The David Knight Show - Thu Episode #2103: Trump’s Ukraine Flip & NATO’s Drone Panic: Sleepwalking Into World War III

Episode Date: September 25, 2025

00:00:50 – Trump’s Ukraine Reversal & False FlagsTrump flips on Ukraine, NATO cites drone incidents in Denmark as pretext for escalation, raising fears of World War III. 00:05:31 – Dallas ICE Shooting & Narrative GamesA bizarre ICE-related shooting with “engraved bullets” is compared to 9/11 passport evidence, raising suspicion of staged events. 00:12:18 – YouTube’s Fake “Amnesty”Jim Jordan praises YouTube’s “amnesty,” but fine print shows it excludes most political dissidents. 00:19:32 – Musk’s Colossus & AI HypocrisyElon Musk builds a massive gas-powered AI data center after profiting from “green tech,” mocked as pure hypocrisy. 00:22:19 – Trump’s Tariff Chaos & Small Business DestructionVolatile tariffs destabilize markets, crush imports, and devastate small businesses while favoring corporate elites. 00:45:23 – Trump–Epstein Ties ReexaminedDeep dive into Trump’s long relationship with Epstein, lawsuits, and cover-ups, contrasted with how others abroad are treated. 01:12:54 – FCC Threats & First AmendmentFCC commissioner Carr’s threats against broadcasters compared to mob shakedowns, echoing past COVID-era censorship. 01:37:06 – Tony Arterburn on Shanghai Gold ExchangeTony explains how BRICS nations are moving gold trade to Shanghai to undermine Western financial dominance. 01:52:11 – Silver Breakout & Dollar CollapseSilver demand surges as governments and institutions buy heavily, signaling a looming repricing of commodities. 02:29:28 – Venezuela Boat Strikes & Edited VideosTrump’s extrajudicial “drug boat” killings are condemned as staged propaganda, likened to Duterte’s death squads. 02:49:24 – Afghanistan War Lies & Lithium MotivesA new documentary highlights how U.S. wars in Afghanistan were driven by opium and lithium, exposing decades of deception. 02:52:07 – NATO’s Drone Clown ShowNATO wastes millions firing Sidewinders at $3,000 drones, while one dud missile destroys a Polish home. Follow the show on Kick and watch live every weekday 9:00am EST – 12:00pm EST https://kick.com/davidknightshow Money should have intrinsic value AND transactional privacy: Go to https://davidknight.gold/ for great deals on physical gold/silverFor 10% off Gerald Celente's prescient Trends Journal, go to https://trendsjournal.com/ and enter the code KNIGHTFind out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.com If you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here: SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-showOr you can send a donation throughMail: David Knight POB 994 Kodak, TN 37764Zelle: @[e-mail] App at: $davidknightshowBTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-david-knight-show--2653468/support.

POMAYORILEEN SULLIVAN HADY HADY HADY HADY HADY HADY HADY HADY HADY HADY HADY HADY HAD. in a world of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act it's the david night show as a clock strikes 13 it's thursday the 25th of september year of our lord 2025 well it didn't take long after trump did a 180 on the war with ukraine for them to come up with some false flag justification we have some drones that, again, flew over Denmark airports, this time over four of them. Is this going to be the thing that drags us into World War III? Of course, it was the assassination of an Archduke that got us into World War I, which is still scratching my head about.

This is another one of those issues, and it's also time for revenge. Trump is coming after Comey, and his cult applauds. Why didn't he ever go after James Clapper? That's a question to ask. We're going to talk about those when we come back, as well as look at the reactions to Kimmel and what Charlie Kirk had to say about education. It seems like we're on the same page when it comes to education.

Alex Newman had an article about his interview with Charlie Kirk. We'll be right back. Stay with us. Well, as they say, revenge is best-served cold. In this particular case, it comes to the side of hot lies as well. This is the war that they're trying to get us into, I guess you could say is revenge. And what we're talking about with James Comey, it was, it's nothing other than personal revenge, I believe, because the attorney's sycophant, Pam Bondi, does whatever Trump says. And they never came after James Clapper. Remember James Clapper? When he was asked point

blank by Ron Wyden, only time I've ever agreed with Ron Wyden. He said, are you spying on the American people without a search warrant? Uh, uh, uh, uh, not intentionally. It was an accident that he spied on us, right. We just accidentally built this giant data center to catalog everything you do. And he was obviously lying. You had Michael Hayden later in a lecture at Washington Lee University said, I blame Rod Wyden for that. He knew perfectly well.

And so in all of his staff what we were doing. And he exposed it. It's your problem if you expose the lies, right? But he went for five years, folks, without ever being charged with lying to Congress. He didn't just lie to Congress. He lied to the American people. and lied to the American people about violating the requirements in the Constitution for a search warrant. That was significant.

And to boot, this is James Comey, who was also part of the cabal that ran the Russia Gate fakery that was out there. It's really amazing that nobody ever brought this up. Nobody in the Senate, nobody in Trump's Department of Justice ever came after James Comey, James Clapper, but they're coming after James Comey now. Again, it is not about restoring the rule of law. If it was about restoring the rule of law, they would have come after James Clapper. But they didn't.

This is simply about revenge. Very dangerous what Denmark is doing, saying that they're going to try to invoke Article 4, which would drag everybody into a war with Russia. You know, Trump, his supporters, is saying, well, this is just a bluff that he's doing in order to get Russia to come to the table. I said it's a really foolish and stupid bluff.

And now I think the NATO warmongers are calling Trump's bluff. We'll see what happens. Meanwhile, we had a Dallas ice shooter named Joshua John. No information about this guy yet. And the only thing that we know is that he supposedly was attacking the police and attacking ice because they conveniently found, again, a signed bullet casing. All these people scratching their name in the bullet casing. Isn't this interesting?

This is kind of like the passport that drifted down on 9-11 that did not burn or get destroyed. I just don't know. Even the message on it really didn't make any sense. It said anti-ice, even though he shot up detainees and no ICE agents or police officers were hit. Perhaps it's because we don't have the details yet. They say they fired into a van, so maybe that was it. Maybe he's just blindly shooting into the van, thinking that he's going to get the ICE people that he supposedly is against? I don't know.

There's no concern from the press or the police about the people that were killed because, you know, hey, they're just illegal immigrants. But it's all, you better not come after the police. Well, evidently he didn't. You know, I just don't understand this. jet, but we'll see what happens. It certainly does look like they're using it already for their agenda, and that bullet looks a bit fishy to me. But he killed several people, at least one died, and then when they got up there, he was dead already. So yet another one of these cases, almost like an MK Ultra type of thing, isn't it? Although he appeared to target migrants in

ICE custody, Attorney General Kim Paxton said the shooting represented attack on ICE and law enforcement. See, that's just it. The other people are not people. There was like 20 shots in a row, they said. So maybe he just rapidly and randomly fired into the van. Maybe that's what happened. Vance said the obsessive attack on law enforcement, particularly ICE, must stop. I'm praying for everyone hurt in this attack and for their families.

again the narrative immediately is this is ice ice ice police police and we don't know too much about this guy they're going to jump into this thing that's what they want it to be so that's what they're going to make it will trump do gun control again i mean i can see when you got people from the texas attorney general to ted cruz to the vice president jumping in and saying this has got to stop there's too much of this it's got to stop what's trump going to do to stop it remember when he did gun control by executive order with a bumpstock that was in reaction to one of the most obviously fake shootings in terms of not saying that nobody died I'm saying the narrative that came up with was one of the most obviously fake and one of the most fake aspects of that narrative was the bumpstock which is what Trump focused on to set a precedent of gun control by executive order so what will he do with this Why are they doing this type of thing?

Meanwhile, in the U.S. Park Police removed a statue that was put up. It was taken down the day after it was put up. It was supposed to be there for four days. I had a permit to have it up for four days. And it was a statue. See if you can put. There you go. Let's see the statue.

Do they have a picture of it? Yeah, that's it. Trump and Epstein, the best friends forever, together. again protest artwork has been removed by the park police a lot of people showed up to see it the next day because there's a lot of people in Washington DC that don't like Trump he's very unpopular there they posted a video one person posted a video of a uniformed officer supervising a team of maintenance workers loading it onto a flatbed truck before sunrise after the sun rose the only thing left was an outline in the sand revealing

where it had been. Dozens of people came down to see the statue on Wednesday morning, disappointed to see that it was already gone. It's supposed to be up that permit to have it there through the weekend. They went through, got permission. And by the way, the First Amendment, which Trump despises so much, says we have a right to protest, and that especially includes satire. That's the thing that evidently he hates the most. And it's just a reminder, Saul Winsky's rules for radicals said satire is the most effective weapon because there's no answer to it. What do you do to answer to this? This is showing Trump and Epstein together. As somebody who has served this country for 17 years to ensure the freedom of speech for our fellow

countrymen, it is beyond reprehensible to me, said a Navy veteran Christopher Hooper. He said, it comes down to freedom of speech, and that includes art. So the fact that it's gone, we're no longer in the threat of an authoritarian government. We are in an authoritarian government. More and more of our rights are being eliminated. You can't protest now. And that is, like I said, especially satire. The statue had a plaque that said in honor of friendship month, we celebrate the longstanding bond between Trump and his closest friend Jeffrey Epstein. Beneath the inscription was a carving of two hands held together to form of heart and a reference to Trump's message to Epstein in the birthday book.

Voiceover, there must be more to life than having everything. So, I said the Epstein case, said one person, reminds me of Watergate in the missing 18 minutes of tape. The truth will always bubble up slowly, but eventually. So the more he panics about it and the more you realize that there is something there. Something there about Trump or something there, certainly I think about Trump, but especially there about the controllers of Trump. So when Trump is called the Epstein Files of Democratic hoax, of course.

But this actually was a hoax in the satire. And he doesn't like that either. Meanwhile, Jim Jordan, who hyped the YouTube amnesty that we talked about yesterday, Chris Menhans said, actually the fine print tells a different story. He appears to have simply

been lying. No, not in Washington would it? Breaking. Due to our oversight efforts, Google commits to offer all creators previously kicked off of YouTube due to political speech violations to return to the platform, said Jim Jordan. However, if you look at the text of the document written by Google's lawyers, it only says that they will provide an opportunity for all creators to rejoin the platform if the company terminated their channels for repeated violations of COVID-19 and elections integrity, policy. policies. They're no longer in effect. I don't know. I was never given a reason. So, I mean, that could be there. I continually violated their policies not to talk about COVID-19, and I did my best to violate all the policies from Trump and his big pharmaceutical shell running HHS at the time, coming out with these nonsense mask issues. I violated it every way that I could think of. But anyway, we'll have to do this anyway. I have to try it. It'll be a good report.

to find out what they're doing about this. I have to try that over the weekend, I guess. Yeah, it'd be interesting to see. Chris Menahan at Information Liberation thinks, well, that means then that if they just banned you for general political purposes, he mentions Nick Fuentes and Alex Jones. He said they're going to remain banned. Who knows?

I don't know. Just as Israeli lobby wants. Well, I don't think Alex Jones is anti-Israel, do you? Nick Fuentes is, but I don't think Alex is. maybe he says that but he also he's all over the place with everything i'm sure he's mentioned apac once or twice yeah we've had a lot of questions about a pathway back to youtube for some terminated creators to set up a new channel youtube's press account said this will be a limited pilot project available to a subset of creators in addition to those channels

terminated for policies that have been deprecated More to come soon. So again, it's looking more and more doubtful that they will allow this. Not that it breaks my heart. In other words, the GOP secured amnesty for quote-unquote all creators banned for their political views. It's actually just a limited pilot project for a subset of creators. YouTube was not having their arm twisted too much

because they really wanted to do this as well. They were doing what they wanted to do, their fallback position as well, we had our arm twisted by the federal government. And the federal government says, well, we're not censoring anybody. YouTube is doing it. All of this is just so disingenuous and fake. We know exactly what they're doing and why. Yeah, the former YouTube CEO, Susan Wojicki, was extremely left-leaning.

Extremely, extreme left-leaning. She was banning people because she wanted to. Not that she was sitting there with the ban button herself, but implementing those policies was something she was just giddy to engage in. I'm sure. Yeah. I mean, there are recordings of her talking at YouTube events to YouTube creators that she likes

talking about how she's going to boost their channels or correspondingly that's going to limit the reach of other channels. It was never a fair playing field. Do you remember the Democrat Convention back in 2020, they had Sink Yugar, or I call them Stink Yugar, and the young turds. They were their on-site live broadcasting. YouTube paid him to go to both a Republican and the Democrat National Conventions

and to broadcast live from there. That should tell you something about what their politics are. And also, points out Chris Menhann, the most that they would do would be to let you start a new channel. They would not give you your old channel back with all the videos that were there

and the viewers and subscribers. lest anyone forget the GOP last year worked together with Democrats and the Biden administration to ban TikTok on behalf of the Israel lobby. That's why Chris Minahan is saying that. And of course, now TikTok is, you have, Larry Ellison is going to have a huge role in TikTok as well. It was an interesting article on the Drudge Report about how much media is coming under the control of Larry Ellison. He's got major studios and major news organizations. We've never seen consolidation like this before.

I remember about 12 years ago, we were talking about how we were going to wind up with just maybe a half dozen media companies. It's going to be far less than that because all of the entertainment media as well as broadcast news, the rest of the stuff is all being folded under just a couple of oligarchs that are there. And, of course, Ellison is heavily preferred by Trump. He's not taking a public position and drawn attention to himself like Elon Musk. Elon Musk made the Steve Bannon mistake of making it about him instead of making it about Trump. Ellison has been a little bit more clever, stayed in the background for this. Meanwhile, we have Trump's homosexual cabinet secretary for the Treasury coming after La La Hara because she snubbed Pete Boudigay, didn't select him for her running mate because of his sexuality.

He called it proof of how low regard she holds the American people. Yeah, the American people or the DEI stuff. Not so with Trump. You know, Trump is more than happy to cater to the DEI crowd, especially the LGBT people. They have had multiple festivities. and events at Marlago, they've given Melania multiple awards, and in 2020, you had the Trump people selling rainbow merchandise. I don't know if they did it in 2024 or not trying to reinvent themselves. Trump, of course, was not just wanting to put trainees in women's sports. He wanted to put

trainees in women's beauty contests that he owned. You know, that might be one place where they might not be able to successfully compete. It's in the aisle of the older, I guess, I don't know. She discloses in her book, she calls 107 days. I think she should spell that D-A-Z-E, L-L-A. Anyway, she discloses that Boudigay was her first choice, writing that he would have been an ideal partner if he wasn't homosexual. But he was a straight, if he was a straight white man, she said.

But it was too big of a risk, so she got Tim Walts. Maria Barteromo. Roll back a clip of Harris doubling down in an interview with MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, and she pressed Bessent on the vice president's admission. And he said, first, it shows her emphasis on identity politics, really? And the American people moved on two, it shows how low a regard she holds for the American people. She was just a terrible candidate, said Bessent, because she didn't. doubled down on the DEI stuff.

Well, Trump has been very happy to do that. And he used not only Bessent, but to use Rick Cornell to virtue signal to the LGBT, at the same time that he goes to all these events for the Christian nationalists. He's all things to all people. And he's able to get away with this double think and double speak. Musk, meanwhile, has put up a giant a power center, the first two gigawatt AI data center.

He's doing it in Memphis, and he's got a large battery backup that will back the whole thing up for like four hours. So he may wind up burning Memphis down like Sherman burned down in Atlanta, but for different reasons. You see, if he really wanted to do it the right way, he should have bought the Bass Pro Shop pyramid and put it underneath there. So, you know, a thousand years, when people rediscover it, they'd be like, what was this? Yeah, after it's destroyed everything. So this is his system that he calls Colossus because, again, you know, nothing to be concerned about. He just named it after a science fiction movie where the AI tries to take over the world, the Fordman Project. But he's got 350 gas turbines.

Isn't it interesting? You know, this is a guy who became the world's richest man, made his fortune doing green gas lighting. We're all going to die if you don't buy my electric cars and on and on, right? And yet he's got a two-gigawatt gas turbine power system. So he's going to use gas there. And, of course, he's shooting off rockets left and right. It only matters when the little guy does it, right? He can do one launch and use more than probably we do and everybody in the audience uses in their entire life combined.

And that's not a problem. It's just you can't have any energy. You can't own anything. You can't have any privacy. So he's greenwashed his way to becoming the world's richest man. And this is so large, just to give you an idea, it could power 50% of the city of Memphis. So that's the power that he's giving to himself personally. At least, I don't think that he's having the local utilities pay for it.

He's taking it off grid. So that's one thing, at least. Hopefully. I don't know. And then that brings us to tariffs. Tariffs are torching the U.S. container imports, says an analyst, that freight waves. China tariffs are driving sharp decline in inbound trade. And we're seeing a tremendous plunge, which has only happened two times in the past 60 years. One time was during the Great Recession, the pump and dump housing crisis. the second time was during Trump's lockdown five years ago.

He appears to be the guy that they go to to create chaos and to lock down our infrastructure. Inbound volume through the top 10 U.S. ports in August finished 0.1% ahead of the same month in 2024. But that happened primarily because the first week or so of August, people had rushed and accelerated their shepherds. shipments before the August 7th deadline of the renewal of the reciprocal tariffs. They wanted to get these goods in before that came up. And it was also happening in July. July's volume was 3.2% ahead, trying to get the shipments in earlier. Now what is happening is Trump in August announced yet another 90-day pause, another taco.

Trump always chickening out. And the chaotic China trade war. And as I said before, I don't think taxes of any sort are good. I think these things are done in arbitrary, capricious way. But the worst thing about it is the arbitrary and capricious way where they're on, they're off, the rates change constantly. It can't make up his mind because there is no plan. He's simply reacting to things. One day he's angry with the leader of a particular country.

and he jacks the prices, the tariffs up by another additional 50% or something. It's insane. And it's that kind of temperamental chaos that is causing so much destruction, even more destructive than the taxes themselves. Front loading by anxious shippers during the previous tariff break soaked up most eastbound volume moving in the peak season, while economic uncertainty and tariff stoked inflation has undercut demand as shown by weaker container rates on the eastbound trans-specific. Without a spike from front-loading, the U.S. would have seen a drop in year-to-year volume in July

at least as high as the Far East's positive number. So China is shifting to other people. The U.S. is a less relevant player in world trade today than it was prior to these various tariff initiatives and would come more so as announced plans or implemented, said. the person who has an organization at Traxas, his name is McCown. A revised forecast by the National Retail Federation shows import volumes falling 3.4% for the year. That translates in the remaining four months of 2025 being down by 15.7% compared to the same four months in 2024. So they're looking for it to really crash in the last four months.

And this is the buildup to Christmas. What does that tell us about the economy? and what's it tell us about supply and prices, what's going to happen to them. If and when those tariffs are implemented, because nobody knows what he's going to do. This is why it is so devastating, especially the small businesses. They don't have the capital to be able to weather this kind of engineered chaos by Trump yet again. But, of course, as Trump said in 2020, the small businesses are not essential. You shut down.

Walmart's going to stay open, but you shut down. That infuriates me. As I said, I had a personal experience of that after a storm with our businesses, and I can't explain how mad that made me. On a year-to-year decline, an inbound volume is a rarity in the more than six decades of container shipment, as I said before. This is McCowan, matched only by drops during the 2009 financial crisis and the pandemic. both of these things engineered and unnecessary. Trump is a one-man dictator, a one-man wrecking crew, whether you're talking about his lockdowns of 2020

or his tariffs of 2025. And he's also going to expand the tariff powers. He wants a, it's not enough that Trump can just sit there with his pen and whim and add them here and there. Now he wants to encourage American producers to add products and things to the list. This is coming from the Commerce Secretary. The Trump administration wants to expand U.S.

Tariff Authority, proposing new rules on imported auto parks and metals, and implementing a fresh tariff framework with Japan. You see, this will never end. This has been going on now for what, nine months? And they're still messing with it. They're still shifting things around. And nobody can plan anything. Chaos that will kill the economy,

especially the small, non-essential businesses, according to Trump. But I think when you look at this and the attack on cars, this is Trump's contribution to making sure that we have no cars whatsoever, make it impossible. You know, regulation expenses, tariffs, taxes, all of this. The Department of Commerce, maybe they should call it the Department of No Commerce. This is from Lutnik who wants to crash the economy as part of the great reset. pump and dump and then have everybody buy his stable coins, then he wants to be able to grab all the natural resources. I think this is what's going on with the technocrats and Trump administration. Anyway, the Department of No Commerce released an interim

final rule creating a new inclusion process for the imports of cars and auto parts under Section 232. The rule would let U.S. producers petition for additional imported components to face the existing 25% tariffs. The Department of No Commerce is also accepting inclusion requests for steel and aluminum downstream products through September 29. After each window closes, the Department of No Commerce will accept public comments for two weeks. See, this is how things are done in post-constitutional America. We don't follow laws anymore. We certainly don't follow the Constitution, and we have no debate.

You know, it used to be that you would have a debate. Your elected representatives would pass a law after that public debate. But now you have edicts from the bureaucracy, like the Department of No Commerce. And they will come up with rules rather than laws. And then that will be followed by a short period of comments, which they are free to completely ignore. You know, if you want to talk about America first, you need to bring back the American Constitution first. What did you say, Lance? And this is the process of, you know, corporations cutting off the ladder below them so that they can't have competition.

This is that made automated. That's right. Here's a government system so that you can do that by yourselves. You don't need to lobby and bribe people anymore. You can do it directly. You can just work directly with a bureaucracy, and you don't have to. You know, it's surprising that the politicians are letting themselves be cut out of this lucrative loop that they've created. Yeah, I mean, this way, if they've got some manufacturing process for something that they've developed in-house so that only they can produce this, then they can get tariffs put on it for manufacturers for everyone else that uses that product made in China.

Yeah, we've always seen, you know, when you look at local businesses, the easiest way to see this is a restaurant business, right? they will go to the local people or the state government and they say, you know, we need to have these extreme rules and it's just there to keep people from opening up a new restaurant. The people are already open or not affected by this. And that's the way they keep their competition out. A coalition of more than 40 business associations, not 40 businesses, but business associations,

have raised concern about the expanded inclusion process. They said the sudden expansion of tariffs with limited industry consultation increases cost by generating significant compliance burdens for businesses of all size, including those that do not purchase or produce steel and aluminum products. They pointed out that manufacturers account for more than half of all U.S. imports. Think about that. You know, you're going to, this is going to really harm American manufacturing because there's

so many cases. You can't find somebody that makes the components that you need. you want to make something in the USA. One of you guys was talking, was it you Lance or was it you, Travis? We're talking about the guy that did a GoFundMe project and he wanted to make whatever it was he's making completely in America. Yeah, there was a YouTube. He basically just had to give up because he couldn't find some of the things that he needed.

Yeah, there was a YouTuber smarter every day who was trying to make just a grill scrubber here in the U.S. out of entirely U.S. sourced parts. And there were two parts that he just couldn't get in quantity. One was a specialty part, but the other I think was just a bolt. And he had a lot of trouble finding any manufacturer that made it at all at McQuanties, he wanted especially not at a reasonable price. So he just had to scrub the grill scrubber project that was going to be made in the U.S. entirely.

He's basically found other people. He said, we found a few of them available at such and such a place, and maybe you'll get one that is 100% made in America, but I can't promise it'll be 100% made in America. We may have to buy this minor part somewhere else. Well, that's what these policies are doing. They absolutely don't care. And he needs to go back. And I said this when he shut down the economy and decided he's going to centrally plan that only Walmart

could stay open and things like that. I say he needs to go back and read Leonard Reed's Eye Pencil, where the market puts together all these things and all these different components, you got rubber from this country over here, and you got graphite from that country over there, you got wood from Canada, maybe. All these different things came together, and without the government's help, without the central planning of government, the free market put all this together, and they pulled all these components from all over the world in order to manufacture pencil. Well, we're not even going to be able to manufacture that.

if you've got Trump and Lutnik and Peter Navarra have their way. The harm to U.S. employment among downstream producers of items now covered will ultimately be significant, including with respect to those that are key to powering critical industries and the broader U.S. economy. You know, when you go back and you look at the rare earth minerals, for example, I interviewed a guy with U.S. rare minerals, and they were trying to put it together to develop it here in the United States. they said we have plenty of the they're not rare it's just the refinement of them is rare we have the

materials there but we've got to build the refining procedures to extract it from what we're already mining but he said that'll take five years even if we throw a lot of money at it what trump is doing is he's just shutting everything down and there is no opportunity not waiting for any kind of a transition not allowing companies to continue to be able to make products downstream using rare minerals? No, he's just going to cut off the supply, just like that. It's boneheaded stupid. It's so stupid that it has to be intentional. That's my belief. Not even Trump is that stupid. And he did the same thing in 2025. If you remember, with a lockdown, you had farmers who were destroying food on their farm because they couldn't get it to market.

Because their customers had been large industrial suppliers, people with toilet paper, let's say, creating these gigantic rolls of toilet paper that they use in business facilities. I told the story at the time when we came back from China with our daughter. She was not used to having toilet paper in China. And Karen had gotten her acclimated to it. And the only word she knew was mama. And so they went to the restroom in New York airport, and she sees those giant rolls a toilet paper that are like two feet in diameter or whatever she grabs it and she comes out

mama mama like look what i found we're fixed for life we don't have to go to costco ever again anyway the import tariffs on some of the largest trade partners are things like 50% to Brazil because we don't like what they're doing to bolesanero bows and arrows 50% to India because we don't like them either China is only 30% I say only 30%. I say only 30%. percent. Remember when it was like a hundred and, uh, it was over 100 percent. It was 145 percent or something like that. And he was talking about 200 percent. Yeah, it's just all over the place. It's just all over the place. So now it's back down to 30 percent. Uh, when you look at Mexico and Canada, they used to be our trading partners and Trump gave them this special deal at

the end of his first term. Now he wants 25 percent on Mexico and 35 percent on Canada. We don't like them. You know, they've got these hockey teams and we don't like Canada. So we've got to punish them 35%. Japan and South Korea are at 15%. Now the question is, will Trump's power to tax, therefore his power to destroy, be upheld by the Supreme Court? Well, Reason talks about the issues, the legal issues behind this, because it is coming up to be looked at by the Supreme Court. I mean, he's been creating this trade chaos now for eight or nine months, and they're finally going to review it. On November the 5th, which will be like 10 months, I guess, since he became president, not quite. The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments. The cases arising from

Trump's unilateral scheme to impose tariffs. The matters have been consolidated by the Supreme Court into a single case for the purposes of briefing and arguments. The Supreme Court will probably turn on the application of an important legal principle known as the Major Questions Doctrine. That doctrine says that when, and of course, major questions doctrine is not something from the Constitution. It's something invented by the Supreme Court. The law is clear.

They're not going to decide this based on the law. They're going to decide this based on interpretation of their previous opinions. This is how bad things have gotten. The major question doctrine says that when the executive branch seeks to wield significant regulatory power, it must first point to an unambiguous delegation of such power by Congress to the executive. Well, how about if they take a look at, you know, this is being delegated supposedly by the case of emergencies. How about we define what a real emergency is? I mean, we know what it means in English, but evidently Trump doesn't. speak English, or at least he doesn't care any more about the dictionary than he does about

the Constitution, where the things are defined. So this is really Trump's patented fraud of declaring an emergency unilaterally and then saying, well, since I said it's an emergency, now I get to do whatever I wish. And so they said it'll take a look at the Emergency Economic Powers Act, Aiepa, the international emergency economics powers act. that grants him virtually unlimited power to impose tariffs. If the Supreme Court concludes that Aeepa's text, which does not mention tariffs, fails to provide clear authorization from Congress, then Trump's tariffs must be ruled illegal

under the major questions doctrine. The Trump administration seems worried about that outcome because they have a leg to stand on. This is as ridiculous as Trump's lawsuits against the press, especially the one that just got thrown out against the New York Times. so worried, in fact, that its brief attempts to rewrite the major questions doctrine in a way that shields the president from ever facing any of the negative judicial consequences. The text is an issue because that doctrine addresses the particular and recurring problem of agencies, asserting highly consequential power beyond what Congress could reasonably be understood

to have granted. The argument goes that from the White House says, well, is not an agency. In other words, the major questions thing was brought up and said, we don't want these bureaucracies creating their own policy when they weren't given that kind of power by Congress. And so the response from the White House, the Trump administration, well, Trump is not an agency. I think he is an agent for somebody. He's an undercover agent. Yes. Congress is far more likely to grant consequential power to the president than it is to grant such power to an agency as a matter of course, they say. But Reason says, remember what type of

agencies we're talking about here. We're talking about executive agencies. All of these agencies are under the executive branch. The president is head of the executive branch. The agencies are part of the executive branch. You know, the buck stops with him, even though Maga doesn't want to say that. Under the Trump administration's own preferred theory of the unitary executive, the personnel of all such agencies are entirely subservient to the president, even though Maga doesn't understand that, and they don't understand how the federal government gets its way by bribing and blackmailing people with money. The distinction makes no sense, they said.

The Supreme Court drew no such distinction between the presidency and agency when it relied on the major questions doctrine to decide Joe Biden's student debt cancellation plan. They declared it to be unlawful because it was an example, they said, of the executive seizing the power of the legislature. That's precisely what's happening here. Do you see how similar Biden and Trump are? You know, they're both of them want to act as dictators, and they don't care a whit about the Constitution. One of them wants to act as a dictator to buy votes from students by canceling their student loans. The other one wants to curry favor with his Democratic donors by using tariffs.

So, Senator Trump's distorted theory, Biden should have won that case because Biden was supposedly not an agency. So the Supreme Court properly scrutinized Biden then and should similarly scrutinize Trump now. The whole point of the major question's doctrine is the enforcement of the separation of powers by ensuring that the executive branch does not exceed the lawful authority granted to it. Wouldn't it be interesting if we just held everybody to the Constitution? We just read that document. Wouldn't it be interesting? That would take care of the separation of powers, I think,

because that's what's defined there. Well, I guess it's kind of interesting to see that Trump is already looking at his presidential library. It's something they usually wait until after they're out of office. But he's got Eric Trump scouting out places, and he wants to build it in Miami. This is for a guy that I don't think has ever read a single book. I can have a presidential library. And it is going to be put close to Freedom Tower, which is a landmark there. Maybe they could call it Freedom City. Who knows? So it's going to be a really, one of the reasons that they're scouting it out right now is because it's going to be a really large development. It's going to have, of course, a hotel that'll be there. It'll be a

Trump Hotel. The first presidential library to have a hotel development. I don't know what ever happened. Is this going to be the first library to have a casino in it, the first presidential library? Yeah, you're feeling lucky punk? Maybe you can get some books on game theory before you go in there. Yeah, maybe that's what he'd never read, so he went out of business. It's kind of interesting. You know, Obama was going to spend, at one point I saw that they were up to a half a billion dollars on his presidential library.

He was going to build it in Chicago, and he was going to complete. Then he realized nobody in Chicago can read, so. Yeah, yeah. Bill Ayers took over the educational system. They're just used to radicalize people. Now, let me be clear. We're going to build it here, but none of y'all are literate, so. And we're going to build it in the poorest neighborhood and disrupt it.

That's what they didn't like about it. It was going to be this big disruption. And the people in Miami don't like, there's a lot of Democrats in Miami-Dade County still, obviously. And when I was in Florida, it was solidly New York City Democrats. I guess it is now as well. But they already had the state. get in there and shut down a lot of things that they would do to object to building it. Maybe they could relocate the Trump Epstein statue there as part of the library in case

anybody read Epstein's a birthday book. So they said the legislation was passed in part because the 2006 legal fight between Trump and Palm Beach officials over an 80-foot pole flying an American flag. The flag was flying over the Trump golf course and local officials said it was larger than allowed by town ordinance. The issue was later settled, allowing a 70-foot flagpole in a slightly different location. So because of that fight, they put this law in. Of course, that was about the same time that Trump started fighting with his best friend, Jeffrey Epstein, over a piece of real estate.

And I think that that was the reason that Trump became the quote-unquote informant for the government. I think that was to get even with Epstein. You know, it's interesting how he can continue to go and, go and go with Epstein and everybody sees what he's doing to cover this stuff up when you have Sarah Ferguson who was at one time married to Prince Andrew the guy that you see pictured with Virginia Guffrey and has been basically he's now the man who used it was formerly known as Prince because he's basically been kicked out of the royal family because of this Epstein scandal well his wife who later they were divorced has had been kicked out

of U.K. charities. They've cut their ties to her after a reported email in which she called Epstein a friend. That's a very different treatment than we're giving Trump here in the United States. There you write one email saying you've been a great friend to us and you're out. And I say fine. I don't have a problem with that. Charities don't want to be associated with her. But here in the United States, this guy can write birthday wishes to Epstein. He can hang out with him for 15 years, and he can do everything in his power as president to cover up discovery of the other friends of Epstein, and he doesn't pay any consequences with his supporters.

He's paid some, but not enough. One of the things that always gets me is you'll see so many people online saying, oh, well, the book is fake. The book is fake. There's no proof. It's real. Whether the book is real or not, there's evidence of him hanging around for 15 years. Like, even if you just totally disregard the book, even if I grant him.

you that the book is fake there is so much other hard evidence the pictures the videos the way they are just you know latched onto each other you know shoulder to shoulder you know in each other's presence continually this is so suspect show me your friends and i'll tell you who you are exactly even if i grant you the book is fake even if we throw that into the trash bin and ignore it there is too much evidence already who the book is just the icing on the cake it's there as this little extra bit on top to show what a weird, strange relationship they had. But there's already proof of the relationship. It's like what Moskowitz said.

How do you become an FBI informant? There's usually some connection. You're deep inside this thing, yeah. And now he calls it a hoax, the thing that he became an informant for. It's now a hoax. It's just Donald Trump is the very embodiment of Orwellian, couple think and double speak. More succinctly, he's just a liar.

But, yeah, it was, you know, that whole thing about it being fake, Travis, and Trump filing that lawsuit. That was because somebody had described it to the Wall Street Journal, and they put it out there, the book, I guess maybe Trump didn't know that the book existed or it was going to be released publicly, but then it was released by the Democrats in that committee, and we could see that it was exactly as the Wall Street Journal described it. But Trump is not going to back down. He's going to continue with this lawsuit, which may be the only way that we get the documents released during discovery.

Who knows? Let's take a look at comments before we take a break. Yeah, North American House Hippo. Thank you very much. And it's good to see you. I hope you're doing well. Says, if it's any consolation to RS in Alabama, prayer request last week. He, as I did two years ago, has time to say goodbye to his mom.

It's not easy. It's heartbreaking, but I'm grateful I could be there. I'll be praying, pray for RS. Yeah, just to remind you. R.S.'s mother was diagnosed with cancer, yes. He's asked for prayer. Nights of the storm. Thank you very much, Jason.

That is very generous. Yes, thank you. So it's getting late in the month. Let's fill the gas tank. Thank you very much. And before we go further, let me just, I've had this on my desk yesterday. I forgot to thank these people who have mailed contributions to us. Mrs. A. from Brooklyn, New York, Mrs. A.

William G., Jack H. Kelly M., Matt and Monica. Peter G. Ronald C. Aaron F. John R. And Charlie, APS. Thank you all so much.

Yes. Thank you all. I really do appreciate it. It's because you were able to continue to do this. Nadlander says, have you seen the statue at the National Mall in D.C. of Trump and Epstein holding hands, L.O.L. What we're talking about, yeah. Says, how long will the Trump-Epstein statue last?

Less than a day. For you, yeah. Less than a day. It's already gone. Less than a day. It should be deemed a national treasure. Well, I'm sure they'll archive it away in a building somewhere and they'll have top men working on it.

Guard Goldsmith, the Boston radio host today said at least no ice agents were hurt. Thank God, totally dismissing the other deaths. Yeah, could have been a human could have been shot, right? This is what's dangerous about this, folks, because the government can come up with any kind of prevarication to deny rights or humanity to any group that they don't like. and I mean just look at the hate on the left to people dehumanizing them look at what they have done to unborn children dehumanizing them that allows them to rip them apart limb by limb so we don't want

to take any of this stuff lightly and we understand that our rights are not privileges granted to us by the American government the government is prohibited from infringing on these rights and presumably they are to protect them that's the purpose of government according to the Declaration from independence. It is not to grant privileges to us. And if we allow them to ignore God-given rights, or natural rights, however you prefer, if we allow them to do that for one class of people, in this particular case, people violated the law coming to this country illegally, what else are they going to do? It's a slippery slope, and we don't have to imagine that the government is going to do this. We've seen them do this over and over yet.

They must be restrained by the Constitution. People recognize that with the FISA Act. They said, you're not going to spy even on foreign citizens who are in America without a search warrant. You can only spy on foreign citizens and foreign countries without a search warrant. And yet, you know, they ignored that, of course. North American House Hippo, when I shoot people, I always make sure I engrave my name and social security number on the bullet first. That's right. paddy wax if they teach cursive in schools again it'll be harder to engrave the bullets

they could do some nice scroll work maybe some filigree yeah BL Houghton the statue in the center of the White House ballroom would be appropriate that's right yeah in a ballroom tell the Lord 1337 ha so Leland went to bring back channels the feds want back on the platform that sounds like they want to control what narrative is allowed back on the platform that's right citizen of america certain categories of speech will be allowed certain categories of people, you know.

Citizen Ameriaca, the only restitution that YouTube needs to pay is actually becoming a free, uncensored platform. Never going to happen. Never, ever going to happen. Says, but that won't happen with this new Anti-Defamation League hate bill when they start getting half a million dollar fines

levied on them for allowing your freedom of speech. D. Rejimer, Trump Epstein statue exemplifies a level of respect rightly garnered by government. Citizen of Mariccai, David Walmart in FEMA, David Walmart in FEMA David Walmart and FEMA have been in bed together

at least 20 years if not since inception That's right We give them our money So they can target us And our freedoms You got to get them where it hurts But you know

We used to report on that But now the police state It's not an issue And the FEMA camps are not an issue Because it's Trump So we're going to applaud that At least that's what Alex is going to do Shield your eyes says

War on Cars There is that's what you and Eric talked about yesterday partially as well if you haven't seen that interview go check it out on the rumble channel it's there it's also on bit shoot odyssey twitter all over the place guard goldsmith I like David's new title for the department perhaps as I call it the department of communism the department of central planning they still keep the C in there just out of P at the end the commies department and of course guard goldsmith hosts liberty conspiracy which you can find on rumble and

twitter at 6 p.m. every day and he has the Monday through Friday Monday through Friday and his substack is guard goldsmith. Niburu 2029 80% of all paper pulp used to manufacture in the US toilet paper comes from one company in Brazil. Oh sounds like a something hitting the fan scenario doesn't it? Audi M-R-R I've never walked inside a library named after one of these A-PAC-owned Zionists. I'm just trying to picture what book. It's got nothing but Schofield Bibles. I'm just wondering what book he's going to put in there.

You know, the guy that doesn't read. It's going to be a much of picture books. Yeah. Radisbro. Thank you very much, Radis, bro. Very generous. We really do appreciate it. Yes, thank you.

A shooter to distract the animals on Amerifarm that the FBI still has no clue or physical evidence on who killed Charlie Kirk, and we are just moving past it, par, for the course. yes that's how it always goes hey look something else also if you're watching the show please wherever you're watching it drop a like on the stream it really does help i know we have a we've got a group of people that like to come in and dislike it before the show even start so if you can drop a like on it we'd appreciate it yeah i got a lot of got an army of haters here um

maybe they're gropers or whatever from nick wendez i don't know uh i was talking before about uh Now, I've mentioned this now. An article has been done by The Guardian talking about Rodrigo Duterte, the former Philippines president. He is being held in prison, charged with crimes against humanity at the International Criminal Court. Now, of course, the U.S. and Russia and China are not involved in the International Criminal Court. So it's difficult to get them to do anything when we have American criminals doing the same stuff that Duterte did, which is Donald Trump wants to do that, I believe. The charges stem from his years-long campaign in the drug war, and that rights groups say have killed thousands. He left office in 2022.

You know, like Trump, Duterte told his subordinates to kill suspected drug dealers without due process. That's what's going on off of Venezuela. The extrajudicial murder of thousands, tens of thousands of people in Philippines, same in principle. as what Trump is doing to these ships in Venezuela. Again, if the ship is not, you haven't verified that it has drugs, and when it sees the plane's coming in, if it turns around and starts heading back to Venezuela, you are not threatened.

America is not threatened. You can't make the case for that. And we've got high-ranking admirals who are ahead of the military judiciary saying the same thing, said even if you could make the case and you couldn't that because it's carrying drugs, we're going to blow it up, That's not been policy. Policy has always been. We're going to interdict it.

We're going to stop it. We're going to take the people to prison. We're going to confiscate the stuff. But now he's just going to do extrajudicial killings. And this is what happens when you start ignoring the Constitution. Again, the drug war was created by the United Nations. They created the schedules. And they completely ignored the Constitution.

Why did we have to have the 18th Amendment to prohibit alcohol? But we never amended the Constitution to have the war on drugs for anything. It's because they don't care. care about the Constitution anymore. International Criminal Court prosecutors have charged the former president of the Philippines, Duterte, with three counts of crimes against humanity over the bloody campaigns carried out during his war on drugs. They laid out accusations against the now 80-year-old former leader who has been in ICC detention in the Hague since March. They accused Duterte of designing and disseminating a policy to neutralize

alleged criminals during his term as mayor of a city, later during his term as president of the country, alleging he induced hitmen to a death squad, and he provided weapons, incentives, and immunity for killing. Same thing that Trump is doing. And I think that we're probably, if we don't stop Trump, I wouldn't be surprised to see him do the same thing with the military in the U.S. cities. I know it sounds extreme. You don't think Trump is capable of doing it. the charge refers specifically to 76 murders they offered no apologies no excuses for his policies he said to the court in the hague he said i did what i had to do whether you believe it or not i did it for my country there you go three counts of crimes and as a co-perpetrator in 19 murders

the real issue however is that they the prosecutors themselves say that it is over 30,000 people that were killed in this, even encourage private citizens to shoot people on site if they thought the person was a drug dealer. Could you see Trump doing something like that? I absolutely could. You know, just have deputized armies of people to do that type of thing. I wouldn't put anything past it. And as I said before, Larry Ellison, a media mogul like no other before, see, if you can't control speech by controlling the free press, then the next thing you can do is you can consolidate the free press under one of your pals is an oligarch.

And I think that this consolidation is really a, the purpose of it, is not only to make money for these corrupt politicians, but I think it is also about speech control. They're going to press gang, the press gang. The family, of Ellison, his son is one of the ones running CBS Paramount. After Trump stopped blocking this when they capitulate to him on his personal lawsuit, he stopped using the government to block the sale.

And the sale was to Ellison's, Larry Ellison's son. The Ellison family could soon control an empire that includes CBS, Paramount, Warner, CNN, and a piece of TikTok. That's pretty amazing. You know, we used to talk about the fact that there's just going to be a few media companies in terms of the news.

Well, now there's just a few media companies in terms of everything. News, movies, social media, all consolidating. So it remains unclear exactly what's going to happen with TikTok. But Larry Ellison has, in the last couple of years,

his fortune has skyrocketed. His power could exceed those of fabled predecessors like William Randolph Hearst and Pulitzer. Yeah, and he will be able to say, just like Hurst did, you want a war? I can get it for you, right? I can use my power in the press to do that. TikTok is just one part of the rapidly expanding Ellison family media portfolio. Ellison's son David, who recently secured an $8 billion deal for Paramount and CBS, is busy putting his own stamp on them and is widely reported to be preparing a much bigger bid for Warner, which includes

CNN. And there's not going, you know, interestingly enough, the FCC is not going to fight this kind of consolidation, just as we talked about. How do we get the a few banks, a half dozen banks that were too big to fail? And it always goes back to that seminal merger between Bank of America in California and Nations Bank in North Carolina. As Gerald Suntis pointed out, it was first they removed the restrictions on interstate banking. And then in the Clinton administration, you had Erksome Boyle. It's what I call him. His name was Erkskin.

I can't even remember his real name now. He was an Erkson Boyle on your. Erskine Bowls. Erskine Bowls. Thank you. He was, I think, he was a high position in the Clinton administration. I think he was chief of staff for a while. And he had been involved in the banking industry in Charlotte, which is where Nation's Bank

was headquartered. And so he approved, got the merger approved. And I remember when it happened and everybody said, you're going to wind up with a half dozen gigantic banks nationwide, which is what happened. And that's when they were able to do the pump and dump in the real estate with the securitization. And then they got bailed out while hundreds of banks every year were failing subsequent years. So everything is consolidating, said a media historian at the University of Maine. What makes these deals different is that they are across. multiple platforms. To have an opportunity to establish an editorial line across TikTok, CBS News, and CNN,

that's a new world, he said. Paramount declined to comment. On a recent day, he saw the value of his Oracle holdings increased about $100 billion, making him briefly the richest man in the world. Mr. Musk has now taken that back, but Ellison has a net worth higher than $367 billion. This kind of consolidation is for control, for cronies, for corruption. Ellison is 81 years old. In 1977, he and two colleagues started software development labs within a few years.

It was renamed Oracle. He was less the technical genius than he was the chief salesman. His son is in the discussions to acquire the free press, a new digital publication that presents itself in opposition to traditional news media. but it is run by Barry Weiss, who is likely to be given some oversight of CBS. Ms. Weiss formerly worked as an editor for the opinion section in the New York Times. So you can see she's on the far left here, and she is a heavy, heavy Zionist. So Trump, meanwhile, pressuring his attorney sycophant, Pam Bondi,

to charge his political foes, as I said at the beginning of the program, we'll be charging James Comey. I have no love of James Comey. I would have thought that it was enough for Trump to humiliate him by firing him on TV. He was like in California or something. Then he was about to give a speech and he saw on TV that he had been fired. He wasn't even notified. Me?

Yeah. Huh? Anyway, we're going to take a quick break, folks, and we will be right back. You know, I'm going to be able to I'm going to be I'm going to I'm

I'm I'm I'm I'm I'm I'm I'm I'm

and I'm I'm We're going to be able to be. I don't know. I know. I know. I don't know I don't know

I'm No I don't know. I know. You're listening to the David Knight Show. Hello, it's me, Volodymer Zelensky. I'm so tired of wearing these same t-shirts everywhere for years. You'd think with all the billions, I've skimmed off America.

I could dress better. And I could, if only David Knight, would send me one of his beautiful gray MacGuffin hoodies or a new black t-shirt with the MacGuffin logo in blue. But he told me to get lost. Maybe one of you American suckers can buy me some at the David Knight Show. You should be able to buy me several hundred. Those amazing sand-colored microphone hoodies are so beautiful.

I'd wear something other than green military cosplay to my various gala and social events. If you want to save on shipping, just put it in the next package of bombs and missiles coming from the USA. Well, Jimmy Kimmel came back and, as I mentioned, I think it was on Tuesday night. So people were reacting to it yesterday. As I said before, you know, when Trump spoke at the U.N., he got it right. He was on the right side of the issue in terms of climate. Unfortunately, he doesn't explain why climate change is a fraud. He just pronounces it that way.

And I said, I find it very damaging to see this guy on my side. And, of course, we've had some people on the left who've said that about Jimmy Kimmel. The sad thing is that Trump has made this vile, disgusting, unfunny, quote-unquote comedian who was out there saying, yeah, wheezy, you didn't get the vaccine, so we're just going to let you die, you know, that type of stuff, not to mention his racist comedy, really was racist. I guess his black face, if they ever, I mean, that really sets them off against anyone, except for Jimmy Kimmel. He gets a pass on that. He gets a pass on sexual harassment and videos that he's done. He's done some really vile and disgusting things. You can see him if you care to look up what I'm characterizing here.

But when he does his comedy bits, Kimmel and Bits, and they're not funny. They're just political. He's now become a hero to many on the left. He's now become a victim of Trump censorship after the First Amendment. And I really don't like that. And so there's conservatives saying, you know, why do you? did Trump do this? And people on the left are saying, we don't want him as our totem for free speech. It's really reprehensible. And his voice breaking at times, Kimmel said he

understood why his comments last week seemed ill-timed or unclear or both. He said, it was never my intention to make light of the murder of a young man. He said, and he choked up. So I see those people on, sell these people on social media saying, well, quite an acting. job that he's got there. I don't think Tamika will connect. I think he was generally choked up about that. I would think that any human being would be. But it wasn't really, he wasn't criticizing Charlie Kirk. He wasn't even really criticizing MAGA that much. What he was criticizing was Donald Trump. Now, I played the clip for you at the beginning of his monologue on Monday, that Monday, not this last Monday. And he played that clip where Donald Trump,

was asked by the press what do you think of Charlie Kirk oh yeah it's horrible then he says just immediately pivots but hey have you seen my ballroom let's talk about that and his comment which was funny and devastating satire he said Trump showed as much compassion as an eight-year-old who just had his pet goldfish die that was brutally honest true satire and that I think just penetrated to the heart of the issue. It wasn't saying that it was the right that was doing it. Of course, Brendan Carr has tried to claw this back and portray himself, not as just a shill henchman for Trump to come after his enemies in the press. He says, well, you know, these stations have licenses, and they are

supposed to, as part of that license, they're supposed to be true with broadcasts. If they're deliberately giving fake news on the broadcast, well, guess what? Who in their right mind would believe that Jimmy Kimmel was giving news. It's obviously his spin, his opinion, as stupid and as wrong as it is. It's still his opinion and everybody understands that. Trump is also trying to come after the New York Times because they had an op-ed piece endorsing La La Harris. You are allowed to have opinions. You're allowed to have satire. And a comedian in a late-night show is not news, and an op-ed piece is not presenting itself as news, even if you don't agree with it. You're not allowed to take it down.

And so it was... We could do away with a lot of the issues caused by, you know, late-night TV propaganda and all this by just restricting the voting rights back to what the founders had originally had it as. Yeah, just head of household, right? Yeah. Well, land-owning males, you know. Well, it wasn't even land-owning males. If you were a widow and you owned the, you were, it was head of household. So if you were a widow and you own property, you were allowed to vote.

You know, it was just one vote per household. And it was people who had a stake in the community. But getting back to this, Trump has rang him as saying he is horrible. His show ratings are horrible. And one of the things that Kimmel said when he came back, he said, well, he repeated those charges that things that Trump had said about him and says, Well, I guess he fixed that, didn't he? He got 14 million views on YouTube.

And when he came back, he got massive. That's what I say. Trump made him bigger than ever because Trump violated the Constitution. Trump made the Constitution the First Amendment smaller than ever. He minimized them and he enlarged Jimmy Kimmel. I mean, what's wrong with this picture here? So Kimmel mentioned that some Republican senators like Rand Paul and Ted Cruz, had stood by the First Amendment, but, and he said, that's not legal.

That's not American. That is un-American, and it is so dangerous. And he was right about all that. Trump has put this guy, and he's elevated him by doing this. So the local stations are still going to, local franchises Sinclair and Nexstar are still not going to carry a show, which was always their prerogative. So Trump had won the lawsuit against ABC in the past because, Stephanophilus had said that the lawsuit from E. Jean Carroll was for rape, and it wasn't.

It was for sexually abusing and defaming her. One of the things is just the President of the United States should be above the sort of petty back and forth with late night TV hosts. That's right. Your focus shouldn't be on what Jimmy Kimmel says about you on TV. You're supposed to be the head of state negotiating the troubled waters of the world. for the country. And yet here you are, Jimmy Kimmel was mean to me. He was very rude. Don't like that man. He shouldn't be

punching down. No. He should be above Jimmy Kimmel, as you said, and he should be under the Constitution. But he's simply a narcissist. I see all these people online saying, well, the presidency always deserves your, he's the president, so he deserves your respect. Then he should act like he's worthy of respect.

Yeah. Always in the past, presidents have come under withering criticism and false accusations because they're public figures and because they take positions that are very unpopular people and they've always risen above that rather than descending down and punching the people but that's Trump he says I think we're going to test ABC out on this said Trump he said let's see how we do last time I went after them they gave me 16 million dollars this one sounds even more lucrative a true bunch of losers no he's the biggest loser So Kimmel also came after Brendan Carr.

He said, telling an American company, we can do this easy way or the hard way, or that these companies can find ways to change conduct and take action on Kimmel, or there's going to be additional work for the FCC ahead. He said, in addition to being a direct violation of the First Amendment, it's not particularly intelligent threat to make in public. He laughed about it. He said, you know, this guy is, as Ted Cruz said, he's acting like a mafia. But he goes, the mafioso are smarter.

They don't usually make these threats in public. Usually to get these threats, you've got to spend all night sitting in the car outside of an Italian restaurant with a microphone waiting to catch this stuff on tape. Exactly right. So the FCC's Brendan Carr says that the Democrats are engaging in projection and distortion over these remarks. He's not telling you the truth still. again, I don't think that it really has anything to do with accusing Maga. If it did have something to do with Maga, I mean, you know, who was damaged by this?

Was that specific person? You got to have standing in this. And so where is Mr. Maga, who is going to come back on this? It was really coming after Trump. He said, when you have a broadcast license, there's a public interest standard, which means that you have to operate consistently in the public interest. As I said before, when you look at these claims about public interest and the public standard, think about public health. Every time they put public in front of something, it's there to wield it as a club.

And so in the past, he has said exactly the opposite of what he has said this time. Disney has painted itself into a corner that it can't win, says John Nolte at Breitbart. he said they continue to pour hate on normal people or they can lose what's left of their customer base, the far left. Disney has so alienated us with its decade-long campaign to groom our children and warp our beloved movies and TV icons and all Disney has left are its far-left customers. Those far-left customers are now the tail that wags the rabid dog. The problem is that John Nolte is one of these people who is, and Breitbart in general,

is probably an example now of the worst. of the Hegelian press. And I say that in every area. They just, they don't look objectively or constitutionally at anything. I mean, I still go there to take a look at what they're saying, but they're more rabidly right wing than mediaite is left wing. And they've become a parody of news themselves. So, you know, this is also John Nolte, not just pushing tribalism now over the First Amendment.

This is a guy who pushed the vaccine. who stood behind the lockdowns and the mass mandates throughout all this stuff on Breitbart. And he was ratioed by the commenters on that website for doing so, but he never changed his mind. And so, you know, this is, he wants to talk about the rabid leftists. And yes, Disney is pushing that agenda. But as I said many times before, said it today. Trump pushed that agenda as well. He pushed that agenda as an entertainer.

He pushed that agenda as a politician. He pushed the training stuff. So to people like Michael Flynn in the military. So the reality is that Mediite says that the left should be embarrassed by Jimmy Kimmel. This is a left-wing publication. They're embarrassed by Jimmy Kimmel because of who he is. And they're upset that Trump has made him into a hero. They said that Trump left a little doubt that,

intimidation was the intention of his administration, while they raged over Kimmel's return to the airwaves on Tuesday night. So Brendan Carr wants to say, we were just talking about the local stations. We weren't talking about the overall network. Brendan Carr says, we don't have any authority to tell ABC what to do. This is a network. They can put the stuff up there, but we do have authority over the local stations that broadcast this out. And it was never our intention to cancel them. The problem is that he's lying and it's pretty easy to see that he's lying. Trump was saying before it happened and he was saying after it happened and he's saying it now after he's back that he wants to take him off. And Trump wrote, I can't believe ABC fake news gave Jimmy Kimmel his

job back. The White House was told by ABC that his show was canceled. In other words, first they were going to do what we demanded and that is to change their content for my feelings. And now, Now they're going to put him back. That's why I said, we're going to test ABC out on this, he said, and I'm going to get even more money from them this time. Well, again, to the news outlets stating that Jimmy Kimmel suggested the suspect was a MAGA Republican, Mediite said, I would strongly encourage you to watch the actual clip and see if you still think that's the case. And so, you know, if he slandered MAGA, who has. standing in that. And of course, genuine threats and slander are things that people can take

issue with personally, and there are remedies for that that don't involve censorship, broad censorship. In the wake of a national tragedy, it left a left-winger, saw a left-winger gunned down a father, husband, and son. This person is going with the established narrative. So a millionaire progressive with inertia alone, to think for his continued employment, used his platform to smear his political opponents. Well, Jimmy Kimball's speech, as usual, was reprehensible and not funny, but free speech allows reprehensible, offensive things. If you don't allow reprehensible offensive things, you don't support free speech, period, if you only support it for the things that you like. Reason says Trump's vision of broadcast regulation is the threat to conservatives.

And, you know, it's a threat, not just a conservatives, folks, it's a threat to liberals. It's a threat to libertarians. It's a threat to Christians. It's a threat to anyone with an opinion. It's a threat to anyone who makes a joke. Anyone who makes a meme. Censorship is censorship, and it will be applied to everyone. And we've already seen this. This is not understanding a principle. It's not we're on a slippery slope. We've already at the bottom of the hill, folks, with this stuff. With 97% of the stories are bad, said Trump on Friday. And so it's no longer free speech.

When TV networks take a great story and make it bad, I think that's illegal. This is a child. You know, you talk about an eight-year-old and his goldfish, back goldfish. I imagine he came up with that age because that's the way Trump speaks. Trump is wrong on both points, says Reef. reason. Yes, it is both stupid and authoritarian. And groping towards a justification for the regulatory threats that preceded Kimmel's expulsion, Trump embraced a principle that historically is bad for conservatives, one that they are apt to regret reviving. All they do is hit Trump, said the president

referring to himself. They're licensed, and they're not allowed to do that. Well, you are not allowed as a president to take unconstitutional actions because your feelings are hurt. He made similar noises during his first administration. He said, network news has become so partisan, distorted, and fake, that licenses must be challenged and, if appropriate, revoked. But his FCC chairman, Agit Pai, said exactly the opposite. He would not do it. I believe in the First Amendment, said Pye.

The FCC, under my leadership, will stand for the First Amendment. And under the law, the FCC does not have the authority to revoke the license of a broadcast station based on content of a particular newscast. Now, however, Brendan Carr is there, and he is willing to be a sycophant to Trump. He has no such constitutional compunctions, says reason. He preposterously invoked the FCC's policy regarding broadcast news distinction. And again, like I said before, and they make the point, who in the right mind would think that this is broadcast news. But let's just set that aside for a moment. They don't even have, shouldn't have the authority to determine what is true, what is fair, what is right.

And that's why they talked about conservatives. Yes, taking away free speech hurts everyone. But he, Carr and Trump have alluded to the broadcaster's vague duty to operate, quote, in the public interest, you know, like the lockdowns were in the public health interest. And yet, this is all reminiscent, says reason, of the FCC's defunct fairness doctrine. I've mentioned this over and over again. It required broadcasters to present contrasting views when they covered controversial issues. So just say, well, you're not even going to be allowed to talk about that issue.

We're just going to keep that. And anything that they didn't want to talk about, they just label it as controversial. the FCC repudiated that policy during the Reagan administration precisely because it impinged on First Amendment rights. The Kennedy administration, for example, had deployed the fairness doctrine against the president's political opponents. Our massive strategy, said former assistant Secretary of Commerce, William Rudder, he acknowledged a decade later. Our massive strategy was to use the fairness doctrine to challenge and to harass right-wing broadcasters and hope that the challenges would be so costly to them that they would be inhibited, and they would decide it

was too expensive to continue. By getting rid of the fairness doctrine, it allowed the political speech on talk radio, enabling the rise of influential conservative commentators such as Rush Limbaugh, exuming and extending that policy as Carr and Trump seek to do, would be a short-sided and constitutionally dubious policy. Although it might feel good, right, now to threaten Jimmy Kimmel, said Ted Cruz. When it is used to silence every conservative in America, we will regret it. It is unbelievably dangerous for government to put itself in position of saying, we're going to decide what speech we like and what we don't. And we're going to threaten to take you off the air if we don't like what you're saying. And as reason says,

the root of the problem is the arbitrary distinction that the Supreme Court has drawn between speech that is aired on TV or radio stations and speech and every other medium. And it was people like John Noltey at Breitbart who was slamming his fists on the table saying, that's our airways. That's our airways. He sounds like a communist because in this he is. And this, people like Noltey at Breitbart want censorship like a communist and they think that the airways belong to everyone. They don't.

There was an auction. and you need to follow that in terms of property. You know, once you sell this, once you auction it off, go away. You know, we don't need to have an entire bureaucracy for that. So reason said, that kind of distinction to say that speech and every other medium will be free except on TV and radio makes no sense. And it's even harder to defend in the current media environment. Government licensing of newspapers, websites, or streaming services should be, a constitutional non-starter. Inviting all sorts of interference for freedom of speech.

Government licensing of broadcasters poses similar perils as Trump and Carr seem keen to demonstrate. It's all simple. You just go back to the Constitution, which these people will not do. So, and when you look at this, where does this go? It goes everywhere, as I said. It's not just going to be conservatives. There'll be liberals, libertarians. It'll be Christians. Here's an example. The U.S. Supreme Court is taking a look at a counseling ban that has been put up in Colorado. This is a Christian counselor who says she works with children and she's got teenagers who are unconcerned or are struggling with their unwanted sexual feelings and they might seek out her help. But under the new Colorado state law, it allows her to support them. if they want to have same-sex attraction or to imagine that they're in the wrong body.

But if you want to support a biblical understanding of sex, she's not allowed to say that. This is how this operates. Understand that when you get rid of free speech and you trample on it, it's going to be used by the very worst actors in society. You want to talk about the radical left? Well, don't give them that tool. Just like you don't want to give the radical left, like Biden, the tool to do. do gun control by executive order.

Penalties for breaking the law are severe. A $5,000 fine for each violation and a loss of her license as a counselor. On October the 7th, the Supreme Court will hear her lawsuit, the person is Kaylee Childs, challenging the law. At issue in the closely watched case is a deceptively simple. Is counseling speech or is it conduct? If a speech, hey, it's going to. be protected. Wait a minute. If it's conduct, it's the free exercise of religion, isn't it?

Both of those are protected under the First Amendment. You can say the free exercise of religion is conduct. Well, that's fine. It's still protected, just like a protest that is peaceful is protected as well. Why would that even matter? So this is a long article talking about, is it going to be speech, is it going to be conduct? But the First Amendment protects both of those things. The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Colorado and said it was conduct so we can regulate it. So we can tell you that as a counselor, you can counsel people that they can have same-sex attraction. They can imagine they're in the wrong body. The LGBT is fine. Just don't talk about the B-I-B-L-E. Don't talk about reality. Childs who works in Colorado Springs

only talks with her clients. She does not engage in discredited practices like aversion therapy or shock therapy that wants to find conversion therapy. And I've said from the very beginning, these terms are carefully chosen to weaponize. They use a term conversion because they want to come after Christians. They use the term therapy because they want to go back to a time when psychologists were, or psychiatrists, I think, are the ones who practiced it, when they were using electroshock therapy against people. So they carefully put those things together, kind of like a portmandu, you know, conversion therapy. So they could come after both counselors and Christians doing this kind of psychiatrist and Christians.

But they want to come after Christian conversion. We have seen that in other countries where they've used that same kind of terminology. An alliance defending freedom attorney representing Childs compared her case to the NAACP in 63 versus Button, the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that struck down to Virginia law limiting the solicitation of legal services. Virginia had used the law to block the NWACP from providing legal assistance to African Americans who faced racial discrimination, claiming the state was regulating conduct. But the Supreme Court ruled the NACP's legal activities were modes of expression and association, protected with the Fourth, 14th Amendment and the First Amendment.

Look, there's no doubt about it that this is covered under free exercise religion and free speech. Circuit courts, however, have been divided on this issue. Third and the 11th circuits have both struck down counseling bans as unconstitutional infringements on free speech. But the Ninth Circuit, the liberal Ninth Circuit out in California, in 2022, upheld a Washington law that was similar to Colorado's. And so now we've had the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals uphold this with Colorado.

and they are 1,000% wrong. The Supreme Court did not review that previous ruling, but Justice Clarence Thomas wrote at the time that Washington's law strikes at the heart of the First Amendment. In Childs's case, the Tenth Circuit Judge Harris Hartz wrote a dissent, criticizing fellow judges for playing a labeling game rather than looking at what the regulation took game at, the expressive content of what is said.

A ruling in Child's case will reach professional professions beyond counseling, however. A friend of the court brief filed by the Christian Legal Society addresses a spillover effect on bar rules in some states that attempt to discipline attorneys not only for conduct, but also for speech that the licensing entities believe is harassing or discriminatory. That could include a view that same-sex marriage is immoral. Scruggs rejected Colorado's claims that mirror. talking to kids about their feelings regarding their biological sex is harmful. He said, if you dig deep, they admit that there's no proof of actual harm here.

But see, this is really a freedom of religion issue. Who are the secular atheist courts to say that they're going to define marriage? Government should have no role in defining marriage. And it is a religious issue. Who are they to say that I'm not allowed to express my religious beliefs. It's absurd. It's tyrannical. Officials shouldn't be cutting off dialogue with kids. The government is saying that we know better than counselors than kids about what views they should adopt and what ideas they should hear. That really is a global

threat to the First Amendment right there. And I think the thing that bothers me the most is the fact that you can talk about the kids sexually in one direction, but you can't talk about the other direction. How in the world could anyone try to justify that? Travis, you want to get the comments here? Yeah, so I'll let you know. We have Tony Arborne coming up right after this, so we will be going to him shortly. Klaus Schwab's cat responding to Audi says, I feel like I've stumbled into a FEMA camp upon entering Walmart. Audi MRR, want to get rid of the cartels and the drug war? That's right. And that is the case. I mean, you've got these cartels that you're We just had Republican congressman, Mills, who has introduced a bill to expand the authorization

for the use of military force. We don't do declarations of war anymore. Instead, we give blanket power to the president over categories of things, do whatever he wants, whatever country you want to go to. And he says, if you look at how just one cartel, the Senilea cartel is involved, that could give the president the power to go to war with over 40 different countries. It's amazing when you look at the reach of the Sinaloa cartel. And all of that was created, just like Al Capone's gang was created with alcohol prohibition.

We have created a multinational narco criminal enterprise because of the stupid war on drugs. Audi, MRR. I predicted that the Kimmel thing was a sci-up. I knew he'd be back on TV in no time. And now he's gotten more publicity than he has in many years. Kimmel is one of them. Yeah, yeah. Guard, Gull.

Oldsmith says Kimmel got six million viewers on his return. Yeah. And he had 14 million on YouTube. Yeah. Took care of the ratings, didn't he? He's back. The real Octo spook says Jimmy Kimmel has a lot in common with the mouse that roared. Didn't someone say something about 15 minutes of fame?

Yeah. Yeah, that's a funny movie, principle of the movie. Peter Sellers, they have a small country. They're gone bankrupt and they said, what do we do? We declare war on America and then we surrender and then they will give us all kinds of foreign aid like the marshal plan yeah i gotta scroll the window up yeah outy m r jimmy kimmel is actually a very funny guy but once he made his deal with the devil he was forced to make cia talking points funny which is a tall order just ask colbert yeah i don't

think i've ever actually watched a anything from jimmy kibble i haven't really either because what the late night shows have become you know they it's such obvious mockingbird media and and it's just disgusting and unfunny uh they're not even even clever about what they have to say yeah i remember watching david letterman when i was very very young with you guys occasionally but yeah that's it yeah he was he was funny at the beginning and then he went down that path as well um you actually got a chance to meet david letterman once uh in a beverly hills hotel that we were both staying at and it was um we weren't paying for it we were guests of um it was our distributor who had us there and uh we got a video of us uh you know

talking to him. It was a funny guy. Yeah. He made a couple of jokes right there. Epstein Island. I still remember what Kimmel said about the unvaccinated who needed emergency surgery. That was his so long wheezy or whatever. That's right.

So he's not a very compassionate man at all. Timed non-tides, I would say that if they, social media, have gotten the benefit of being ruled a platform, then we ought to have free speech rights there, just like the sidewalk, city hall, on the phone, et cetera. I have always made that argument. That's right. And as a matter of fact, Jack Dorsey said in multiple congressional hearings,

he said, we are the digital public square. And I said, well, then we've already got Supreme Court precedent saying that even if the digital public, even if the public square is privately owned, the First Amendment applies there. So just apply that. That's the Marsh v. Alabama case, yes. Audi, MRR, MAGA is being tricked into approving the attack on the first Amendment. They've been tricked

into supporting Trump no matter what he does. They've been tricked into a lot of things. Ben Laden Bernanke. One, Jimmy Kimmel has a smaller audience than Me TV Prime Time. Most of them are older and usually in bed by eight or nine. So that's a minuscule amount of people. Kimmel visited Epstein Island over

20 times. Oh, wow. Did he? I didn't realize that. Yeah. Well, we're going to take a very short break. And when we come back, we're going to have Tony Arterman of Wise Wolf Gold. Joining us, we'll be right back. We're going to be. . We're going to do.

I'm going to be. We're going to be able to be. I'm going to be. I'm going to be able to be. And so on the I'm going to be. You're listening to the David Night Show. Sounds good. Welcome back.

joining us gold exchange yeah well welcome back joining us now is uh tony arterman and we're a little bit about the shanghai gold exchange and what's happening last time you're on tony you talked about the hong kong gold exchange i think and um so china is making a huge move to accumulate gold that's been one of the many driving factors i mean we have we're into record territory we've passed in terms of real terms when gold shot up to eight hundred dollars an ounce but it's because there are so many different things that are driving it simultaneously. And one of those is, as you've been talking about for the longest time, the push by a lot of central banks to accumulate gold,

but nobody is pushing it like China. As a matter of fact, they're trying to de-westernize the global bullion market, says Zero Hedge. London and New York have been places where gold has been stored in the past. China's trying to place that with Shanghai, perhaps Hong Kong as well. What's your take on that? I thought the story last week about the Hong Kong play was really important because we already have the Shanghai Gold Exchange, and it just highlights the move the China's making, as well as the BRICS nations, to make the move of commodity pricing eastward. There's another headline up that's up on zero hedge, and then just, I mean, really putting some emphasis on what's going on with the West, and Canada has no gold.

reserves, David. Did you know that? I didn't know that. Zero gold reserves. But they've got a central banker as their prime minister or whatever, so I guess they're covered. You don't need gold if you got a central banker. I think that's a key indicator of where we're headed in this decade, and especially in this century, is that everything is flowing out of the hands of the West. And they had an interview with Ray Dalio, and he was talking about, you know, the, the, the, juxtaposition of

1945 when the United States had about 80% of the world's money. You know, we were about 5% of the world's population, about 50% or more of the wealth. And then that's completely dissipated and it's flowing eastward and is being decentralized out of

our hands for sure. So dollar domination is really, I think, in this timeline, it's really in danger of losing more and more market share. Yes. Zero Hedge had a headline said, nobody is hedged for the real gold panic. That hasn't even started yet.

No. No, I don't think it has. As a matter of fact, it's interesting. Every day I start calculating the ratios, and not only the gold-to-silver ratios, but the Bitcoin gold ratios. And Bitcoin has slipped a little bit off of, I think, AI expansion and other things that have happened since the rate cut.

and that's probably temporary, but it went from 31 ounces of gold to make one big coin to about 29. And so that slipped a little bit, but the real metric to watch is the gold-to-silber ratio. That's starting to come back to normal, or at least somewhat normal levels. I mean, we got up to past 100 ounces of silver to make one ounce of gold, not too long ago when it was $35 an ounce for gold and $3,500. an ounce, or $3,500 an ounce of gold, and $35 an ounce for silver, David. And now we're at 83 to 1 because silver passed the $44 mark. Wow. Yeah, it truly is amazing. We're hitting one all-time high after the other. But as I said, there's a lot of different

reasons, especially for us as individuals. When we look at the rise of stable coin, there was an article from Zero Hedge talking about $100 billion a year battle that it's taping up between credit cards and stable coins. But I guess, though, really, a stable coin would be more like a debit card. You know, it lets you pay for things instantaneously. But we live in a credit card society, don't we, where people are borrowing from the future. So I don't know really how much of that is really going to be over the credit cards versus that. I think you see the credit card companies are merging with the stable coin companies as Visa

merged with the biometric company, they want to be there for the surveillance. So I imagine, you know, they could process a transaction and still put it on a credit card account for you and charge your 30 or 40 percent interest as long as we're going to continue to allow that to happen. Yeah. I think what makes the stable coin battle between credit card processing and stable coins is the fees, it's merchant fees. I think that'll be their selling point.

As a matter of fact, I saw it was, I think, a Coinbase commercial about a year ago, and it was highlighting how small business could open up a Coinbase account, and if they took crypto, that their fees would be lower than if they just took credit cards, which I thought it was interesting. And then if you enter in stable coins, now I've been looking into stable coins because I thought, well, if you're going to deal, if you're going to have Bitcoin or something, you should have stable coins. That's a whole other, like to actually deal in stable coins.

It's a lot harder to deal in than it is Bitcoin, at least right now. You have to go through a third party, which I think that's probably how it's going to be. It's not going to be the third parties that are connected to Trump like Lutnik and others. Right. It'll be something else. So it's not, you know, meet the new boss, same as the old boss. It's probably a lot of the same entities or interest, except it's a different vehicle. And they can be competitive because for the longest time, you know, the hidden cost of credit card fees.

And I know this from being in the gasoline business in my entire life and, you know, 3% at the pump. And how that looks on your balance sheet when you're selling gasoline at the retail level, the credit card companies make more than the retailer most of the time. You know, if it's over $3 a gallon, that's $9 a gallon that the retailer usually makes about a nickel. So that will be an interesting, I think all the infrastructure that's being put in right now with stable coins. You and I both know that it's not to save the merchant. It's not to save the retailer or the operator fees or anything like that. And it's another transfer of well.

Oh, yeah. Yeah. But I imagine people, a lot of retailers would give it a chance because it is a really expensive thing to take credit cards. I remember when we had our retail stores, video stores, it was such a big bite that I said. said, well, we have the ability to, you know, with the system that I had written, we had the ability if somebody had late fees that they'd accrued because they turned something in late, you know, we could have balances on a customer's account so they could pay it off later. So we tried it as an experiment.

It was a very short experiment because what happened was we said, well, if you're going to use a credit card for this small amount, let's just defer it. Next time you come in, you can pay it, you know, with a check or cash or something like that. And that did not work because people wanted to use credit card. and we as a store didn't have any club over them in terms of if they don't pay the bill, they're not going to get a hit on their credit rating and that type of thing. So we had to stop that pretty quickly. But it is really a high fee.

And as we look at the banks, you're talking about how Stablecoin is set up, centrally controlled, just like a central bank, except that it's a crony system. They have a way that they are going to know their customer and all the rest of these so-called anti-money laundering laws that are out there. Vietnam is showing the pattern. We talked about this last week, I think. They just immediately closed 86 million bank accounts because the people did not sign in and give them their biometric data.

And it's like, okay, well, if we don't have your biometric data, we're closing your account right now. I think we could see that type of thing happening in the West. That's the way that they're going to roll this thing out. Do we lose you? Yeah, I think unfortunately that's the future, especially as everything continues to get more and more digitized. Yeah, that's right. They're going to force our hand.

Are you coming through? Okay, David? Yeah, you're coming through now, yes. So I think that's the direction that they're going to go without a doubt. And I think that's why there's, as an individual, we're looking not only at the general economy and at the price of gold, we're also looking at the control that's coming through with all this. The World Economic Forum has got a plan to. overhaul the global financial system by monetizing nature, don't they? This is an article from

LifeSight. And we've talked about this before, how Bessent, as well as Lutnik, as well as Bergam, who Trump put ahead and as head of the Interior Department has all the different parks and public lands in it, they've talked about how, yeah, we need to monetize and put to work our natural resources. And so I think that they will monetize nature. They'll come up with some a derivative system to do that and that's one of the ways that we will wind up owning nothing and they will have everything uh people like larry fink at black rock and uh hoffman and others uh that's exactly what the world economic form wants isn't it well unfortunately i think this is a natural outcropping of what happens when you have fiatur currency when you demonetize your currency you

monetize everything else and they're looking for value and everything it's that's the reason civilization is built on sound money when that's the whole That's the whole point of having a medium of exchange, and if you lose that, then there's chaos, and then you go back to, I mean, in a sense, a bartering economy, but there's, you find value and everything else. It's the reason why we have such a massive housing bubble. It's why we have a debt crisis, a debt, a debt time bomb around the world. It's having to borrow against assets and everything to outpace the loss of purchasing power in the currencies. That's a good point. another reason why you're seeing yeah that's a good point is you're saying you got to have some pretense that your fiat currency is linked to something that's real i mean first with first breton woods it was gold and then the second one they made it with oil or with energy right and so now what's left you know they're going to monetize it with the real estate that's here in the united states and that may very well be what they're going to do they'll monetize everything and

yeah it'll be as still fiat currency then i if even if we may move to a digitized system, like a stable coin back system, it's still going to be based off of ethereal, you know, blue sky. It's going to be based off of nothing. It's going to be based off of GDP and economic growth and all the rest of that. Unfortunately, we're seeing the endgame here where you can't inflate your way out. You can't print your way out of economic downturns. And a lot of the things, the metrics are going backwards, used to,

And you lower interest rates, and there would be sell-offs and precious metals because people would be taking, you know, getting liquid in positions to buy into the market. Now you're just seeing gold just continue to go up. Every time I come on the show, it's breaking its another all-time high. Yeah. I think silver is about to do the same thing, and I don't want to, you know, give investment advice. But I'm looking at silver having a big breakout here, and probably this year. going into the final quarter of 2025. And as of right now, I'm stockpiling.

If I can get silver and keep it, I'm holding it. And if I can financially afford to keep it on the books, I'm doing that. Because I think there's going to be a squeeze, even with the amount that's being sold right now is really interesting. Buyers aren't necessarily there, but the price keeps going up. So you have to take it to the wholesalers. And I just don't like that game. I think there's something inherently wrong with the price rising and retail has slowed down.

And we still have, you know, the smaller buyers are there, but not like it used to be where the people are buying big chunks at a time on the retail level. I'm watching that very closely because those two things don't go together. The retail slowing down and the price going up. That means institutions and governments are buying. And they're signaling something, I think, that we need to pay attention to. Yeah, they've been heavily manipulating silver. said before, you know, it was just a few months ago. I remember seeing a YouTube video. Somebody sent it to me as a listener and said, look at this. And it was a small show of precious

metals. And the guys that were there that were dealers, you know, the guy went around and talked to him. He said, yeah, everybody wants to sell silver, but they're not buying. He said, look at the ratio here. And how low silver is. It's a great deal. And so we're buying all that we can. But the retail people are not, for whatever reason, they're selling their silver instead of buying. it. So there's a lot of manipulations and going on for that for quite some time. I've got to... I worked at the shop in Denison

yesterday in Texas. My old new bank, the branch bank that I took over, I'll just send you some pictures of the signage. It's a little bit of an experiment where Wise Wolf, Gold, Silver, Bitcoin, and I rebranded it. I'll have the drive-through

operational, probably sometime by by the end of the year. But I was there just working the counter for my son, And from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m., and I did six transactions buying silver bullion. And that was all I bought. It was a silver bullion. There wasn't any gold. There was six transactions of different silver bullion buys and probably about $5,000 worth or more.

But that's just kind of indicative of the steady pace. So the retail trade is still, the retail trade is still selling it when they're buying it then. yeah well the public is selling to me and then i'm having to figure out how am i going to either you know get it to the trading house and make a small margin and liquidate it off my books find a way to keep it on inventory and sell it out slowly uh it's it's a very strange position to be in because i love silver i think it's uh i think it's a bargain right now it's hard to always keep it on your books with cash flow as you know from small business david you can't just to continue to accumulate inventory and survive.

So I have to make that decision, but I still think I'm buying it cheap. And the reason is, is what you mentioned, you know, with the repricing of everything, I don't think that we've factored in the true destruction of the dollar. The dollar's lost 40% of its purchasing price compared to gold in the last year alone. Yeah, that's right. It's amazing. Just in the last 12 months. Yeah.

Yeah. And silver went from, what was the last year, David, about $29 an ounce at this time, somewhere in there. And now we're at $44 an ounce in climbing. I think that's in direct correlation to the loss of purchasing power in the dollar and where we're headed with the repricing of commodities. So, yeah, it's eventually, and I think there was an article up on Zero Hedge about the phomo. I mean, I think a lot of people are going to look back and think this was the time. and they, you know, end up not being able to buy. Unfortunately, I think silver is going to surprise everyone

because it's been lying in wait for 45 years. And everybody's been waiting for silver to do its thing since 1980. And you mentioned earlier, adjusted for inflation, you're absolutely right. So in 1979, gold went, or landed 79 into 80, gold went to over $800 an ounce. So it went from $35 an ounce in 1971 to over $800 an ounce in the end of 1979. And that was based off of, it seemed to be that the Fed and the Treasury's goal of, you know,

whip inflation now and all the rest of that didn't happen. And people were just, and it gold doubled by the, from first quarter of 79 all the way down to the end. And then there was some easing, you know, Paul Volcker raised in. interest rates to the teens. And we've discussed this many times. So there was a contraction from the money supply. And eventually there was a, you know, an easing of perceived inflation. So silver took, you know, went down from $52 an ounce down to, gosh, you know, almost nothing. And then gold went from $800 an ounce down to about $300. So you're right. Pricing for inflation, if you looked at $800 an ounce gold in 79, we just crossed that.

line. So that priced into inflation, 35, I think $3,600 an ounce or something like that is about the adjusted for inflation mark of where we were in 79 with $800 an ounce gold. But we've not even gotten close with silver. If I said many times, you know, $52 an ounce in 80 was like $300 to today in purchasing power. Yeah. That's an estimation. So I think we've got a lot of room to run. And all commodities. I mean, But look at what's happening with platinum, palladium. Palladium is up, I think, 500% over the past many, like, five years, I think. It's... Well, it's anything that's real, actually. I get Mr. Everything that's real. Yeah.

Mr. Prom 1011 says, Silver is up $5 per ounce just in September. And he says, thank you, Mr. Thank you, Tony. So I appreciate that. And again, you know, we go back and we look at the inflation that was happening in the 70s, you mentioned it, you know, the whip inflation now, the little win buttons that Gerald Ford wanted people to put on their little puzzles.

Like, what are we supposed to do to stop inflation, right? They didn't know what to do to stop inflation. I'll get right on it, Mr. Ford. Yeah, that's right. I mean, they would really just talk to us as if we were children. It's the same administration that came out with a, this is your brain on drugs thing, you know, the egg and a frying pan. It's like, they really do think that we're children, and maybe they're right.

I don't know, but I never. No to inflation, David. Yeah, that's right. So when you go in, it's like, no, I can't afford that. None for me, thanks. Yeah. I never figured out what my responsibility and inflation was. I knew what his was, but I didn't know what mine was.

Yeah, it's pretty crazy. That really is the crux of the matter, is the fiat currency. Once you've untethered from value, and you mentioned earlier, you know, we've talked about the petro dollar. We had a seemingly gold-backed dollar until 1971. It wasn't legal for you to own gold. Gerald Ford made that legal. I think in December of 1974, you could finally own gold again legally in this country. So we really didn't have, the dollar had the perceived backing of something. And we went off the petro dollar pretty much officially last year. And you've seen the world start moving away from using that, by setting it into energy.

Yes. So what's left, I think, is the stable coin models that we've discussed. And I don't know how that's going to work out for the dollar or what's going to go on. But in the meantime, everything is getting repriced. Yeah, that's right. That's right. Speaking of that, we've got a couple of comments here.

Three Little Birds says, ask you, Tony, who will buy gold or silver when it becomes so highly valued? I think you'll be buying things with gold and silver I think it's what you'll be doing I'm sorry go back and look at the stories about the Vimar Republic when the paper money became worthless and people were using wheelbearers full of it

one guy became incredibly wealthy because early on he got out of the currency and got into gold and then he could basically buy whatever he wanted to on the cheap right well the hardest money wins yeah and uh those stories about the wymar republic the meltdown uh where somebody bought a hotel for a $20 gold piece you know because the the current priced

in the currency and that that's the this gets complicated if you've priced in your debt models based off a currency to say you have a you have a promissory note uh you have a mortgage that's priced into the currency at the time. It's one of the reasons why, you know, you have William Jennings Bryan at the end of the 19th century. With the cross of gold speech, the currency had become so hard. Like, the United States was deflationary. It was harder and harder for the farmers to, you know, get liquid and pay it off their notes. And so that's why they called for free silver. It's really, the whole allegory of the Wizard of Oz is all about that with the yellow brick road and yeah uh you know dorothy's slippers were originally silver you know

she's she tapped him to go back home of all the rest of that there's a there's an allegory there but that was the that was the the inverse that was the opposite problem we had a currency that was so uh rigid and hard and like it was deflationary that it was harder to get out of debt now if you you know if you free up capital for a while it looks pretty good like oh you can pay off dead a lot easier but then you start everything gets repriced and so you know an ounce of gold will go a lot farther and you talk about that in in relation to what's known as gresham's law and i don't want to get too technical because i don't think i'm the guy to explain it but it's gresham's law simply states that um when bad money enters a system and good money goes into the hiding and so i

always you know i try to figure out what's the what's the what's the end game of Gresham's law. How does it end up? Well, good money comes back, and that's the, you know, the proper money always reasserts itself. Gold always wins. If you look at history, gold always comes back. Silver comes back.

And it can be pushed out for a while. And I think that period between when they put down the gold and silver rebellion, because I really think that's what it was in 1980, as I look back and you realize what happened with the Hunt family, you know, they were. Deep stated, you know, I think they were punished for exposing something that was wrong with the dollar and making silver go up to $52 an ounce. And, you know, the rest is history with that because silver was nothing throughout the 80s and the 1990s. Warren Buffett for a while seemingly cornered the silver market, but nothing really happened. That's why he called it a pet rock.

You know, it said gold was like a pet rock or it didn't do anything. It just sits there. Well, that's the whole point. It's not supposed to sit there. It's supposed to house value. It's supposed to be a monetary thing, whereas the dollar, again, the dollar is with fiat currency loses purchasing power. So we had that interim period between the 80s and 90s and early 2000s where it looked

like fiat currency at least stabilized enough, but that's all $300 an ounce gold, David, in two thousand and uh and three and i remember that because i was going into uh iraq i bought my first gold coins and i remember you know i the dealer that i called put me in some i didn't know what i was doing so he put me in numismatic collectibles that i never could get any value out of but if i just bought gold bullion i'd have been way way up i wish i had wish i had that but i invested three thousand dollars in uh in 2003 i could have got 10 ounces of gold i'd be looking a lot better right now well you know we're talking about these different scenarios you know one of the scenarios is like uh the vimar republic where the entire financial system collapses and the currency collapses

and that type of thing and that's where you pay for where you buy the hotel for a 20 dollar gold piece type of thing but then you also have what happened in the 70s and 80s where because of a bad government policy a number number of number of different ways inflation got out of hand and eventually when they got that under control then gold came back down for a while but I think we're looking at something that is more like the vimar scenario and this fourth turning these institutions everything is being changed the international financial system is being re-engineered all of these different things are happening so I think when you look at exploding debt in the west and you look you know that's looking

Weimar-like. And then you've got the desire by the Russians and the Chinese to completely change the financial system. This is something unlike what we have seen before. And we could very well be pushed into a worldwide depression, especially with Trump's capricious and arbitrary tariffs that are happening out there. So, you know, that's really, I think, more of the scenario that we're looking at. And as you point out, Tony, when you have a collapse of that order, people are looking for real money for hard money for real assets and it falls back to that and the uh the uh the fiat currency becomes like confederate dollars so i think maybe that's the answer that's exactly right that's the one that i would give and it history shows us you know is that old maxim the of the golden

rule he who has the gold makes the rules and i mentioned earlier about where we were in 1945, especially, you know, post-World War II, how much wealth that the United States held, and the rules that it was able to make because of that, and that's dissipated and it flowed out. And because of our monetary policy, you look at places, I mean, Canada, again, that's another, they fall into that fiat trap. Well, we've got all this currency, we've got a central bank. Well, so what? You know, do you have assets to back it up? And that's the, the rest of the world is moving away and, has been moving away rapidly, and I think when I was on last week, and I was pointing out that

the Hong Kong gold depository, I thought that was big news. It didn't get a lot of play, but next week, Bloomberg's running a story on China, leveraging the Shanghai Gold Exchange and Hong Kong to usher in a new commodity pricing system. And I think that's really important to watch as the outflows continue to happen in these. especially the BRICS nations accumulate more and more monetary metal. And they're doing that again, you know, the centers have been London in New York, but there's been some scandals involved in that. A lot of people wanted to get their money out of New York as well as out of London

and there's some difficulty in getting that. So I think China sees an opportunity there. Well, they're right. Yeah. And the backbone of all of this is trust. And I believe the West is, eroded its trust and especially the dollar system and the weaponization of the dollar was very mismanaged on purpose i was uh reading an old book by jim mars on the plane yesterday

it was uh coming out here to to la and it was ruled by secrecy and it talked about james forestall that famous quote from james forestall you know who uh was uh i think murdered you know You know, I pushed out of a window at Betheson ABLE Hospital for his views. He was the first secretary of defense under Truman. But he had that famous quote. He said, you know, if they were just stupid, then every once in a while they err in our favor, he's talking about the ruling elite. He said, they never do.

You know, that's how you know that it's pretty brilliant, and it's a plan. Except for, you know, the controlled demolition of the dollar, we have to really ask the question, and the controlled demolition, of this current monetary system, who bono, who benefits? Really, who benefits, because we're watching the destruction of our monotune system in real time, and the vacuum that's going to leave,

you just look at places like China, which I don't think is a good thing. That's right, absolutely. Well, you know, we've always talked about the economic system and anything. Let me get your take on war because we had... Real quickly, before we leave, the economic system, we've got a comment from Three Little Birds. wants to know, Tony, do you think the future could hold two separate economies?

Do I think the future have two separate economies? Yes, that is a question. Maybe financial systems or something. Their example is a metals-based one and an energy-based one, but, you know, will there be two separate ways of doing business? You know, like the established method and then something other than that, say, you know, gold, silver. I think that's entirely possible. It's going to take a while, nothing like that.

this happens rapidly. Well, maybe it's more gradually than suddenly, probably. But I don't think people are exactly ready for that yet. But I think there will be, you know, different ways to conduct business and parallel economies that we discussed for many years, especially with decentralized tokens through crypto and then things like gold and silver that are physical in the real world that you can actually trade and hold in your hand. I think that will make a, that will make parallel economies. I think naturally people want to have the best money. And if the money from the established order is constantly in flux or in danger

or if you've got to deal with social credit scores or anything like that, you're going to naturally gravitate towards something that's outside of that. It may not happen in a day, but it will happen. I think that's a natural human condition. History shows us that. You can't debase your way out of economic downturns. The Romans learned that many times, by the way. They did it more than ones.

We've had the coin clipping and other things when debasing the currency and then bringing it back. We always see that nations rise on sound money. Empire has rise on sound money and economic nationalism, and they decline on fiat currency and free trade. Yes. And I think, you know, once you get this dominant Viet currency out of the way, you're going to have the market trying a lot of different things, many of them probably simultaneously, until they settle on maybe something or one system. But I wanted to ask you about war because, you know, war is always a part of these fourth turnings.

You know, begins with financial issues. Then they take us to war, as Gerald Sunti said. And we've had Trump do a complete 180 at the U.N. And now he's all in for Ukraine. They're going to take back all their land and maybe even some of Russia, he says. So what do you think is happening with us? And it wasn't even, I think, a full 24 hours before we have Denmark saying, well, we've got drones at our airports again.

This has got to be the Russians. Let's go to war. What do you think? You're going to take us to war pretty quickly? I think this is the most volatile situation that the world has been in since 1962, since the Cuban Missile Crisis, honestly, and it's a sad thing to watch if you followed history or geopolitics like I have and been interested in it, and been part of the instrument of failed foreign policy. I was a tiny cog in that machine as a young man watching some disastrous decisions unfold.

This is really unnerving, and I've warned against it for a long time, and it seems to kind of go away, and then it'll come back, you know, the dressing down of Zelensky at the White House, I wondered how much of that was theater because it seemed like, oh, we're making a move here, we're going to finally put this thing to bed, which was, you know, the established order once that war. They want NATO and Russia locked in some sort of kinetic conflict. It's ideological reasons, it's territorial reasons, it's financial reasons. All of that's baked into that. and that's something that I thought was so myopic.

It's so, I think it's psychotic at the same time. And they're focusing on one or two things, but the wider picture is that the West is sleepwalking into a cataclysm. You look at somebody like Zelensky, he said earlier, I think in the last couple of days, he said that Russia either makes peace or they make bomb shelters. Wow. That's the kind of rhetoric of a madman. Yeah, it is. And yet we're seeing that from European countries now. We've seen it from Poland. You're seeing it now from Denmark. They're all jumping into this and you've got the Germans just calmly saying, well, we're going to have to be able to take care of a couple of thousand casualties a day here in our hospitals. That's what's coming in.

And they're setting up their military. They're looking how they're going to get a larger army. All these different things. They're just doing it as kind of a matter of fact. It doesn't like. like there's not any panic about it. It's just like, well, this is what we're going to do now. And they're kind of telling everybody what they're going to do. And for what? Yeah. What is the point here?

What would be the point of the sacrifice other than some sort of ritualistic luciferian agenda? I mean, I don't see the point here. What is the point that they're trying to make? What is the security threat to Europe by Russia if you leave it alone? I mean, I don't really understand it since the fall of the Soviet Union, we've done everything to expand NATO, to interfere with, even like you look at the, what was it, 2014, we had the CIA back coup in Ukraine, the democratically elected leader, fled to Russia, the inner, the orange revolution in 2007, we've done everything to get us to this point is really on the West. Russia, I mean, I'm not a russifal, I don't, I don't pretend to think that Vladimir Putin's a great guy or that, you know, he's the same actor. But at the same time, we just look psychotic and schizophrenic.

Well, it's NATO. And we've broken our promise. NATO was set up to fight Russia. When Soviet Union collapses, it's like, oh, now what do we do, right? And we've had in the past. Yeah, what's the Warsaw Pact? Yeah, yeah, exactly. In the past, we've had NATO do Operation Gladio, where they stayed.

terrorist attacks, kidnapped Prime Minister, killed him, all that type of thing. These are people who are satanic and insane. They have operated literally as terrorists in Italy and in Germany for their political agenda. And these are the people who are looking to do anything that they can in order to preserve this institution. Mark Ruta, who tried to destroy all farming and the Netherlands, gets booted out. And where do they put him as head of NATO? because he's their kind of guy. I mean, it's almost funny,

except that it's so serious because they're trying to drag us, they're determined to drag us into World War III, no matter how flimsy the excuse. I mean, we'll be drug into World War III over some drones harassing an airport. I mean, that sounds like getting

drug into a World War because some Archduke was assassinated somewhere in a place that we've never heard of before. It's crazy. Some place you've never heard of that makes no sense. Yeah. You run into people. I remember I was in Washington, D.C. in 2014, and I went up there to speak at an event for Congressman Ralph Hall at the Capitol Grill.

And before that, they had a little luncheon. And somebody, some kid from the Heritage Foundation was, this was, again, right on the heels of the Ron Paul Revolution. And there was a lot of libertarian thought that was entering into conservative. which I thought was a great thing and I was one of those people and they said we've got to instruct people you know about even things like World War I you know World War I you know World War I was worth fighting and it was the reason why we fought it and I remember looking at this luncheon and I'm like am I on a different planet like what can you explain to me what that was I mean modern historians really can't say why we fought this you know

Pat Buchanan called it the great Civil War of the West which was World War I and just this bloodletting other than some rich dualistic bankers wars what was the security measure what was what was it threat here other than the the wealth and control of the very few yeah i agree yeah one of my favorite movies the first half of it is sergeant york and then they gaslight him and get him to go full in this war it's like no you're right the first time don't let them trick you you know wars when they tell us who to fight revolutions when we figured out for our yourself. So you've got a program that's coming up after this show, don't you? Are you doing that in California? You're still going to do today's show? I'm still going to do today's show

live from the, from the Green Room here in Thousand Oaks. I'm going to do the Arterburn radio transmission. So yeah, we'll be live on Rumble on the America Unplugged Channel and live on my ex at Tony Arterburn. And I can't believe, I still have a YouTube. Me and Jimmy Kimmel. We both got YouTube now. I'll be over at Tony Arterburn. How about that? too so did they never take you off they just they just missed it or something the sensors or well a long time i've had other channels gone but i just this time i just use my name just said i'm tony arderburn at tony arderburn and we'll see how long they take to

figure out that's me over there maybe maybe you got on there after linda left uh she was the yaccarino or whatever susan she got about me was that susan wogicke uh yeah that's right Yeah, Linda Yaccarina, she was at X. But, well, that's great. So you're going to be on X and YouTube right after this program, right? During the live broadcasts. Yes, sir. Right.

12 Eastern, 11 a.m. central time will be live. So come join us over there. And I still want to reiterate, too, on David Knight.govold. If anybody's, any of your listeners, there's a special that I'm running. It's just for David Knight listeners and my listeners. We've got some in-house silver deals, and it's a hodgepodge of the stuff. Like I said yesterday, we're buying a lot of silver. So to take advantage of that, if there's in-house pricing, we can beat a lot of the major retailers right now

and give you a pass on a great deal. Can't promise exactly melt on everything, but we can get really close to spot on some items. And it could be, you know, 10-ounce coins, 5-ounce bars and pre-1965 U.S. silver. I'd even hate to sell it, honestly. I love selling it. I make a little bit, but I'm trying to stockpile right now because I think that price is going to keep moving because the dollar,

you know, the saying goes gold and silver and, you know, have no top because fiat has no bottom. That's a good saying. And very true. Thank you so much for joining us, Tony. I really do appreciate it. Again, folks, go to David Knight.

I'll take you to Tony's Wise Wolf Gold. let him know that she came through us. Thank you so much, Tony. Thank you for your support. All right, folks. And I also want to remind you, as we're talking about war and peace, Gerald Salentie's Occupy Peace is coming up this weekend. You can go to Occupypeace.com and find out information about where that is. Kingston, New York, it's a great place that's where Guard and I met in person when I was there back in 2021, four years ago. And that's a great event. I would highly recommend it. And we need that. to, you know, you can enjoy yourself.

If you're not too far away, you can enjoy yourself in a nice environment there and show your support for peace at the same time. We're going to take a quick break, and we will be right back. Stay with us. Here's a little song I wrote. You might want to hear it in your pod. You'll owe nothing. And be happy.

Ain't got no cash, ain't got no car, but 24 booster shots in your arm. Oh, nothing. Be happy. You can't even buy shit in the store because of your low social credit score. Oh, nothing. Be happy. You will own nothing. And be happy.

Be happy and eat the bugs. I don't know. I'm going to be able to You're going to be. I'm a lot of I'm I'm

I'm I'm on I'm And so, you know, I'm .

I mean, I'm gonnae, you know, I don't know. And so, I'm going to be able to be. I'm going to I'm going to be the

I'm going to be, I'm going to I'm going to I'm ...what... ...and... ...withal... ...their...

...and... ...the... ...and... ...the... ...the... ...and... We're going to be able to be. Defending the American Dream. You're listening to the David Night Show.

Hear news now at APSRadio.com. or get the APS radio app and never miss another story. Welcome back to the show. We got a lot of comments. S.A. Miller, one, two, three. They only claim there are two sides in order to keep you divided. Trump was the Democrat placed on the Republican ticket

to blur the lines and pull the right towards the left. Well, he certainly has done that, hasn't he? He's done a great job. Piper from New York. I'm of the opinion rule. Technically, there are only two sides. There's right and there's wrong, but dividing them along, you know,

political party lines. Maybe they're two sides of the same coin, I guess, yeah. KWD 68. I had a MAGA tell me yesterday that the Tylenol issue for Trump is to draw out the pharmaceutical companies. Their IQ drops daily. Yes, 4D. Chess.

Pay no attention to Epstein. Yeah. Let's talk about this. And again, it's... Sounds like we had too much Tylenol. Yeah. Again, you know, how could you possibly believe that? And why would we not look for something that has gone up at,

the same time, and exploded, at the same time that the autism has exploded. It's clearly the vaccines, and even RFK Jr. said that once upon time, but now he's being pulled back by Trump. Dougda, 007, people demand health care for all, and when Convid came around suddenly the unvaccinated were deemed unfit to receive medical care, even when in an emergency. That's right. They suddenly realized, wait a minute, they're, you can't provide care for everyone. Yeah, well, I look at these people like Kimmel, you know, his comment about. let them die if they're not vaccinated. And you look at Colbert and his dancing vaccine, hypodermic needles.

And, of course, they did it cartoon-wise. And then they did an even more disgusting one later where they had human dancers. And they had guys with hairy legs like they were dancing like they were rockets or something. They made me want to vomit on every level. I mean, not only you're trying to push people to die, but you're doing it with your LGBT optics. It's just disgusting. Yeah, it's amazing. how much humor has become,

ha, ha, look, we're doing something kind of gay. Isn't it gay? Yeah. Yeah, it is. Lieutenant Oracle, Florida is going to investigate if Ivermectin can be used to treat cancer, but they still haven't made it over the counter. Well.

Yes, I had a person point out that here in Tennessee, thanks to the great work of Mr. Senator Nicely, Frank Nicely, who unfortunately passed away. I missed that for several months, so I didn't go back and cover that, but we owe a great debt of gratitude to him for things that he did in Tennessee here. But he got that to where it was purchasable over the counter, but that's not the case everywhere. When I was talking about it being cheap, people using that for cancer treatment, along with a keto diet and vitamin C. intervenously, they were using a couple of antiparcytics, Ivermectin, and Fembindazole.

And those you can buy the veterinary form of it. And I guess the issue is, do they relax the standards for veterinary medicines? Do they relax the standards for pet food, for example? I kind of think they do, certainly for the food. I don't know. That's kind of, you know, you could eat dog food and dog biscuits or whatever, but, you know, It's the thought of it. And the reality is that they may have relaxed standards for those things as well.

I don't know. Citizen of Americaca. I thought it was going to revalue what little gold we had in Fort Knox, but apparently we just have a bunch of IOUs written on cocktail napkins and candy wrappers. Isn't that amazing? We should go through and do a compilation of all of the crazy nonsense that Trump has thrown at us just within nine months. You know, we're going to take over Greenland. we're going to go to war with Canada or whatever.

It's just making the 51st state. We're going to go to Fort Knox and look to see if the gold is there. It's just been one theatrical professional wrestling nonsense, piece of nonsense after the other. It's really what it is. It's just WWE wrestling. You know, he learned how to get viewership with WWE, and that's the way he's running his presidency. Dear Ruchimer, easy, 5K gold by 2030, could explode. to 10K, but it's not the bet.

KWD 68, Silver has to hit $200 an ounce to be adjusted for 1980 high with inflation. It could happen even without the Hunt brothers. Guard Goldsmith. I remember my mom mentioning that her dad didn't turn in his gold under FDR. The anti-authoritarian thread

runs through generations, I think. Oh, it does, yeah, it does. I've seen it myself, yeah. Give me your gold. I don't think I will. The collectibles are less reliable than actual metal. I found out my own mistake years ago because in tough economic times, people won't bid as high for the collectible despite the metal in it. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That's right. Citizen of Maricaca. Rambo 08, old men start it. Young men fight it. Nobody wins. Everybody in the

middle dies and nobody tells the truth. That's right. And guard goldsmith again says the wolf pack is awesome. And of course, Wolfpack is what Tony Ardebren is set up. And go to davenite. dot gold to get yourself some gold where silver wolf pack is a monthly subscription he will send it to you you've got multiple different tiers there and you can set up on a monthly basis or you can just do it at a one-time thing you know we've had people send some to us as a matter fact don't really do appreciate that it's a great way to save because if you put putting money in a savings account in a bank is a guaranteed loser because of inflation and because they don't even pretend to pay interest anymore on it.

Even if they were to pay interest, it wouldn't come close to the inflation. So, yeah, you've got to, if you want to save, you want to save in precious metals. It's always funny. You'll see something high yield savings account, 2%. Yeah. Oh, yeah, high yield. I bet. I'm going to get rich.

When inflation is several times that. Well, as we're talking about liars, somebody here is lying about Tom Homan. because you have stories coming out saying that there was an investigation into him that was shut down, and they said as part of that investigation, that he had accepted $50,000 cash. He was still going to cash. I mean, he could have gotten $50,000 in gold. That would only be a few ounces, right? Also, I mean, $50,000, that's not even that much anymore.

What can you? But anyway, he gets $50,000 in a... a grocery bag given to him by some people who said that they wanted him to approve contracts when he became head of whatever he's going to become head of. I guess it's not just ICE, but it's anyway, the Border Patrol, I guess it's what it is. And so people are asking, when is that going to be, it's going to be investigated? And so you have Caroline Levitt, the press secretary for the White House, said that he never took the 50,000.

So somebody is lying. And the question is, who? There's no way that we can tell because everybody who's weighing in on this, whether it's the New York Times or their sources or whether it's Susan Lovett at the White House, they have all lied repeatedly about everything. That's how you know that they're talking. Their lips are moving. You know, they're lying. So he said, they found zero evidence of illegal activity or criminal wrongdoing, she said. So I don't think that this.

is going to necessarily die, we'll have to see what happens with it. But let's take a look at the war, because a lot of people are lying about the war as well. There was an interesting article on anti-war asking, what does Trump want from Venezuela? What do they have to do to get him to not attack their country? And it reminds me very much of what people were saying about the invasion of Panama under George H.W. Bush, when you had loudspeakers coming in telling everybody, Get out of the area. We're going to be destroying this area, and it's like, what area are they talking about? You know, such a small country and city that you can basically hear this everywhere.

So it's like, we still don't know where they're going to be attacking or why. We have no idea. Reporting has recently emerged that the U.S. is considering direct strikes on Venezuela that could increase volatility in the region and the risk of war. Well, I would say that direct strikes are war. Under the pretext of disrupting the flow of drugs in the U.S. by Venezuelan drug cartels, the U.S. is militarized the waters off the coast of Venezuela, flooding them with Aegis guided missile destroyers, a nuclear-powered fast-track submarine, P8 spy planes, F-35 fighter jets. And, of course, American forces have blown up several boats now.

I think the count is three of them, but I'm starting to lose count of how many people, how many boats he has killed in Samaritan. executed the people. The Trump administration has yet to offer evidence for its claim. They have neither publicly identified who the 11 people who were killed by the boat were, nor identified the drugs that they were supposedly carrying. And Congress has not been briefed, and Congress hasn't asked to be briefed. They don't even care about this. Marco Rubio said the boat was probably headed to Trinidad or some other country in the Caribbean. Well, Trump said, said it was bound for the U.S., and that's why they destroyed it because it was in defense of the U.S.

It turns out, however, that it was headed back to Venezuela. U.S. officials familiar with the operation, I've now told the New York Times that having spotted the military aircraft stalking it, the boat had already altered its course and appeared to have turned around before the attack began. The 29-second video that Trump posted on social media spliced together several clips, some just like the Epstein tape, but edited out the boat turning around. Despite the lack of imminent threat, the aircraft, either an attack helicopter or an MQ9 Reaper drone, repeatedly hit the vessel before it sank.

So, again, you know, if he's editing the Epstein tape, if he's editing this extrajudicial killing of his, that's worse than what he accused 60 minutes of doing. Remember, he accused them because they had, you know, they filmed a long interview with Lala Harris and they aired part of it on 60 Minutes and they took another part of it and used it for the trailer. And he goes, so you're editing this stuff. It's like, yeah, that's the way it's done. Everybody does it that way. But it didn't substantially change anything. And no matter how they edited this thing, they could never make her look like she had a brain and she lost the election. And yet here he is, His administration is editing the Epstein tape, and we have the metadata that shows that's the case,

and editing this video that he put out boasting about how he killed people without due process. The Trump administration has claimed the right to supplant the National Guard and law enforcement with the military and lethal force on the grounds that the drug cartels are terrorist organizations who pose a threat to the national security of the U.S. because the drugs they bring into the U.S. kill Americans. Rubio has insisted that the speedboat was, quote, an immediate threat to the United States, except that it had turned around. And so it wasn't. As a matter of fact, even though he says it's an imminent threat, he admits that it was on its way to some other nation in the Caribbean. Setting aside the legitimacy of the terrorist justification, if the boat had already turned around,

the immediate threat argument is blown out of the water. If someone is retreating, where is the imminent threat, said Rear Admiral Donald Gooder, a retired top judge advocate general for the Navy from 2000 to 2002. He said, where is the self-defense? They're gone if they ever existed, which I don't think they did. Another Rear Admiral, James McPherson, who was also a top judge advocate general, he was for the Navy from 2004 to 2006, added, if in fact you can fashion a legal argument that says these people were getting ready to attack the U.S. through the introduction of cocaine or whatever. If they turned back, then the threat is gone away.

The Trump administration is considering going further, however, they're not turning back, and more significant with more strikes on Venezuela. The strikes could take the form of either shooting down a Venezuelan military aircraft or bombing Venezuelan military airfields, which, by the way, I will interject. They could come into direct conflict with Russian personnel who are still running their air defense installations that are there. Such action could be taken in two situations. If Venezuela threatens U.S. forces off of its coast, or if Venezuela and President Maduro does not enhance its administration's efforts against drug cartels,

which is why you have anti-war saying, so what does Trump want them to do? They point out that in terms of enhancing their efforts against drug cartels, that the Venezuelan's collaboration in the fight against the drug war, so-called, and drug trafficking, has been recognized as among the best in South America, according to former executive director of the UN Office for Drugs. And remember, the drug war is a UN war. They were the ones who came up with this stuff. They were the ones who created the four schedules.

They were the ones who were complaining the loudest when California legalized marijuana, medical marijuana. The U.N. was like, you can't do that. And that's that along with the interviews I was doing with law enforcement against prohibition got me. That's when I understood that the war on drugs was not something that Richard Nixon created. He took the credit for it. But it was something that was handed to him by the U.N. He was pushing a U.N. agenda. It's just like the agenda 2030 or something like that. It's reprehensible. Why would we push a

UN agenda for so long for 50 years? Well, it's just like the climate change agenda. Maduro had ordered the more than doubling of Venezuelan forces to monitor drug trafficking. In addition to the 10,000 troops already deployed, the Venezuelan military is ordering an additional 15,000 to quote, determine and verify the absence of illicit crops. And to block, this area also of possible drug trafficking. So of all the central and South American countries, they have arguably done more than anybody else to stop the drug trade. And there is no fentanyl that's being manufactured there or transiting and coming from Venezuela. So everything that the Trump administration is telling us about this is a lie. That's why I say when you look at the

Tom Hohman thing and the bag of cash, is that true? the denials, are they true, or is that another bull face lie? What makes the question of what Venezuela is supposed to do to appease Trump is made more difficult in that there is nothing that Venezuela can do? The U.S. is demanding that Venezuela make a course correction to correct a problem that does not exist. Again, when we look at the UN's World Drug Report this year, they say that Venezuela, quote, has consolidated its status as a territory,

from the cultivation of coca leaves, cannabis, and similar crops, unquote. They continue by saying only 55% of Colombian drugs transit through Venezuela. The UN report says it does not mention Venezuela even once as a corridor for the international drug trade. So the Trump administration has offered no evidence that the destroyed speedboat was carrying drugs or drug smuggling, or that it was on its way to American shores. The Maduro administration has already addressed the American demands and has increased its efforts against the drug growing and trafficking that was never a problem in the first place. Nevertheless, the U.S., Trump, is threatening further military strikes on Venezuela, raising the hard-to-answer question of what is Venezuela supposed to do. Well, maybe the only thing they could do to head this off would be to turn over the oil fields to Trump, because I think that's what he's.

after. I don't think he's after. He's not after, you know, the cocoa, whatever, however they grow at fields. You know, we were after the poppy fields in Afghanistan, and we used that to increase the supply of opioids that were there. But the only thing they could do is just hand over the oil to him. And as I said earlier, you know, this Duterte, who is in the international criminal court, he killed, they're only coming after him for. slightly more people than Trump has killed already in these boat attacks, and yet that's only a subset of the people that were actually killed by Duterte in this war on drug stuff. It truly is insane.

We're going to look at the war of drugs. They estimated more than 30,000 people, and this is an estimate from the prosecutors. They just have hard evidence for 76 of those killings, and arrested back in March. A proposed war authorization could allow Trump to target 60 plus countries. I mentioned this earlier. I said, this is how powerful these cartels that were created by the war on drugs. It's how powerful they have become. They've gotten into every kind of criminal enterprise, and they've gotten into pretty much every country.

And now you have an insanely broad draft authorization for the use of military force, AUMF, could provide the president with wide latitude to go. after supposed narco-terrorists they have combined the failed war on terror with the failed war on drugs to come up with narco-terrorists and well you know two negatives make a positive so well the question is you know when you look at this war stuff why is trump pushing for control of bagram air force base in afghanistan is you trying to restart the afghanistan war as well I wouldn't be surprised. So the U.S. War on Drugs has escalated rapidly over the last month with Venezuela and so forth.

How far Washington should go in its new counter-narcotics campaign has been the source of controversy within the Trump administration. The DEA proposed the use of the U.S. military to attack cartels within Mexican territory during a White House meeting earlier this year. Remember that? officials from the Defense Department and other agencies reportedly objected in part because the executive branch lacked sufficient legal authorization to do so. Well, sufficient legal authorization is something that has never stopped Trump so far. Why would that stop him? And it looks like they're going to turn around for that. But they may try to have a little bit of legal cover.

This is coming from Representative Corey Mills in Florida. A proposal reportedly brought forth by him for a new. new authorization for the use of military force that would be aimed at, quote, narco-terrorists began circulating around Washington last week. Just as a backup, if you remember, the authorization for the use of military force legislation was passed in response to the inside attack of 9-11, laid the groundwork for the so-called global war on terror that became the basis for the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. because it has extremely broad language, the 2001 authorization for the use of military force

has since been used to justify military intervention, military attacks, folks, is what we're talking about, not intervention. We're not trying to help somebody get off of drugs. We're doing a drug intervention. Yeah, with bombs. So they've had, they've used it to justify military attacks in 22 countries already and now that we've abandoned the Constitution this is how we do wars now we give a authorization for the use of military force on a broad category we go to war with a tactic terror we go to war with drugs inanimate objects okay we even confiscate property saying that the property has violated their rules about drugs we don't charge

the person. We just steal their property. So now, Corey Mills out of Florida wants to expand this and make it even broader. His new authorization for the use of military force, they put a sunset law on it. You know that something is bad when they say, well, we'll only try for five years. They know how bad and overreaching it is. And that's just kind of a pullback. It's a promise. We could get rid of it in five years. And you know what will happen. They put it out five years because then people get used to it. And it's a boil the frogs process. So after five years, oh, yeah, we've had this.

And look, we're still here. So let's reauthorize it again. The authorization does not identify specific targets. It contains no geographic restrictions either. Harvard professor Jack Goldsmith said that the proposal is insanely broad. That was his term. He said it's essentially an open end. war authorization against an untold number of countries and organizations and persons that the

president could deem to be within its scope. This version of the AUMF attributed Mills would give the president the ability to use, quote, all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons the president determines are designated narco-terrorists, including those who provide financing or support to narco terrorists. So, yes, they go through and they talk about how, if you just look at the Sinaloa cartel, it operates in 47 different countries. And they said, you know, it's not just a Sinaloa cartel. You've got some other ones as well.

They operate in a lot of countries as well. I think, though, this AUMF that is being put around by Mills is specifically targeted towards giving Trump a legal prevarication for going after Venezuela. But it is kind of interesting. I mean, we look at the places where the Sinaloa drug cartel is in. It's not just Mexico or Central or South America. It's places like Albania, small, distant countries like Albania, and the Democratic Republic of Congo in Africa, France, Germany, we could attack them if we want.

Ghana, Guinea, Bessar. I never even heard of that country. Ireland. Ireland. Sinolaa cartel in Ireland. You'd think they'd stand out a little bit in Ireland. You'd think these guys wouldn't be hard to find there.

New Zealand. It's just everywhere. With enough immigration, it's all the same. Yeah, that's right. Yeah, we're going to marginalize everybody. Serbia, Slovakia, Spain, the UK, and Belize, That's so forth, right? If the proposed AMF has targeted the Sinaloa cartel alone,

it would theoretically authorized U.S. military intervention in at least 42 nations. But this is only one of many cartels that have been created by the war on drugs, the UN's war on drugs. Taken together the combined forces of the proposed AUMF and the terrorist designation that have already been assigned to specific cartels could allow the U.S. President to intervene, in almost every nation in the continental Americas. Taken literally, it could even be abused to justify military intervention within the United States as the terrorist-designated MS-13 gang was created in Los Angeles

and maintains expensive operations throughout the U.S. Again, is that what it's going to do with the military that's putting in all these left-wing areas? that's in California, L.A. So, yeah, let's put the military in L.A. and let's use them to go after the MS-13 gangs. Trump is laying out a framework, and everybody says, oh, he wouldn't be crazy enough to use that. I say he is.

I say he is 100% crazy enough to do the worst-case scenarios. We have seen it over and over again. This is not speculation. It's not projection. And it's not even a prediction. It's history. and he could do it again. There are still a whole host of constitutional protections

against extrajudicial targeting of persons within the U.S., which Trump, of course, will ignore, and Maga will applaud it. This is the best use of our military, J.D. Vance will say, just as he said when they blew up these boats near Venezuela. U.S. authorities have long tried to expand their power by blending together the war on drugs and the war on terror, creating the term narco-terrorism. The newly proposed AUMF could therefore be applied to many traditional terrorist organizations,

including al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Taliban, etc. So once you combine the terrorist organizations with the narco organizations, we basically have authority to, we've given the president's authority to go to war against anybody on his own declaration. The bill would create justifications to the White House to engage in offensive military activity in more than 60 nations. While there's currently no indication that the Congress is eager to take this up, a little unpassed. An extremely broad new military force authorization, if it were to become law, would fully merge two of the largest policy failures in U.S. history, these two wars on drugs and terror. you know it's interesting we've had a war on poverty a war on drugs a war on terror we've had a war in vietnam we've had a war in afghanistan a war in iraq haven't won a single one whether the war is

literal or metaphorical we have lost all these wars uh so i guess we should just call it the epic fail um so the u.s sold its longest war with a bodyguard of lies that's the headline from reason magazine this is about a new documentary that has come out talking about afghanistan asking why the media failed to push back how money and power kept america's longest war alive long after it was lost i believe that uh we were in you know for the longest time even after they came in and again you know you have this massive shock and awe and there's basically no military resistance there but then they try to occupy the country And you know then that they're going to lose that asymmetric war.

They always do. But why would they occupy Afghanistan? I've always believed that it was because of the opium that just exploded. The Taliban had been working against opium. And when the U.S. military came in, they were guarding the fields. That was reported and filmed by, what's the guy, Geraldo Rivera. And, you know, I've played that many times. But I think also it was an area that was rich in lithium.

And, of course, there's not going to be any government there to tell you that you've got to be careful in terms of how you extract it because lithium extraction is very damaging to the areas environmentally. But you just go in there and rip that place to shreds. I always felt that we're keeping that prolonged position there because of lithium and opium. But now Trump wants to go back. Is it because of the lithium and the opium? I don't know. He wants to restart this, evidently, bullying them over Bagram Air Force Base, which, by the way, that would have been a logical place to evacuate from, but instead they left Bagram Air Force Base

and they went to the commercial Air Force Base, which was vulnerable. That's why there were so many problems when they got out. Everything about this is absolutely insane. And so the new documentary is called The Bodyguard of Lies, a look at the Afghan War. war and the lessons that the public desperately needs to learn from it, except the public never learns any lessons from any of these things, just like we didn't learn from the COVID war either. Rumsfeld admitting that they were not going to be honest with the American people, and he reminds us that within six months of the 9-11 attacks, the U.S. had essentially destroyed al-Qaeda's capacity

to attack us, but instead of leaving, Washington chose two more decades of occupation, strategic confusion, and widespread corruption. So that's the basis of that documentary. Again, a bodyguard of lies. So when you look at how we win these wars, right? You look at the failed war on drugs, the failed war on terrorism, all of the failed wars. Is there any wonder that we fail? When you look at this, we've had a couple of narratives about drones.

First, there were the drones that supposedly flew into Poland. from Ukraine. And yes, those were Russian drones. Then we had, following that in a few days, there was an incident where there were two or three drones that would turn their lights on, turn them off, and it was like a harassment campaign. Whether it was done by an individual or whether it was done by a nation state, there's no way that anybody can tell. They never caught the person that was doing it. They simply said, well, this is very professional, so it must be the Russians. Well, that has been followed up now just yesterday. today, several more drones flying the area.

So now Denmark is saying, we want to invoke Article 4 of the NATO treaty so that we can go to war with Russia. But let's take a look at the very first one, the one that Donald Tusk, the Polish Prime Minister, tried to use to push us into World War II, World War III. This is from RT. Headline is a million-dollar fiasco. NATO fires sidewinders at $2,000 drone. Western Europe's leaders wave the no-fly zone banners while America shrugs.

And this is the essence of these wars. Any asymmetric war is exactly this type of thing. Why did a handful of foam plastic drones leave NATO in such a panic? Because NATO is fear-mongering because they won a war. Why is Poland now proposing to establish a no-fly zone? zone over Ukraine. It's been a long time since the West entertained ideas as reckless as these. Foreign Prime Minister Sikorsky broke what has been a useful tradition of keeping quiet when he suggested that NATO should impose a no-fly zone. The last time we heard this nonsense was

at the very start of the Russian-Ukraine war, where Zelensky demanded that NATO shoot down every Russian missile and aircraft over Ukraine. Estonia cheered him on, but NATO leaders dismissed it. They knew then what should be obvious now. A no-fly zone would mean war with Russia, which folks is exactly what they want and what they've been pushing for since the 1990s. No one in the alliance dared risk it in 2022. So why bring it up again? To point out, it's political theater. The trigger was an incident in which a group of UAVs entered Polish airspace. Western European politicians seized on the episode, trying to extract maximum political mileage but decisive action is the last thing on their minds the

incident revealed just how unprepared NATO is for modern warfare you know Trump insulted Putin trying to shame him into coming to the table perhaps that's the most charitable interpretation of what he had to say at the UN but he said oh they should have won this in a couple of days well you should talk when you look at the way NATO handled this supposed invasion of small drones. 19 unarmed decoy drones that had no cameras and no remote control. These things were just on autopilot. They crossed the Polish skies.

Their sole purpose had been to commit suicide against air defenses. They were just there as decoys before any real strike. NATO managed to shoot down only four. These things, they're not flying them. They don't have any evasive maneuvers, no, electronic countermeasures, nothing. And they were still only able to shoot down four of them. The rest of them wandered across Poland, unhindered, some traveling nearly 500 kilometers before running out of fuel and falling from the sky.

That's about 300 miles. In their panic, NATO scrambled F-35 fighters, armed with sidewinder missiles. Each one of these missiles costing $470,000. The price of a single decoy drone, no more than $3,000. To bring down a handful of foam contraptions worth between $8,000 and $12,000, NATO spent close to $1.9 million. What's even worse about this, folks, I talked about it before. At the very beginning, they said, look, look at this home that was destroyed by one of these drones falling down on it.

And they knew at the time when they put that out, they had already known for 24 hours that that home was not hit by a drone. It was hit by one of the F-35 Sidewinder missiles, which not only missed its target, but when it hit the ground, it was a dud. And so it just did kinetic damage to it. There's no explosives involved. So they miss with a dud missile that cost a half a million dollars. This is the NATO clown show. These are the people who are kicking sand in Putin's face, hoping that we can get into World War III. Folks, you better start preparing for yourself, seriously.

Get the manual, the Civil Defense Manual, start preparing in terms of your independence because these people are absolutely crazy and suicidal. And you can find the Civil Defense Manual at Jack Lawson Books.com. Now, we've only got a little bit of time left, so I'm going to be cutting you off. and remind people that if you like to show, you can support it multiple different ways. You go to David Knight. News to see all the ways you can support it. There's subscribe star.com forward slash the David Knight Show. Got a lot of different tiers set up there.

One of them may fit your budget. We ask that you go check that out. There's also the PO Box, which is P.O. Box 994, Kodak, Tennessee, 37764, and you address that to David Knight. You can also use Cash App or Zell. There's a Bitcoin address as well. we appreciate all the support you guys have given us you can also donate we're getting close to the end of the month as well not close to the full full point though you can donate on rumble as

well and we really do appreciate everyone that does that you can also subscribe over on kick and real quickly i want to run through these comments that we've got i'm going to do it quick dug to the 007 frank nicely was a classic southern gentleman i really appreciate what he was trying to do for the people frank nicely was a very good man very great man yeah he was a very good man yeah he was was a great guy. And I've never seen such a zero of a candidate, somebody who was helped with money from outside of state who had absolutely no background.

Well, you talk about somebody who is a chameleon carpetbagger. He is from Tennessee, but, you know, the money. The guy that ran against Frank. Yeah, the money, yeah, exactly. I'm not talking about Frank. I'm talking about the smear campaign conducted against Frank nicely by the establishment powers that they're. And, of course, Frank nicely tried to stop outside money from being involved in funding these state campaigns.

He didn't get his fellow Republicans to vote for that, and he was the casualty of that in the next election. To outside money, money outside the state, wanted to make sure they maintained that influence by punishing anybody who would push back against them. Yeah, he was a real hero to me. So we're sorry to see him gone. Well, thank you all for tuning in today. We really do appreciate it. We will be back tomorrow, and we'll see you then. Thank you.

Have a good day. They created common core. in 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 is 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 the David Knight Show.com. Thank you for listening. Thank you for sharing.

If you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers. The David Knight Show.com.