The David Knight Show - Mon 2Sep24 David Knight Show UNABRDIGED

Episode Date: September 2, 2024

Today on the David Knight Show, Gardner Goldsmith (MRCTV, Liberty Conspiracy - M-F at 6 PM on Rumble, Rokfin, Gard's X @gardgoldsmith) sits in to look at the new attacks on X, including former Labor Sec Robert Reich calling for Musk's arrest, Gard studies reports of a law school dean calling for the elimination of the US Constitution in order to facilitate "democracy" and Gard welcomes author Donald Jeffries (@donjeffries on X) to discuss his new book, 'American Memory Hole' and dig into forgotten US history, and contemporary attacks on communication.Hour One hits upon the latest on Brazil and Reich attacking X and free speech.Hour Two sees Donald Jeffries join the program to discuss his new book, 'American Memory Hole,' and key narratives in US history that are not true.Hour Three brings more information on US 'immigration' policy, a new move in California to give illegal immigrants home loans, and the problems in Colorado, where the government not only has a problem dealing with armed gangs, they also will not acknowledge that those gangs are armed in contravention of recently passed, utterly useless, gun-grab statutes.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 should have intrinsic value AND transactional privacy: 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.

At BetMGM, Ontario's best casino action is just a click away. Play thrilling games like Premium Blackjack Pro, the dazzling MGM Grand Emerald Knights, or try to score in Gretzky Gold Lucky Tap. It's all here at BetMGM. Visit BetMGM.com for terms and conditions. 19 plus to wager. Ontario only. Please play responsibly.

If you have questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you, please contact Connex Ontario at 1-866-531-2600 to speak to an advisor, free of charge. BetMGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with iGaming Ontario. Want to own part of the airline you flew with on your last vacation? Or part of the company that makes your favorite

triple shot latte with extra foam? What about owning part of a company that one day could send you on a tour of outer space? Now you can. With partial shares from TD Direct Investing, you can own part of your favorite companies. Just pick a stock and decide how much to spend on the share. It's a piece of cake. Learn more at td.com slash partial shares. TD, ready for you. Using free speech to free minds. You're listening to The David Knight Show.

As the clock strikes 13, we gather for the David Knight Show. Welcome one and all to this program, the 1st of September, 2024. September 2nd, 2024, Year of Our Lord. I'm Gardner Goldsmith, sitting in for David on this holiday, and I welcome you to it. Together today, until noontime Eastern time, we'll be looking at breaking stories, gathering some pertinent information to carry along with us after the fact, and we'll be joined by guest Donald Jeffries, historian, author, political commentator, discussing his new book, and we'll look into freedom of speech with a man who knows very well what technology can do. Marty Gottesfeld will be joining us later in the program, as well as your opinions on The David Knight Show. © transcript Emily Beynon Welcome to the David Knight Show, one and all.

I'm Gardner Goldsmith, sitting in for David, who's getting a much-deserved day off on this long weekend. And I hope you're enjoying it, whatever time zone you might be calling home. Thanks for making this your home. Monday through Friday, The David Knight Show, 9 a.m. Eastern Time until noontime. You can join us inside the chats, and of course, you can leave your comments after the fact. Please give the show the thumbs up

and share it as much as you can, whether it be live or after the fact. If you're familiar with my work, it's probably because of my efforts with MRCTV. You might have also seen my program, which is on 6 p.m. Monday through Friday, on Rockfin and Rumble, and that is the Liberty Conspiracy, because freedom is out of fashion nowadays. David Knight has great reach, and I am so glad that you are here, whether you're watching on Rumble, on Rockfin,

on David Knight's Twitter slash X feed, which is at Libertarian. If you're just catching it, please follow David. And of course, on DLive, DLive, getting that audio out there. Already, I can see that people are inside the chats, and we've got a lot of really good folks who are populating there including

mary ellen moore and fellow liberty conspirator i can't believe jason barker is also in the house he's of course the uh one of the two co-founders of the knights of the storm and did a great show this weekend at 10 a.m on rumble so check out jason barker well. And you can follow him at RealJasonBarker on X. Well, my friends, it has been some weekend. It's been an absolutely beautiful, beautiful start to the morning. I hope you're having a beautiful day wherever you are. I want to give you cheers, lots of wonderful, faithful hope. And I want to thank right off the bat, before we go into any of the stories, towards the end of the program, I found out that someone contributed as we closed off the month of August, someone contributed to the program, to David Knight's show, to the family, for the love of the

road. And David actually texted me about it. So if you are watching right now for the love of the road, thank you for what you did to close off the month the way you did. And thank you to everyone for being here to start off the new month. So let's do it in high fashion and great style. Let's offer our opportunities to discuss items with each other.

And of course, if you would like to donate to help The David Knight Show, that is how they propel this program. So it's good to be here. I'm delighted that I get the opportunity to be here with you on this holiday. I hope you've had a fantastic holiday weekend. And in fact, before we do anything, as far as the news is concerned, I want to show you a Bible quote that I came across today, and I think it starts things off beautifully. This is from what David suggested to me to visit, the Blue Letter Bible. It's a wonderful, blueletterbible.org, a wonderful site. Here is today's Bible quote,

and wisdom and knowledge shall be the stability of thy times and strength of salvation. The fear of the Lord is his treasure. That's from Isaiah. That's great. Wisdom and knowledge. Well, we get a lot of that from David Knight. That is for sure. So, everyone, let's see what's on tap for the David Knight Show today.

I mentioned we're going to have some great guests today, and we're going to dig into a lot of very major issues. Today on the program, this Labor Day, beginning of September, and let's start it off with a bang, everyone. The David Knight Show, 9-2-24. What's on tap today, everyone? Wow, look at that. Jeez, the whole team here put together a lot. You guys are working hard.

I'm going to have to give you better food and drinks and pay, I think. Let's see. We've got the newsflash. It's our Silence of Dissent edition. Yes, of course, that's going to roll into the first major story. Brazil, Robert Reich, and both of them, a lot of others going up against free speech, X and Elon Musk. What are we to make of these developments as X has been banned in Brazil and VPNs have been banned in Brazil, but some politicians are openly defying the judicial order. We'll talk about that, give some of the details of how this has built up over the past few months out of Brazil and what some people seem to be making of the reason why this is happening. Perhaps some political frustration on the part of many of the people in Brazil?

Definitely. We'll look at Aurora, Colorado residents, talk about political dissent, how they are worrying about migrant gangs taking over apartments. Saw some discussion about this, saw that it was disputed and then saw that it was confirmed. And then we'll take a look at California as Nancy Pelosi invokes Ronald Reagan to promote a California statute handing home loans to illegal aliens. We'll also discuss the Berkeley Law Dean, who has joined MSNBC to very flamboyantly and wonderfully, almost as if it was rehearsed, quite to rehearse. When you see the video, I think you'll know what I mean. To call for the trashing of the already trashed U.S. Constitution, sorry to say. And we've got Don Jeffries as our guest on his new book, American Memory Hole, and guest Marty Gottesfeld on online privacy and government corruption. So welcome to the program, everyone. Hope you had a great weekend. I hope it's a great

day. Hey, let me know on the five by five, if the audio is coming through strong for you, put it in your comments. I see already, we've got Martin Thorne is saying good morning guard from the shadow band muskrat lounge. Well, I'm sorry, your shadow band, my friend. And yes, let's talk a little bit and get your personal opinions about free speech, especially on X. As you might have heard, Eric Peters joined us last week and on Friday, and it was quite interesting because Eric's been working on whether or not everybody is really enjoying the fruits of the free speech totem of X. We'll find out. And of course, we're going to be welcoming more and more viewers as they pop in. So thank you everyone for recycling and giving it the thumbs up.

I want to say hi to everybody inside Rumble Land. I see Lieutenant Oracle of Truth is there. I salute you. I see Princess Wrong Think. I love that. That is great. What a great title. Judy Wrinkles.

Where are you people coming from? This is great. And gold's nugget as well as the real Jason Barker. Rufus 69 firefly is saying, yo, I like it. Very good. Reminds me of like, uh, what was the Carmen Carmen Raguso or something was one of the, it was like the boyfriend of one of the women on, uh, on, uh, Laverne and Shirley. Was that his name?

Carmine? The big, I don't know. But he always said yo. Anyway, thanks for being there, Steve Swan inside Rockfin. Lazy Toad, thanks for being there, Lazy. And Nancy as well. Eco Taxi, good to have you there. And again, big thanks for the love of the road for ending last month.

And let's start off this month with a bang as well and send all of our affection and energy over to you-know-who, David Knight and the family. Hey, by the way, everybody, if you want to follow me on X, it's at guardgoldsmith. That's at guardgoldsmith. And I do want to give the thumbs up and thanks to the people at MRC TV. I just found out that there is a person who owns 11 small television stations out West and he's made a deal. It's just a, you know, like a sharing deal to provide some of the material that we do on video for MRC TV onto his television stations,

which is just great. It's just terrific. I'll find out more details and give it to you. But I spoke with Eric Scheiner, the executive director of MRC TV over the weekend. And that was wonderful to hear. And the man liked some of the videos that I was doing and so on. So thank you. I'll have to speak to him directly. And I thought that was really nice to see.

Very, very good piece of information over the weekend. A nice addition to everything. Well, everyone, let's give a nice addition to the start of this program. I usually start Liberty Conspiracy on Monday through Friday at 6 p.m. over on Rumble and Rockman and my ex by going through a quick take on some of the things that have been happening in the news. And you know what? I thought of something special to put behind this. It's all about free speech, what's going on in Brazil and the wonderful Robert Reich. As Rush Limbaugh used to humorously poke fun of him as he used to give his pieces on PBS and end them with Robert B. Reich on the NewsHour. Well, let's talk a little bit about free speech, shall we? It's time for a

little derivation from the Liberty Conspiracy for The David Knight Show. It's time for a news flash, everyone. Brazilian government is freaking out. I wonder why. Oh yeah, yeah, that's probably why as the Brazilian government just literally banned Twitter. Hello darkness, my old friend. I've come to talk with you again The Brazilian government just banned X, which means that the handle for the U.S. Embassy in Brazil at USAMBR is now banned in Brazil. Brazilians can't even see the X account of the embassy, and the embassy has not issued a statement condemning what's happened,

has not threatened sanctions, has not threatened the retrenchment of US business interests, has not threatened getting rid of the $200 million in foreign government assistance to Brazil, nothing. Just today earlier, the US embassy finally, finally after, I don't know, almost a year of total silence on just hours before the Brazil bandit said, finally made a public statement about everything that's happened and said, we are monitoring the situation. Because a vision softly creeping. I think we need to push back on this.

There's no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech, and especially around our democracy. Persecution, what they're doing to me, what they're doing to Sarah, what they're doing to Palestine Action, it's entirely and utterly political. took over, and suddenly this starts. And I'm not saying the Tories were any better, but we should remember Tony Blair is the one that brought this piece of legislation into effect and was buddy-buddy with George Bush. We all remember this. And the vision that was planted in my brain still remains. Conservatives are tolerant, where are, kind of get out of your business. You leave me alone, I'll leave you alone. Hit Iran.

They have oil fields out in the open. They have the Revolutionary Guard headquarters you can see from space. Blow it off the map. And in the naked light I saw, 10,000 people, maybe more. I just got off the phone with the Israelis. Their goal is to destroy Hamas in the south. The Times has published an expose headlined buying quiet inside the Israeli plan that propped up Hamas.

It's about Israel secretly sending billions of dollars to Hamas over roughly a decade. The piece begins, quote, just weeks before Hamas launched the deadly October 7th attacks on Israel, the head of Mossad arrived in Doha, Qatar for a meeting with Qatari officials. For years the Qatari government had been sending millions of dollars a month into the Gaza Strip money that helped prop up the Hamas government there. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel not only tolerated those payments, he encouraged them.

And when the Qatari officials asked David Barnea, the head of Mossad, should we stop this? He said no. People talking without speaking. People hearing without listening. Senate Democrats have introduced legislation to crack down on price gouging. And voices never share And no one dares To stir the sound of silence Fools in eye you do not know Silence like a cancer grows

Hear my words and I might teach you Take my arms and I might reach you But my words like silent raindrops fell And the people bowed and prayed to the neon god of the night. For people that are using IVF, which is fertilization, the government is going to pay for it or we're going to get or mandate your insurance company. In the sign flashed out this morning

In the words that it was for me The sign lashed out its warning Hear the words that it was forming In the signs there the words of the prophets are written On the subway walls In tenement halls and whisper the sound of silence I'll talk to my Democratic colleagues who we might be able to find common ground here. So a little mix of the original song and, of course, Disturbed with a version of that song that so many people commented. I was unaware of it, and it is quite powerful,

and mixed in with a lot of news cuts that themselves are quite disturbing. So thanks for viewing, everyone, and please spread the word about The David Knight Show. Of course, David giving me the opportunity to fill in for him. I want to make sure I do a really good job presenting the news to you and getting feedback from you as we break apart these news stories of the day. And so the first story will be about the sounds of silence coming to us from Brazil and elsewhere, following up on the heels of what the French government has done with the CEO of Telegram, plus the Telegram employees fleeing their former place of employment in Qatar. No, United Arab Emirates. So let's look at my Sunday News Assembly.

You can see this every Sunday. And I put out, instead of 20 stories yesterday, I decided I would split it into two Sunday News Assemblies for the long weekend, so there'll be another section of it coming out today, later on today. The first major story, of course, was the French attack on Durov and the departure of Telegram employees from the UAE, mixed with what is going on in Brazil. And as I wrote, in line with the French attack on Pavel Durov and the departure of Telegram employees from the UAE over fears that they too would be arrested, the leadership in the Brazilian government is how do we judge Elon Musk's efforts at X? His parentage coming from technocratic parents? How does one judge the immediate situation for him and his legal fight there? He's definitely

spending a lot of money to try to remain operative, and he could be arrested if he goes down there. Well, a man named Judge DeMorris, as I noted on Substack, appears to be both doing the bidding of President Lula and acting on his own rancorous behalf. DeMorris has banned X and I wanted to offer a reminder to the fans of the United States government who seem to be very delighted with the fact that the U.S. government is banning or forcing the sale of TikTok. that he wants users to be banned and specific users he wants banned, including members of the Brazilian Congress that he wants banned from X. And X has not served up a so-called employee to participate with the government, in other words, to get arrested and probably stand trial. For what? Nobody's really sure. Now, there is a very good piece on this that comes from Mario Nafal, and he says, Telegram's Dubai office, where Pavel Durov moved the company in 2017. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm skipping over. I went to the wrong one. That's incorrect. Sorry about that. Here is the key paragraph. Yes. So this is what I want. Yes. All right. It says here,

Mora's order calls for the immediate, complete, and comprehensive suspension of X in Brazil, directing the National Communications Agency to enforce the ban within 24 hours. Judge Mora has also threatened a fine of $8,900. Many people have been hearing that number over the weekend for anyone using tools like VPNs to circumvent this block. Additionally, the judge initially demanded that tech giants Google and Apple, along with internet providers, implement measures to prevent access to X, though he later softened that order. Now, I want to head over here to play you a little bit from Glenn Greenwald and system update on Rumble. And there may be a commercial.

There may not. We'll see. Hey, football fan. There is a quick one. Glenn Greenwald was living in Brazil. He's not in Brazil anymore. In fact, I believe he's back in the United States, which is not going to be a friendly place for Glenn Greenwald either. I don't know whether he's going to be here permanently because, of course, he worked with Edward Snowden.

Here's more from Glenn Greenwald. As I noted at the top of the show, we spent Monday and Wednesday dissecting why developments in France, specifically the arrest of the Telegram founder and CEO, the Russian-born Pavel Durov, is so unbelievably threatening to core online press freedoms and speech expression rights as well. Because what France is essentially saying is that anybody who doesn't immediately cooperate with our censorship demands and provide us backdoor access to encrypted apps becomes a criminal subject to arrest in France and then presumably in all of Europe as well. And I can assure you that this has captured the attention of every single founder and CEO of big tech platforms who are all billionaires and travel the world freely and are very concerned now that their liberty can also be

constrained, if not outright denied, by this precedent set in France for obvious reasons. That's the point of that arrest, is to create a climate of fear among big tech companies that you either comply with all of our orders and give us access to your user data, or you too might go to prison no matter how rich or powerful you are. What is happening in Brazil, and this has long been true, is a step beyond. And the reason, as I say, I always want to report on Brazil is not just because Brazil is a massive country with geostrategic importance, the second largest country in the hemisphere, etc. It is a part of the democratic world. Brazil is still ostensibly a democracy in the same way that the US is at least. And

I can assure you that all the censorship actions that have been undertaken in Brazil, which are a step or two ahead of even Western Europe, are being closely watched in those European allies and in the United States to see how far those countries can go as well. Every time there's a disinformation conference or a hate speech conference or a combating online harm conference, they invite all these Brazilian judges and all of these Brazilian think tank experts and all these Brazilian prosecutors and experts who are all cheerleaders of the censorship regime to come and talk to these fancy conferences in Berlin and Paris and Amsterdam and Rome and uh Spain and Portugal about exactly what it is that Brazil

is doing because the EU wants to copy it now just a couple of uh today actually rather uh what what happened here is the context is and we've told you about this before, is that last week the indescribably authoritarian judge on the Brazil Supreme Court, Alexandre de Moraes, who essentially runs the country, it's really not an exaggeration to say that. Brazilian executives with X that they would be immediately arrested if X did not instantly comply with censorship orders that had been sent to them, including to censor elected members of the Senate and the Congress. And X is reluctant to censor this because obviously these are politically motivated censorship campaigns. There's no due process provided. These people have not been convicted of any crimes. It's just this very politically motivated judge ordering these people banned from the internet with no due process. And X doesn't want to cooperate with that. And so once this threat was issued, we're going to arrest executives with X inside Brazil

unless you comply. Elon Musk said, we can't guarantee the safety of our executives in Brazil any longer. And so we're closing down all offices in Brazil. We will no longer have any executives who work in Brazil because it's not safe for them to work there. And it absolutely is not. And as a result, X either separated with Brazilian executives or brought them outside of Brazil to work with X and other capacities. And now this judge in response is saying, either you comply with our

censorship demands in 24 hours. This is the order that he issued last night. In 24 hours, you must, number one, comply with all of our censorship orders and remove these members of Congress from the internet instantly without question. And number two, you must identify an ex-representative in Brazil, physically in Brazil, because he wants to hold them hostage. He wants to order them arrested and then say they're not getting out unless X complies with these censorship demands. What person in their right mind would agree to be the ex-representative in Brazil, given this judge, unless he said X complies with those two conditions, then he will block X as a platform in all of Brazil. And that has happened

because of course, Elon Musk was smart enough to know that the judge's claim that he wanted to negotiate with a member of the X team was completely fatuous because you can negotiate from afar and not have to worry about being arrested. The judge wanted to put out an arrest order and hold someone hostage. That's exactly right. Glenn Greenwald nails it. And of course, I've got to say, Michael Schellenberger has been doing some great investigative reporting on this as well. You can find Schellenberger's Twitter coverage of this, the X coverage of this on Michael Schellenberger's feed. And I'll give you a quick taste of what we're talking about here. And he has a number of thumbnails. He has a long, long series of posts about this if you want to get really deep into this. And we're going to get semi-deep here because things are moving very rapidly when we look at the X information.

In fact, things were changing even this morning. I was doing some updates to the plans for the program. So here it is. This is what Schellenberger says. Twitter files Brazil. Brazil is engaged in a sweeping crackdown on free speech led by a Supreme Court justice named Alexandre de Mores. De Mores has thrown people in jail without trial for things they posted on social media. Sounds like England. He has demanded the removal of users from social media platforms,

and he has required the censorship of specific posts without giving users any right of appeal or even the right to see the evidence presented against them. And as we heard Mike Benz say, what has the U.S. State Department said about this incredible attack on one of the bedrock principles of the United States system? Zero, except we're monitoring the situation. And Mike Benz has some thoughts on that. I'm going to show you in just a minute. And, of course, a lot of people are saying, where did Mike Benz come from? What's this guy's background? Well, you know, I got to say, I saw him offer a presentation about a lot of the information on Ukraine and the CIA connections there with the deep state and the Atlantic Council.

He was right on the money. So I'm taking each piece as it comes out, saying, do I find this valuable and trustworthy? And this one, I want to get your opinions on when we present the Mike Benz information. But right now, Schellenberger's got this covered very well. He says, he says, he says, this judge has demanded the removal of users from social media platforms, and he has required the censorship of specific posts without giving users any right of appeal or even the right to see the evidence presented against them. Now, Twitter files released here for the first time reveal that de Mores and the superior electoral court that he controls engaged in a

clear attempt to undermine democracy in Brazil. Now, of course, we have to be very careful of the term democracy, and we'll discuss that in further detail in a piece that I wrote for MRCTV, if we can get the time of it. But democracy is, of course, two wolves in a sheep deciding what's going to be served up for lunch. There are supposed to be protections against the tyranny of the majority. So let's say hypothetically that this man, this judge was a politician who had been elected by the majority. Would it be any better if that kind of a person cracked down on free speech? No, it wouldn't. Of course, of course it wouldn't be any better. He says, this is what the judge is attempting to do. He's illegally demanded that Twitter reveal personal details about Twitter users who used hashtags that he didn't like.

Next, he has demanded access to Twitter's internal data in violation of Twitter policy, much like what the French government wants Telegram to do. They want the back doors. They want access, as I mentioned, exactly like Joe Biden's early 2024 executive order that demands that any company that is creating algorithms, any programs that could have an application for biological research or chemical research or communications, he says they've got to turn over all of their programs and their backdoors to him, which means anybody, anybody working on any program, because it could potentially be used. A Word document could potentially be used for a company. A digit, a zero or a one in binary code could be used. Finally, Schellenberger says the man has sought to weaponize Twitter's content moderation policies against supporters of former president Jair Bolsonaro. Sorry, Bolsonaro. So Bolsonaro, of course, pushed out by Lula, and now they've got the backup on the judicial side.

What a shocker. Of course, painting all the political opposition, as you saw a little bit earlier with Luke at the beginning of the newsflash. There are a lot of people who are opposing Lula and favor some alternative, perhaps Bolsonaro coming back. The files show the origins of the Brazilian judiciary's demand for sweeping censorship powers, the court's use of censorship for anti-democratic election interference, and the birth of the censorship industrial complex in Brazil. Now, to let you know, I've reposted this one, and you can follow all of this thread. There are many, many pieces in this. He's got a lot of information.

He's got the documents. And it goes back to February of 2020. As he mentions, on February 14th, 2020, happy Valentine's Day, Twitter's legal counsel in Brazil, Rafael Batista, emailed his colleagues to describe a hearing in Congress on disinformation and fake news. Batista revealed that members of the Brazilian Congress had asked Twitter for the content of messages exchanged by some users via DMs, as well as login records, among other information. Batista said, quote, we are pushing back against the requests, which were illegal because they do

not meet Brazilian internet law, Marco Seville, legal requirements for disclosure of users' records. Batista noted that some conservative Twitter users had gone to the Supreme Court after they learned from the media that the Congress was trying to get their IPs and DM content. In light of this, the Supreme Court granted an injunction suspending the requirement given its failure to fulfill legal requirements. So you can see where this judge has completely flipped the switch on his own and people are saying it's the judge who should be arrested. That's Michael Schellenberger's coverage. And of course, Michael Schellenberger did excellent work

previously exposing a lot of the Twitter files. Now, I want to give you something along the more speculative lines. Mike Benz, of course, sort of rose to fame rather rapidly as a whistleblower who had a lot of information about spying and censorship. Great conversation, hour-long conversation recently with Tucker Carlson, a major portion of what Mike Benz had to say about Ukraine, I know is 100% verified because I had friends who were working in the Obama administration at the time who spoke to me.

So I'm taking Mike Benz for what he's offering here. This one really starts to tie in the United States. So here, let me give you this and get your opinions on this. Hey, I'm just doing this video totally off the cuff. I have to say something. The Brazilian government just banned X, which means that the handle for the U.S. embassy in Brazil at US AMBR is now banned in Brazil. Brazilians can't even see the ex-account of the embassy, and the embassy has not issued a statement condemning what's happened, has not threatened sanctions, has not threatened the retrenchment of U.S. business interests, has not threatened getting rid of the $200 million in foreign government assistance to Brazil, nothing. Just today, earlier, the U.S. embassy finally, finally, after, I don't know, almost a year of total silence,

on just hours before the Brazil bandit said, finally made a public statement about everything that's happened and said, we are monitoring the situation. They are monitoring it. They've been monitoring it. They have been behind it. They have been funding it. They have been coordinating it. Earlier today, I saw a picture

of a Brazilian member of Congress in the United States saying he was a censored man in Congress. Would you know that the US government actually funded the Brazilian NGOs, the Brazilian think tanks, who were part of the legislative development of these censorship edicts and who pressured Brazil's government not to create a carve-out for congressional parliamentarians because it would give a free pass for Brazilian members of Congress to spread misinformation online. So the U.S. government funded the pressure for the ability to arrest that politician. So let's pause it right there. That's a very strong allegation, and it looks like he's got

the documentation. We're talking organizations like USAID, Powell and others, Susan Powell and others, who have been intimately involved in the overthrow of nation states. And of course, we can't forget that the United States government has not lifted a finger about Ukraine banning journalists, arresting Gonzalo Lira, seeing him die in prison, likely killing him, eliminating the Russian Orthodox Church, and then killing him, eliminating the Russian Orthodox Church, and then last week eliminating the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, doing everything it can to silence people. And of course, we can't forget that Rumble had to move out of Brazil recently. And yet the United States not only is not doing anything in Brazil, they're continuing

to take your money out of your pockets to give it to the Ukrainian dictator, who, of course, has long since gone past his bogus election period and is still sitting in power getting our cash and weapons. It's incredible to see the hypocrisy of these politicians as they go around and wave the flag on the 4th of July and talk about things like free speech, but want to do everything they can to silence speech, including the forced sale or closure of TikTok, as they tell us that China, China is the repressive government. Oh, okay. Thanks, Kettle. Meat pot. Not a case of Brazilian government gone rogue. The U.S. government sponsored it through the State Department, through USAID, through the National Endowment for Democracy, and about 100 different NGOs, university centers, legal scholars, and activists within Brazil, starting in 2018, starting in about October 2018.

And first they came for the social media companies. Then they came for WhatsApp and Telegram. and now finally they're coming for X now They are between a rock and a hard place Which is why I believe the US Embassy it finally issued this pittance of a public statement hours ago before the ban that they're monitoring The situation and this is because now there's a fire lit under their ass and I'm sorry But part of that may have been because I generated over 100 million impressions in the past 48 hours, specifically naming the U.S. embassy. And I just went on Tucker Carlson, specifically naming the U.S. embassy. Now, to be clear, I'm not sure if it's the U.S. embassy or it's the Western Hemisphere. What I know is it's the State Department and State Department dollars.

And I have a thousand of these people in Brazil with confessions that they were coordinating with the State Department while receiving State Department money to do it. Okay. Okay. So that's a very, very big claim, but I think it ties in with a lot of the sentiment that many people feel about what the French government is doing to Telegram and Pavel Durov and how many people think that this is on behalf of the national security establishment of the United States that wants the back doors to Telegram's cryptography. But whether they can get it, we will see.

And whether they if they even get it, the folks at Telegram say even they can't break their own cryptographic codes. So I think that that is a big deal. But also there's something else here that I think is very key. This coming from Reuters, the Brazilian judge is also blocking Starlink accounts in the country because, of course, he doesn't want X to make any money. Well, Starlink is very important for many of the people actually in that country to function. Brazilian Supreme Court Judge Alexander de Mores on Thursday ordered the blocking of the financial accounts of billionaire Elon Musk's Starlink due to the lack of legal representatives in the country for social media

platform X, of course, whom he would kidnap, a Supreme Court source told Reuters. Morris and Musk have been in a public feud for months and after X failed to comply with his legal orders to block certain accounts accused of spreading so-called fake news. So what? So what? Are they direct attacks on people? No. This is a pretty big deal. It's unbelievable, and the trajectory of it is going to increase as the members of the United States political elite are doing everything they can to try to silence us and get back doors into things. I want to remind people of some of the information that recently came out via MRCTV. I want to give you this one on, let me see, make sure I can find it here. Yeah, MRCTV via Newsmax.

They reported on this a number of months ago, so I thought that I would bring this back. Watchdog, Google interfered in U.S. elections 41 times. This is the Media Research Center that did this. They're the folks who contract with me for MRCTV work. So Media Research Center is the overall umbrella organization. Conservative Watchdog Media Research Center released a report Monday. This is back in March. This is Monday, March 18th, 2024. Conservative Watchdog Media Research Center released a report Monday that documented 41 times over the past 16 years that Google has interfered with U.S. elections. That's direct interference. Then we've got other things like Zach Voorhees and the Google

blacklist. We've got Facebook removing 800 pages after Prop or Not, which was an absolute farce. It was a total beard for Deep State Connections to try to portray people like Ron Paul and his website as somehow potential terroristic Russian propaganda. Utterly absurd. I mean, it was just ridiculous. It's laughable. A 10-year-old child could look at that and say, this is so stupid. Are you serious? I wouldn't even believe this in a cartoon. In a 19-page report, MRC said that Google's impact, quote, has surged dramatically, making it ever more harmful to democracy. Now, is MRC calling for the shutdown of Google? No, they're not. They're not asking a judge to shut down Google. They're trying to get the information out to people. They don't want to use the weapon of government censorship, which is already being used via Google and others, like the prior owners of Twitter when the FBI gave them three and a half million dollars. despite the fact that people like Jay Bhattacharya and other signers of the Great Barrington Declaration brought suit in the case that was retitled Murthy v. Missouri, and the majority of the Supreme Court a month and a half ago said, Oh, I'm sorry. You know what? You just don't have any claim of harm, so you can't bring it to court.

Seriously? Honestly? What do they determine as harm? Again, that's up to the state see i'm a voluntarist i'm an anarchist right i believe there should be no human being who claims authority over you you have to voluntarily offer your decisions operate according to your free will as given to you by god nobody else can tell you that they control you. As I mentioned on Friday, Jefferson said it, no man is born with a saddle on his back and no man is born with spurs to ride him. So I don't believe that any human being claiming authority over you is legitimate. So when we see this idea that the United States government can work with these agencies to say, well, you know,

that should be suppressed. And then someone's speech is removed. And then we see continued U.S. agents in the Supreme Court then saying, well, you know, I'll define for you what is harm. And that's not harm. Even though even if you were to look at it professionally, one of the people who was in the suit did suffer and she could find direct linkage between her removal from social media platforms and her profession. Even if that weren't the case, it's not up to the state to tell us whether or not we've been stinking harmed. How about that? Because if that's the case, they can say we're never harmed. It's for our own good. It's for the public good. We can be sacrificed. We can be silenced,

even though what we're saying is actually the truth and the stuff that they're spouting in the meetings with Donald Trump and Anthony Fauci and Deborah the Scarf Burks are clearly lies. So one final thing on this point here, as this trajectory just goes skyrocketing with what's going on in Brazil, please remember the heroism of Zach Voorhees, who years ago exposed the Google blacklist. And please remember that Zach Voorhees was trotted out of his house in San Francisco and guns were pointed at him merely because he exposed the fact that Google had a list of websites, including MRCTV, that should be suppressed in their searches. Did the United States government do anything about that? Did they bring them up for antitrust violations, the sort of thing that they're demanding of various groups and say,

we might bring antitrust against you. We might shut you down under Section 230 of the 1996 Telecommunications Act. No, of course not. Because Google actually was started as a branch of the CIA. They got assistance from the CIA and they've been doing the bidding of the people who want to expand collectivism. So when they downgrade people like, oh, I don't know, talk show host Glenn Beck, and some people have problems with Glenn or the Daily Caller, some people have problems with them and their pro-Israeli positions, that sort and so forth. But Ron Paul, MRCTV, those things, what do they do?

The United States government doesn't do anything. In fact, they like it. So I thought that I would bring that up to you because I thought it was important. And also, I think it might be wise to remember what the French are doing with Telegram and then talk about something else. Let's go domestic with a breaking story that has been coming around over the weekend and has a lot to do with the way that things are portrayed in the media. I want to talk to you a little bit about this story about Aurora, Colorado, because it mixes both the immigration issue and firearms of all things. So let's go with a little theme. Sometimes I do themes on my program. This is my theme that I use for immigration. It's a great song,

which is, I think, kind of a fun tune. And it doesn't necessarily mean that all the migrants are coming up from Mexico. And again, I'm actually in favor of people recognizing that immigration is not a federal purview. Let's give you some information about what's going on in Colorado and then what's going on with Nancy Pelosi

in California as they're pushing for, you got it, special home loans for migrants. We need a theme for this. Esta noche es el amigo y pero vénganse porque la busca ha empezado una vez más con el concurso. I hear the ribbon of the music by the product they never use it. I hear the talking of the DJ. Can't understand just what does he say. I'm on a Mexican radio. I'm on a Mexican radio. I'm on a Mexican radio. Ah, yes, yes, yes.

There's nothing like central command and control to get everybody arguing over how some sort of a system is going to be managed. And that's precisely what the United States government did in 1875, when, despite the fact that the word immigration doesn't appear in the U.S. Constitution, a Supreme Court ruled in the case of Chee-Lung v. Freeman that, hey, immigration should be up to the Congress. Naturalization is a power left in the Constitution to the Congress, but the immigration issue is supposed to be left up to the states. And so now you get absolute mismanagement because nobody can figure out what to do. And we get major problems in places like Colorado. Migrants, central command and control, incentives, double talk. Who always gets to claim power over your property to build the walls or to allow migrants to work there?

Whichever side you want to take, well, it's the government. So here is a little something of what's been going on in Colorado. As videos have been circulating on social media showing gang members taking over apartments. It's important to note the city nor the Aurora Police Department have confirmed any of those claims. In contact with the residents, reassuring them about the criminal activity that's happening here and how we're going to address it. We're out here. We want to reassure the people that live in this community that we are actively investigating criminal activity that's happening and listening to them. I'm not saying that there's not gang members that don't live in this community, but what we're learning out here is that gang members have not taken over this complex. We've really made an effort to the last few days to just really ask the specific questions and the

direct questions in terms of, can you confirm whether or not this gang has taken over these buildings there in Aurora? So there are several buildings actually under the same ownership, out-of-state ownership, that have fallen to these Finnish oil and gas gangs. Somebody put them there and somebody funded it. Whether it's federal government or not, we're trying to find out who they've, in fact, have kind of pushed out the property management through intimidation and then collected the rents. Okay. The innovation and the collected the rents up. Okay.

With immigration and the challenge we have of us. Yes. We'll get to the Nancy Pelosi piece in just a second. Actually, I was going to play that in a minute, but let's go back to Nancy. As Pelosi shows us years ago, her position on immigration. With immigration and the challenge we have of undocumented people in our country, we certainly don't want any more coming in. OK, that was then. This is now.

The California lawmakers just passed a law. It hasn't been signed by Governor Newsom, but giving government assistance to undocumented immigrants to buy houses. That's kind of a different place than the Democratic Party used to be on immigration, is it not? Like I say, that's what the country's going to do. But that's certainly where California is. Well, let me just say, immigration had always been a bipartisan issue. I refer you to... But not free houses. Well, it's not free housing.

It's the American dream, being available to more people. Colorado today, did you see that? Where Venezuelan gang members have taken over parts of the city. Okay, so there's a lot to that, and whether the gang members are posing as Amazon delivery people and that sort of thing. A lot of stories coming out of there. And some of them are very, very scary.

A couple of the things that I'd like to bring up to people, however, is that Colorado specifically recently had a major gun crackdown. And, of course, this is Aurora, which is infamous for the theater attacks years ago. But here it is. A lot of people aren't discussing this part. The eight gun bills passed by Colorado's legislature this year and signed into law by the governor. This just came out June 12th, and it's from the Colorado Sun. Governor Jared Polis signed into law eight bills passed by the legislature this year that tighten Colorado's gun statutes. Colorado Ceasefire, a nonprofit that calls for tougher gun regulations, says that is a legislative session record for the state. Well, clearly the people with criminal intent really care about that. Interesting that especially in Aurora, where everyone is so sensitive about guns, of course, after a man went into a movie theater, knowing that there wouldn't be people who were armed there, that people should come into Aurora and target it as they carry firearms.

And people are vulnerable without firearms. These laws impose new requirements on people obtaining concealed carry permits, the way firearms must be stored in vehicles, and how weapons and ammunition are sold. Yeah, and Senate Bill 3 authorizes the Colorado Bureau of Investigation to probe gun crimes, including illegal firearms purchases. It also sends $1.5 million to the agency for that work, the Bureau of Investigation. And that will be spent hiring 10 employees next fiscal year, which starts July 1st. And strangely enough, it's way past July, isn't it? Well, there's more. Guns are banned in schools, so kids will be highly vulnerable there.

That's wonderful, isn't it? Then, of course, there are banned voting sites and at the state capitol, except, of course, for the armed guards who are hired by the agents of the state. But if you want to be armed yourself walking around the Capitol, sorry, not any luck there. They have to be surrendered by people subject to a temporary domestic violence restraining order, despite the fact that no one has been actually tried or given due process. So that is a violation of the fourth amendment, of the second amendment, violation of the third amendment, violation of the fourth amendment, because of course the agents of the state will be allowed into anybody's place to inspect it. That's essentially like quartering of truths. The Fourth Amendment is you have to have a judge's warrant specific to an item, and the judge has to determine if there is a probable cause.

Now, I don't like to leave it in the hands of the state to determine what is probable cause. The Fifth Amendment says that if you are going to be punished with something, you have to be accused of a crime and have a speedy trial. Of course, it leaves it up to the state to decide what is a speedy trial. In front of your peers with the Sixth Amendment, the Eighth Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. Well, how can you be punished if you've actually never been charged with a crime? Well, Colorado is throwing all that away. They don't care. They don't care. They want to disarm

people at a time when they've got guys walking around with automatic rifles going into apartment complexes. And then everybody's debating as to whether or not it's fake news and you can report on this. Well, regardless of all this, let's just get a quick lesson out of this, which is one thing that is for sure. You will not find the word immigration in the U.S. Constitution. This is supposed to be left up to the states. So if there's a problem in Texas, they're supposed to handle it in Texas, where in 1869, when they passed their state constitution, they actually have a Bureau of Immigration in it. It's supposed to be left up to Colorado. So they're not going to get my money for screwing up what's going on in Colorado.

I don't have to pay for that. I don't have to pay for the federal government to go and then give my money to Alejandro Mayorkas, who doesn't do anything about what is evidently a problem on the Texas border, according to the people who live in Texas. I don't live in Texas. He doesn't seem to be doing anything about what's going on in Colorado. And let me tell you, if you know any local cops, they have major problems with the feds. I spoke with local cops here in New Hampshire. They have major problems with the feds because the feds often prevent them from being able to apprehend criminal wrongdoers whom they know are illegal immigrants. This is a big deal. And again, as a voluntarist, I want to mention that for me, it's extremely important to note first

on the constitutional level, your central command and control system isn't giving you what you want. And so if conservatives think they're going to get a better deal by putting Donald Trump in for a little while, well, it will eventually revert back to where it was because you're systematically looking at it in the wrong way. The Constitution doesn't give the federal government the power to handle immigration. Only if states ask for the federal government to participate in assisting them in maintaining their constitutional form of government, and that is in the Constitution, can the federal government ask the members of the militia to go in and help out? The legislature of a state can do that, or if the legislature is not in session according to the Constitution, then the governor of the

state can do it, which is exactly what Abbott did. And'm not a big big fan of abbott okay but this is exactly what he did now as a voluntarist i do want to bring up just like in economics and i brought this up before in my show just like in economics no one can ever say that anything the government does any political system does has any value why Why? Because logically speaking, all politicians are not spending their own money on it, and the people who are paying for it are forced to pay for it. So it doesn't reveal their preferences. It doesn't allow them to show their voluntary interests. So the entire system negates free will. It negates the revelation of preferences. So technically, logically speaking, no one, no one can ever say that a political border that is put up by the government by

taking people's property, right? That that actually is the place where someone wants a border. The only place where you can tell someone wants a border is if it's on his own land and he's spending his own money, not forcing somebody else and saying, it's my preference that you will put that border somewhere. And this is the thing that strikes me. And we'll get into the Nancy Pelosi story in a little while coming out of California and her utter hypocrisy. But the people who are upset about these Venezuelan gangs coming and taking property are also, many of them, in favor of the federal government coming and taking people's property to build walls.

How does that comport? It doesn't, unless, of course, you come up with the idea of it's for the greater good, which is a pernicious and very poisonous philosophical consequentialist outcome that has nothing to do with individual morality or the recognition of the sanctity of the individual, which can be turned back on yourself. At least when the founders wrote it up, they allowed for differentiation. They allowed for the states to handle this themselves. As Thomas Jefferson said in the Kentucky Resolution of 1798,. They wrote them simultaneously, aware of what the other people were doing because of the Alien Act under John Adams, which was patently unconstitutional. Why people can recognize the unconstitutionality, the utter affront to the very concept of the

Constitution, which itself was a usurpation of the articles of confederation why they can't recognize what's going on today as similar the concept that the federal government is going to come up with rules over who can be here on the soil of the states that would that was utterly utterly talk about alien alien to people of that time except people like john adams who wanted to centralize things so i wanted to make sure that i brought except people like John Adams who wanted to centralize things. So I wanted to make sure that I brought that up. And then we'll discuss that video clip of Bill Maher and Nancy Pelosi a little bit later in this hour. But right now, I'm going to take a break. And then when we come back, I want to talk to a man who has looked into a lot of American history. And he has found that Americans seem to be operating based on what he calls the American memory hole. A lot of things in U.S. history have been forgotten.

So while we take this opportunity, I want to thank again for the Love of the Road donation last Friday was great. And remind you that if you want to maintain the David Knight Show, feel free to donate. And we're going to hear a little wonderful music that David composed for the program. © B Emily Beynon I am the king of the world. You're listening to The David Knight Show. Wonderful movie, Shannon Doe, providing the visuals there. And I hope everybody will take the opportunity to watch Jimmy Stewart in that film. As I mentioned, it has a lot of pro-liberty themes. It's about a farmer who is between the North and the South, wants nothing to do with either of them. And as you see in the video, circumstances end up roping in one of his sons

and he has to go try to rescue his son because he's been mistaken as being one of the fighters in the Civil War. It's a wonderful movie. In fact, it has such strong pro-liberty themes. And I know that people have mixed feelings about Ayn Rand, but there's actually a train called the John Galt in the film. So check out Shenandoah and check out the work of this next man. I want to introduce this gentleman to the stage. If you follow him at Don Jeffries

on X, you will discover a very rich vein of thought and knowledge. And of course, you'll discover that the author of the new book, American Memory Hole, has a lot to offer us, especially about censorship, about the United States handling of the border, and a lot more. Donald Jeffries is with us. Don, good to have you here. How are you?

Welcome to The David Knight Show. Great to see you. Hey, Garth. It's always great to talk with you. How are you? Welcome to the David Knight Show. Great to see you. Hey, Garth. It's always great to talk with you. Thanks for having me. Absolutely. How's it going outside of the swamp of Washington, D.C.? Well, it's all, you know, I live far enough away where I don't smell. And, you know, I'm lucky I'm in one of those dinosaur suburbs, you know, that I'm clinging to. You know, these are the kind of neighborhoods they want to eliminate. So I'm enjoying it while I can.

Well, absolutely. Absolutely. You know, Don, over on your X feed, you posted something. And I want to tie this in, if we can, to just open up this topic. And then we'll talk a little bit about your book and so on. But one of the things over on my schedule was I wanted to discuss this unbelievable move by Robert Reich, who's calling for Elon Musk to be arrested. I'm going to put this up on the screen and you've got a little something from Kamala Harris that a lot of people have seen seen some video. Now, this is actually a reprint from Robert Reich's Guardian piece. So here it is. Elon Musk is out of control, says this constant

government parasite. Here is how to rein him in. And he goes through, this is a very strange piece that actually reads from left to right. He goes through all these things and he says that he thinks that musk either should be arrested or he should be gone after by the u.s government for antitrust and that the um the um uh the folks and the securities and Exchange Commission should do something about him. On your X feed, you have the video of Kamala Harris, and you have, imagine that, letting people speak to potentially millions without any oversight or regulation. Yes, Kamala doesn't like that. It's almost like we have a First Amendment or something.

Now, you come from more the left tradition. You've mentioned this before. And it is, I come from the punk rock tradition where I started to see that the people who had been portrayed as or portrayed themselves as leftists shouldn't have been believed. You could start to see it as I was a teenager. What's your take on the ex-attack out of Brazil and the status of many of the bigwigs shutting down TikTok on the Republican and Democrat side? Kamala Harris and her utter disdain for free speech and Tim Walz claiming that so-called misinformation as he describes it has no place in our discourse, despite the First Amendment. It's just stunning. Well, as you noted, I did come out of the left as a teenager. I was a card-carrying member of the ACLU. Mark Lane was my hero. I became a civil libertarian because of him when I was working on the JFK assassination with his group. And it's amazing to me how the left has completely

swung around on their entire, and this is a perfect example of it. They used to be about trying to stand up for the little guy and get rights for people who didn't have them. Now they're trying to take rights away from people who kind of still have them. And that's all they're about. They're trying to suppress speech. I mean, I remember back in the day, it was all about free speech. And most of it back then was they were fighting the catholic church and they wanted more nudity and sexual stuff that was pretty much the fight back then but now it's all about suppression and hate speech this orwellian term and it's become accepted and i point out many times like what what does that even mean hates the human emotion who's it's in the eye

it's in the eye of the beholder we all hate hate something. That doesn't make any sense to say, hey, so hate speech contradicts free speech. Misinformation and disinformation, you know, you have the right to be misinformed. I mean, 90% of the American people is misinformed about everything, you know? So it'd be that you have the right to be wrong. And we just, Robert Rice exemplifies somebody

that he said a few good things economically. He was a member of the Clinton administration. And I know some of my friends on the left were talking him up and said, you know, talked about my book, Survival of the Riches. And he would never read my book. And these kinds of statements are the reason why. At heart, he's an authoritarian. And somebody like Elon Musk, and you know how we all feel about Elon Musk. I don't think he's the champion of free speech, but he's been put out there as that.

That's what his that's what his role is at this point is to try to defend free speech. And even his version of free speech is too much for these people. And the idea that they could arrest him. And again, these are it's like Trump getting arrested. You know, it used to be impossible to arrest a billionaire for anything. And now you're going to arrest a billionaire for having, I mean, X is the only platform. I'm still shadow banned there, but it's eased up a lot under Musk. But the idea that this is the only social media platform where at least the guy pays lip service to free speech and talks about it and seems like he's more willing, but that

they don't, they hate that. They don't want anything. And I said all along guard that when, when the internet came into being, they got it out of the Pentagon. It really, they were beside themselves because they, they want an FCC to regulate this thing. And there, and there's no FCC. Now they finally came upon the social media, and that's how they've gotten a lot of us, is because we're so dependent on the social media platform. So if we lose this one, if you lose X, and of course, the only place I'm not shadowed about is Substack, and I live in fear that they're going to get there, because that's the last free speech platform.

That's where I make most of my money nowadays. Yeah. they're going to get there because that's the last free speech platform. That's where I make most of my money nowadays. I hope they don't go there, but these little incremental processes, and when you look in the heads of somebody like Kamala Harris, and she's saying you can't, what do you mean if you, and this is the left's notion. This is what passes for the left today. They used to be, again, civil libertarians, free speech purists. Now it's it's oh you can't say i mean we we have to regulate we have to who has to regulate how does that how is that possibly in line with the first amendment but they don't believe in the first amendment guard the recent poll said 53 percent of americans think the first amendment's gone too far and that's exactly what tim wall said millions of people support him we're outnumbered, my friend. Absolutely, absolutely.

And John, it's interesting because I, as a teenager, I used to look at the vaunted claims of the so-called anti-authoritarians who were the authorities in front of me in the school, these aging hippies. And I looked at them very skeptically. And it's very difficult because I thought, this is a difficult thing to navigate here and I'd love to

get your thoughts on this because back then I saw the shadow play that they were and I mentioned you know Plato's parable of the cave they were projecting the idea that they were free speech when they were really authoritarians it was very easy to see they would tell us look at this television show look at this news look at this And I'm like, are you aware of Reason Magazine? Are you aware of my dad's favorite human events? No, you don't want us to talk about those things. You already have your preferences. You already are acting as an authoritarian. And that was the problem that I found in college at Boston University. And now the question is whether there's some grander shadow play going on as we see some of these blips pop up with Telegram.

And it seems to be accelerating with with Elon Musk and X. And we saw what happened previously. I think people try to differentiate and say, is this all on the ground sort of stuff? Is this Google blacklist for real? Yeah, it's for real. I was on the Google blacklist. You know, MRC TV was on it. I get hit by NewsGuard. I have to write letters back to NewsGuard. That's the on the ground question. I can answer that as, yes, they're trying to censor there and they don't click the hyperlinks. So last time I mentioned on my show, last time I had to write the back, I said, if you think it would be constructive, maybe we could just have a debate

and you could bring your information. We could bring ours. We can go up on the stage. We can do it for charity and you could offer what you have to say. And it might be constructive for people. I haven't heard anything back. In fact, they downgraded MRCTV before they even got through our emails back to them. That's what NewsGuard is doing. So it's unbelievable to see what they're doing. And of course, the way that you have been treated with your books, Masking the Truth, all those different things, whether it be on Amazon and so on, you yourself have been directly affected by this. And so I'm wondering if you look at something like X, some people might say this is a grand shadow play. I just don't know where to assess that. But on the ground, these immediate things, I'm taking them as what they

are. I think there's a big battle in Brazil for political control. I think the United States was involved with getting the French to go after Pavlo Durov. I know that they have gone after me. So these are direct things. I think this is, you know, whether Elon Musk is playing some larger long-term game, I don't know. But what's going on in Brazil,

I don't think is part of some grand strategy that they're pulling off right now on some theater. Yeah, no, and I think you brought it when you said about the hippies. I mean, we saw that the hippies were the counterculture back then. And as I wrote in my book, Hidden History, it was largely controlled. You had people like Timothy Leary and Gloria Steinem that were working for the CIA. We now know that. So a lot of their leaders were being put out there, and again, it's controlled opposition. But once they came into power power i mean jerry rubin ended up his days as a yuppie on wall street uh they they quickly changed i mean abby hoffman stayed good and i i have the respect for abby hoffman anybody

that writes writes a book called steal this book and he wanted people to steal it so i mean he i mean he was at least being true to his credo but uh most of them were uh were not you know the real deal and uh as you noted they they were very controlling even if you watch the arguments between meathead carl reiner who in real life you know exemplifies what those guys became he is in real life that's what he is and they're control freaks and they what really really repelled them were the rt bunkers of the world the old guard their antiquated beliefs. And they were constantly lecturing them all the time. Yeah. Yep.

And Archie Bunker was always the straw man. You know, he was the straw man, right wing. Yeah. The classic cliche caricature. And back then, that's one of the things that that show specifically was one of the things that got me very sensitized to the way that they would portray they would put out a projection of what the enemy was in their eyes which wasn't realistic and it's the same thing as you investigated with people like senator mccarthy um so let's talk about american memory hole your new book how people can get it and of course hopefully it won't be memory hold i really want to suggest people find the book and it's literally just out on its real public run just over the past few days. People could order it a little bit beforehand. Tell us about American Memory Hole and maybe mention how this sort of fits the theme for what we're seeing with silencing of information. Yeah, well, we do. And that's why I urge people because most Americans are historically illiterate and it's not their fault because they don't they get this McHistory stuff and they get the court. I call them the court historians. And the reason I use that term all the time, the subtitles, how the court historians promote disinformation.

I use that term over and over again. It comes from Professor Harry Elmer Barnes, who was a typical leftist of the day back in the 20s. And most of these people I admire, H.L. Mencken, these were classical leftists who would be considered white supremacists and they'd want to put in prison today just because they were the liberals of their day. Harry Elmer Barnes, the establishment turned on him when he realized, well, you know, all these millions of people died in World War I. I can't figure out why. You know, he said there's absolutely no reason for this to have happened. It was a bloodletting beyond belief. And once he started to go against the narrative there, he was drummed out of polite society. He ended up his life, you know, speaking at revisionist historical conferences because nobody else would have him. He was also an early victim of what I have in the book. We

talked about how FDR, you know, was inventing cancel culture back then. And Barnes was a typical victim of that, where FDR and the administration would go after their critics, just like you would see today. And instead of getting them drummed off social media or maybe talking to the big publishing houses, they would talk to the newspapers and the radio stations and the magazines. People like John T. Flynn, who was the head of the American chapter of the American First Committee in New York, who was, again, a liberal in good standing, wrote for the nation and all these periodicals. FDR called him up and said, hey, get rid of this guy. Don't hire him. Yep. He doesn't want us to get in World War II. And so that's where you can, so these things, when you look at what's happening today, these things are connected.

I mean, they come up to the point where you can have a Robert Wright or Tim Walz or Kamala Harris running for president, where they can openly come out and speak against, and talk against free speech. And it's not controversial. In fact, it's popular to millions of people. And it just, I mean, that should ruin what Wall said and what Harris said, regardless of anything else. That should have ruined their chances right then in an honest electorate, but it won't because again, they're running against Trump and you know what I think of the Trumpetstein project. So people are going to vote for them no matter what. And I've talked about it with enough, some formerly, I thought good people in the JFK

assassination research community who have lost their minds over Trump. And I said, you know, you understand when Kamala Harris was district attorney of San Francisco, I wrote an article in American Free Press years ago that had such an impact. Paul Schrade, who was a victim, who shot in the Ambassador Hotel, just died a few years ago at night. He contacted me and said how much he loved the article. Kamala Harris at that time said, I don't care if there was a second shooter. It doesn't matter. Oh, it's stunning.

It's stunning. And you know, Don, it's interesting, the work I do with MRCTV, you know, you've got these people who take a quote from Donald Trump. It's a flip comment about how he might say something like, you know, he is he's going to arrest journalists. He's going to shut down free speech. He's going to do all these different things, which he has not done. Right. And they don't even mention that Obama and Biden, as president and vice president, tried to use the Espionage Act against more whistleblowers and journalists than all the other presidents prior to them combined up to when it was passed during World War I. They've got the gall to bring this sort of stuff up while they have surrogates like NewsGuard being fed with federal money to shut down people, while they've got the FBI going into Twitter and paying them $3.5 million to thank them for their efforts to silence people. And it has a direct effect on people's lives because we were talking about

don't take the jabs, watch out for the masks. They don't do anything. This stuff from Fauci is bogus. Here's the story about how they can't actually say how many people died from this virus because they're subsidizing the hospitals to claim that they've got the virus, the PCR tests are bogus, all these things that are verifiably true. And even if they weren't correct, as John Stuart Mill said in On Liberty, openness to opinions and information allows people to exercise and argue and debate. And to me, one of the big things that comes out of this, and I'd love to tie it into American memory hole, Don Jeffries, is this. There seems to be this constant push for them to try to portray anybody who is speaking and they don't

like as the big guy in a sort of cultural Marxist way. So Robert Reich is portraying Elon Musk as the big guy who runs X. And so therefore the great paladin of the people, the securities and exchange commission, which shakes down people all the time and gets our tax money, whether we like it or not has nothing to do with the constitution. He wants to go after musk he wants musk arrested he's calling for a guy who just wants to open up speech to be arrested and he thinks that he's standing for the little guy it's just stunning it's so completely inverted from anything that has anything to do with individual morality and yet they're the ones who try to claim that they stand for the little guy, which gets right to some of your information on things like McCarthy and revelations about Abraham Lincoln

and others that you have come out with in American memory hall. I'd love to put this on the screen, Don. So tell us some of the things that surprised you, for example, about Senator McCarthy. Well, McCarthy, and I want to thank Chris Graves and Peter Seacatch. They did some incredible work and research. I couldn't do it without them. They really helped a lot. McCarthy, I alluded to it in Crimes and Cover-Ups, my earlier book, but he really comes off more and more as a hero. And he's been so misrepresented.

Again, just to give you an idea of how historically illiterate Americans are, if you look at his name, it's been added to the dictionary, McCarthyism, to represent an era, supposedly. And there's probably 1% of Americans that even know that's Joe McCarthy. You could ask them and say, well, I guess there was somebody named McCarthy. They must figure somebody was named McCarthy. They don't know who or anything. And I'm sure they get him mixed up maybe with Eugene McCarthy later, and it ran, you know, against Johnson, but, and anyway, this guy was a genuine, and again, I, you know, I feel about war, but he was a war hero, his name was Tail Gunner Joe, he wasn't a chicken hawk, and that's how he was elected to Congress, like a lot of these guys, JFK, and all of them were,

but he, he has been unfairly represented he's he's tied him with the hollywood 10 the blacklisting and hollywood and all this stuff when he had not been the house on american committee what and he was in the senate it was in the senate right so he said so all that came out if they want to blame anybody blame jay parnell thomas nobody knows who that was he was the chairman of huac which was mean, talking about an un-American committee, a committee called the House Un-American Activity is ridiculous. But McCarthy had nothing to do with that. He was in the Senate and he was investigating subterfuge in the United States government. He was concentrating on the army. And that's when, you know, he, all the list of how many people, his list, by the way, was very similar to a list that came out of the FDR administration earlier. But, you know, once he did that, he got to kind of press, although it

wasn't bad because you saw more of a conservative press then, but the liberal press, the Drew Pearsons of the day, young Jack Anderson, people like that, they went after him with the viciousness that you're used to seeing with Donald Trump. And the guy, as we show in the book, he was probably the first conspiracy theorist openly in public book, he was probably the first conspiracy theorist openly in public to talk about FDR knowing about Pearl Harbor in advance, and he was, you know, he was a friend of the Kennedys, friend of James Forrestal, who was pushed out of the window at Bethesda Naval Hospital, and you know, I use Forrestal's quote to McCarthy all the time, when he told me, you know, McCarthy, if this wasn't a giant conspiracy, once in a while,

they'd make a mistake in our favor, and I use that all the time, they never do, you know, McCarthy, if this wasn't a giant conspiracy, once in a while they'd make a mistake in our favor. And I use that all the time. They never do. There's no randomness at all involved at all. That's why you know this is organized. Otherwise, randomly, once in a while, something different would happen, something good. But McCarthy, like Forrestal, died at the Tess Naval Hospital. He went in there at age 48 with a knee issue. Two days later, he's dead.

No autopsy done. Jack Anderson instantly attacks him and claims he was an alcoholic and he drank himself to death. And that's the story. Later, roll back decades later, the idiot George Clooney makes a movie exemplifying energy. A typical journalist of the day was completely biased and smearing McCarthy. So that's the way he's gone down in history. And again, I think it's terribly unfair. He was also good friends with old Joe Kennedy. And as you know, I think I'm the only person, you know, that's trying to restore Joe Kennedy's reputation. And he wasn't a bootlegger. All that stuff is nonsense. It all comes from CIA and mafia sources. Joe Kennedy was really good friends with Forrestal

and McCarthy was a godfather to Robert F. Kennedy's oldest child, Kathleen, although they try to deny it now. That's how close he was to the family. And you know, Don, that information about Joe Kennedy, that coming from the New England area, I had no idea about that. You know, the story about him being a rum runner and, you know, how that was how he made his fortune. That is like established lore. The same thing with McCarthy, you know, all those things. And I'll give you an example of how the lore of Edward R. Murrow. Perfect example. You know, incredibly biased. Walter Cronkite, incredibly biased. This is one of the things when I was 11 years old, I was arguing with my teachers about this.

It's like, how can you say that those people are unbiased they're human beings we all have biases like how can you be so stupid i couldn't understand it it's like just look for alternatives the the most you can ask is for a journalist to be at least fair and open that's all you can ask you know so um i'll give you an example i was at boston university where they heralded Murrow. They loved Murrow. And they had a panel on objectivity in the media. Every person that they brought in was from the Boston Phoenix, the Boston Globe, or some left-wing radio station like Public Radio or whatever. Every person on the panel. And they almost all repeated the same mantra. I got into journalism to fight the big wig in the, I mean, it was almost word for word. It was uncanny. The big wig and the three in the big glass office in his three piece suit.

So then we went and got together in the teachers like Kumbaya, everybody turned their, their chairs to a circle, like you're 10 years old. Right. And she's like, so what did you think? Wasn't it?

What'd you think of the panel? And I raised my hand i was like did anybody else here notice that this panel on objectivity in the media was completely substantially biased and she's like what i was like i went through every person i was like this person's from the globe this person's from the phoenix like who are you kidding like why do you serve up this nonsense hey ed don if i can can i read a little bit of this excellent forward and people can find this at amazon american memory hole is the new book from don jeffries everybody and you're probably familiar with hidden history and masking the truth just great great stuff uh here's the part of the introduction from sam tripoli i'm so glad that Sam wrote this.

I'm going to read it without putting it on the screen, Don, and I hope you don't mind, because it obviously has a lot of great things to say about you, but in particular about the work. It's great. He says, Sam Tripoli in the foreword says, it is with great enthusiasm and admiration that I introduce you to Don Jeffrey's latest literary endeavor, American Memory Hole. I've had the privilege of knowing Don through his insightful contributions to journalism, a field where his commitment to truth telling stands as a beacon in an often murky landscape. Wonderfully stated. That's great. That is great, Don. And it's so true. In the realm of investigative journalism, Don Jeffrey's is a name that resonates with authenticity and courage. His career spans decades, marked by an unwavering dedication to uncovering the hidden truths that shape our world. From clandestine operations to cover-ups, Don fearlessly navigates through the labyrinth of misinformation to expose the realities obscured from public view. One of the things that, of course, Sam Tripoli, host of Tinfoil Hat,

brings to mind, Don, and I wanted to bring it up to you from American Memory Hole, which is just out, everybody. American Memory Hole, show it on the screen again, is there's a weird psychology that I noticed, especially in high school, which was a form of defensiveness that becomes its own doctrine. They become doctrinaire and accept things without question as a form of almost a protective layer against criticism. So the McCarthy stuff, it's an easy go-to. Nobody questions it. You've got different things like Edward R. Murrow. Oh, he's unquestionable. What a wonderful journalist he is. Walter Cronkite, the fact that he was a hardcore socialist, nobody wants to bother talking about that,

that he might've been biased. Nobody wants to talk about that. And now we get to this idea of people like Robert Reich saying, well, of course, for the protection of our democracy or Tim Walz of our democracy, they always use that term democracy as if it would be OK if the majority wanted to take away your life or take away your freedoms. For our democracy, somehow the highly much more democratic idea of open voices has to be stopped. It's recursive and insane, but they push this stuff. And I wonder, as you saw the left become increasingly more authoritarian and totalitarian, did you have any friends who commented to you? I know that a lot of them went by the wayside. That sort of felt the same way from your generation? Well, there's like my friend Cindy Sheehan and I have become really good friends.

And the left, I mean, she was, and she probably is a socialist, so we differ from that. But she's honest. She's been a great supporter of mine. She wrote a blurb for this, like she has pretty much any time I've asked her. But she lost her child in the Gulf War. And as long, when Bush was in the office, the left loved her. We were talking about Jackson Brown. I just happened to mention how much I love Jackson Brown.

She was friends with Jackson Brown. Jackson Brown asked her to present an award to him. He admired her that much. But what happened was once Obama came into office and she saw he's doing the same thing, he's bombing even countries but left left her yeah and so she then suddenly it didn't matter anymore and that she exemplifies what's rothwell you cynthia mckinney's another one who i admire very much who was who uh would refuse to take the and she claimed there was an actual oath she had to take in congress to israel she wouldn't take and i think they looked at her as just another member of the black caucus and then uh eventually said well you gotta get rid of her. And there are people like that. I

think Dennis Kucinich is still pretty good. And I think that Jimmy Dore, I like very much. So there's a left out there that still stands up for some of these classical liberal ideals, but there aren't many of them, and there's very few. I'm the last civil libertarian in America, I think. But I feel that way sometimes. But, you know, that's the essence. Because the essence of free speech is what Patrick Henry said. He was quoting Voltaire, but he said, and it got me excited as a little kid.

You know, learning is, I love the revolutionary era, and I used to just gravitate towards that. I'd read books on it as a little kid, you know, learning as I love the revolutionary era. And I used to just gravitate towards that. I'd read books on it as a little kid. And I realized even then, God, there's not many movies about that. And I've written about that before. Hollywood avoids the subject. And when Mel Gibson made The Patriot around 2000 or 90s, whatever it was, it was very controversial. I mean, they went nuts over it.

And it was nothing. He just told the story. Yeah. They didn't want anybody knowing. They didn't want anybody remembering that, hey, the United States decided to break away, to secede, if you will. And there's a reason why they called it the Articles of Confederation.

And then later, they became the Confederate States. They chose that name with a reason, because they recognized they were doing the same thing. And that's why it gets to when you roll up why I read so much about Lincoln, because he's the secular saint of our civilization. That says a lot about your civilization when you have the greatest despot we've ever had. And so I'm trying to show the truth about him. But people need to realize that whatever the founders were fighting for, their underlying principle was the consent of the governed. And in 1860, those states no longer consented.

And Abraham Lincoln said, no, you have to consent and crushed them. And almost a million people died. The United States became singular instead of plural. And that was the end of the founding fathers. Most people don't realize that. You had a great conversation about a month and a half ago with, of course, author and now head of the Mises Institute, Tom DiLorenzo. And his books, just fantastic. The Real Lincoln, Lincoln Unmasked. Also, Jeffrey Rogers Hummel has an excellent book called Emancipating Slaves and Slaving Free Men. And of course, DiLorenzo's book

called How Capitalism Saved America is just phenomenal, just remarkable. And, you know, as a guy who was the tall kid in fourth grade, I had to memorize and recite the Gettysburg Address, have the stovepipe hat, have a fake beard that looped around my ears and give, you know, give the four score. And it just sounds such, you know, such flowery language, but yeah, you, you know, when you find out about Lincoln, when you find out why they called him leaping Lincoln, when you find out how corrupt he was, how he, you know, he was in Congress and the unconstitutional transcontinental railroad, which was not supposed to have been any sort of government project, but the scions of Alexander Hamilton and made sure that that rail line was steered that way and then sold all that land back to the feds for more money than he made even as a lawyer during

his whole career as a lawyer that ought to tell people a little something even before he becomes president and then the entire idea of the Emancipation Proclamation being this wonderful thing that somehow it frees the slaves it was a tactical move to try to generate rebellion yes on the slave plantations in a place where he didn't have jurisdiction anymore and northerners rioted they had protest marches over the fact that he wasn't freeing the slaves in the north right and all you need to know about him is that uh and we talk about it in this book is that during during his career, he was a corporate lawyer. My hero is Huey Long, and Huey Long used to like to say he never took a case against a poor man.

I don't think Abraham Lincoln ever took a case for a poor man. He was the exact opposite of Huey Long, and he was a railroad corporate lawyer, and he was in their hip pocket. And all you need to know is that there we talk about there was at least one example of when he there was a runaway slave and lincoln didn't represent the runaway slave he represented the master in court this is a great emancipator now what what is the great emancipator see you try to bring that up and they don't let you bring it up because obviously it ruins the image right you know this you You're going to court, so you're representing the master? Wait a minute, and you're saying, and all you need to, in Lincoln's first inaugural

address, he laid it out. He said, if I could save the union without freeing a slave, I'd do it. And people, you're exactly right. He did it for public relations purposes. And then Lincoln, there's all the evidence in the world is Lincoln was an atheist. And then in fact, he wrote a rebuttal to the New Testament when he was young and that his, his friends said, we've got to get rid of this. And they burned it. And when he entered politics and, uh, but still this, this flaming atheist, he decided to a few years into the war, he started blaming God and invoking the almighty who he didn't believe in. So all those great speeches and he wasn't, he wasn't good writer and he could turn a phrase and, Oh, well,

The slippery tongue devils, you know? Yeah. And in fact, you, you, you remind me, I'm showing on the screen, Don, Don Jeffries is our guest on the David Knight show folks. And I just want to mention Martin Thorne over on X says, Don, I know by comparison, Gab is a small player, but Andrew Torba stands against censorship. He sure does and works hard. Very small team there. And I'm on Gab, too, and against foreign governments telling him what to do. So, yeah. And I know David Knight is over there and, you know, maybe more people will populate that.

And feel free to comment on that and bring on other comments. But I want to show the screen again because this slippery tongue devil of Abraham Lincoln, right, Don, makes me think of Bill Clinton. And you've got something in here, the quote, it isn't easy being a historian when most of America isn't interested in the past and is woefully uninformed or misinformed about even the most important events and personalities. In this book, we'll examine in greater detail the events of 9-11, the Oklahoma City bombing, and the death of JFK Jr. We'll also look back at the founding of the Republic, James K. Polk, Woodrow Wilson, FDR, Joe McCarthy, and several other misrepresented historical events and personalities. I often bring up things like Shays' Rebellion and how that was used to leverage people so that a lot of those very wealthy friends of Alexander Hamilton would buy those pennies

on the dollar bonds from the war for independence. And then they were able to, of course, get them paid for by the central government. And the whiskey rebellion was put down in order to make sure they could facilitate the excise tax to pay for those bonds. I mean, it was incredibly corrupt. But let's talk about Oklahoma City, because when you look at Abraham Lincoln and the way that he was able to set up the firing, the shot at Fort Sumter. I mean, utterly, utterly corrupt, unbelievably corrupt, sending fake messages so that the South would think one thing. And then, of course, getting the South to be very fearful and getting them to fire the first shot. Much like the way FDR communicated with Winston Churchill to say, I'll do anything I can to get the U.S. involved in this. And then

already breaking the purple code of the Japanese, moving all the valuable ships away from the cone where the Japanese would be traveling, then blaming the people who were there who didn't get the information from the people in D.C. I mean, this is real, real dark character action. But we'll go to Oklahoma City real quick because I'll never forget. And I actually got it because I was going to write a book on the history of talk radio. When Clinton said, we hear so many angry voices out there, you know, violent voices. He was blaming Oklahoma City essentially on Rush Limbaugh. Yeah, it was unbelievable.

And you've got a lot of this information pick any of those don and let's let's extend our conversation as long as you can be here because i'd love to to continue this conversation and take questions from the audience in the david night show sure uh well you know clinton was uh i you know much as i think reagan transformed the right into this and basically he let the neocons take over. And instead of worrying about, you know, Reagan didn't cut a single sub-agency in government his entire eight years in office. And he raised taxes on the majority of people, especially double-taxed Social Security, which is already taxed. And somehow the right was okay with that.

The right was transformed under Reagan into this kind of greed is good kind of worship of the marketplace. And Clinton in the 90s transformed the left. He was the first one to feel your pain. And, you know, identity politics. He was all about, and that's exactly what, so he would naturally look, who can I blame? And that was when the left started doing that. And you see that that's right out of their playbook. Something happens, let's blame the white supremacists let's blame uh you know and instead of course they they

never it's a conspiracy theory to even look into it you have general ben parton it was the nation's uh topic general you know it must have been something he was the general uh the nation's top expert on explosives he was trying to get on he couldn't get on a single tv show i think alex jones had him on to talk about it they had to be bombs in the buildings and uh they know that they have the original coverage of oklahoma city that day where they uh used to be i don't know if it's out there on the line now but it was for a long time where the original coverage for the story took hold they have over and over again reporters reporters and witnesses talking about explosions finding bombs they even talked about bringing bombs out.

So in this book, I have the story of Corey Laudenslager, or Mike Laudenslager, I think his name was. Despite that name, I can't find any of his family to talk to, but he was seen by many people. He was a hero rescuing people. He was also seen arguing with government agents heatedly. Their official explanation is that he died during the blast at his death, that all those people that saw him arguing and helping people, nothing.

And of course you can't find this family to talk about. I had representative state representative Charles key on the, I've had him on my show a couple of times and he couldn't locate a lot of these people, you know, the missing daycare center owner who disappeared. Chris Gray has worked a lot on that and, uh, we can't find her. She's going to, she's alive. She's gone into hiding. And that's, you know, I actually talked to Timothy McVeigh's father very briefly. He was one of the few actually answered the phone. I was shocked, you know, but I had maybe 30 seconds of a conversation, but he didn't want to

talk. I said, well, I think your son was a patsy and I tried, but he didn't care. No, I can't, he didn't want to hear anything about it. And was a patsy and i tried but he didn't care no i can't he didn't want to hear anything about it and that's that's where we are the people that are associated with these things don't want to talk you know all down to seth rich's family or anybody like that oh that's amazing i mean the seth rich thing is such a classic example of of what what actually really had to have happened which was the data had to have been downloaded inside the building. And Seth Rich literally getting killed before he's going to meet with the FBI. And, you know, they call it a botched robbery. And, you know, with the Oklahoma City thing, you bring it to mind because Mary Ellen Moore, Chris Emery, their company has done Yeoman's work, a documentary film on Oklahoma City.

Absolutely excellent work. And I want to, if I can, I'd like to show some of these great quotes here, Don, on the book, these blurbs. John Barber, of course, from NBC television and producer. And he has, take a dive down the memory hole with Donald and you will have the most brilliant memories of how our media and government under-informed and misinformed us. I want to go back to John in just a moment. Then you've got a quote from G. Edward Griffin, author, of course, Creature from Jekyll Island, very good on nutrition. He has, this is not a giant tribe against America. It is a wake-up call to recognize that the bigger a government becomes, the greater attraction it is to those seeking to use that government to attain personal power and wealth.

Knowledge of this truth is the first step to realistic reform. And then you also have this from Daniel Estelin, who is a great writer, have numerous of his books, many of his books. Yes. Jeffries rightfully teaches us that we must question what we are told. And this is why American Memory Hole plays such an important role in helping us understand who is doing what to whom and how it is being done on a global scale. So if I can if I can entice and gender even two or three people in the audience to pick up this book and get some of your other books as well. Hidden History, Crimes and Cover-Ups. These books are remarkable. And then of course, to follow you, Don, it's at Don Jeffries, at Don Jeffries on X, right, Don? Yes, yes. And you can do it. They're letting me grow very slowly there. They still, you know,

for a long time, they've unfollowed people. People have told me and all that. So they definitely in the old days tried to stop that. But it is what it is. But Substack is the best place. Donald Jeffries at Substack.com because it's called I Protest Like My Podcast because that's the only place they are allowing me to grow. Substack. It's good stuff. Yeah.

That's a free speech platform. Let's hope it stays that way. You get big names like Glenn Greenwald, my friend Naomiomi wolf people like that are writing there and and doing well let's hope because these are we need something like that to counteract what's happening on facebook and and instagram and then that tiktok if they close that down you know it's just it's ironic isn't it because tiktok so many people on the right were appalled at the, you know, the purple haired tattooed teachers. And I was too, you know, with the LGBT flags, but you don't shut the entire platform. That's the essence of being a civil libertarian. I mean, much as I, you know, I kind of blanched at saying that they have rights too. I don't,

I'm not going to sit down their free speech. I mean, they have a right to fly that flag and say whatever nonsense they're saying. I mean, and that's, you know, if you're, if you're true to free speech, then you support their right as well. Absolutely. Don, Don Jeffries is our guest on the David Knight show. Don, going to check out some of the comments, see if, uh, if people have put comments in and I've missed them just, uh, you know, copy paste, regenerate anything like that. Um,'ve got here uh william a martel says lincoln was a student of shakespeare well if you want some uh curious information about shakespeare get sam blumenfeld's book on the marlo shakespeare uh connection because uh he uh he reveals that christopher marlo was never killed he was actually a spy for Queen Elizabeth.

And the idea that Marlowe was killed outside a pub in a fight was a trumped up thing. They had to move him out because of political pressures. And he lived the rest of his life in Corsica. And through analysis, it's very interesting. Sam Blumenfeld, this was just one of his side interests. He was one of these guys with Charlotte Iserby, very influential on John Taylor Gatto and so on, and really good friends with my father. And when my dad was working with Charlotte in the Reagan administration trying to eliminate the education department, that's how he became friends with Sam. And Sam just became interested in Shakespeare. Very interesting stuff. And perhaps Lincoln could have been a character from a Shakespeare tragedy. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Joe Sobern wrote a great book about that too, about the country. Oh, yes, that's right. Joe Sobern. Yeah. And was it, he wasn't looking at Marlowe as being- I think he was looking at Bacon. I think it was Francis Bacon, I believe.

Bacon. That's what it was. Yeah, yeah. It's and it, you know, who can answer it? But one thing we do know is that Shakespeare, as as Sam brought up, Shakespeare, supposedly this man of letters, had a daughter who was illiterate. He never taught her how to read and he didn't have a library. So where was he getting all this knowledge yeah yeah meanwhile a guy like marlo was basically a scion of the or at least uh a special especially favorite person of the queen and the royalty had access to all this information and was well educated in those areas so very curious uh inside rockfin i want to thank uh let's see inside Rockfin we've got EcoTaxi Who has contributed to the program Thank you EcoTaxi

And he says Hi again Liberty Guard Goldsmith Of real Christian libertarianism Remember how almost lifelong Figurative and literal NWO Nancy Patricia Delisandro Pelosi's,

nasty, he abbreviates it, political career evidently began as JFK's, oh, is there a story that she was mixed up with JFK? There's a picture taken of her. She was Miss Lube Oil of 1959 or something. So I don't know who knows maybe jfk and her father was a monster in baltimore and i i have uh actually an american memory we're talking about that her brother her brother was involved in a uh a gang rape of a 12 year old or 13 year old or something like 10 guys and he was the only one that wasn't prosecuted so that

shows whoa his father had yeah yeah oh man and And isn't Newsome her nephew by marriage? Is that what it is? Yes, yes, yep. They're all these people related. They're incredible. Also inside Rock, Ben, let's see. We've got, oh, very, I appreciate this, Sam. Don, this is a bit of a side mark, but I know you're probably familiar with Sam Blumenfeld's work.

Brian McCartney says this, we taught our youngest to read with alpha phonics by Blumenfeld. Well done. Sam Blumenfeld was one of the people who spoke up against the public school hegemony and tried to tell people that most of the kids who are diagnosed as dyslexic, they're just not taught phonetic reading left to right the way the Phoenicians developed the alphabet. And I, I, I, you know, I, I have, Sam gave me a bunch of, uh, his stuff before he passed away. He lived about an hour away outside of Boston,

Don, and we, we would have dinner together and stuff like that after my dad passed away. So Sam was a good friend and, um, he was a great guy. And, um, it is interesting because he would take, uh, you know, parents in and they would bring their kids in and he would teach the kids phonics. And by the end of the afternoon, they'd be reading the street signs going home and they had been diagnosed as learning disabled and all these things. And then they would have been drugged. Pharmaceutical complex would have gotten a hold of them. It's it's amazing to see how, and Don, from your perspective, one of the things that I found, just to sort of bring this around, I found that some of my left-wing British friends in punk rock were right on the money regarding corporatism. And there's this fine line between recognizing the dangers of the corporate government fascist feedback loop and blaming business and endeavors and private property. And to me, the source of the problem is the corrupt power of the state, of the government.

So the more that the government does and the larger the area of control, the more people it's going to hurt and the more likely they're going to try to game the system to get advantages. So that's one of the reasons I like decentralization because there's an easier escape um yeah but that's why i'm a populist and uh you know populist and again my hero is huey long huey long you know people think of them as a communist or socialist and you read what i wrote about in survival of riches really obituaries they get read i mean they hated this guy even in death uh the communist didn't like him the way the socialists like because he actually accomplished something and he did. He provided great services to the people of Louisiana. He did it with the third lowest operating expenses of any state. He also,

his share of the wealth plan was going to exempt the first million dollars of income from any taxation. That would be $12 million today. So you know who he was going after. He already knew about the foundations. He was already talking about them was going after. He already knew about the foundations. He was already talking about them now. Imagine what he'd say about the Gates. We don't even know how much wealth is tied up in those foundations. So he knew where the money was. That's why they hated him. That's why Roosevelt, that's why they had him assassinated. But populism looks at a bigness, too much concentrated power anywhere. So they don't like big government or big business. They don't, or, you know, a big person. They don't want, they want things,

they want things spread out because they know power corrupts the great populist Lord Acton, who was a good friend of Robert E. Lee, not Abraham Lincoln. His credo, of course, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, is remembered by most people. And that's what it is.

So we have to, it doesn't matter whether it's you, me, or anybody who thinks a great guy, power is intoxicating. And that's why you have to, what is it? Jefferson said, you know, hold them down by the chains of the constitution. We have to stop too much power. And that's what differentiates a liberal and a conservative, you know, that conservatives defend big business, liberals defend big government. Now, too much concentrated power anywhere is not good. And you see the results in the way the country is. So true.

You know, you bring up there's so many, so many rich veins to tap here, Don. American Memory Hole is the book, everyone. And before I bring up my point, I want to bring up some points inside Rumble. It's the fruit stripe, gum colors of Rumble. I love it. Michelle Obama is there. Thank you for being there. Hal 9000 Watson is there.

Hal 9000 Watson says, and Newsom's ex is Trump Jr.'s wife. Good point. That's right. That's right. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So what is that?

Yeah. Yeah. I mean, how would she, that shows, you know, that these people are strange bedfellows? I don't know. I don't know. I can't explain it. I couldn't be married to somebody who was my political opposite. I know. And at the same time, I don't want to be you know, I don't want to criticize because i just don't know what the circumstances were on people meeting i don't know how much of it is artificial i don't know right but a couple of the things i do want to bring up uh is and there's so much in your writing let's talk about robert e lee and the way that lincoln is portrayed as the saint well robert e lee is portrayed as the bad guy and yet it was robert e Lee who actually cared about slaves, cared about human beings and actually believed in natural rights.

This is fascinating. Any comments you have on that and any of the other items that we might want to bring up before 11 o'clock? We'll have Marty Gottesfeld is going to be here about free speech as well, because Marty is going to be talking to us about that as well, Don. Well, Robert E. Lee, I think, represents class. He was a statesman and he comes off much better. Him and Jefferson Davis both come off way better than anybody in the North. And I in American Memory Hole, I published a directive from, I think it was from Jefferson Davis. I think it was from Davis. But to his troops and his generals about how they were, because they already knew all the stories about what the Union was doing. Targeting civilians, raping women, stealing.

I mean, they talk about stealing, theft on an unimaginable scale, atrocities, burning crops, destroying homes, the stuff that they did. He was appalled by it, but he told them, you are not to target civilians. No matter what the enemy is doing, you don't do that. That's why you can't find these tales of atrocity, otherwise they'd be trumpeted to the skies. If you could, Lee was a, and again, Lee was his, you know, your friends speak well of you. Lord Acton was maybe the greatest populace of the 19th century out of England. And he was just a great man. And he was, he was good. He was rooting for the Confederacy.

And he, at the end, he said he weeped for what happened there, you know, because he weeped for the surrender in Appomattox. And later, Lee, once the horrors of Reconstruction came to it, Lee came up with that great quote, if I had known what was going to happen afterwards, I would have never surrendered my sword. And so, you know, I think these guys, and that's why when I look, I don't know how many of them, you know, heroes or what a hero is even, but for the most part, when you look at somebody like Robert E. Lee or Joe McCarthy, Joe Kennedy, people like that, that are demonized in a life. And then you look at FDR

and what are rules and Abraham Lincoln, people like that, Hamilton, certainly, uh, these people seem way more like villains when you just scratch the surface. So I, I don't know, you know, what that means other than maybe they're just trying to mess with people's minds. But if you worship people, if you believe that people like Lincoln who set all these precedents, so look at today. If, for instance, you had civil libertarians, the ACLU is doing its job today, and they were actually protesting the fact that the January 6th people have been held, done that all due process for over three years now. They were doing their job. If somehow they got the government to respond to that, what would the government do? They would cite Lincoln as the president. Well, you know, it's an insurrection.

Look what Lincoln did during the Civil War. Oh, Lincoln did it. Okay, it must be fine. Yeah, the man who attempted to suspend habeas corpus himself. And then when a judge said, a member of the Supreme Court said, no, only Congress can do that. Then he sent magistrates to arrest the Supreme Court justice. Yes, he did. So when you worship a guy like that, and to a lesser extent, somebody like FDR, Woodrow Wilson, and you can see because the court historians, they will probably give know, they'll probably give Joe Biden a good presidential ranking.

I don't know. But they'll certainly give Obama a much better ranking than he deserves. And Trump will be at the bottom. It's typical. And this is dishonest. And it's not based, it's based on, and again, go back to Bill Clinton. When he rewrote the left, the left lost all its reason back then. You know, this was before Trump.

And they started going to emotion. How does it make me feel? And that's what identity politics is all about, and that's thanks to Bill Clinton. And you had the ultimate in Barack Obama with the left. Again, all these crazy, especially white women, went nuts because, oh, to kill a mockingbird. This is the culmination of all our dreams. We finally have a half-black president. And that was it.

They wouldn't have cared what he did at all. They felt so, so excited that this was their dream. It made them feel good. And that's identity politics. Oh, it's amazing. And I think, Don, it's almost as if, again, we talk about defensive postures. Eventually, there's so much retrenchment that they eventually have to get to the point of well don't talk to me about facts you're hurting me with your words because this

is my this is my truth and it's just amazing and it's cultural max cultural marxism to the max where you can't even discuss actual two plus two equals four because they they feel that it's five so in a way you get to the same destination as orwell and and room 101 you know it's just it's the emotional room 101 and i'll give you an example of the stunning hypocrisy this is a piece that uh will uh will be published tomorrow at mrctv don and you might have already heard about this as we close things off i just want to give this one to you to show the absolute self-delusion and confusion of these people. The dean of the Berkeley Law School has a new book, and you might have seen this, where he is calling for the trashing of the Constitution because, as he says, it hobbles

American democracy. So we talked about how the founders tried to explain democracy, as Benjamin Franklin said, you know, two wolves and a sheep. James Bovard's done great work about that. And so he's on MSNBC. And I mentioned this as we opened up the show, and we'll talk about it more on Liberty Conspiracy tonight at six o'clock, everybody. So stream it.

But the guy's name is Erwin Chemerinsky, and he's the dean of the school the tax supported subsidized california school and he actually says get this that there's not enough democracy around so what is what do they have to do? They have to, of course, the Constitution itself doesn't allow for enough democracy. It's putting so-called democracy at risk. Well, the Constitution was put in in order to stop the tyranny of the majority over people. That was the point. If you're going to establish the founders thought democracy was very dangerous.

But then the guy says, you know what? We ought to do something like have a constitutional convention. And if that doesn't work, we ought to, oh, split off and have the West become what's called Pacifica. They should secede. So here you've got a left-wing guy who hates the concept of Southern secession he doesn't like the constitutional confederate system that's made up and he eventually gets to the point where he argues for confederation and splitting off he doesn't even get it you just sit there you're like oh my goodness did i just some succession is more equal than others yeah i. I mean, and that guy, again, there are people that, if you wonder why, again, the country

is turning, why 53% of the Americans, and I believe that's true, maybe higher, don't think the First Amendment goes to work because they're being instructed by people like this. And you see the monstrosities, the purple haired tattooed people that are completely nuts that are teaching our children. And so they're obviously going to come out of that. They're going to be indoctrinated. And so you see in the, especially the Antipa-type marches, you see they're screeching like banshees. They can't even, this is what it creates.

And it's really a shame. But this thing about threatening democracy, and again, what what i would if i'm up there and allowed to have a platform then i say well first of all like define the anti-semitism define white supremacy define democracy what's what do you mean by democracy because how how does free speech threaten democracy free and this is the thing you know the the austrian economists uh that's one of the reasons why i'm a voluntarist anarchist is you know subjective valuation and things like that if you take the term democracy and strip it of its political polis derivation uh what they should be in favor is getting rid of government controls over everybody if they want real democratization they want more free speech

they want everything open and yet they use this bizarre beard where they claim like liz warren does oh we're working for the little guy in creating the uh corporate financial protection bureau right and they create this thing and she gins it so that she as an attorney before she becomes a senator will be hired by these giant corporations it's not going to put them at risk and she'll make money off the corporations helping them navigate the legislation she wrote it's just it's mind-boggling and you get an idea of what they mean by democracy when you look at the uh they they're fighting for they're supporting democracy in the ukraine they think this guy zelensky who was who's shut down all his political opponents, shut down all the newspapers like Lincoln did. Lincoln shut down

over 200 newspapers. So maybe that is democracy. I don't know. So in which case, as you said, but whatever we have in the United States today, it's certainly not a constitutional republic, but I don't think it's, it's not what I think of as democracy. Democracy is supposed to be the majority rules. I mean, but maybe that's true now because, you know, if the majority of people are against the First Amendment, I think they probably are now. Maybe they finally reach, you know, the point where they want. You remind me, you remind me, Don, of the lesson that James Madison seemed to learn. Remember when Madison, during the Constitutional Convention period, Madison was much more on the Hamiltonian

side, you know, with the, you know, you got, yeah, exactly. Federalists and things like that, who, of course, suborned the name federalism. They were really the centralists. But he worried that the states, if left without some stronger central government, the states would crush individual rights. So he wanted a stronger central government. And then over the years, he seemed to learn like, oh yeah, I see the problem. Just like Thomas Hobbes, you know, Thomas Hobbes in writing Leviathan said, well, you know, you got to have some central authority because everybody's going to be arguing against each other and worrying about each other. And, uh, so then I go to the students. I was like, I would draw a little circles. I was like, these are the individuals you got to have the Leviathan around them. Now let's go back a little further and have this

monarch. Now we've got another monarch over here. They're both human beings too. So how does Hobbes answer that? No, you're just making it worse. You're centralizing the problem. You're removing more and more individual choice and decisions and valuation over things. And what I think is kind of an interesting thing is as you look at these people who talk about democracy and all these different types of things, they constantly turn to the central government as the answer to protect the democracy. And Madison learned that is not the way to do it. At least the founders had decentralization and a confederated system. And people look at that now. They depict that since the 60s as somehow commenting on state rights is a cipher to racism. You know, they do. It's a lingua non lingua. You can't even use the language anymore. No, you're right. And that's what happens when they associate, you know, with states' rights. And again, it goes back to the states' rights party with Strom Thurmond and everything that ran back. So those are the Dixiecrats and they're the people that were

against segregation. But I mean, I don't, to me, the left kind of seems like they're pro-segregation at this point. To me, they don't seem like they're for integration. And I've commented many times, the civil rights movement was based on not everybody having the right to eat in restaurants. And then you had Sarah Huckabee Sanders drummed out of a restaurant by the owner because she worked for Trump and nobody saw the irony.

It's a restaurant. I mean, you'll see. Okay, if you want to make that argument then some other owner can make the argument i don't want these people in here if you can say i don't want somebody trumped and be consistent i'll give you an example i watched video uh last week i played it on liberty conspiracy of a bath pub owner uh back in 2021 telling Keir Starmer out of my pub, out of my pub. And the owner, yeah, the owner was struggling against one of the bodyguards of Starmer who was pushing him around in the foyer of his own pub.

And I remember I knew immediately when I saw the video, I was like, I know that place. That's the first place where I ate that pub in Bath is the first place I ate fish and chips with the mash peas. It was fantastic. It was so good. But I was so glad I gave the guy my money because he wanted Starmer out because Starmer was in favor of the lockdowns. And so here you have such a good recognition of private property rights. And in the United States, it's such a mixed bag. You know, yes, Donald Trump was the one who initiated the unconstitutional executive order for the emergency for the medical emergency in March of 2020. He wasn't the one who directly ordered the jab mandates that that was mostly the governors, the jab, um, uh, and, and the Biden administration. Um, and you know, it was a real mixed bag when it came to Trump with the jabs and the rollout of those things that obviously was a big mistake.

And, um, so now, uh, you know, I don't vote, I don't vote for anybody to fill a political office, but people are looking at these, these choices and they're saying, well, you got, you got a guy who was very against the jabs going in with Donald Trump. Now that's RFK Jr. His vice presidential candidates said we were going to resist because Trump didn't apologize. And I would love to see Donald Trump, at least, and again, I don't know whether to trust him on anything. You know, he unconstitutionally occupied, continued to occupy Syria, the jab stuff, the Operation Warp Speed is ridiculous.

But I would love to see at least some honest conversation between a guy like RFK Jr. that he brings in to say you know could you at least speak to these errors at least speak to the constitution but they're not talking on the constitution that i see the founders wrote no and and it's um any rfk jr and i feel about the kennedys and i he uh he says so many great things of course he's got rabbi schmooly which is a huge but but they all have their Rabbi Shmuley. I mean, there are. Yeah.

You know, there's no there's not there's no dissidence there allowed unless you're Thomas Massey. And then your wife suddenly dies a week later. You know, I don't know why. But but, you know, RFK Jr., I think, is having a good impact on Trump. I don't know. You know, I think Trump's an actor. But, you know what I think, that I think these things are decided in advance. I don't know what they're planning to do at this point,

but I think the only reason they would let Trump back in office is if they want the country to completely collapse, because that will happen, because the left is completely insane. And all they need to do is have a few of their leaders lead them out into the streets and they will go nuts they'll burn and loot on an unprecedented scale trump will do the same thing he did before he won't send out the national guard he'll talk and tweet and all that stuff that he does that's what he does and um that will be you know i think very sad but on the other hand what's you know if you put harrison them in there then you're just going to have especially if you're a white person the great replacement is going to continue unabated. And I don't want my kids, and if I have grandkids one day, I don't want them to be second-class citizens, just like Martin Luther King didn't want his to be.

But, Don, you're clearly racist. It's those people in England who recognize that the government's taking their money to house people in hotels outside of Heathrow or the people in Massachusetts, like Howie Carr, who's saying, Hey, you know, I wanted to go to that football game, but the hotels are filled with people that you're subsidizing their moves. Like maybe that's not racist. Maybe there's a major systemic problem here that they're not discussing. Exactly. There's a major systemic problem here that they're not discussing. Exactly. But I do want to mention a couple of things. First, I want to mention that Steve Swan, who's, I believe, up in Maine, is over on X right now.

And he comments, he said, I knew Sam Blumenfeld from Libertarian Conventions where I promoted Erwin Schiff. Rest in peace, Erwin Schiff as well. Yep. And his anti-income tax info. Erwin was a great guy peace, Erwin Schiff as well. Yep. And his anti-income tax info, Erwin was a great guy. Sam was a great guy as well. And, um, let's see, uh, we've got William A. Martell on X says, I thought the claim has been made that RFK wouldn't allow visitors into his home unless you had the jab. I think his wife had a party and uh and he went with yeah i think and i i think he said i i kind of had to go and anything reported about the kennedys i'm dubious about

they don't they never tell the truth about the committees i know but yeah uh but i have heard that as well i have heard that as well yeah and also heard that as well. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah. And also inside X, I mean, inside Rockfin, we have Auntie Opal. What a great name, Auntie Opal. A number of people have contributed to the show. So I want to thank Risha M. As always, awesome information. Thanks, Don, for coming on. And Auntie Opal, David offered a contribution as well. Thank you all. This is

great. Don, once more, again, your substack's the best place and it is, I protest, look up Don Jeffries and let's talk one more time about the book. Here's one last quote from Cindy Sheehan and boy, has she gone through a lot. Another entry in the Jeffries canon of setting the historical record straight. We all owe a debt of gratitude to Donald for his very well-researched body of work that helps us understand the true origins of what has grown to be an evil empire. I hope those that should read this book do. Cindy Sheehan, activist and author of Peace Mom. That all about the book, American Memory Hole. Don, thanks.

Thanks so much. I hope I can, again, inspire a number of people to go out and get the book. I appreciate it. I appreciate it, Garth. Thanks for having me on. Don, you were great. Thank you. And I will contact you via text afterwards. I love you, man. You're great.

Okay. Thank you. I love you too. Thank you. Thank you. Take care. Thanks Don. Good man. Don Jeffries. Good man. Hope I didn't keep him too long. I really am just glad that he stuck, stuck around. It just flew by. There's so much to discuss in his books. They're so great. I remember the first time I picked up Hidden History, I thought, wow, this is great. It was similar to the first time I picked up Dean Lorenzo's The Real Lincoln. You're just flipping the pages. I'm underlining all sorts of stuff.

Like every page is under like, I got to remember this. Going out to people like, did you hear this? I got to check this out. So great stuff, Don Jeffries. And William, thank you. Thank you, William. I appreciate that. I appreciate that very much, InsideX. And I see Jason Barrett, we only upend the coming ambush by invalidating Kamala out of office ASAP as ineligible. Yeah, I've heard people talking about that, and I don't think it's going to happen, obviously. I don't know enough to be able to comment on it it but I think that it's not going to be happening. But thank you all and thank you for the contributions. It looks like I'm just waiting to see whether our guest Marty Gottesfeld will be

able to join us. So I'll be looking for that very very soon. But while we have the opportunity, I want to maybe offer you a little something else from David Knight. Another nice one from David that, of course, his musical talent and the video talents, they come together beautifully on The David Knight Show. 🎵 🎵 you're listening to the david knight show and i see also on x jackson says thanks gardner and jackson thank you what a great day what a wonderful way to start the month um and thanks to david and everybody in the family god bless everyone who's here. It's wonderful. Very contented feeling to be on the show. Very hopeful. And I just send cheers to everyone. Thank you for having the faith in David and the team. And of course, thanks to MRCTV for letting me do the pieces for them. I'm not on staff with MRCTV. I'm on contract with MRCTV. And I want to give you this preview of what will be coming tomorrow on

the program on MRCTV. I'll be shooting a video about this as well. This is that story about the Berkeley Law Dean, this man who was on MSNBC. His name is Erwin Chemerinsky. And as I noted, it's really flabbergasting. I said in the opening, I just said it might be difficult to decide which is more offensive. The fact that a law school dean subsidized in the state of California can be either so toweringly ignorant or so dismissive of natural rights that he can spout this dribble. The fact that the dean's salary is tax subsidized. The fact that he can get a publishing contract to spread his curdled cream collectivism, or that he can get such a receptive audience on the obnoxious MSNBC. So I'd like to juxtapose that with the man we just heard on the program and saw on the program and listening on D live, just an audio. Um, but, uh, saw Donald Jeffries, yeoman's work with great researchers, Peter Seacost, Chris Graves, helping them out.

They are down, down in the trenches. It's DIY, DIY punk rock. They're not getting promoted by MSNBC. He's getting shadow banned. His book is being slammed. His last one, Masking the Truth, got slammed by Amazon. Not in reviews, but the tech was going after him. So strangely, Erwin Chemerinsky, who is, of course, on the payroll of the tax-subsidized Berkeley Law School, is getting a very easy ride from MSNBC. So whichever facet of this truly ugly political shadow play one studies, it contributes to one's understanding that many so-called legal theorists and politically motivated media members, as well as many of their politically powerful friends, love to promote both the canard that the U.S. government operates as a or our democracy,

folding you into it. It's all the collective we, the most dangerous pronoun in the language. And they promote the idea that the Constitution is a clunky anachronism that puts said democracy at risk. So on the one hand, they're talking about the U.S. system as a democracy, and then they claim that the Constitution, which is supposed to protect against democracy, of course, puts their vaunted democracy at risk. So clearly they don't like the Constitution. So the latest high-profile deceiver in this regard is Erwin Chemerinsky, who is the author of the scintillating new book, No Democracy Lasts Forever. Oh, yes, indeed. Let me show you that on Amazon. It's looking really good. It's got the thread

with the star and all that. It's like, oh, it's unraveling. Oh, lamentations. Oh, okay, fine. Well, we'll continue. I said, so of course, one can see his democracy canard in bold text. The subtitle is to be edited out or not, but anyway, we'll find out tomorrow. Allowing us to wonder how the so-called rule book that creates the federal offices and applies the limits to them also can be the thing that threatens itself. Again, the politicians don't swear an oath to the United States of America.

As much as John McCain said that that was the case when he ran for president. When I ran for president, I swore an oath to the United States of America in protecting America. No, John, you didn't. You swore an oath to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution, which evidently is why you went and hung out with Nazis like Ole Tianebok and the Slovodov party in Ukraine when you were preparing the overthrow of Ukraine. Yeah, I love it. I love Lindsey Graham. He's so pro-Israel. In the meantime, if you criticize Israeli government policies, the policies of a state apparatus, You somehow are anti-Semitic as they're crushing the Semitic peoples in Palestine and now the West Bank, those occupied territories. And yet Lindsey Graham is on camera shaking hands with a neo-Nazi in Ukraine. Seriously. And so is Joe Biden. He's, oh man. I guess maybe he couldn't quite feel the handshake because his hand was so slicked up with oil from Burisma. I don't know. Maybe I'm wrong. I could

be off base on that one. But anyway, we'll continue. I said, regardless of, or perhaps because of these logical, historical, and philosophical problems msnbc august 30th made sure to offer the berkeley law dean plenty he's the dean plenty of time to look the fool on morning joe so for news guard hey news guard here's a hyperlink let me me show you. Oh, look, there he is. Check this out, everybody. This is unbelievable. There'll probably be an ad, so we better make sure that we take care of this. It's very important to let them have their say. All right. So MSNBC. Oh, yeah. Tied to Microsoft, of course. They're wonderful. All right. Here we go. It's a beautiful shot of the sun coming up over the Golden Gate Bridge in San Francisco at 639 in the morning, 939 here on the East Coast, as we fast approach one of the most consequential

elections in American history. The political divide is wide, with both sides of the aisle believing a win for their opponent could doom the country. But the dean of Berkeley Law School argues it's not just politics, but America's founding document, the Constitution, that needs a bit of an overhaul. Joining us now is Dean Erwin Chemerinsky. His new book is titled No Democracy Lasts Forever, How the Constitution Threatens the United States. Dean Chemerinsky. So let me just get this straight. And I asked this of Bill Bradley when he was running for president. I said, Senator Bradley, since many businesses, states, I said, many politicians claim the Constitution is what they call a living document,

and they don't mean the amendment process. Since there is an amendment process in there, and yet we seem to be at the whim of judicial and legislative interpretations that have nothing to do with the constitution, why should we bother having a written constitution with an amendment process at all? He sort of blinked. And Bradley, he sort of blinked like he got a bad pass when he was playing in the NBA. Like, well, that came at me out of nowhere. What was that? And he said, well, it took him a second. He said, I consider myself to be more a child of the declaration of independence. I believe in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And literally he said this, and I believe that here in America, the government is here to give us these things. I'm like, boy, dude, first of all, you're not addressing my question. Second of all, you just flipped the concept of natural rights as expressed by Jefferson completely upside down. The government is here to give us these things. Oh, man, they're just insufferable. But here's the rest from MSNBC.

Not all of it, but you'll enjoy this. And then we'll go a little bit and round this off with that MRCTV piece as a preview. Tim Marinsky, thanks for being with us this morning. So how, in your view, does the Constitution that this country was built on and has been for nearly 250 years is a threat, threat actually to the country. Choices that were made in adopting the Constitution have come to haunt us. The Electoral College increasingly is choosing the president who lost the popular vote. Two senators per state is undermining democracy. In the last session of Congress, there were 50 Democratic senators and 50 Republican senators, but the 50 Democratic senators represented 42 million people. It's not rehearsed in any way. He's not nervous. Okay, so let me just go now to the piece at MRCTV.

I said, I hope this doesn't sound too harsh. I said, Chair Marinsky wasted no time to spout idiotic blather, releasing what appeared to be a rehearsed litany of complaints about the Constitution and how it seems to stand in the way of what he wants. More gang rule over innocent people and their own individual rights to property, their freedom of contract, their right to self-defense, and right of free speech. First up, the Berkeley law dean revealed his disdain for the fact that the Electoral College in 2020 chose for president someone who did not win the so-called popular vote. Do you even trust that? Of course not. Which makes one wonder if this law dean has read anything by the founders and if he knows that they were well aware that the Electoral College was supposed to act as a check on large population states, lording it over small population states. Of course,

the idea of state differentiation and the concept that there might be vestigial state semi-autonomy, well, those are verboten in Mr. Chermaninsky's lexicon. It's U.S. hegemon for him. It's D.C.-created uniformity, and that includes your individuality. Yeah, it's the tyranny of the majority, all for his totemic religion of democracy, democracy, democracy. He and other collectivists claim to be fighting for individual choice. It's their pretense, their fakery, that their tyrannical so-called democracy means you get to control your life. Actually, the way to lead to greater self-control is to allow for freedom, decentralization, and autonomy, not democratic pretenses that actually allow for gangsterism across an entire continent. If you want true individual autonomy, which you're claiming is included in your democracy, if you really want to democratize things, get the government out of restricting their lives, taking their stuff, telling them what their choices can be.

I know, it's kind of crazy, isn't it? More individual choice, less government. I know, it's kind of weird, not imposing your will on others through the means of the state. And then he added two senators per state is undermining democracy. So I said, since the founders wanted the Senate to be composed of people who were chosen by the state legislatures to represent state interest, again, trying to balance population-heavy states that might have more sway in Congress, and since many Americans view the 1913 17th Amendment as a massive cut against that principle, this law dean might want to return to the books

rather than writing books. Chermurinsky also decries the fact that, as he says, in the last session of Congress, there were 50 Democrat senators and 50 Republican senators, but the 50 Democrat senators represented 42 million people. So I wrote, so what? Again, not only was the Senate designed to be the legislative body where state legislatures sent so-called representatives for their state governments, the very idea of so-called representation in any political system is philosophically and logically impossible. All forms of statism, be they democracies, monarchies, or constitutional republics, are imposed on people. By definition, they are involuntary. If they were voluntary associations of people, again, by definition, they would be socially, personally achieved

organizations, and no one would be forced to be involved or to pay. Otherwise, I said, likewise, so-called representation in any political system is mathematically, temporally, and ethically impossible. There would never be enough so-called representatives in a political body to represent all the people under the rule of that government every time some idea is debated. Elected politicians don't approach each person they so-called represent to get their opinion on every new bill after they get elected. Political decisions affect multitudes who aren't even born. And if people believe in allowing their neighbors to truly represent their own interests, they can't ethically impose a

government on them and then claim that those people are somehow represented. I mean, the whole thing, it's so ridiculous. I'm an anarchist, libertarian, I'm a voluntarist, I'm an anarchist, Christian anarchist. So it's just, it's really, really ridiculous. So the one thing I wanted to add to this, though, is MSNBC is not just promoting this guy's book. The New York Times is promoting this guy's book. So down the way in this piece, I wrote MSNBC is not alone in front of promoting this guy. On August 31st, the New York Times published a long, vacuous screed by Jennifer Salah. I don't even know how to pronounce this. I know that must have sounded terrible. S-Z-A-L-A-I. Zalai? Zalai, I guess? Pushing Chermurinsky's book. I know,

my tongue has been doing a lot of dancing with these names. Ranging from her complaint that Donald Trump didn't win the popular vote, yet appointed three Supreme Court justices, justices who helped overturn their gilded Roe v. Wade decision in 2022, and return the question of abortion statutes to where they belong in the states, that if the Constitution isn't amended to allow for more gang rule over individual rights, the West Coast states should secede to become Pacifica. Slala, slala, I also misses the point about freedom versus democracy. Here's the last bit. I said, in fact, by arguing that West Coast states might secede to get away from the federal government, both she and Chermerinsky both tacitly admit to the benefits of decentralization over rule by the mob. Oh, man. And then I do mention at the end, I don't know whether they'll cut this out or not,

but I mentioned Lysander Spooner. If anybody wants to read a great essay about how the Constitution doesn't have any authority over you, you never complied to it. You never were there. You didn't sign it. You can't sign it for somebody else. Your grandparents can't sign a contract for you. Read Lysander Spooner's great essay, No Treason, The Constitution of No Authority. It was published in 1870. He came from Ayer, Massachusetts, just over the border. And he was a remarkable guy. He's the guy who started up an alternative to the U.S. Postal Service that, yes, they eventually shut down because it was cheaper and more efficient and people were turning to it rather than the U.S. Postal Service. Now, there is another bit that

I want to get to for you. First of all, I do want to mention just briefly, you were probably aware that inside the newsflash that I played, we showed Donald Trump talking about how he wants to force or insinuated that he and his wife had two children through IVF. And in that piece for MRCTV, I noted that IVF is sort of a cipher for those people who are involved with the pro-abortion movement because it creates embryos, living human beings who will never have a chance to live beyond that point. They're frozen. And then they pull them out, they try to implant them to see if the woman will take them and become pregnant. So this has massive ethical problems. So the least we could do is ask Donald Trump

not to force my neighbor to pay for it. Well, you might've seen that Lindsey Graham is in the news because Lindsey Graham has been said that he won't back Trump's IVF idea. I saw that reported in one area, but in fact, he's actually saying that something could be done. They could work something out. I've got a little video of that. Let me see if I can show that. I don't know if I've got that prepped up okay. And we also have his claims about Iran, which are just stunning. And Hamas. And, you know, we got to stop Hamas. Oh, you mean Hamas that was, of course, being funded by the West and Netanyahu.

But here is Lindsey Graham. USA Today claims that he doesn't back Donald Trump's IVF proposal, but says Congress could find common ground. And that was the last piece that you saw in the video where he says, we could probably work something out as that Sounds of Silence song finished off. That was one of the clips that I played at the beginning of the show today. And here's a little bit in text form from USA Today. Lindsey Graham, Senator of South Carolina, Republican, said he could see a bipartisan way forward to help American families afford in vitro fertilization.

One of the things that he mentioned on television was a tax credit, but that's often a cipher to subsidy. Like for example, the earned income tax credit, that's actually a subsidy. It's not a tax credit at all. And then the left says, oh, we gave the middle class a tax cut. No, actually you put the US government further in debt and shuffled off money from some people who are earners to those people because you forward scheduled their Medicare payments and you're still promising the Medicare payments when they get older. So it's a subsidy. Well, Graham appeared on ABCs this week on Sunday, where he said he would support a means tested tax credit for IVF users. So means tested. So you see what that's already an indication that it's probably going to lead towards some sort of subsidy because means test, of course, is progressivism, Marxism

built into who actually gets to write it off their taxes. And then they expand it to the point where even if you aren't paying taxes, you can claim it and then you'll get money back. And then you haven't even given it up. You'll get money from somebody else. Now, interestingly enough, other people in the Republican Party are supportive of Donald Trump's idea. He says that Trump is he's not in favor of mandating insurance companies. Graham says he's not in favor of mandating insurance companies fully cover IVF, saying that there's no end to that. Okay. So he doesn't like the idea that U.S. insurance companies should be mandated to cover IVF, but he does like the idea that you should be forced to pay for weapons to be sent to Ukraine

and for weapons to be sent to Israel. Okay, see if you can figure that out. Graham, who voted against a recent bill that would have protected access to IVF, added that he saw Trump's statements about IVF as a signal of support because, quote, we've been accused the party has of being against birth control. We're not. We're being accused of being against IVF treatments. We're not. Again, here's one Tom Cotton of Arkansas, also on Meet the Press, said that GOP lawmakers support access to IVF services for American families. Well, again, it's not a federal issue. It's a state issue. So federal GOP lawmakers should be saying,

you know what? We have no say on this. It's a state issue. Now, technically speaking, again, if people are familiar with the 14th Amendment, the 14th Amendment stipulates that states that have punishments and prohibitions that have statutes that protect people against aggression by other people have to apply those protect people equally. It's the Equal Protection Clause. As former Senator Bob Smith noted, that technically speaking would create a nationwide abortion ban.

If people actually wanted to address that every state has statutes that protect human beings against encroachments on their lives by other human beings, then you have to decide, is the fetus at conception a human being? It is human, distinct DNA from the parents, and it is being. It's not anything else. It's growing. Otherwise, what are you trying to stop? So it doesn't matter morally, although morally, that is the key. Logically, you can appeal to these people and say, just logically, do you want to be consistent or not? If you support the state and you say that there should be statutes that punish people for taking the lives of other human beings, are you going to be consistent or are you going to call for the abolition of the state apparatus the way I do? I believe that the state is

illegitimate philosophically. I can't force my neighbor to pay for the policing of anything, whether it be policing of a border, policing of what I think is the correct amount for police to protect people or to I can't engage in the bad action of making my neighbor pay to stop, to create a police force that supposedly will stop that. I don't have that right. It doesn't arise out of my recognition of trouble for another guy or even for myself. And I certainly don't have the right to be parasitic off somebody else for my own protection. So the predicate for the state, supposedly, is that the state is there to protect you. And as I mentioned, even Thomas Jefferson in the Constitution, he offers what John Locke did in a sort of mistaken way. Jefferson uses the passive voice in the Declaration of Independence.

I mentioned to David that I might bring this up. He doesn't use the active voice, which is a form of magic in a way. He says governments are instituted among men. Well, by whom? Some people. It's not governments arise. And he says because, he says, men are born, men are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Governments are instituted among men. No, the point is that men claim that people have a right to be left alone. And then they undercut that by saying, in order to protect your right to be left alone, we're going to create an agency that won't leave you alone. And it'll be run by other people. That's all it is. That's what the government is. That's what the state is. And then they come up with all these various arguments to protect different kinds of people because they say, well, that group is, they're taking advantage. So we got to do this. And it builds and builds and builds. So let's go over to the Nancy Pelosi story and show you some of this Nancy Pelosi story out of California. There are a number of stories out of California that I'll give you. First, let's offer this one out of California. California passes a statute prohibiting localities from requesting voter ID.

This from SCNR. August 29th, Hannah Clare Brimelow wrote, voter ID laws only subvert voter turnout, said state Senator Dave Min. Okay, what kind of turnout? Do you want authentic turnout or not? And again, the idea of voting to have a system that will then control other people's lives, that's part of the reason the founders tried to say that the state can only do certain things. At least they tried to pare it down to person-on-person conflicts. That was supposedly what it was about. It was an amendment to Senate Bill 1174 in California. Now, the governor has not signed this yet, but if he signs SB 1174, it would override a Huntington Beach ordinance requiring voter ID starting in 2026. The state's Attorney General Bob Bonta and Secretary of State Shirley Ann Weber have already sued Huntington

Beach over the ordinance. Just amazing. They don't want voter ID. Well, I wonder why not? Maybe it's because they want certain people to be able to vote. Maybe that's it. Let's talk about Nancy Pelosi. All right. And I've got sure that Californians get $150,000 in home loan subsidies. Okay, well, this is the story and it should be out tomorrow. Years old, fully grown normalcy bias is a tricky animal. And former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's latest smorgasbord of socialist so requests in favor of California housing loans for undocumented migrants is a perfect example. So get this. Appearing Friday with Bill Maher on his HBO program Real Time, Pelosi succeeded in not only avoiding the touchy matter of her role in perpetuating the centrally controlled and utterly messed up federal so-called immigration system, she perpetuated the corrosive idea that government has an ethical role in providing home loans to people, even as she invoked, you got it, Ronald Reagan. To fatuously add what she seemed to think was a patina of patriotism and Americana to the fantastic feast. So she not only was saying that home loans should be provided by the government, but she invoked Ronald Reagan. Let's go to the video. Let's go to the newsreel footage. And here it is. This is provided

actually by Disclosed TV on X. And we showed a clip of this earlier. Here's a little bit more. The California lawmakers just passed a law. It hasn't been signed by Governor Newsom. But giving government assistance to undocumented immigrants to buy houses, that's kind of a different place than the Democratic Party used to be on immigration. As a non-Democrat, I say that's what the country is going to do. But that's certainly where California is. Well, let me just say, immigration had always been a bipartisan issue. I refer you to the... But not free housing. Well, it's not free housing. It's the American dream, being available to more people.

But understand this about immigration. The best speech on immigration was by President Ronald Reagan. This is the last speech I will make as president of the United States. I want to communicate a message to the country I love. And he talked about the Statue of Liberty and the beacon of hope it is to the world and what America was preeminent in the world because our door was always open. And we will cease to be preeminent when we shut the door. Now, I don't do justice to the great communicator. Google it.

It's a fabulous speech. And George Herbert Walker Bush continued in that respect for the diversity of America and the rest. California is always in the lead. Maybe others will follow that lead, but that's up to those states. But we are very blessed here with beautiful diversity. Do you vote for this law? Excuse me?

So you'd vote for this law? Well, I'm not familiar with exactly what it is, but making the American dream of home ownership available to all people is something we have to do for people who are here now. This is before you, this is undocumented. This is for the undocumented. Well, what I would like to do is move them to documented. So there you go.

Okay. So she finally gets to that after hemming and hawing and going back and forth. And, you know, I have many disagreements with Bill Maher and stuff. And every once in a while he comes out with something like, oh, that was a good point. You know, you made a good point. And you think, oh, maybe he's coming around to this side or this way or whatever. But so I happen to note this because there are a number of salient points here that I think I'd like to bring up. And a lot of other people probably notice, too.

So hopefully I said appearing Friday with Bill Maher and his HBO program real time. Pelosi succeeded and so on and so forth. She gave this patina of patriotism and Americana to the fantastic beast. Maher appeared to want a serious discussion about the new legislation, California's AB 1840, which the state assembly passed Wednesday. It's a statute that, as the Daily Caller noted August 18th, willth will quote amend the California dream for all shared appreciation loan program okay that's the California dream for all shared appreciation loan program it would amend it and it would it would uh it's an initiative launched last year that provides first-time home buyers with a loan of up to 20%, according

to the Daily Caller, and it would allow illegal migrants living in California to be able to apply for a piece of that. So they would get 20% of a loan, that would be 20% of the house's purchase price for down payment or closing. The Daily Caller also noted in that piece that now that the CARES Act federal handouts to states have dried up, California is $60 billion in the red. Okay, so they're offering this loan subsidy and there's 60 billion in the red.

I said, but that isn't stopping the panderers like Governor Gavin Newsom from not only promoting the idea that it's perfectly fine to have taxpayers subsidize loans for first-time homebuyers, it's also not stopping Pelosi from widening that insane normalcy bias to imply that it's only fair to expand the toxic state tax-funded loan idiocy to migrants who have moved here contrary to her central government's immigration statutes. Maher introduced the topic to her by correctly stating, the California lawmakers just passed a law. It hasn't been signed by Governor Newsom, but it gives government assistance to undocumented immigrants to buy houses.

That's kind of a different place than the Democrat Party used to be on immigration. And we showed the clip of Pelosi from years ago, and she had the exact opposite sort of position. Pelosi says, I said, like a palomino of platitudes, she burst from the corral with, well, let me just say immigration has always been a bipartisan issue. And I said, that wasn't the point. Maher kept focused on the matter at hand. He says, but not free housing. And then she says, well, it's not free housing, Pelosi claimed. And then she avoided the reality of what it is, which is taxorted loans that will artificially pump home building and direct resources where unmanipulated market participants normally would-called Great Recession, which technically was an economic depression, could see numerous banks count the loans as assets, see the mortgages become unpaid and toxic, and see wider systemic problems throughout the state economy. Yeah, she avoided

all that. It's not about tax-subs unnaturally pumped up housing demand from undocumented migrants. Instead, Nancy spoke about dreams, dreams. She says it's it's she seemed to fish for something, the American dream being available to more people. And so I wrote, did you know that? As with most normalcy bias reinforcers, she kind of skips essential parts of the American dream. Those aspects being self-reliance, self-achieving, work, merit, investment, and not being a parasite, regardless of whether one is a migrant or one is born here. And she made things even more offensive, trying, yes, to add a shine of Americana to her pablum by mixing Ronald Reagan into the dream world. She said, but understand this about immigration. You heard what she had to say about the great communicator.

She pretended to respect him by calling him the great communicator. So I have a hyperlink to the actual speech. If you want to hear Reagan's speech, there's a video of it there as he goes to leave. There's music behind it. The horrible events of September 11th continue. This is an ad, obviously, so we're going to have to dump that ad. So this is Reagan when he was speaking. And, you know, it's about being open to migrants, that sort of thing.

The last speech that I will give as president, I think it's fitting to leave one final thought, an observation about a country which I love. It was stated best in a letter I received not long ago. A man wrote me and said, you can go to live in France, but you cannot become a Frenchman. You can go to live in Germany or Turkey or Japan, but you cannot become a German, a Turk, or Japanese. But anyone from any corner of the earth can come to live in America and become an American. Yes, the torch of Lady Liberty symbolizes our freedom and represents our heritage, the compact with our parents, our grandparents, and our ancestors. It is that lady who gives us our great and special place in the world, for it's the great life force of each generation of new Americans that guarantees that America's

triumph shall continue unsurpassed into the next century and beyond. Okay, so I'm going to pause it there because just even in that imagery, there's a lot of propaganda. When you see Ellis Island, when you see the Statue of Liberty near Ellis Island, Ellis Island exists because of the unconstitutional federal usurpation over the power of immigration, which is supposed to be reserved to the states. It was the 1875 Chilong decision. So let's continue here because I've got some more to offer to you. So she says, now, I don't do justice to the great communicator. Google it. It's a fabulous speech.

So we go through some more. She talks about how George W. Bush pushed for this. And I said, Mr. Maher appeared to be very aware of Pelosi's grand eloquent attempt to deflect from the actual points. So he offered one final attempt to get a real answer from her. So you'd vote for this law. And Pelosi appeared, I wrote, flustered and, of course, deflected again, invoking her position as a federal politician in order to avoid answering about the ethics of the California statute, then claiming that the state was trying to help people achieve the wondrous American dream. Making the American dream of home ownership available to all people is something we have to do for people who are here now. As I mentioned, that's the same sort of pablum that George W. Bush pushed after Bill

Clinton pushed for banks to have to give loans to people who shouldn't have gotten loans because they didn't have the income for it. George W. Bush claimed that he wanted America to become the home ownership society. And we saw what happened in 2008 after they pumped up the home buying market and everything collapsed. Yeah, there's a lot to be said about not trying to promote any area of the economy through artificial means. Nancy Pelosi doesn't seem to get it. And of course, she wants to pander to people that she evidently thinks will vote for Democrats. And yes, even in Huntington Beach, they're trying to make sure that only citizens vote. And even in California, Newsom doesn't want that. So we have this. I said she first, just because California or any other political

gang hands out tax-backed home loans does not mean that such a baseline action is proper on a moral or economic level. I have no more right to make my neighbor pay to back another person's home loan than I do to force my neighbor to pay for anything. Taxation is theft, period. And as noted above, when the government engages in such activity, it warps the market, seeing monetary, human, temporal, and other resources pushed into those new homes when the homes normally would not have been built and the resources would have gone elsewhere based on honest market decisions made by what should be free people. And finally, Pelosi's attempt to claim that migrants should be on the same socialist

get-a-government-subsidized-home-loan footing as legal residents mixes into it the idea that she wants the feds to create a way to grant more migrants legal status and not be deported. This brings us to the final and very important level of normalcy bias, about which I have written numerous times for MRCTV. And by the way, yes, NewsGuard, here's some hyperlinks for you. It is the fact that immigration is not a federal issue. The word doesn't even appear in the U.S. Constitution. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison both noted in 1798 that it was a state purview. There's Jefferson's Kentucky Resolution No. 4. Resolved that alien friends are under the jurisdiction and protection of the laws of the state wherein they are, that no power over them has been delegated to the United States nor prohibited to the individual

states distinct from their power over citizens, and it being true as a general principle and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared that the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution nor prohibited by it to the states are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. The Act of the Congress of the United States, passed on the day of July 1798, entitled An Act Concerning Aliens, which assumes powers over alien friends not delegated by the Constitution, is not law, but is altogether void and of no force. Of course, I don't see what the day was stipulated there. Then we have Madison, who said the same thing in his Virginia resolutions. There you go.

Virginia Resolutions 21, December 1798. He goes into it as well. And there's a lot more. I said they pointed it out. Texas had a Bureau of Immigration in its state constitution. Here is the image of the constitution. Article 11 of the Texas Constitution, Immigration. Section 1.

There shall be a bureau known as the Bureau of Immigration, which shall have supervision and control of all matters connected with immigration. The idea that the federal government should have anything, anything at all to do with immigration is ahistorical and anti-constitutional. And it came about in 1875, as I mentioned in my article, with the Chai Lung v. Freeman decision. That was about a California statute that blocked migrants from coming into California because, of course, local workers didn't want the low price competition. They fatuously claimed that it was to stop possibly disease carrying women from coming over from China and becoming prostitutes. But they also were stopping men from coming into work in the gold mines and on the railroads. And so it went to the Supreme Court in 1875. And that's where the Supreme Court just made it up. And so it went to the Supreme Court in 1875, and that's where the Supreme Court just made it up. They made it up. And ever since then, Ellis Island, all that lovely

black and white footage of all those people coming in, enter here, all that stuff, it's utterly preposterous. It has nothing, zero, zero, zero to do with their claims of being constitutionalists. And this is a message for conservatives. Please look, if you call yourself a constitutionalist, I'm an anarchist, but I'm familiar enough with this that I'm conversing on it. And I hope that people will just at least honestly know what was happening then, even if they can't agree to say, I don't want the federal government involved. It's not constitutional. It doesn't decentralize things.

If they do think that there's something that has to be done, at least they'll know that they're operating in a manner contrary to their principles, according to the Constitution. At least they'll know they're taking a tack that isn't legitimate. At least they'll be honest with themselves. Even if they hold the double standards, they could admit it. I've had, as I've mentioned, I've had debates with Pat Buchanan, Tom Tancredo, J.D. Hayworth.

They all agree. They say, you know what? You make your arguments right. You have a sound argument card. And they're good guys. You know, they're great, great guys. But then they go back to exactly where they were. Oh, the federal government's got to do something about this. Then they claim that there's an invasion.

So the final point on this, if there is an invasion, if the federal authorities want to claim that there's an invasion, an invasion by whom? By what? Well, it could be one of two things. By agents of an invading state. And in that case, you address it by addressing the invading state with a declaration of war. Capital W, it's state on state. If they're not members of the state's military and they're not wearing the uniform of the state, the only way to address it on a federal issue, a federal level, if you're gonna try to do it that way

and inspire it from the federal government first is to claim that they are coming in and you will not declare war, but you will issue letters of mark and reprisal against them. They haven't done that. They won't do that. That allows the president to hire mercenaries and to go after these wrongdoers. They won't do that. There is the final part, which, as I mentioned earlier, Greg Abbott brought up from Texas. States can request the militia from the federal government to come in to protect their constitutional form of government from invasion or insurrection or violence. This is why Trump couldn't go into Minnesota because he wasn't asked to go into Minnesota. This is where I should have brought this up with Don. This is where no president can just waltz into a state with federal troops. They've got to be asked to come in by the legislature or by the governor if the legislature is not in session. Those are their rules. I didn't sign up for them. I'm just asking them to be honest, to at least just give me a breather, right? And let

me say, okay, at least if you're claiming control over me, you're going by the rules of the claimed control over me, at least. I don't know how, I mean, that's kind of weird, but there you go. So listen, I got a message from Marty Gottesfeld and he apologized that he couldn't be with us. I'll try to see if Marty can join us on Liberty Conspiracy sometime this week. That would be great. And yeah, so we'll try to talk to him. I'm really looking forward to talking to him. And I want to thank Don Jeffries. Again, the book looks phenomenal. I have to get a copy. I'll probably buy a couple copies and give one away on Liberty Conspiracy. I did that with his book, Masking the Truth. And I want to thank everybody for being there. American Memory Hole is the name of the book. Thank you so much, everyone,

for being part of the David Knight Show today. It has been phenomenal. And I think we had one more contribution over at Rockfin. This is from EcoTaxi. Again, he says, dynamic Christian libertarian duo guard and Don, my belief that nasty, nasty. Oh, yeah. Oh, soi. Again, he says, dynamic Christian libertarian duo, Gard and Don. My belief that nasty, nasty. Oh, yeah. Oh, so, okay. Yeah, I saw that. Okay, so we're all set on that one.

And in Rumble, I want to thank you, everyone, for being there as well in the Fruit Stripe Gum. Thank you very much, Texas Coast South. He says, Gard, kicking you know what very well. Thanks, buddy. Appreciate it. And again, check out the Davidid night show.com david night.gold of course connecting to wise wolf gold and silver exchange tony artovern what a great guy rockfin rumble d live david's ex at libertarian and david everyone thank you for bringing me

the cheer and the contentment and the faith and the hope. And however things go, everybody, you're part of a great team. So thank you for being part of the David Knight Show audience. Thank you to everyone who's been here. I'll leave you with a little something from David's program, The Common Man, and also big compliments to the whole family, the Knight family. They're awesome. I'll talk to you soon.

Talk to you tonight, 6 o'clock. Do tune in. Gives me a great opportunity to mention Liberty Conspiracy, Rumble, Rockfin, and my ex is at Guard Goldsmith. And of course, my sub stack. That's the Gardner Goldsmith sub stack. Be seeing you, everyone. Take care. God bless. Thank 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 listening.

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