because I might be still at the, at the state house. Oh, that's right. You might. Yeah. Yeah.

All right. Well, into the state house, if you can't, uh, if I, if I, if I can come, if I can get a wig or whatever, I could pretend to be you, but I, that wouldn't work. Yeah. Just, you'll be able to watch it virtually. So, uh, I would say sign in and, and sign in and there'll be a lot of good content. That's for sure. Good stuff.

Good stuff. Thanks, Toby. Toby Leary at Cape Gunworks online and check them out and what they do. And thank you for taking the time, Toby, to talk to the Dave Knight audience. I appreciate it. Absolutely. Anytime. I'll be there.

Thanks. All right, man. Talk to you soon. All right. Thanks, Toby. Great stuff from Toby Leary good man good man and uh we're gonna take a break now folks and come back with our next guest the inimitable the awesome the fantastic you know him James Bovard coming up on The David Knight Show. Thank you. you're listening to The David Knight Show

And again, we're going to be coming up towards that season, Halloween and Christmas So I thought I'd play those for you as we get ready with nice, relaxing music from David Knight Amazing work And now we get to enjoy some interesting, very important breaking information, plus something that allows us to sort of take away some carry out intellectual ammunition, some appreciation for history, some good people in the past as we get to talk to a good person of today. On the screen, you can see James Bovard's Twitter feed, and we will talk more about how you can find James Bovard coming up in just a moment. Right now, I'd like to welcome our guest, James Bovard, coming to us via audio.

Jim, we are on. How are you? Hi, Jim. Are you there? Okay. Come on. How are you? Hi, Jim. Are you there? Okay. Come on. Hey, Jim. Shit. No, you're here.

I got you. Let's see if we can bring him back up. Just to double check. Looks like his mic is on. He is on. Well, I'll tell you what we're going to do. Are we on?

Hey, Jim, are you there? Come on, dude. Hey, I'm here with you. We can hear you. Hey, am I coming through? You're coming through. Can you hear me? I can hear you fine. I'm coming through? You're coming through. Can you hear me? I can hear you fine.

You're coming through here. I'm going to put a little message in here for you. It sounds like you're good to me, Jim. Yep. You sounded good to me, Jim. So, well, I guess we'll just bring him back. Hey, Jim. Let's go. I'll tell you what we're going to do, Jim. I'm going to bring you. Hold on a second. Hey, Jim. Try it again. Hi. Can you hear me? Looks like we can hear him, but he can't hear me. So what I'm going to do is

grab my phone and just bring him on by phone. Hey, Jim. I think you should be able to hear me, but if not, we'll just do this and we'll go like this. See if we can get him on the phone. And if not, well, that's okay. Let me see here. Alrighty. See if we can reach him and uh give him a quick call okay try one more time see if this works as an alternative yes i would love it. Hey, Jim, I'm just going to... Hey, Jim, we got you on phone.

Yep, we could hear you on our side on the computer, but you couldn't hear me answering you. So I thought... Yes, yes. So I thought if you still like to go for it, we can do it via the speakerphone if you'd like to do that. All right, That sounds great. Jim Bovard is with us, folks. And so let me bring this up on the screen. Jim, you had a very, very good you always have great pieces, but you recently put out something that sort of ties in with some of the things that people might

have heard recently have been going on revelations about the FBI and how they, uh, as usual seem to be targeting people, uh, especially people who have ideologies that they don't seem to like. And over at FFF, the future freedom foundation, uh, they might have seen one of your most recent pieces. And I think it's kind of nice because you get to tie in contemporary stories with stories about people that can sort of enrich us and give us a little better historical perspective and appreciation, a positive that we can get out of these frustrations. And in particular, you were talking about habeas corpus and you mentioned Macaulay and the Ghosts of Tyranny Past Part Two. It's a two-part piece. And I'd love for you to talk to people about what inspired you to write

this two-part piece. They can find this over at Future Freedom Foundation. And how you felt as you started to go into it, why you went into it, and some of the key parts of what you put into this excellent two-part piece. Well, it was trying to put a handle on the things I learned over the decades and what I learned from one of the greatest English writers who's a wonderful rank style and gung-ho pro-freedom and understood the nature of government politics far better than the vast majority of historians. This is Thomas Macaulay. He was born in 1800, died in 1859. He was famous as one of the best essayists to ever write in English language. He also did a History of England, which I found fascinating when I read it when I was about 20 years old in the late 1970s. him is how the legal procedures are vital for individual liberty. It's well and good to have these broad rhetoric, broad declarations about rights of man, this, that, and the other, but it's the nuts and bolts of the court procedures, the legal technicalities that make a difference as far as whether or not people are free or not and it's funny because at

the time when I read it you know I was I was charmed by his writing but his stuff on the nature of habeas corpus and the talking about how the English kings and their tools would abuse torture in the 1600s that That was a historic relic. It was kind of like, you know, it wouldn't have any relevance to me as an American. That country had just celebrated its 200th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. There were a lot of mistakes America had made in the past, but things like torture and habeas corpus, well, those were ancient history as far as problems go. 9-11 proved me wrong.

So right, so right. The relevance of this is unbelievable. Your work, especially covering the attacks on civil liberties from things like the Patriot Act, 9-11, the mass surveillance, destruction of civil liberties in so many areas have been absolutely remarkable. And Jim, you might want to mention a couple of your books if people want to see the deep dives you've done into this. I know that attention deficit democracy is a great one to start, but why don't you mention a couple of your books, and I'll flash that up on the screen for people to check out your website as well. Okay, thanks a lot. Terrorism and Purity, Trampling Freedom, Justice, and Peace that Rid the World of Evil. That came out in late 2003. That was my first frontal attack on the

abuses of Bush's war on terror. Basically, as soon as George W. Bush promised to rid the world of evil, I knew America was screwed. Because when you have that broad claim to power, nothing's going to hold you back. And you just go, you know, everything is in the name of fighting evil. It's like you're going back to the Middle Ages and you're trying to wipe out heretics. Yeah, yeah, that's so right. on the FBI secretly targeting people it calls extremists, is this notion of heretics is still around, and the vast expansion of federal surveillance

has meant far more Americans can be tagged as heretics or potential heretics by federal agencies. And once the agencies do that, it's kind of like, well, let's just vacuum up their email. Let's vacuum up their history on the internet. And let's maybe send an informant out to see if we can stir up some trouble. Yeah. Yeah. It's really amazing. I think the prominence of this really should not be discounted. This is a really important thing. I remember how many people were talking about it when Judge Napolitano wrote about this, and he was on Fox News with his

program. And you've maintained your focus on this. Before we get into that British history and so on, let's turn to that breaking story that you had published over at the New York Post on October 5th. Is the FBI turning Trump supporters into terrorist targets? And a lot of people were talking about this, Jim. Very, very good. You say Donald Trump supporters are now the FBI terrorist investigation in their crosshairs, according to a new report in Newsweek. The agency has created a new category of extremists that it seeks to track and counter, Donald Trump's army of MAGA followers. And strangely enough, Hillary Clinton appeared on

television to seemingly support that, almost as if it was coordinated. Strange, isn't it, Jim? It's almost as if they have a narrative to push. Tell us a little bit more about this, the result, A-G-A-A-V-E, anti-government, anti-authority, violent extremism. Yeah, the acronym for that looks like a typo for a sugar substitute. Yeah. But it's interesting. There was a guy, William Arkin, very good investigative journalist, did this piece for Newsweek. He said the great majority of the FBI's current anti-government investigations are of Trump supporters. And what the FBI has done is say that if someone is, you know, pushing, is doing something in furtherance of political and

or social agendas, then that might be sufficient for the FBI to start checking them out. And so almost, you know, lots of political activists are doing things in furtherance of political agendas. This is basically the definition of being a political activist. But now you've got the FBI saying, well, if we don't like your activism, then we're going to treat you as a practical, like a terrorist suspect. It's amazing. You say here the FBI recently vastly expanded the supposed agave peril by broadening suspicion

from furtherance of ideological agendas to furtherance of political and or social agendas. Now, how any of that has anything to do with actual criminal activity, I'd like to know how this can actually be excused under the constitutional paradigm of the founders. I'm curious. And it really is amazing. And what you brought up there is, as you mentioned, it's targeting strident Republicans with some of the same counterterrorism methods honed to fight al-Qaeda. Now, you might want to, if you have the opportunity, go back into a little bit of the Patriot Act and the so-called fight on terrorism that I think many of us knew would be directed on so-called domestic terrorism. And Jim, you have here, the FBI conducted more than 5,500 domestic terrorism assessments, as they call them, in 2021, a tenfold increase since 2017 and a 50-fold increase since 2013. And of course, by doing that, they can claim, well, we're seeing so much more domestic

terror activity when they're the ones who are engaging in whatever make-work activity they want to make. Well, and this is something that's given up talking points for President Biden's re-election campaign. Oh, yeah. You have Biden is, you know, top-stopping that the biggest threat to America is white supremacy, domestic terrorism. And, you know, there are so many errors in that assertion,

but the FBI is trying to help out by concocting a lot of new terrorist investigations, many of which are complete BS, as a number of FBI whistleblowers have said. But this is something that the news media basically wants to echo Bynes' points. And so there's been very little hard analysis of these claims by most of the media. Yeah. And, you know, I'm reminded of Jim Jordan's committee bringing up the fact that the FBI was getting pointers from Ukrainian sources to investigate Americans over here. That was something that they exposed a couple of months ago. Matt Taibbi wrote about it. And you have here from the Newsweek piece, a top official told Newsweek last year, we've become too prone to labeling anything we don't like as extremism.

And then any extremist is as a terrorist. The House weaponization of the federal government subcommittee warns that, quote, the FBI appears to be complicit in artificially supporting the administration's political narrative. The narrative of domestic violent extremism is the greatest threat facing the United States. And you have here whistleblower Steve Friend complained of current FBI leadership, quote, there is this belief that half the country are domestic terrorists and we can't have a conversation with them. This is a fundamental belief that unless you're voicing what we agree, you are the enemy. You're either with us or you're with the terrorists, right? I mean, to quote George Bush.

Right, Jim? Yeah, yep. And just take a guess which category Garth Goldsmith lists. So right. So right. And you've got this here. This is very, very key. And we sort of go back in history a little bit here. You say, did the Biden administration secretly want Newsweek to vindicate the fears of legions of Trump supporters? Perhaps those assessments in vast number are repeating a tactic used against Vietnam War protesters. FBI agents were encouraged to conduct frequent interviews with anti-war activists to, quote, enhance the paranoia endemic in such circles and, quote,

get the point across that there is an FBI agent behind every mailbox, according to an FBI memo from that era. So it works in two ways. It gyms up fear from the people watching it from the outside saying, oh, well, there must be some domestic terrorist threat. You get CNN putting these people on, I mean, literally employing war criminals like John Brennan. And then you get the other part of it, which is people who might feel like they're being targeted, are now made paranoid. So you get a two-prong effect here, Jim. Yeah, and it just stirs up, you know, it throws rocks at so many hornets' nests. But this is what, I think this is part of the purpose, and it's out of control. There's little or no oversight by Congress or by the courts,

and the FBI's shown for 100 years it cannot be trusted with arbitrary secret power. Oh, so true. And you go at the close of it, you talk about will the FBI's interventions in the 2024 presidential election be even more brazen than its 2016 and 2020 stunts? Will the agency exploit its assessments to recruit knuckleheads to engage in another pre-election Keystone Cops plot to kidnap a governor as it did in Michigan in 2020? And we saw just recently,

the last three of those suspects, they were found not guilty. And the machinations of the FBI working for political purposes, not for the protection of people, are so manifest that, to me, honest FBI agents must be pulling their hair out, Jim. They must be going nuts saying, what are you doing here? Yeah, well, there are some honest FBI agents and some of them have become whistleblowers. Yeah. And I think we'll probably see more of that as time goes on.

Yeah. I hope we do because, I mean, it's a frustrating thing because it's so difficult to get the, you know, there's the old saying, truth will out. It doesn't apply to inside the beltway because it's so difficult to find out what these agencies are doing. But every now and then there's a leak or this or that, whatever. And you can kind of pick up the ball and run with it if you're paying attention. Well, it's really remarkable. You know, Jim, up here in New Hampshire, as some of David Knight's viewers know, a good friend of mine and a broadcaster named Ian Freeman just got sentenced.

Yeah, you know about Ian, eight years in federal prison for dealing in crypto, you know, in Bitcoin. Oh, that's so sad. Yeah. It's so sad. And, you know, the thing that really got me and I mentioned this in an email to David when he was, you know, he read it on the air last week. It was a week ago today, actually, almost 10 years to the day that they sentenced Ross Ulbrich to life in prison. And originally the sentencing for Ian was supposed to happen on 9-11, Jim. So I think they're clearly trying to send some signals.

Yeah. And they've they've hated the Free State Project people. As you say, they've tried to infiltrate them with the FBI over and over and over, whether it's through trying to get them to sell drugs or do something bad. And constantly Free State Project members, they're able to sift through these people and weed them out. They get rid of them. But with the thing with Ian, I went up to the court, Jim, and you get this temple to the state, this federal district court. And it's heavily modified outside, very, very well-protected in ways that you wouldn't realize unless you were actually looking for it. They've got flowers planted in these gigantic stone things so that you can't drive any car close to the building or anything like that. And then you get inside and of course, you can't carry your phone,

you can't carry a camera, you can't do any of this stuff. So you might as well leave it in the car. They don't even take care of the phones properly. You can't put it in a little bag with your name on it. It's out there with all of them. So anybody leaving can just pick your phone up and just walk away with it. I mean, it's just ridiculous. Yeah. You'd never see a private establishment operating that way, like a restaurant. Oh yeah. We'll just leave your phone in the, in the container with all these other ones. It's ridiculous, you know? So I get in there and one of the things that struck me, Jim, and I'm sure you've experienced this sort of thing with some of the, the, the dark mentalities of these people.

And I think many times they do, they don't realize that they're using their room for power to engage in some very aggressive and slippery activity. What happened was I got there up in the upstairs. They have this hallway with the different courts and the court where Ian was going to appear had someone standing, sometimes sitting in front of it. He was a federal official. And I said, I walked behind someone else and he turned to this person who was about to open up the doors that were closed. And he said, nothing had started. We're 15 minutes away from the start of the sentencing. And he says, oh, it's all filled. So he goes, you can go to the spillover room and watch the video feed.

So last time I was there, that's what I had to do. I had to go to the spillover room for a little while. And I thought, you know, I'm actually, I'm going in, I'm going into the main room. I don't care if this guy tries to stop me. He can try to put his arm on me or, you know, his hand on me or whatever. I just want to test this because I got a vibe that he was lying. I said, I don't think this room is empty. So I went in and sure enough, space is all over the benches. And so after I sat down, a news reporter from the only ABC affiliate in New Hampshire, she came in after me. She got another space. There were still lots of spaces on the bench a lot of empty space and um ian had not come in yet with his attorney mark sisti and uh then someone else tried to come in and the guy comes in behind him that the official comes in behind him says no

there's no room literally you can see the room it was like it was like kafka-esque it was like look it was insane the guy's point is like, it was like Kafka-esque. It was like, look, it was insane. The guy's point is like, well, there's a seat there. There's one there. People are moving over like, yeah, you can sit right here. And the guy's like, no, no, it's not going to happen. He almost arrested it. Yeah. He almost arrested a couple of people in there. And I realized, Jim, what was going on was they wanted to make it look like the court was sparsely populated so that they would demoralize ian they didn't want him to think they wanted him to think that his friends hadn't shown up i mean it's just

unbelievable uh it just that's bad yeah it's it's amazing the stuff they'll do to somebody they're sending them away for eight years for doing nothing you know it's crazy you know let's let's um to put to put, to put the positive side on this, Jim, what you did with your two part piece about the Macaulay books was great. The first part was so interesting talking about how you picked up this book for 75 cents just outside this library at university of Maryland. And then you go into the history, the printer from 1842, and you talk a lot about the principles that Macaulay discussed, especially coming from this, the British jurisprudential tradition and the Magna Carta. Would you like to express to the David Knight audience some of the things that drove you to write about this Macaulay's history of England and the Habeas Corpus Act in particular? Sure. I mean, as I mentioned, there was a sense of my being very naive when at the time I first read it, because I assumed a lot of these lessons of history were no longer relevant to the U.S.

because there are a lot of great things in Thomas Macaulay one of the things that makes me roll my eyes as he talks about how how political science is a progressive science and how folks are learning and how government is getting better and it's almost like a trend line almost like biological science discoveries so but the actual history is that things are forgotten or things are buried. And that was part of what inspired me to write basically a tribute to Macaulay and to his wisdom. There were so many things that were taken as self-evident truths 200 years ago that have been completely forgotten. And that was part of what I sought to do with pulling out some of his quotes, some of his best quotes.

He had a number of quotes, a number of attacks on the John Stewart meal type utilitarians. And that's relevant, too, because he was whacking them for being people that memorized a few phrases and thought they had completely understood the nature of government because of that. And I'm not saying there's any parallels nowadays, but anyhow. Yeah, yeah. Well, it is interesting, too, because to me, Jim, it all has to do with the artifice of power over people and the various excuses they will give, whether it's Marx's claptrap that supposedly he's helping the little guy and that supposedly the state will get eliminated if you only have a dictatorship of the proletariat, somehow the state will wither away, or it's the corporatism slash fascism that

we see rife around so many states today, thanks to the central banking and government privilege that they assume, because they're going to be bringing in all their special interests. And, you know, the habeas corpus movement that we see with, and this is something that I've brought up, goes hand in hand with the concept of jury nullification. And I think that that is, these are, yeah. So let's talk about habeas corpus, what it means and why it's, it's really important, especially nowadays.

Okay. I'm a bit of a deadline here today. So I'll, I'll throw out a few comments. Habeas corpus is basically a, a legal, it goes back to Magna Carta or actually much further. It says, the literal translation is bring up the body. And so it means that governments cannot have secret arrests and, you know, seize people and hold them without filing criminal charges against them. And that was a standard in the U.S. mostly prior to the 9-11 terrorist attacks. And then there were so many exemptions to it from there. And then you had George Bush with his enemy combatants that basically said anybody he called an enemy combatant had no rights forever. Yeah. So, yeah. Bush, George W. Bush did. And also talk a little bit about jury nullification as well and sort of wrap that up. So that allows you to do your thing. And then I'll be able to give the audience this,

the remainder of this great piece on Macaulay and the Ghosts of Tyranny Pass Part Two. I really appreciate you being able to be on here sort of to whet the appetite. And and we're going to dig into this piece now. Hey, thanks so much for having me on guard and keep up the hell raising. Thanks, Jim. I appreciate it. And I'm lucky I didn't get arrested at that court. I was so upset. I left. I was getting too angry. I left. I couldn't I couldn't handle it anymore. So. Well, well, you didn't get arrested that day. Yeah, yeah.

Anyway, Jim, thanks so much. James Bovard, you are an amazing saint, Jim. I really appreciate it. Thanks so much for your kind words and encouragement. All right, buddy. We'll talk to you soon. All right, bye. Yeah, you know, folks, it's interesting talking about Jim Bovard being on deadline.

Let me bring this up for you because I hadn't planned to do this, but I'd like to make this a little bit larger and then wrap things up with a couple of breaking stories. Just to let you know also, if you're looking for a reiteration of what I said about the guilds and the history of the guilds and things like that, I'll do that tonight on the Liberty Conspiracy Show at 6 o'clock. That'll be on Rockfin and on Rumble. And if you want to find the origin of many of the stories that I've

been discussing, a lot of these stories are covered in the Sunday News Assembly from yesterday at my Substack. And if you want to follow me, I haven't even brought it up. If you want to follow me, it's at Guard Goldsmith on Twitter. And i want to thank everybody over in rockfin chat uh for their great comments and also over in rumble chat for your great comments uh really really good to see everybody there and um i also want to say thank you for your thoughts on the sound and things like that as i as i handled that for uh for dav talked to Jim. It's very interesting to see how the government is trying to portray these people over the long term, whether they're Trump supporters or Ron Paul supporters. They're just going to continue pushing this narrative.

And it goes all the way to even people who remember what George Bush had to say. You're either with us or you're with the terrorists. So here is the Macaulay piece and the ghost attorney past part two. And feel free to drop your comments over in Rockfin chat. That'd be awesome. I'll check for those. General McGuffin, Jason, thanks for being there. Aaron Moss, very good to see you all. And also in the Rumble chat as well, which I haven't had a chance to check out yet, just on my second computer here. So here it is. He says, reposing with a favorite author in the Virginia Tech Library in 1976, I savored one zinger after another in Thomas Macaulay's History of England. Macaulay hailed the Habeas Corpus Act of 1679 as, quote, the most stringent curb that ever

legislation imposed on tyranny, a law that adds to, quote, the security and happiness of every inhabitant of the realm. A petition for a writ of habeas corpus, Latin for produce the body, compels government officials to bring a detained person before a judge to be either formally charged or released, which is what the Guantanamo prisoners asked for for quite a while. And of course, which is something that they wanted to slip past courts to be able to hold Americans under the Obama administration and to hold journalists and whistleblowers. Habeas corpus was enshrined in the U.S. Constitution even before the Bill of Rights was added.

In 1969, the Supreme Court declared that the writ of habeas corpus is the fundamental instrument for safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary and lawless state action. And of course, they do a lot of other things legally through takings and licensures and for safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary and lawless state action. And of course, they do a lot of other things legally through takings and licensures and things like that without actually apprehending our bodies and putting them in jail. They just threaten to put us in jail, putting us in a virtual jail through their threats to make us comply with their demands. So this can be translated in many, many ways, I think. So the Latin for produce the body. It's the fundamental instrument in 1969. They declared it was the, the Supreme

Court said it's the fundamental instrument for safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary and lawless state action. That, of course, coming from the Supreme Court, which you will have to pay or you will go to jail. So a little bit of an irony there. Macaulay provided a wonderful roundup of ghosts of tyranny past. As America celebrated the 200th anniversary of its independence, however, in 1976, I assumed that stuff about habeas was as irrelevant as the flintlock muskets used at the Battle of Bunker Hill. And then George W. Bush proved me wrong. When President Bush promised to rid the world of evil a few days after the 9-11 attack,

I knew America was screwed. Because dozens of bad guys hijacked airplanes on September 11, 2001, the U.S. President miraculously acquired the prerogative to arbitrarily designate and perpetually detain anyone in the world he labeled an enemy combatant. Bush, and of course, they broke the Fourth Amendment through the TSA every day, every minute. Bush subsequently declared that he also had absolute power over illegal non-combatants. Anyone who was suspected of supporting terrorists or violent extremists or whatever forfeited all their rights. Again, if the federal government wants to go after enemies outside this country, they have two

ways to do it. They can declare war in the Congress against the nation state. And if they want to go after enemies that are not part of a nation state's military, then they have to issue letters of marque and reprisal, allowing the president to hire mercenaries. Bush's decree made habeas corpus as irrelevant as it had been before the Magna Carta was signed in 1215. The president's executive order also negated all the judicial procedures and protections developed since 1789 to safeguard the rights of individuals seized by the government. At the same time, Justice Department lawyers and FBI agents swooped down on more than a thousand immigrants, jailing them on any flimsy pretext they could find and denying them any legal rights

or access to lawyers. Georgetown University law professor David Cole observed, quote, never in our history has the government engaged in such a blanket practice of secret incarceration, end quote. Federal judges vehemently protested, but the abuses continued. I was astounded that Bush's proclamation did not spur a sweeping backlash. A few pundits and Democrat members of Congress groused, but not enough to raise a ruckus. Throughout history, politicians have concocted outlandish pretexts to claim boundless power, but they have usually gotten smacked down by contemporaries. But America's purported leaders were more craven or more clueless than the English statesmen who thwarted the absolutist Stuart Kings almost 400 years earlier. A 1621 parliament report eloquently warned, quote, if the king founds his authority on arbitrary and

dangerous principle, it is requisite to watch him with the same care and to oppose him with the same vigor, as if he indulged himself in all the excesses of cruelty and tyranny, end quote. Jim Bovard writes, Bush's enemy combatant declaration was the epitome of the arbitrary and dangerous principles cited by Parliament, but most of the Washington establishment shrugged, nodded, or applauded. In retrospect, the Bush administration was just getting warmed up. I was charmed by McCulay's writings because his casual comments exposed more truth than most contemporary historians reveal in an entire book. Macaulay immortalized an odious Scottish minister of the late 1600s as, quote, the man who had first introduced the thumbscrew into the jurisprudence of his country. End quote. Great damn line. Although, I thought,

when I read it 40 years ago. Luckily, Americans were far too enlightened and civilized to worry about that type of whoops. After 9-11, President Bush left no barbarity behind as he created a secret worldwide torture regime. On August 1st, 2002, the Bush Justice Department secretly redefined torture banned by federal law and the U.S. Constitution to refer only to pain and suffering equivalent in intensity to organ failure or even death. The new definition nullified a long history of U.S. court precedents and international treaties. White House counsel, there he is, I've often mentioned him, Alberto Gonzalez, dismissed concerns about whether the U.S. government was violating the Anti-Torture Act and other prohibitions

by invoking the Commander-in-Chief Override Power, whatever that is, another bizarre invention of Bush's legal wizards. And again, I'll mention this, folks. Don't forget, after 9-11, the Bush administration sent White House counsel Alberto Gonzalez to Congress to ask them not to declare war, which is the only constitutional thing they can do unless they're going to issue letters of mark and reprisal on either of those military fronts. Ron Paul, who was not in favor of invading Iraq or Afghanistan, said, look, I oppose any of these military excursions, but this sort of meddling is being done in an unconstitutional manner at the outset. So he offered a declaration of war. He got three votes. I know that Tom Tancredo was one of them, and Ron Paul didn't

even vote for his own bill. Of course he didn't. So this is very clear. Part of the reason they did that, they did not want places like Romania, in places like Libya, and they would have non-U.S. people engage in the torture so they had plausible deniability. They did this on federal government-rented land on Cuba, of course, Guantanamo Bay. Ron DeSantis visited. He must have known what was going on. Of course, that was before, as I mentioned, started to mention at the start of the program today, before he became governor of Florida and signed two bills one year apart, basically making it a felony to criticize the what the government claims is anti-Semitic. So if you say Israel out of Palestine on the side of a board with spray paint on the side of a building, that somehow is worse than, oh, I don't know, putting up a pentagram or writing Zofo, like the Led Zeppelin symbol. You're still graffiting somebody else's property. What's the difference, right? Here's more. And there's a difference between directly threatening an individual. That's criminal threatening. That's different. If you write on somebody's building, I'm going justified reason, is engaged in X, Y, or Z,

whatever someone's position on it might be, whether it's justified or unjustified, right? So Jim Bovard continues writing, enhanced interrogation quickly became Washington's favorite euphemism to sway detainees to spill their guts. As John Kiriakou has mentioned, CIA interrogators were entitled to use head slapping, waterboarding, frigid temperatures and hypothermia, manacling for many hours, blasting with loud music to assure sleep deprivation for seven days and nights, and walling, throwing a detainee against a wall, but not more than 30 times in a row. CIA interrogators often did not speak the language of the detainees, so they compensated by

beating the hell out of them. Bush's interrogators tore out toenails, relied on compulsory enemas for feeding, simulated live burials in coffins for hundreds of hours, burned detainees with electric shocks, and inflicted, quote, sensory deprivation through the use of hoods, end quote. CIA operatives or U.S. soldiers killed dozens of detainees during interrogations, but those fatalities were treated like paperwork errors, not homicides. The Justice Department slapped gag orders on torture victims to prohibit them from revealing exactly how they had been scourged. What could be worse than systematically torturing detainees around the world? Quote, a practice the most barbarous and the most absurd that has ever disgraced jurisprudence, end quote, as Macaulay wrote in his damning essay on his favorite

philosopher, Francis Bacon. In late 2004, a top Justice Department official announced plans to use, quote, evidence, end quote, gained by torture in judicial proceedings. The perverse legal rationale, Bush had declared that enemy combatants, quote, have no constitutional rights enforceable in court. Well, I wrote about this. In June 2006, the Supreme Court rejected the Bush administration's claims that the Geneva Conventions did not apply to war on terror detainees. It's common article three, if you want to find it. Bush out fear mongered himself, whipping up a backlash against any limits on his power. He warned that CIA interrogators, quote, will not take the steps necessary to protect America. Remember, Cheney said the same stuff. As long as the War Crimes Act hangs over their heads. So anyone who opposed committing war crimes automatically was a threat to the safety of the homeland. You're either with us or you're with the terrorists.

This is one of the most astounding rhetorical reversals of the war on terror. Congress caved to Bush's browbeating, enacting the Military Commission Act and retroactively legalizing all the torture inflicted after 9-11 and prior to December 30th, 2005. Yep. And don't forget, folks, within that Military Commissions Act, in the Constitution, it grants the Congress the power to universally lift the writ of habeas corpus. This is something that the criminal Abraham Lincoln tried to do himself in the executive branch during the Civil War, should have been court-martialed, taken away, thrown into irons, and absolutely imprisoned for the rest of court found in favor of Hamdi and Hamdan in 2005, 2006, two cases of Guantanamo Bay detainees, and one of them brought about the Supreme court

acknowledging that as prisoners under the U S system, they're supposed to be afforded habeas corpus. They're supposed to have a day in court. They can't be held for years, which they were being held for years without any evidence being brought against them at all. right? The body of evidence. Then Congress under Bush's pressure came back with this military commissions act that Jim writes about here. I've got a piece on the Mises Institute about this that I wrote about a year and a half later. And it's called a long train of abuses to paraphrase it, you can look it up, long train of abuses, Mises Institute, Gardner Goldsmith.

And they then tried to grant the president the selective power in the executive branch to individually, case by case, either decide that someone could get habeas or not get habeas. Which is, again, patently unconstitutional. Every congressperson who voted for that should have been out of office immediately, just like every congressperson who voted for the authorization to use military force rather than a declaration of war. Every one of those people. It's just incredible to see how these people have operated for so long. And I think one of the positives that I get, even as I talk about this sort of frustration and sense of frustration that I often feel, is that the United States government in engaging these things actually gives us opportunities to see the history of these things, to call things out, to help other people, especially young people, get this intellectual information, this ammunition, and carry it with them. I want to turn, as a reminder, to close things off. Before we close off David Knight's program, turn back to the Rockfin chat and thank everyone for being there. Really appreciate you doing that.

And also thank David and everyone for being so kind and welcoming me to the program. I will be on tonight at six o'clock with Liberty Conspiracy. And so many people have been watching. Don't forget, if you want to donate, Rockfin is open and Rumble is open. If you want to donate, that's great. You know, while I'm holding down the fort, I really appreciate you doing so. And if you have any questions or comments, you can put those in that. Or I'll try to see your comments now as I look into Rockfin generally, even if you don't put these forwards.

Brian McCarthy says a former pastor spouted yesterday that he would stand with criminal Congress critters if they swore allegiance to Israel. Eyeballs popping out. Wow, Brian, that is rough. That is rough. And Aaron Moss, forced induction. You know, the way that they got these, and I don't know whether that comment pertains to what they did, but, you know, John Cariocco talks about you can't rely on anything that these people will say because eventually just to stop the pain, they'll say, yes, yes, this or that, you know. Don't forget when a lot of these people were forced to either get habeas corpus hearings or be released after the, uh, Hamden case, um, uh, they released about, uh, I don't know how many of them and of all things, Sean Hannity. And again, you know, in one of his longer periods of warmongering, which he tends to pretty much have all the time now. Um, he said, Oh, when when they were when they returned to the Middle East,

you know, 15 to 20 percent engaged in violent activities afterwards. It's like, OK, so what you're saying is 80 percent of those people didn't engage in violent activities. They never had any any charges brought against them. They were just held in Guantanamo and tortured, many of them. They were separated from their families, some of them eight, seven, eight years. And then you're upset that a certain percentage, not even a fifth of them, engage in violent activities against the United States. You should feel stinking lucky that 100% of them didn't turn around and come after the United States after what had been done to them. After the drone killings, the extrajudicial murders, just unbelievable stuff. The funneling of weapons, you know, incredible.

The takeover of the Afghan poppy fields. So before we go, I want to mention a couple other things very quickly. First of all, tonight on Liberty Conspiracy, I'm going to mention that the Pope is at it again. He is pushing his climate change rhetoric. And on the climate change issue, I want to remind you that a frequent and great guest of the David Knight program, Eric Peters, was able to chat with Eric on Friday about this zero emissions zones story that he has at Eric Peters Autos. It's something that is being proposed in California, and it will essentially make the

next step. Once people start getting their electric cars, it's going to start doing what we're already doing, saying, well, you know, your electricity actually comes from a carbon spewing, carbon making, carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is not a problem. Carbon dioxide, uniform gas, unicorn gas emitting coal plant or whatever plant. And so therefore, it still is based on carbon. It's not zero carbon. And we're going to restrict places where you can go, just like the ULEZ, the ultra low emission zones in around London with Suddecon that have brought about so many troubles for locals in places like Croydon, where Lawrence Fox lives and others like, oh, I don't know, people in the East End or elsewhere, right? South Croydon is a little separate than Croydon.

So that's a very, very key piece from Eric, but it ties into something else that's happening in California. So I want to draw this to your attention before we close off the program for the David Knight Show today. And again, thanks, everybody, for your comments inside Rockfin. And also thanks for joining us on Rumble. So, oh, I see. Okay, great. So here's the story. California Governor Gavin Newsom signs law requiring big business to disclose emissions. Emissions. So this is compelled speech. This is a breach of the Fourth Amendment. It's a breach of the Fifth Amendment. And it is all based on the fraudulent idea that their emissions are bringing

harm. To whom? How? Temperature? Particulates? Is it someone who's being harmed by particulates in the atmosphere the way L.A. was in the late 60s and 70s? Or is it something else? Well, here we go. The Associated Press writes, large businesses, this is their introduction to it so they don't describe it in specifics until later, large businesses in California will have to disclose a wide range of planet warming emissions under a new law, governor statute, Governor Gavin Newsom signed Saturday, the most sweeping mandate of its kind in the nation. The law requires more than 5,300 companies that operate in California

and make more than $1 billion in annual revenues to report both their direct and indirect emissions. And as I mentioned at my sub stack, how are they going to measure these things? Well, that's part of the point. California politicians clearly have some friends who work in the field of measuring the emissions. Clearly, they will have incentive to open up new government branches, to accept the data, to expand the CARB, California Air Resources Bureau, to add new employees, appoint more people to it. And it says here that includes things like emissions from operating a building or store, as well as those from activities like employee business travel and transporting their products. The law is called SB 253, Senate Bill 253, will bring out, they say, more transparency. In other

words, it is compelled speech from people who should be left alone because they're not harming anyone. They're not suspected of doing any crime. Habeas corpus, Fifth Amendment, Fourth Amendment, nowhere to be found in California based on this. The public, they say they want more transparency to the public about how big business contribute to, you got it, the MacGuffin of climate change. And it could nudge them to evaluate how they can reduce their emissions, advocates say. They argue, nudge, wink, wink, nudge, nudge. In other words, we are going to apply pressures to you. And this is the first step in California for the carbon tax. This is how they're going to do it. This is how we do it. As you often hear over in the Northeast, they've got the carbon tax green

traders in the Northeast. And it's a bunch of Northeast governments ranging from the coast of Maine down through New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New York, Connecticut, New Jersey, going down the coast. And these states have signed on to the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, RGGI. It establishes so-called tradable credits that they tell you is a free market. Again, it's Hegelian dialectic. They give you a non-choice and call it choice. It's the get groped or scanned in front of the gang of thugs who have now put themselves between you and the airline with which you are supposed to be able to privately

contract. This is the same sort of thing. They're going to be telling you, you've got to report to us in California about your emissions. And then we are going to tell you eventually how much that's going to cost. And don't forget, the Biden administration recently raised the so-called cost of carbon. Again, it's not a harmful output. It's carbon dioxide and it is utilized by plants. That's what it is. It's not a particulate. It's not causing problems in the lungs for human beings. And it is not driving any sort of of their fictitious anthropogenic climate catastrophe. It's not happening. These are really, really key things. And I think it's important to keep in mind, everybody, that as they push these piece by piece, they're going to be moving for more.

So, yeah, they're going to be demanding this. It's going to cost companies money just at this stage. And then the next stage is, well, you're causing these problems. This is the cost. The Biden administration has raised the so-called cost of carbon to 61 cents per cubic metric ton of carbon. What? Now, people say, oh, that's terrible. They raised it from seven cents per metric ton under Trump. People say, yeah, see, Trump brought it down. How about the government not do it? How about Trump actually stand up for some principle somewhere, somehow? No, he kept it there. How about principle somewhere, somehow? No, he kept it there.

How about Trump eliminate the EPA? No, he kept it there. How about Trump not issue a statement about red flags? We take the guns. We do the jurisprudence, the due process later. That's not due process. This is where Trump continually falls flat, has bad people working for him, and people have to ask, is it intentional or is he just a bull in a china shop and doesn't get it? Final bit, the California Chamber of Commerce, agricultural groups, and oil giants, as they say in AP, that oppose the law say it will create new mandates for companies that don't have the experience or expertise to accurately report their indirect emissions. That's why there's a whole cottage industry that California politicians want to fund.

And then eventually California is going to do it. They also say it's too soon to implement the requirements at a time when the federal government is weighing emissions disclosure rules for so-called public companies. So I wanted to give you that and we'll discuss it more on Liberty Conspiracy tonight, everybody. And I want to thank you as they would say in that great song, thank you for letting me be myself and thank David Knight for joining us. Remember, go to davidknight.com, thedavidknightshow.com and davidknight.gold to support The David Knight Show. Feel free to contribute now on Rockfin or on rumble. If you want to help the show and check out the great store at the David

Knights, David Knight show website, and also David Knight's Twitter feed. If you're listening on D live or anything like that, and you don't know it's at Liberty Tarion. And I've noticed he's getting a little bit more engagement. So maybe the shadow ban is not as bad right now i just don't know but i'll leave you with the opener and um i think

yeah we'll say farewell now and thank you so much for being with me. I'm going to go with the, no, I'm going to go with the common man ending. I love that ending that David has put together. And I'll say thank you everyone. This is Gardner Goldsmith. Can't even believe I get to say my name on David's show to be associated with such good people. You bring the power everybody and David and his family sure do. Thanks for watching, everyone. Be seeing you. 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.