The David Knight Show - Wed Episode #2179: COVID Shots & Turbo Cancers

Episode Date: January 14, 2026

00:02:10 — COVID Vaccines and the Cancer SignalKnight cites a major review of dozens of studies linking COVID injections to aggressive cancers, arguing the pattern is now too consistent to ignore. 00:07:37 — Warp Speed Skipped Cancer and DNA Safety TestingHe argues Trump’s emergency rollout bypassed basic carcinogenic and genotoxic testing, turning the population into live test subjects. 00:14:12 — DNA Contamination in mRNA Shots Vastly UnderreportedKnight details findings suggesting residual DNA levels may be underestimated by orders of magnitude due to industry-designed testing protocols. 00:16:48 — Humans Turned Into Permanent Spike-Protein FactoriesHe warns lipid nanoparticles allow spike production to persist long-term, with no built-in biological shutoff. 00:23:29 — FDA Protects Pharma, Not Public HealthKnight condemns continued FDA censorship of natural health claims while pharmaceutical products receive blanket protection. 00:32:32 — EPA Lowers Formaldehyde Safety StandardsHe exposes regulatory rollback that doubled allowable exposure to a known carcinogen under pressure from chemical interests. 00:50:49 — DHS Admits Real ID Cannot Verify CitizenshipKnight reveals court documents showing DHS acknowledges Real ID is unreliable despite mandating it for travel. 01:00:42 — ICE Surveillance Now Reaches Most AmericansHe explains how ICE can locate the majority of U.S. adults through utilities, driver databases, and private data brokers. 01:05:11 — ICE Has Become a Standing Army at HomeKnight argues immigration enforcement now functions as a domestic military force, violating foundational constitutional warnings. 01:14:50 — Federal Agents Do Not Have Absolute ImmunityHe dismantles claims that ICE officers are untouchable, citing Supreme Court precedent allowing state prosecution. 01:35:14 — Surveillance Contracts Create a Police–Tech CartelKnight details ICE’s partnerships with phone-cracking, facial-recognition, and location-tracking firms operating without warrants. 02:01:12 — From Immigration Enforcement to Authoritarian RuleHe closes by warning ICE’s evolution follows the historical path from civil law to internal authoritarian control. Money should have intrinsic value AND transactional privacy: Go to https://davidknight.gold/ for great deals on physical gold/silver For 10% off Gerald Celente's prescient Trends Journal, go to https://trendsjournal.com/ and enter the code KNIGHT Find 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.

of deceit. Telling the truth is a revolutionary act. It's the David Knight Show. As the clock strikes 13, it's Wednesday the 14th of January, year of our Lord, 26. Well, as we close in on the one-year anniversary of Trump, part two, we are going to talk about the good, bad, and the ugly. There has been some good, but it doesn't excuse the bad and the ugly. This has become, this Trump administration has become, as reason put it, a libertarian's nightmare, an authoritarian's dream. And when you look at ICE, it has become a literal army, folks, one of the world's largest armies. And guess what? Its newly tripled budget is being focused on. You. is turning into a surveillance state.

Maybe that's why these guys wear masks, because they know that everybody's watching them, and they know just how powerful surveillance is. We'll be right back. Well, I'm going to begin. Actually, we've got a quote here, a comment. Was this from yesterday or today? Yesterday?

Birdhouse Ballou said, I applaud the new 2026 schedule, the time change and duration. I like the two-hour rapid-fire news updates. I'm going to try to make this very rapid, because we have got a lot to cover today. And, you know, I think one of the good examples of this is to begin with the pharmaceutical angle. You know, what are we getting from the Maha people?

It really is a mixed bag, to say the least. There's been a couple of good things. But it's so much has not been changed. And if you go back to 2020, all these people will say, well, I can't believe that Trump is doing this or that. Most of them are not saying that because you're usually following the cues of the MAGA. media that's telling him, don't worry about it. You know, what about the Democrats did that? So we can do it now.

You see how that works, how that ratchets that thing in? I mean, we need to, we need to focus on this what aboutism. And we need to destroy that. Just because Obama did something or Biden did something doesn't mean that you and got away with it. It doesn't mean that we should applaud that when a Republican does the same thing. Why is that rocket science for MAGA? I don't know why.

But why are people surprised to see these types of things that Trump is doing when you look at the fake pandemic and the bioweapon injection? Well, we just had Scott Adams just died. And so the question is, you know, what did he think about these vaccines? He said he regretted getting them. He didn't blame it for his cancer. but the tip of a very damaging iceberg, COVID vaccines are linked to several types of cancer in a new review. And this is from a free thought project,

actually originally from Children's Health Defense. And Children's Health Defense, I've got to give them credit. They are not afraid to criticize RFK Jr., who is the head of the organization for a very long time. They're not afraid to criticize him when he's wrong. All of conservative media could take a, tip from them as well. 69 studies identified safety signals for leukemia, lymphoma, breast, and lung cancer.

They said a systematic review of 69 studies identified a possible safety signal linking COVID-19 vaccines, the Trump shot, to certain types of cancer. The paper identified mechanisms, including the spike protein and DNA contamination, that might be responsible for triggering cancer. The authors also addressed several recurrent themes in the studies that they examined, the unusually rapid progression or recurrence or reactivation of the cancer, or the fact that many of these cancers began at the site of the injection. But going back for just a second to Scott Adams again, you know, when he said,

well, okay, you didn't get the vaccine, I did, so you win, I lose. Remember when he said that? But they did say that he specifically didn't think that it was caused by the Trump shot. And yet, he said he regret it. Why would you regret it if you didn't think that it had done something negative to you? That's my question. So if you look at the people who are coming, oh, well, you know, Scott didn't criticize the vaccine, all the rest of the stuff.

I think he knew what was going on. And I think when he says he regretted it, you win, I lose. I think that he understood what was happening. And specifically, when you look at prostate cancer, which is what he had. The spike protein has distribution primarily to reproductive organs outside of the liver and the spleen, which everything gets filtered there. Outside of that, the second place where it accumulates more than anything else is in

reproductive organs, male and female. and that includes a prostate. And so the spike protein has what they call an S2 subunit. I have no idea what that is. It's found, however, to interact with tumor suppressor proteins that they call P53B1 and BRCA1. So some people have done the detailed analysis to see the mechanism of how this works. And of course, we knew a lot of this at the very beginning. We had one pathologist, Dr. Ryan Cole, who said, I'm seeing the killer T cells, which is your body's main defense against cancer.

I'm seeing these decimated by people who have been vaccinated. He said, we're going to see massive increase in cancer, much faster cancer. And that was in the spring of 2021. We've known this for a long time. But now there's more studies. People get more granular on the details of the mechanism. type of thing. So here we have some tumor suppressor proteins that are destroyed by the spike. And they say these particular tumor suppressor proteins are specifically relevant and prostate cancer.

So some of the findings look like a smoking gun linking the trump shots to cancer. Carl Jablonsky said at the Children's Self-Defense said this is the tip of a very damaging iceberg. It's not remotely surprising that a gene therapy rebranded as a vaccine that was never tested because we had to do it at warp speed, right? How did we get it out there so fast that Trump is so proud of? He skipped all the testing. Never tested for cancer safety with severe immune, disregulating effects injected into a billion people. It shouldn't be surprising that that would correlate with an increased risk of cancers worldwide. Another person at CHD said the review may provide insights into rising cancer rates in recent years,

including an increase in the so-called turbocancers. I believe there's a risk of cancer associated with COVID vaccine, said L. Deary, who was one of the evaluators of these studies. The magnitude of the risk remains to be more precisely defined, including the risk of hyperprogression. In other words, turbo cancer. and where they grow faster, more aggressively. The paper doesn't say that COVID vaccines cause cancer,

but it does argue that when the same pattern of aggressive cancer keeps appearing across different cancers in different countries, they can no longer be brushed aside. And also, as you start to look at this, it becomes clearer and clearer that it is not a genetic connection that it's there. And it also becomes clearer as to the, devious diabolical business of the pharmaceutical companies. You know, 20% of their business is chemotherapy drugs. It's bigger than vaccines. It's bigger than Ozympic and the weight loss injections.

It's the biggest part of the pharmaceutical income. 20% is the treatment of cancer, certainly not the cure. So the Trump shots were never evaluated for carcinogenesis or genocene. no toxicity. Several studies emphasized unexpectedly rapid progression, atypical presentations, or unusually aggressive courses of the disease. Forty-one percent of the studies identified a link between the trump shots and solid tumors, including melanoma, breast cancer, long cancer, sarcomas, and organ-specific carcinomas, such as pancreatic cancer. Several studies described unusually rapid onset, short latency recurrence, or aggressive clinical progression for these tumor types. Some of the studies described tumor formation or recurrence at the vaccination sites.

A South Korean study found a statistically significant link between the trump shots and six types of cancer, breast, colorectal, gastric, lung, prostate, and thyroid cancers. A 27, percent higher overall cancer risk. A 20-25 study of nearly 300,000 Italians found that cancer hospitalizations were moderately higher with the vaccine recipients, so-called vaccine, the Trump shot, and a particularly increased risk of bladder breast and colorectal cancer. A U.S. Armed Forces Health Surveillance Division report tracking non-Hodgkin lymphomas incidents among active duty service members between 2017 and 2023 found a significant increase in these lymphomas in 2021 as they forced people, coerced people, to get the Trump shot.

Again, why are we surprised at anything this guy could do after that? You know, and when I look back at this, you know, Scott Adams, you guys were lucky. You had an anti-government disposition that kept you from getting it. No, actually, Scott, we did some research. We knew about it. Knew about dark winter. New about the vaccine industry. You knew about many other things.

It wasn't just a wild hunch. It wasn't just a tribal prejudice based on research. New RFK Jr. pick for vaccine panel. And I don't say this to say, oh, I always knew this stuff. I didn't know this stuff at one point in time. I was blessed to have been alerted to it prior to this. happening. But we've had consequences in our own family from medicines that we've taken, antibiotics, vaccines, other things like that have harmed members of our immediate family.

And so it's a sadder but wiser situation for us. Unfortunately for him, he had never had a non-fatal brush with the pharmaceutical companies. A new RFK Jr. pick for the vaccine panel says, I was not anti-vaccine before, but I am now. That's good. Good sign. Two OB-GYN appointed people who have been pointed to an influential federal vaccine advisory panel have criticized vaccination during pregnancy. And let me say, this is one of the most startling things. That was something that changed just immediately before the Trump shot rollout and the fake pandemic.

Prior to that, they did not recommend vaccines for pregnant women. And then they started recommending it for pregnant women, and we were talking about that. And then when the COVID experimental gene therapy came out, the bioweapon, they were pretty much demanding that pregnant women get it. That was the amazing switch to see that kind of stuff. That was also a gigantic red flag. one of the two obstetricians who were put in called the vaccine industry disgusting. Well, they got that right. That's a good sign. That's a good sign.

Researchers are finding residual DNA that is not detected by standard tests in these trump shots, the MRA so-called vaccines. They found residual DNA in Pfizer and Moderna Trump shots, currently methods, current methods, recommended by regulators, and used by vaccine makers substantially underestimate DNA contamination, according to the researchers who said better, more accurate testing methods exist and should be mandated. This is also an article from Children's Health Defense.

I said the researchers concluded, commonly used quality control tests are really underestimating DNA contamination by 100-fold. In other words, the tests that they're using are giving them numbers that are showing that it's a hundred times less than it actually is.

Isn't that amazing? Brian Hooker of Children's Self-Defense said having this type of genetic code in the vaccine's lipid nanoparticles, which can easily cross cell membranes, is very dangerous indeed, quote-unquote. So the code for the spike protein was meant to express itself in the body in a targeted location for only about two weeks, said Hooker.

I don't know that it was meant. I mean, that's what they told people. But I said from the very beginning, I said, okay, so you remember Trump had arranged all of this stuff to market it, right? And he has the roundtable discussion. How long is it going to take you? Well, it's going to take us a couple of years or something. Not too long. How long is it going to take you?

Well, we can do it in a little bit less time. Yeah. It goes around the table and he's got everybody prearranged. He knows what it's going to be. Everybody is there in order of decreasing time. And then finally it gets to Moderna. They said, well, we can do it tomorrow. How's that?

Well, we're going to use your body. to manufacture the vaccine. We don't have to manufacture it outside of your body. So at that time, I looked up on their site, and that's exactly what they were saying. You're going to turn your body into a genetically modified it to make it produce these things that we say are going to train your body to fight COVID. But then, of course, how does that work when natural immunity is supposedly not going to work? See, though, all of virology is a lot. folks. It's all a lie. It is a bad science fiction film that is inconsistent with itself. You don't how that works, right? You know, you go to, you're going to see a science fiction film. Well,

let's say something like Superman or something like that. And it's like, wait a minute. So he's got one weakness. He's got kryptonite or whatever. Then they change it, right? Like, wait a minute. You know, if you're going to create a fictional world here, you've got to make it follow some consistent rules or the whole story is gone. Well, that's what really happened. with the virology, quote unquote, science. It's bad science fiction. It's inconsistent with itself. So Brian Hooker goes on to say,

it was only supposed to last for a couple weeks. However, it doesn't. It lasts for a long time. And when I saw that, I said, oh, okay. So they're reprogramming your body to manufacture something that is unnatural. We don't know what it's going to do. But when does that stop? What's the off switch?

Nobody talked about that. Well, it turns out, as he points out, this exogenous DNA can more easily disperse through the body. It can continue to replicate and express epistemally, making humans into genetically modified spike protein production factories. That was the very boast at the inception of this. It's not a surprise to see this. That was the warning flag at the very beginning of this. We're going to turn, we're going to genetically modify you to produce. the spike protein. Well, okay, what else are you going to genetically modify? And what turns

that off? Well, it turns out nothing does. It turns out the spike protein is very, very dangerous, and your body continues to make it. So this may be why we have seen some vaccinated patients reported to continue to produce spike protein for periods as long as two years following their last COVID shot. So this doesn't even include the insertional effects that this additional exogenous DNA may have, leading to many different disorders, including cancer. And so now people are starting to understand the mechanism. The mechanism, however, is downstream from the politics, from the machinations, from the CIA, from the people who practice these germ games.

It's all downstream from that. Regulatory guidance generally limits residual DNA to 10 nanograms per dose. But the 10 nanogram limit is outdated because it was created based on the assumption that residual DNA is naked DNA, which would degrade quickly. However, one of the things that makes this persist is that the DNA and the COVID vaccines of the Trump shots is encapsulated in lipid nanoparticle. So it doesn't degrade as fast. The safety issues of the Trump shots is that there's more fragments present at a greater risk. for that DNA to be integrated into existing cells. Some DNA sequences hybridize with their corresponding RNA transcripts, which carry genetic

information from DNA use for building proteins. These RNA-DNA hybrids are significantly more resistant to DNA's one digestion than typical double-stranded, standard, I'm sorry, not standard, stranded DNA. and again, the line that we've all been told is that the RNA does not modify DNA. Well, it's used to copy DNA. So what happens if the copying is not exactly right? You get modification, right? It's just that simple.

And as a matter of fact, when all this stuff is unfolding, I remember in the summer of 2020, Thomas Jefferson University did an experiment that showed that they could use RNA to modify DNA. It wasn't even a copying issue. They could use it to change the DNA. But, of course, that was not widely reported. Another one of these things like the American Hospital Association, giving a 20% discount to the hospitals to participate in all this

and to claim that they had cases. Regulators leveraged just one assay target for vaccine-sponsored quality control. They didn't verify quality, nor did a third party. So here's the summary of this from Jablonski, who works for Children's Health Defense. He said, those who stood to profit from the vaccines designed the test and then tested the quality. They chose a test that was least likely to yield a bad outcome. A perfectly usable and validated alternative was already in their toolbox. but the results would have halted the entire enterprise.

This is why the vaccine industry is disgusting. And that's not a strong enough word. It really isn't. And the person who became their chief salesman, Donald Trump, you know, look at these people who are the pharmaceutical salespeople. They are notoriously slimy characters, like Donald Trump. But that was the case for a very long time before that. So, again, we keep seeing headlines and recommendations.

basis, this is from ABC News about the so-called outbreak in South Carolina. Well, 124 new measles cases as the outbreak grows. Well, how do you define a case? How do you diagnose it? Are they doing a test in finding a measles virus? No. No, they haven't isolated it. As a matter of fact, it's done by looking at the rash. And there's a lot of things that look like a measles rash. and if there's some other issues there, they claim are serious health issues. Oh, well, their bias is that it wasn't the serious health issue that caused a rash. The rash was measles, and the measles somehow caused this serious side effect. Do you see how that works?

And yet, even though they've got 124 so-called cases and 400 people in quarantine in South Carolina, nobody's died. It's not interesting. And I think it's also interesting that it's not more than this. I mean, we've been told over and over again, measles is the most contagious infectious disease. Do you realize that for the CDC to have an outbreak? And they've had, by their definition, an outbreak is more than two people, more than two people.

Three or more people, that's an outbreak. And so when they look at it, they have found that of all the cases, they found that a third of them, 31% of measles cases were isolated, meaning one or two people, that it was not an outbreak. How is that the most infectious and contagious disease? Yeah, none of their stories tie together. So South Carolina has been facing a measles outbreak. They don't say deadly because they can't even try to make a case like they did in Texas.

And again, that was debunked very well by children's self-defense, that the children that they said died from measles did not die from measles. The rash had disappeared long prior to that. They did not die from it. So Brian Schellhavi at Health Impact News is pointing out a betrayal for Maha. And again, I don't go anywhere near any of these Trump cheerleading groups. the FDA is continuing to censor natural cures

as the Trump administration considers giving Monsanto and Baer legal immunity for the harm from glyphosate and this is something that we also saw with fluoride the Trump administration just like the Biden administration

has come down on the side just like the Obama administration they've all come down on the side of supporting glyphosate and Monsanto and Bear and on the side of supporting fluoridation of the water. RFK Jr. promised to address the root cause of our failing health and to increase transparency in federal regulatory agencies under the Maha agenda. The FDA only allows disease claims, however, for patented pharmaceutical drugs.

If you make a disease claim for a natural product, even something as simple as saying, drinking more prune juice can cure constipation, you might be arrested by the FDA for using federal marshals for practicing medicine without a license. I guess we're starting to get there with free speech. I mean, this morning we just had FBI agents raid a reporter. I can't remember what paper it was.

Was it New York Times? The New York Times of Washington Post is one of those two. And the rest of them because they don't like what they're reporting. I went through this myself, says Brian Schallelhovey. Back in 2005, when the FDA ordered me to remove all customer testimonials and all links to peer-reviewed research regarding coconut oil. And of course, we saw this with Letitia James during COVID stuff as, you know, we're talking about silver and the fact that it is very effective in terms of, you know, killing pathogens.

If you want to look at that in terms of bacteria and things like that, well, they came down very hard on Alex Jones. He removed all of his silver. products because of that. But silver is used to prevent infections from bacteria and hospital, but in many hospitals for burn victims especially. But yeah, you don't pay attention to that. We don't like the way you phrase that.

So we're going to threaten to take your entire business away. I went through this myself back in 2005. He says with the coconut coconut oil and peer-reviewed research about that. He said, Maha promised to end this kind of censorship about natural cures. But it said the FDA has doubled down on censorship, and they're protecting the drug industry profits. The Alliance for Natural Health petitioned Kennedy's FDA last year to allow nutrient disease claims that were backed by the U.S. government's own scientists, but the FDA rejected their petition. ANH is now suing the FDA again.

They said Maha promised transparency, FDA delivered censorship. The FDA is formally rejected ANH USA's landmark petition seeking to open up American access to truthful science-based information about health benefits of nutrients. Instead of transparency, the FDA appears to be doubling down to protect a drug-centric health care system. under the landmark case Pearson versus Shalala. Shalala, no relation to Lala, I guess, heiress. Anyway, of which NH USA was a co-claimant, FDA may not suppress truthful, not misleading health claims unless it can prove that they are false.

In other words, you're innocent until proven guilty of fraud, right? Wouldn't that be a great way to conduct our government innocent until proven guilty? FDA did not even attend. to do that here. So the A&H's lawsuit will ask the court to enforce both the FAAFD AMA and the Constitution and restore the public's right to receive truthful health information at the point of sale. FDA's refusal to allow these claims does not protect consumers. It protects pharmaceutical profits. For example, diabetes, which again is the second largest drug category, I think, at this point,

Up and coming is really close to vaccines. They're neck and neck. By far and away, the biggest profit category for them, again, is the cancer drugs. But Ozympic, Manjuro, Jardinase, I guess is how that's pronounced, generate tens of billions of dollars annually. Government-veted research recognizes benefits from nutrients, however, such as chromium, magnesium, zinc, and green coffee bean extract. So these are things that will help with diabetes.

It doesn't just the pharmaceutical gold mine of Ozympic and others like it. In terms of inflammation, blockbuster biologics dominate the market, even though the compounds like omega-3 fatty acids, selenium, boron, and Asian ginseng are recognized by government scientists for anti-inflammatory effects. When it comes to heart health, the global cardiovascular drug market continues to explode. all nutrients such as magnesium, potassium, vitamins B1 and B12, vitamin D, and grape seed antioxidants remain sidelined. So those are just some of the effects. And of course, when you're talking about censorship, take a look at what R&C store went through.

It truly is amazing, but they are a great source of information as well. You can go there, you can find the book A World Without Cancer by G. Edward Griffin as well. as you can find things like vitamin B-17, which is a very interesting mechanism. As a matter of fact, Brian Schovi had his Natural Cures book. You can find it. It's referenced in this article.

And if you go to healthimpact.com or vaccineimpact.com. There's a link there to where you can download Brian Schoheavi's online book, Z book, talking about natural things. And so I did that. and I looked up vitamin B-17, amygdalin or leotryl. These are different names that it's gone by. And as he points out, it is a glucosinide,

which means that it is glucose plus cyanide. And of course, cancer cells thrive on glucose. They have to have it. That's one of the reasons why many people, when they get cancer, they wisely cut out sugar. I think it's one of the reasons why we've had an increase. and cancers because of all the sugar that we consume and the sugary drinks. So cancer cells need the glucose.

But this glucosinide that they have with the B-17, they get the glucose, but they also get cyanide, an interesting mechanism that's there. So again, if you want to take something that's natural, that's not going to harm you, it's pretty strong in terms of the taste. But you can also get it in pill form from them. But B-17, you can find that at R&C stores. give them plug. You can even use the code night to get a 10% discount off of it. Educate yourself over this stuff because the FDA is not going to protect you.

This is one of the things. You know, we have these organizations like the FDA for which there is no constitutional authority to start with. They're incredibly expensive. And then they tell you that they are watchdogs for the consumer. When in actuality, they are captured by the very people that they're supposed to keep watch on. the whole thing is a fraud. We'd be better off without FDA. Don't put your hopes an RFK Jr.

Don't put your hope in that or anybody else like that. This whole thing needs to go. Here's a good example. formaldehyde, a well-known carcinogen. A few years ago, the EPA prepared to regulate formaldehyde based on the assumption that there is no safe level of exposure. Carcinogens don't behave like ordinary chemicals and even low-level exposure. can increase cancer risk. Again, I go back to just the amazing chameleon-like shedding of his skin that Alex Jones did when he said,

well, you know, it's just basically sugar water. Yeah, you're going to have some adjuvants in there, you know, like formaldehyde and mercury and stuff. You can take a little bit of that, right? For Trump, for Trump is all okay. Police state's okay for Trump as well. Foreign wars and regime change. That's okay for Trump as well. We oppose it when it's Obama, but when it's Trump, it's okay.

It's good, actually. So anyway, that approach is now being scrapped, the idea that you don't want to have any formaldehyde. Under the administration of Lee Zeldin, Trump's EPA administrator, the EPA has issued a draft memo, assuming that a safe threshold for formaldehyde exposure exists, a move that would nearly double what the agency considers safe to inhale. That is being driven by EPA leadership with deep ties to the chemical. industry. And of course, they're the ones who are also covering for fluoride in the water. There had been a court case that had examined the evidence. It was several years that this was

going through. And finally, the good guys won. They acknowledged that formaldehyde was unsafe and dangerously unsafe. And so directed the EPA to stop pushing it on And, of course, it's put in at the local level, and you can still stop it at the local level. However, as soon as Lee Zeldin got in with the EPA, well, the Biden administration appealed that, that decision. Said, no, no, no, we don't want to change the rules. We want to keep fluoride not only allowed, but push it on people. So that it's recommended. When the Trump administration got in, and with all this talk about ma-ha nonsense, I call it ha-ha.

It's a joke. what the Trump administration did was they continued the Biden lawsuit to appeal this court decision that talked about how dangerous fluoride was. And then we go to glyphosite, Roundup. Meanwhile, the Trump administration is also going to bat for Bear and Monsanto to protect them from liability lawsuits. And of course, Bear bought Monsanto, even though they had all the glyphosite lawsuits that were there. Glyphosite-based weed killers are implicated in things.

thousands of lawsuits claiming exposure to them caused non-Hodgkin lymphomas and other cancers. Juries across the country have repeatedly found that Monsanto, now owned by Bear, failed to warn users of these risks, and it's why the Bear Monsanto is backing legislation in Congress. See, that's how they stop it. They can't stop it at the local level, and they can't stop prohibition of glyphosate at the local level. There was one particular case in an agricultural community where, mostly farmers where they realized just how bad this stuff is. And when they realized that it was drifting onto their land and poisoning their land,

so they would have to buy seeds from Monsanto if they wanted to grow anything. Monsanto spent $8 million in ads there. And they still lost. So then they said, well, I'm not going to take this approach, this patchwork quilt of regulations. Now we've got to stop it centrally. Let's go buy some policy. politicians in Washington and stop it in Washington, which is what they did.

And they push through what we call the Dark Act. Trump is doing the same thing with AI. Don't interfere with AI. We're going to say that you can't have legislation at the state and local level. Well, see in court, okay. The people at the state and local level should do it anyway. If they want to regulate artificial intelligence or data centers, they have the legitimate authority under the Constitution to do so.

and they should challenge this intimidation from Trump on AI as well. In December, a filing with the Supreme Court, the Trump appointed Solicitor General is urging the court to take up the company's appeal, that's Monsanto Bear, and rule that federal pesticide law preempts state failure to warn claims. Baer's arguments are simple because the EPA approved Roundup labels without a cancer warning the company should be immune from lawsuits. There you go.

And so we'll just buy some people at the top, buy some people in Washington and have them shut this all down centrally. That's what Trump is doing. So again, I would recommend you download what Bain Shulhavi has in terms of natural cures.

He's got an e-book called Unapproved but Effective Cancer Cures. You'll find it on the end of this article that I just covered here on his site, vaccineimpact.com or health impact.com. And again, it's not just about B-17, but when it comes to cancer therapy, that is very, it's had a lot of very, very good success with people. Again, a lot of times people come and their body has been so damaged by this cut, burn, poison treatment that we have with cancer, that it can't recover from this. But it is.

is a very, we have a long history of research with that. I trust Jeddra Griffin. He's not only wise, but he's honest. And so take a look at that book. Take a look at what they have in R&C stores. Again, 10% off with you use the code night, RNCStore.com. The FDA is relaxed oversight of wearables, for example. They're ignoring the privacy issues.

They're ignoring the issues about wireless radiation concerns. I did that for a while to check my pulse course it couldn't do blood pressure, but I did it for a while to check my pulse because I was having problems with AFIB and things like that. And I thought, I don't want to wear this thing all the time. I mean, even though it's low-level radiation, it's all the time. So I have stopped that. And a lot of people have concerns about that, but not the FDA. As a matter of fact, they sent people to the consumer electronic show. It always happens at the beginning of the year in January.

to push the fact that they really want people to have wearables. That's going to help us to see any developing health issues and things like that. Not necessarily. It may come with its own. The FDA is loosening regulations for a broad rollout of wearables. And Eckenfels of the Children's Health Defense says that's a bad sign. You know, like I said before, I'm really proud of Children's Health Defense for not becoming partisan hacks. We're not excusing this stuff because it's done by their friend, RFK Jr.

They praise him when he does the right thing. They criticize him when he does the wrong thing. That's the way it ought to be. It ought to be issue by issue, not blind loyalty to some person. So RFK Jr. said, we're about to launch one of the biggest advertising campaigns in HHS history to encourage Americans to use wearables. Why do we need to have an agency for which there's no constitutional authority, conducting a massive advertising campaign to tell us to buy a product.

Does any of this make sense? Does it show you how captured they are? He says, my vision is that every American is wearing a wearable within four years. And he got a lot of flack about that. People said, look at this. He wants to put out a surveillance state. You realize how this stuff is being used.

If you look at the privacy issues and things like that. But so he issued another state. He said, well, what I was trying to say is, I want this technology to be universally available. I don't want to mandate it to anybody. He says the idea that it would be mandated everyone, that everybody's body is being hooked up to a data center somewhere. It's horrifying, he said. But he just wants to push product for his corporate sponsors, I guess. So, again, Children's Self-Defense, Eckenfels, said, we do not share his vision.

Quite the contrary. We oppose governmental pressure to incentivize the widespread use of wearables. They pose serious health risks, especially to children, and they threaten privacy. That's right. I quit using one. So, again, in another area, of course, AI, they want to do everything they can to help AI. So in the past, the FDA has had regular.

for example that would consider products that delivered a single recommendation, they consider that to be a medical device. But now those products can enter the market without FDA review as long as they meet other criteria that are set by the agency. So if you've got something that's going to, you've got an AI product that is set up to help summarize radiologist's findings, okay, that would not have an FDA review. whereas in the past it would. Again, I think people can work these things out on their own without the FDA one way or the other.

It is unconstitutional. It is expensive. And it is captured by industry. That's the key thing. You know, why even have somebody who is the head of something like that? Well, we're going to take a quick break. And I've got a lot of news to cover today. And I want to talk about the burgeoning police state.

and the burgeoning federal army, which is really what it is. It's not just militarized police. It really is military. You know, we're going to be the policemen of the world with our military, and now we're going to have bureaucracies like ICE and Border Patrol. Now they're going to be militarized police here domestically as well. We're going to take a quick break, and we'll be right back.

Making sense. Common again. You're listening to the David. at night show. APS Radio delivers multiple channels of music right to your mobile device. Get the APS Radio app today and listen wherever you go. Well, I want to talk about ICE and I'm going to talk about what they're up to and how big they are up to.

It's very concerning the size of their budget and the fact that they said, yeah, we put out a call for 200,000 people. We got so many responses that we decided to hire 12,000 new agents instead of 10,000 new agents. that's just the tip of the iceberg folks. And what are they using this massive budget that has been tripled from what it was a year ago? But let's begin with the corruption because, you know, what we're seeing over and over again, people say, well, the end justifies the means.

I want to get these illegal people out of here, especially these fraudulent Somalians that are really milking the system. And so I don't really care what they do. I'm going to give them a blank check to do anything. and I'm going to cheer them no matter how excessive the use of force is. I'm going to cheer this. Let me just say, the end never justifies the means. How many times do we have to experience this before we ever learned that lesson?

But at the same time, let's take a look at what's going on with a Somalian fraud. Scott Besson said, how the hell did this happen? He said when he's talking about now Attorney General Minnesota, Keith Ellison, who was a congressman. Remember, a Muslim congressman who took the oath of office using the Quran, his political strength is really based in that Minnesota, Somali community that's there, that Islamic community, just like Ilhan Omar. Keith Ellison owes his political career to that.

But it's more than that. They've now had some audio that has been captured of Keith Ellison, allegedly saying that he will stop probes into people who have been charged with fraud. This was him in phone conversations with some of the people who are now at the epicenter of this fraud. They were complaining that they were being prosecuted. And he said, I'll take care of that. I can take care of that. And then he got money after that from those people.

So whether it's over the two counties here in Minneapolis, St. Paul, or whether it's to East Africa, there's tons of luxury properties. cars that have been bought over there, said Besson. One leaked audio clip of Ellison has the Democrat meeting with some soon-to-be-convicted Somali fraudsters saying, but when you tell me, hey, this is a problem, I can call somebody and I can say, what's going on? And if we don't want to do what the agency is saying, please do,

I call the agency head or the governor, and I say, we can't do this. I mean, just we do this fairly regularly, he said. And so now, you know, we see this happening. The right is really jumping in on this. How different is this from Trump saying, you know, to Israel, the Israeli government has owned Congress in the past and rightfully so. But they're not really performing for you. I can get it done. You know, give your money to me, that type of thing.

I mean, quite frankly, I think it's the same thing, but, you know, same yet different. in some regards. So Democrat Keith Ellison bragged about helping indict fraudsters who stole $250 million from a federal child nutrition program, but newly uncovered audio shows that Ellison privately offered support to people that were tied to the scandal. He privately offered to shut down the investigation. Kind of similar to what you see with Tom Emmer, the number three. three guy with Republicans, right?

When this stuff was being talked about a decade ago, he was out there calling the people who were engaging him in town meetings, he basically called them racist for saying, you don't like Somalis. And he started a congressional Somali caucus. Now he's out there saying, yeah, we need to deport all these people, even the ones who became citizens, we need to deport them. So now he's Mr. Super against this.

stuff, right? So same type of thing. You see with Keith Ellison as well. He says on the tape, I want to help you. And they discuss how he can help him. They explain that they're being cracked down upon. He says, well, don't worry about it. I'm going to use the power of the Attorney General's office to stop that, to prevent that from happening. A few days later, guess what pops into his campaign account?

Campaign contributions from those very same fraudsters. And he gives that money back only after those people are indicted. So, yes. I want to see him have to explain that. I'm one of the people following this. Well, we also have federal court orders DHS to revisit the H-1B visas in light of widespread gaming. Now, this is coming from WND. And I've got to say, they will never cover the fact that Trump has hired a lot of H-1B and H-1-A visa people.

He hired people to work in some of the... the agricultural aspects that he's got that are, you know, basically feeding into his hotel business. He's hired people to work at his hotels with H-1B. He's hired agricultural workers at $2 an hour less than what he would have to pay. And he is exploiting this type of thing himself. And yet they will never mention his name in any of this stuff. W&D focuses on H-1B visa issues. And I think it is a bad issue.

I agree with them on the issue. It needs to be stopped. But Trump is not stopping it. He's using it himself. He even said that when he was running. Yeah, that's bad. I hire these people. Hey, you've got to compete in business and everything.

But he's not stopping it as president either. A federal court in Arizona has issued a narrowly focused but powerful ruling, spotlighting serious concerns about how certain U.S. employers, anybody we know, are leveraging flaws in the H-1B visa lottery system to game their way into approval. This is a decision on January the 6th, it came in the case of Port Nuru versus Homeland Security. It was about nine Indian nationals who were all beneficiaries of H-1B visas challenged Homeland Security after their employers' H-1B petitions were revoked. And so they're suing over this.

Meanwhile, we have, and this is reported by the New American, DHS admits, Real ID is unreliable for verifying citizens. You know, just recently they rolled it out saying, you're not going to fly if you don't have real ID, right? And so that's the TSA putting it. And I think it's kind of interesting because this came out as part of a lawsuit. And it was supposed to be redacted. It wasn't supposed to be made public.

But through a screw up, it got made public. And it's actually Homeland Security admitting that real ID is unreliable. for verifying citizenship. Very similar to a TSA admission that got accidentally published from documents in 2011. I've talked about this many times where you had a pushback against the naked body scanners and the pat-downs in Texas. They were threatening to turn Texas into a no-fly zone if they didn't shut that down. And, of course, it had been passed unanimously by the Texas.

his house. They was shut down in the Senate by a guy who used to work for the CIA. Then they set him up to be a billionaire in the oil business. And he spent more to get elected as lieutenant governor in Texas than anybody ever spent for Texas office up to that point in time. He was the point man who stopped it in the Senate, the lieutenant governor. And so at the same time, all that was happening. The TSA said there are no threats and their internal documents.

They said there are no threats to airports or airplanes, no terrorist threats. That got revealed in 2013, but of course nobody did anything with it. Now we see DHS admitting the same discovery process accidentally, admitting that real ID is unreliable for verifying citizenship. This all came to light through a civil rights lawsuit filed by Leo Garcia Vanegas through the Institute for Justice. Benegas is a U.S. citizen, and he has been detained multiple times in 2025 during warrantless immigration raids.

So it's like, where are your identity papers? Your identity papers, please? So they don't say please, right? So again, DHS, TSA, ICE, all of these police state organizations that are out there. And it's all a McGuffin. They all tell you that this is to keep us safe. We've got to have TSA, you know, because of N. The government did 9-11.

We got to have Real ID because of open borders. The government did open borders. Their problem and then their solution is an even bigger problem for us. Critics argue that Real ID violates the 10th Amendment, it does, by usurping state power over issuing driver's licenses.

At least 25 states initially resisted, but threats to cut federal funding coerced compliance again. I have repeated this over and over again, especially for the MAGA people. Trump was responsible for what was done. It wasn't bad Democrat governors. They had bad Republican governors who were part of it as well.

And it was because they're being bribed to do it. Or they're being blackmailed that money was going to be taken away. In the same way that we have Obama saying, you've got to put trainees in the girls' bathroom, or we're going to take your money away. And then Trump comes in and says, don't have them in the girls' bathroom or we're going to take the money away.

That is the mechanism by which they always get around the 10th Amendment. Always. It's by blackmail and bribery. Maga can't get that through their thick skull. And I've had so many people who just scream and yell at me. It wasn't Trump. It was the governors who did it. You don't understand the first thing about how government operates

and how they get around the Constitution. It's actually amazing. Again, it's like this end justifies the means. I like what they say they want to do with this. So I'm going to give them carte blanche to do whatever they want. Right? No rules whatsoever. I want to get to that end point.

Well, guess what? You're not going to like what everything looks like when you allow the rule of law and you allow the police to do whatever they wish. You're not going to like the kind of society that looks like. And maybe you won't have any immigrants. You also won't have any freedom. left either. So again, Ron Paul spoke out about this a long time ago. He said it's going to be a mandatory national ID. That's what real ID is going to be. He said, I'm quite confident that this bill,

if you vote for it at the time, you will be voting for a national ID card. And I know that some will argue against that. They say that this is voluntary. Not anymore, is it? But it really can't be voluntary. If a state opts out, nobody's going to accept their driver. license. So this is not voluntary, said Ron Paul. He's been shown to be right. The federal government lacks authority to impose a national ID. And so real ID's lack of reliability only highlights the threat to privacy and freedom. They can't mandate it, so they twist it in. Well, ICE is going on a surveillance shopping spree. This is an article from the Electronic Freedom Foundation. You'll also find it on Free Thought Project.

And folks, listen to what ICE has become under Trump. Standing with a budget of $28.7 billion, $29 billion, for the year 2025, which is three times what the 2024 budget was, at least another $56.6.5 billion to be given to it over the next three years. the ice has now become the envy of many national militaries around the world. As a matter of fact, if you look at their budget for militarized operation here domestically, ice, if it stood alone, would be the 14th largest military in the world, out of about 160 or 70 countries.

Just ice. I've said this for a long time. if you look at the number of police that we have and federal, state, and local, it is the only armies that are bigger than that are the U.S. Army and the Chinese Army and the Russian Army. And I'm not so sure about that anymore, as a matter of fact, because we're growing faster than they're growing their army. That's a domestic standing army. And so here is ICE with a budget that if it was its own, um, kind of. country would be the 14th largest military in the world. And what are they using this for? They're using it for surveillance equipment. That's really where most of this is going. The people who

don't want you to see them. I mean, you look at how angry they get when you start taking a picture of them. They get in your face with their masks and they start doing this. By the way, why we're talking about this? I thought this was interesting. This is, um, what it looks like in Iran. Now, you wouldn't know it. You wouldn't know that this is Iran or the U.S., would you? When you look at these massed, militarized police. Yeah, we have become what we fight, haven't we?

This is what it looks like when you have a repressive regime. The only thing you need to change is replace that Iranian flag with an American flag. That's the only thing that changes. But the way that they interact with people and the purpose for these massed militarized police remains the same, whether it's the Ayatollah or whether it's King Trump. It doesn't change at all. Authoritarians always want militarized massed police. They always make sure they got them. And we've got them as well.

So not only that, but it's not only the 14th largest, but it's not only the 14th largest, but it's budget is right between Ukraine and Israel. I'm not sure which of them is ahead of them, but you know, ICE's budget, militarized budget is right between the military budget of Ukraine and Israel, just to give you an idea. Which we are both funding, of course. Yeah, yeah, which we're funding them. That's why we have nearly $40 trillion. And we will have a $40 trillion deficit before Trump leaves office, no doubt about it. ICE doesn't just end up targeting surveilling, harassing, assaulting, detaining, and torturing people who are undocumented immigrants. They also have targeted people who on their work permits, asylum seekers,

permanent residents, and naturalized citizens, even citizens by birth. So while the NSA and the FBI might be the first agencies that come to mind when thinking about surveillance in the U.S., ICE should not be discounted. ICE has always always engaged in surveillance and intelligence gathering as part of their mission. A 2022 report by Georgetown Laws Center for Privacy and Technology found the following. And by the way, it bothers me to see what Jonathan Turley has become. Another cheerleader for Trump. He teaches at Georgetown.

Maybe he ought to take a look at this report from his own university. It showed that ICE had scanned the driver's license photos of one out of three American adults. ICE has access to the driver's license data of three out of four American adults. ICE was tracking the movements of drivers and cities home to three to four adults. ICE could locate three out of four adults through their utility records. ICE built its surveillance dragnet by tapping data from private companies and state and local bureaucracies. ICE spent approximately $2.8 billion between 2008 and 2020. 2021 on new surveillance, data collection, and data sharing programs.

And so we look at this, just like real ID or just like E-Verify, which DeSantis and the Florida Republicans made mandatory. We have these usually government-created issues. You know, they do 9-11 and they tell everybody, well, we've got to protect you from terrorists now. So we've got to have ID of some sort. You've got to have real ID. then they admit that it doesn't work.

We've got to protect you from drugs, even though it's a CIA that is running the drugs, a CIA that's creating the drugs like crack cocaine, LSD, and these other things. No, no, we're going to protect you from the drugs that we're running, the drugs that we created. Yet they don't. And we have this massive, expensive,

and destructive drug war because they are addicted to power. So we see this over and over again. And it's always the conservatives To fall for this They come in and say, well, you know, We're being overrun by foreigners Who are taking our jobs. We've got to have the government.

We've got to have an ID to get a job. We got pornographers on the internet. So we've got to have ID to use the internet. And we've got people who are knocking down skyscrapers, steal skyscrapers with airplanes. So we've got to have real ID and TSA, all the rest of this stuff. As always, their problem, their solution.

I spilt at surveillance dragnet by tapping data from private companies and from state and local bureaucracies. They have spent approximately $2.8 billion between 2008 and 2021 on new surveillance data collection and data sharing programs. But Trump is pouring gasoline on this dumpster fire. Tripled their budget from last year. And I know people say, I voted for this. They cheer it, right? Well, the problem I have is that, you know, if the police state was just going to happen to the MAGA cheerleaders, I'd be fine with that. They'd deserve it.

The rest of us don't deserve the police state that they're cheering, that they're voting for. The entire surveillance industry is being allowed to grow and flourish under both Democrat and Republican regimes. Obama dramatically expanded ICE from its more limited origins. And, of course, we had multiple Alex Jones documentaries about police state. and about the Obama deception, all the rest of the stuff. But now, when Trump does it, it's like, this is epic. This is great. We love this stuff.

Just the last year of the current administration, 4,250 people detained by ICE have gone missing. Nobody knows where they are. Relatives don't know where they are. 31 have died in custody while being detained. And so ICE has openly stated that they plan to spy on the American public looking for any signs of left-wing dissent against their domestic military-like presence. Do you see how this has changed?

You see, it used to be simply about, you know, at least the argument was, it's about arresting people here illegally. Now they're getting very defensive about this stuff. Because people protested, which we have a right to do, specifically protected

in the Constitution for a reason, a good reason. They don't like protests. They don't like to be surveilled themselves. These people who are pouring tens of billions of dollars into surveillance equipment. Don't you dare hold up a cell phone and show what they're doing. They'll come after you. They'll get in your face.

They'll knock your cell phone on the ground. They'll knock you to the ground. They'll put their knee on your neck. They might shoot and kill you. Don't you dare film them in public? That's what they have become. And so now it's not just that. They are so paranoid and over the top that they are now looking on

online to see what people are saying about them. They are turning against us. You know, it was Madison who said the means of defense abroad become weapons of tyranny at home. I would say that the means of defense of our border from people who come here from abroad, that means a defense, ICE, has become a weapon of tyranny. Madison said, that always happens. that means of defense abroad become weapons of tyranny at home. This is our standing army, folks.

This is why it must be opposed. This is the issue that is far above the issue of what you clearly see in these videos. Clearly, you can see that she's turning her wheel. Clearly, you can see that if she'd wanted to run over him, she wouldn't have backed up and turned the wheel. She would have just gone straight forward. You can clearly see that he jumped in front of her car. And on and on and on.

can see that he shot her from the side when he was clear of the car. So, again, people who are cheering this stuff, I have no patience with them. ICE has already openly stated they're going to spy on the American public, and they are doing it. The acting ICE director, Todd Lyons, is an unappropriate name. He's a lion always is. It said in a recent interview that his agency was dedicated to the mission of going after Antifa and left-wing gun clubs. How is that a mission for immigration control? I mean, I don't like Antifa at all, but these people are equally dangerous, are they? Perhaps even more so. They have the

full force and resources of the federal government, which Antifa does not have. And, you know, you can talk about, well, Soros gave them money. That's nothing compared to what they get from the government. How is it the mission of the ICE director to go after Antifa and left-wing gun clubs? Has nothing to do with immigration, has to do with their politics and weaponizing a standing army against their political opponents. A surveillance industrial complex and a democratic society are fundamentally incompatible regardless of your political party or your political beliefs. In 2025, ICE, and of course we don't have a democracy. We've got a Republican theory.

That's what it's supposed to be. In 2025, ICE entered new contracts with several private companies for location surveillance, social media surveillance, face surveillance, spyware, phone surveillance, car surveillance. Do you have a problem with that? Did you vote for that? You want to cheer that? Come on. Seriously.

This is insane. So just with phone surveillance tools, they renewed an $11 million contract with the company called Celebrite, which helps to unlock phones so they can get a complete image of all the data on the phone, including apps, location history phones, photos, notes, call records, text messages, even Signal and WhatsApp messages. They also signed a $3 million contract with Celebrite's main competitor, magnet forensics for unlocking iPhones.

If ICE can't get physical access to your phone, that won't stop them from trying to gain access to your data. They also have resumed a $2 million contract with a spy manufacturer, Paragon. It doesn't even get into what they're doing with Palantir. I'm sure they're heavily into Palantir. Then there's internet surveillance where they have a program that they bought Tangles, able to link together a person's posting history, posts, comments, containing keywords, location history, tags, social graph, photos with all their friends and family,

PIN link then sells this information to law enforcement, allowing law enforcement to avoid the need for warrant. Same type of stuff you see with Flock. And of course, they're involved in Flock as well. Flock is for the real world and Tangle is doing this for online stuff. And this is what it's always been about. They brag that they've got access to 200 websites through a program called Shadow Dragon. and they're able to scrape and analyze social networks that are there publicly,

but they bought the program that is there. And this is why the social media companies were pushed by the intelligence people because of that. It was always designed as a kind of surveillance device. So this is where this massive army is headed. The ICE shooting victim's father, it turns out, is a Trump supporter. The president, when told that, had some interesting comments about that. Again, this is, to me, this is kind of a microcosm, all of Maga.

They've actually got no clue what they're signing on to. And that's even after what happened in 2020 with the pandemic. They still can't connect the dots. Trump has delivered a conflicted message to a family of a woman who was shot dead by ICE after it revealed that her father was a Maga supporter. So this is in an interview. you, CBS, said, her father, who's a big support of yours, is heartbroken right now. And I said, he's heartbroken because your administration so quickly has come out and said that she is a

domestic terrorist. What do you want to say to her father right now? Trump said, well, that's great. And I do. I think it is great. And I would bet you that she, under normal circumstances, was a very solid, wonderful person. But, you know, her actions are pretty tough. Were they? really really and you know he immediately jumped in and told a lot of lies about you know she ran over this guy he's lucky to be alive he's in the hospital noam said yeah she attacked them with a vehicle as they were trying to get their car out of the snow they were just making this stuff up folks they have so little respect for you and they know there'll be no consequences no matter what they say they just make this stuff up they don't even look at it and say okay well they were doing

this, let's spin it this way. They don't even bother to try to spin it in a particular way. They just make it up whole cloth, knowing that they can get away with all these lines. And so, President said he'd looked at various angles of the footage. He said, when you look at the way that car was pulled away, there's a couple of versions of that tape that are very, very bad. They're all very, very bad for your narrative, Trump. So her family has been forced to deny online rumors about crimes that she committed, all the rest of the This is the tactics that's being taken by people. Let's demonize that particular person.

And you see this happening by both the left and the right. You know, the right will go after this Garcia guy. When he was actually a criminal, they ignore the crime that he was stopped for in Tennessee in terms of human trafficking. They start going after made up stuff, fictional stuff about him. And, you know, they're doing the same thing with her. I've been pretty quiet about this because I wanted to wait until our family could be. piece together a statement. And finally we have it, said her sister-in-law, as they put it out, said, we are grieving heavily, and yes, we see everyone's posting comments, some in support,

but also nasty ones, ripping apart our beautiful, beloved Renee, and we've seen the false claims and the wrong Renee Good info being posted. Criminal history, she didn't have one. People are making this stuff up. The Post found no evidence, the Washington Post, sorry, New York Post, which is conservative. The New York Post found no evidence that Good has any criminal record, but a widely spread image on social media complete with a possibly AI generated mugshot list numerous bogus criminal charges and arrests dating back to 2022. If they can't find any real crimes or person, they will make them up. And I've got to say one of the most, one of the comments I just thought I haven't spent a lot of time on social media with this, but it just

It came up. Eric Metaxus, who does a lot of Christian apologetics or whatever. And I saw a very reprehensible post from him, questioning something about her children. I thought, really? Is that what you're going to focus on? You're not going to focus about the standing army of surveillance that is being deployed and funded by Trump. That doesn't matter to you. It's more important for you to try to justify that by slandering a dead person? Really? That's what you're doing as a Christian? I just don't get it.

I tell you, I look at these so-called Christian influencers. Pete Hegseth is another one. What? A reproach to Christ they are. I guess, and I look at this and it's like, you know, people like Doug Wilson. He's got a church plant there in Washington,

and of course, Pete Hegseth is going to it, and that's a great thing for Doug Wilson. So they're not willing to do any church discipline with Pete Higseth for murdering people. Seriously. What is going on here? What is the purpose of a church if there's no discipline there, right? The wounds of a friend are very important.

There needs to be discipline. And I don't really understand. What is the purpose then of your church if you're not going to call out behavior like that? If you're not going to try to help Christians who are going down the wrong path? Is it just to raise my mind? Is that what this is all about? Is it about money and about prestige? Is that what it's about?

Because you're not disciplining the people who are going to your church plant. Seriously. No ICE agents do not have absolute immunity from state prosecution. This is a reason article. And they point out that what J.D. Vance said about absolute immunity is not true. There's been a couple of court cases. There's one going back to the 1800s and one going back to the early 20th century. The first one, the oldest one.

was a situation where a federal marshal protected the life of a Supreme Court justice who somebody was trying to attack him. And then there were questions about how that was done and whether or not there was going to be a trial locally. The Supreme Court said, nope, you can't do it. Unsurprisingly, since he had protected a Supreme Court justice. But then there was another case of a soldier who was looking for somebody who'd stole copper, and this is the early 1900s, and track the guy down and wound up killing the guy who they alleged had stole the copper. Witnesses said they wanted to do a trial because witnesses said he'd already gotten the copper back from the guy before he shot him. And so they wanted to have a trial for murder.

And he tried to use this previous Supreme Court case to say that he didn't need to stand trial. But then there was a second decision by the court saying, no, he does need to stand trial for this. So the whole idea of absolute immunity, if you're a federal agent and you're doing something as part of your job, you don't have absolute immunity. You have absolutely lost integrity, J.D. Vance. I don't care what the law says. That is the wrong approach to have. So we've had some federal prosecutors in Minneapolis

have actually resigned over this probe into the Minneapolis ICE shooting. And these, interestingly enough, the lead guy was the one who was taking the lead and had started and had already, indicted a lot of people for the Somali fraud. It goes back to where we started with all this stuff, right? So this is a federal prosecutor is actually indicting people.

And then when this shooting occurs and they tell them, you got nothing, we're cutting you out completely in terms of this investigation. He said, well, that's it. I'm out of here. He and five of the lawyers have resigned because of this pressure to say that you're not going to be allowed to investigate this shooting. and the police chief in Minneapolis said, Police Chief O'Hara, just like Batman, he's got a police chief O'Hara. He said, this guy, Thompson,

is an institution within law enforcement, directly responsible for building and prosecuting the fraud cases that are now being cited in order to justify this moment. He calls it a moment. I call it a murder. When you lose the leader who is responsible for making those cases that signals that this is not prosecuting fraud? And I really don't think it is. I don't think that it is really about what they say it is about. I believe that about government all the time. Okay, so they say that it's about this.

So what's it really about? And Trump is losing the support of some people like Joe Rogan's. As a matter of fact, it's kind of interesting to hear the different takes. I'll put them back to back of Mike Johnson, the invertebrate speaker of the house. No backbone. And Joe Rogan. This woman was taunting ICE officers. She was impeding law enforcement. She was violating a number of laws in doing so. They were very patient and asked her multiple times to remove her vehicle and stop impeding their operation. Don't taunt.

You refuse. Obey. Her partner, whoever that was haunting the officer. It was a... Don't taunt. It was a crazy set of circumstances. And from the angle I saw, this is my view. I'm not the investigator and I'm not the judge and jury.

But I'll tell you what I saw is that the vehicle, she revved. She hit the accelerator. That's Tom Emmer over his shoulder who's looking down. Very ugly. To watch someone shoot a U.S. citizen, especially a woman, in the face, where it's like, I'm not that guy. I don't know what he thought. And again, this is a guy who had almost been run over.

But it just looked horrific to me. I mean, when people say it's justifiable because the car hit him, it seemed like she was kind of turning the car away. Well, you know, it is kind of interesting, isn't it, when Christine Homme has a press conference after this. And look at the slogan that is there on the podium. It says, one of ours, and then in Bullface it says, all of yours. Where did that come from? Well, a lot of people said, this sounds exactly like the lightest massacre of the Nazis,

of this Czech village. that was there. It was a situation June 10th, 1942, German forces completely destroyed the small mining village of Littis. That's located near Prague, which is now the Czech Republic.

The act of collective punishment was carried out in retaliation for the assassination of high-ranking Nazi official Reinhard Hedrich, known as the butcher of Prague. I remember I've seen at least one movie about this particular thing.

You had these guys, this guy's particularly bad, so they set up an assassination. They were able to kill him. And then the Nazis decided that what they would do was, you'd kill one of ours, we will kill all of yours. And so after Hadrick was fatally wounded by Czechoslovak paratroopers who were trained in Britain, May 27th, 1942, the Nazis sought a target for terror. Littus was wrongly chosen based on misinterpreted intercepted letter. But what they did in the early hours of June 10th,

all 192 men of the village were rounded up and shot on the spot. Then you had approximately 200 women deported to Ravensbrook concentration camp. Many of them perished there from starvation disease or execution. Of the 105 children in the village, 82 were sent to the Chelmno extermination camp in Poland and murdered or murdered in gas vans. Nine children were deemed racially valuable and were handed over to German families for Germanization. Only 17 children survived and returned after the war. Then they set the entire village on fire.

They dynamited and raised the buildings to the ground. The Nazis even plowed over the site. and diverted a stream to ensure that every trace of his existence was wiped out and that it would not be rebuilt. Now, that slogan that is there is really about collective punishment. And that's something that has been prohibited by the Geneva Convention. In the same way, there's been prohibited to go back to circle back and to murder people who have been shipwrecked, people who are no longer combatants for the same reason. we did that. But this phrase has been interpreted as one of authoritarian fascism. One of ours,

we kill all of yours, right? And again, this is, this is Christy Nome. One of ours, all of yours. That's what she's talking about. And she knows this and should know this. This is a slogan that really embodies this type of authoritarian fascism. It was also a slogan for, for the fascists in Spain in the 1930s. One of ours is worth many of yours. That was their slogan. And so this is something that's been around for a very long time. Does Christenome not know that?

Do the people who set up that podium not know that? I mean, it could be that she's just incredibly stupid and tone deaf. I mean, she did write about executing her dog because it got her angry. So maybe it's part of that. Or maybe she's just cold. Maybe that's what it is. And so, again, it is, their response to that, when people pointed out, that's been well known as a encapsulation of a Nazi approach and this massacre of Littus.

I hope I'm pronouncing that name, right? I'm not sure. It's L-I-D-I-C-E. It's kind of a summary of that. And the Nazis bragged about that. They wanted to intimidate people. They did that to intimidate people. And it's kind of the same type of.

thing when you summarize it. It's kind of like the quote that we attribute to Voltaire. I may, I completely disagree with what you're saying, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it. He never said that. But that is an accurate summary of his many, many writings about free speech. And so this is in the same vein of this. And so the response from Homeland Security was not to say, well, you took that wrong.

Their responsibility was, their response was, well, it's getting very tiresome to be called Nazis all the time. Well, it may be you ought to consider. I'm getting tired of calling them Nazis. I'm getting tired of talking about how Orwellian it is. But unfortunately, we don't have, they fit the mold so perfectly. That's why we keep using this.

And it is getting tiresome to talk about that. But if it's true, you have to keep talking about it. The Nazis proudly announced the annihilation of Littis and their propaganda, which triggered worldwide. outrage and condemnation. And it should trigger condemnation of Christy Knoem as well. But not enough condemnation is being done of that. Andrew Schultz, host of the flagrant podcast, has also turned on the president besides

Joe Rogan, saying that he felt duped. He was interviewed, he had interviewed Trump during the 2024 election, just like he had Theo Vaughn had access to Trump and interviewed him, and they helped to push him to the finish line. Sorry to cut in, but I just want to say, these guys are all comedians. And I just, I miss when comedians were funny. Can you shut up and tell a joke? I don't care what Theo Vaughn thinks about politics. I could care less that Andrew Schultz interviewed the president.

Was it funny? Probably not. Probably not, huh? Tell a joke. We got Greg Gutfield as well on Fox News, right? And then you got all you got all these other comedians who were jumping into it, you know, all the late night show guys on the left. And John Stewart's matter of fact, we got a clip that John Stewart put together here that I thought was pretty good. But yeah, again, how does that happen?

You know, it used, I guess part of it is they want people who can do satire. Solowinsky said satire is the most devastating form of political criticism. So let's get some comedians out here. But again, Theo Vaughn and this other guy I've never heard of, Andrew Schultz. So he says he's a comedian. I've never heard of him. Yeah, he was coming up in like 2012, 2013. He was all over YouTube for a while.

I've never really watched this stuff. I've seen clips of him pop up. He's some skinny New York Italian guy, I think. Well, he said everything that Trump campaigned on, I believe that he really wanted to do. And I feel betrayed about all this stuff. It's like, guys, you didn't feel betrayed in 2020 with the lockdown, the pandemic, and the vaccine,

and all the rest of this stuff. I just don't know what to say these people. Anyway, Theo Vaughn has pushed back on it. They put up a video of his on DHS put up. He said, I don't want you to take that down. First of all, he said, I know you know my address, so send me a check for what you've used my face for. And then take it down. Again, it's about money, right?

John Stewart tracks Trump's swing. And again, just like Jake Tapper with Christy Noam, they point out the contradiction between January the 6th, five years ago, and January the 7th, this year. And I think that is an appropriate juxtaposition. It really shows not only Christy Noem and not only Trump's hypocrisy, but it also shows the hypocrisy and the misunderstanding of people like John Stewart, I'm going to play this for you, or people like Jake Tapper, or even people like Jesse Ventura. Like, I absolutely agree with what Jesse Ventura.

was saying about the militarization of the police. But again, he completely mischaracterizes J6. You know, when we look at J6, the real analogy of J6, what they'll do is they'll show the people who are fighting the police. And again, what's the context? How did that start? That's a very important thing to look at. Many people who were there say the police initiated that conflict.

But, you know, the people who are fighting the police, the people who were breaking into the building and all the rest of the stuff, that's a very important. very different situation than the people who were there peacefully protesting. And at the time, I talked about the fact that there were two elderly men and one of them, their son was there. They were like in their 70s and he was 50-something and they needed to use the restroom. And so they asked the police, the door was up, where can we use the restroom? They just go right in here.

They go in. Then they get prosecuted. Even as they came out, there was a police woman who was trying to push them onto the congressional floor. They didn't want to go in there. They just wanted to use the restroom and leave. But they came after the. as well. So there was a lot of unjust prosecutions. And of the people who were violent and destructive,

the punishment was cruel and unusual. And so that's the real issue. And if you want to have a real comparison to really show the hypocrisy on both sides, take a look, juxtapose Renee Good with Ashley Babbitt. neither one of these women deserve to be shot in the head point blank by government police the guys who did it were not threatened

they were not in danger and that's the real issue but you'll see the people on the left will ignore Ashley Babbitt and they will defend Renee Good people on the right will defend Ashley Babbitt but they will attack Renee Good

and so this is what John Stewart had We'll play a game. On January 6th, a bunch of... They were peaceful people. These were great people. Went to the Capitol. Peacefully protesting a stolen election. I have never seen...

The majority of them were. ...spirit and such passion and such love. But while they were there... Capitol Hill police officers instigated the violence that day. And ultimately, they deserve a... Full pardon. Got it. Don't agree that's what actually happened or what should have happened afterwards, but at least it sets a precedent.

But now let's jump ahead, I don't know, a day to January 7th. We've all seen that footage. I think I know what I saw that day too, but let's go through it again with the correct interpretation. On January 7th, A, highly disrespectful, deranged lunatic woman, professional ICE agitator, domestic terrorist. did what? This woman used her car as a weapon and tried to run over an ice agent and attempted murder

and so she was shot and killed so while very little of the descriptions that you were saying matched what we all saw on the tape the important lesson here is what she brought it upon herself mother f***

we are in a confusing dark place and this is where quite frankly rule of law and institutions are kind of an important framework. But now that those are gone, what's our North Star? Do you see any checks on your power on the world stage? Is there anything that could stop you if you wanted to? Yeah, there's one thing. My own morality, my own mind.

So nothing. Yeah, that's right. So nothing. There's not a mind. There's not morality. But, yeah, there's no law that he's. has to obey anywhere, not the Constitution, nothing. You can do whatever he wants. There's nothing that restricts his power. This is the issue. Hands up. Obey commands, right? Show your hands.

Obey commands. That's the phrase that they want to. Like click it or take it, right? Sorry, not doing that. Not doing that. And that's not what I want to see this country become. But again, the juxtaposition is not the people who are fighting police. The juxtaposition is Ashley Babbitt versus Renee Good. And you can see, if you juxtapose those, you can see just how dishonest both the left and the right are. We're going to take a quick break. And actually, we've got a comment here. Travis, go ahead and read that before we take a break here.

You got it. DG8. Thank you very much for the support. It says, David, everything you see from the left is planned. The right will beg for martial law and embrace a police surveillance state. They're working together. How can people not see it? That's right.

Also says, David, I'm thoroughly disgusted. Maga Christians are celebrating Trump. flipping off and telling a worker, F.U. Are we in crazy world? Remember Trump called DeSantis to Sanctimonious for opposing abortion? That's right. That's right. Yeah, I saw that.

As a matter of fact, it was on a conservative aggregator, and they had a thing there saying, epic. You know, Trump has, you know, some guy, he flips off a guy and says, F you, right? And so I clicked on that link, said, who did that? It was Info Wars. Info Wars. It's epic.

if that's Trump's response to some guy who yells out to him, pedophile protector. And he is a pedophile protector. He's protecting these pedophile clients of Jeffrey Epstein and himself, a pal. And yet you look at what Infowars is doing with Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton and how the Republicans are saying, you've got to come in and testify.

And now the Clintons are going to do a Steve Bannon and say, I'm too big for that. I don't have to obey your stuff. And so they're going to get a contempt charge. just like Steve Bannon did. And perhaps before they can delay this thing out, and by the time the contempt charge goes through, it'll probably be a Democrat president.

He'll give them a pardon. I guess that's the gambit that they're going to do. But they'll criticize Bill Clinton for being a pal of Jeffrey Epstein. But then they'll applaud the pal of Jeffrey Epstein, Donald Trump, when he flips somebody off and says FU, right? So again, this is, Karen's looking at him. You're like, what are you doing?

I'm sorry, I just, but, you know, they, well, let's take a break. We'll be right back. Night show. All right, I'm going to try to move really fast because we don't have too much time left. I've got a lot to cover here. But before I do, I just want to thank the people who make this show possible, the people who are donors, but really are the producers of this show.

And these are people who have just recently contributed. Evelyn and Susan L. Thank you so much, regular supporters. Timothy W. Gary B. Lois L. I've had two from her recently. Joel B. T.K. from Ohio. And wrote us a letter talking about what he's going through. And he didn't ask for prayer, but I'm going to ask for prayer for T.K. Because he's faced with some real challenges.

And so TK, we're praying for you. Hope that these things go through. issues, family issues, job issues and things like that. And still, we donated to us. I really do appreciate that. Thank you, T.K. And H.D. from North Carolina. I said at the beginning of the program that Trump,

second term of Trump, the first year, a libertarian nightmare. That's a headline from Reason magazine. It absolutely is true. His second term is being powered by his monarchical authoritarianism. As he points out, he says, Trump, in a big picture way about his nature as a person, in his larger meaning as a political phenomenon, he says there's not much new that can be said about that.

But he said, part of the problem is that his things like his audacity can no longer shock or surprise. His crudeness, so initially colorful, has faded into the dark background of his actions. his bottomless sea of childish willfulness and grievance has become very tiresome. He said near the end of the first full year of his second administration, Trump has demonstrated his core authoritarianism so completely, so consistently, that his personal character and comportment peculiarities lose significance. Since his peradical and unconstitutional imperial conquest of Venezuela,

he has declared that he is taking command of a dishinge, range of economic and foreign policy matters from his planned further imperial conquest of Greenland, accompanied by declarations from his say trap, Stephen Miller, and from himself, that no external force or authority holds back his power to conquer or to wreak destruction on the world. Again, the only thing holds back is his morality. To dictating how weapons contractors can compensate their executives on deals with their stocks, or to dictate the interest rate that credit card companies can charge and whether or not certain companies can buy houses or not.

Again, these are things that even from a pragmatic standpoint, you have to look at them and shake your head, just like the tariffs, right? But then it gets worse. He's gone hogwile so far in 2026. In 2025, he wielded state power to punish enemies, reward friends, send the military into city streets under bogus pretenses over the objections of local electoral

officials, he's authorized masked cops to enforce a papers please policy, except they don't say please. On U.S. citizens moving in public, he has ordered the serial murder of suspected drug smugglers disrupted the global economy by making Americans pay sharply increased taxes on imported goods, and that's just for starters. He's concentrated what was supposed to be competing branches of the federal government into the whims of one man. He has erased the distinctions between federal, state, public, and private.

America has never had a president who acted more like a monarch. And again, he says, well, you know, he's done some things that are right, and he has. However, this doesn't absolve him, you know. We frequently would hear, well, Hitler made the trains run on time. Or where are the trains going? That's the era issue here. And, you know, what they were saying was that, you know, he fixed some problems that were there. And Trump has addressed some real problems, and he has, on some minor side issues, we've had some wins.

But that goes against the greater flow of what the man himself is doing. Yes, previous administrations have also violated Americans and the world's economic and political liberties and lives. But this doesn't mean that Trump deserves a pass. That's what aboutism, right? we got to not say that, you know, well, because somebody else did this, he gets to do it. If it's wrong, it's wrong. If it's wrong, it's wrong if Trump does it. His specific documented exertions of state power over the past year should be enough to declare him dangerous and a foe of American liberty.

The anti-Trump protesters of 2025, unlike the pink-hatted resistance of 2017, zeroed in smartly on the through line that unites most of his grievous flaws. He is the president who wants to be king. He has actively purged the Justice Department and the Defense Department of people that he deemed insufficiently loyal. He has gutted the executive branch watchdog system of inspector generals and converted federal law enforcement into a weapon that was aimed at those who cross him. And of course, a big part of that defense department is getting rid of most of the JAG officers.

If he thinks you're on his side, you need not. fear that the law will ever contain or control you. And again, they go back to January the 6th. But, you know, I don't lump in the peaceful protesters for the people who got violent. There needs to be distinction made. And that's another aspect of this. Yeah, we're just going to link in this person with all the people we don't like. We're going to link her in with Black Lives Matter and the anti-fob people and everything. That's what the left has done to the January 6th peaceful protesters. I disagree with all that. America has had the globally envied universities, says reason.

I don't agree with that at all. As a matter of fact, I think, you know, as far as our universities that he had a conflict with, I say a pox upon them. They don't deserve any money. They are sci-op operations, as far as I'm concerned. They are a key thing that's wrong with our country. They've been seminaries of Satan. And they don't deserve money.

But Trump withdrew the money because he wanted to censor their speech. And if they would censor their speech, they get the money back. That's what I'm saying. Even when you get the right things, it's for all the wrong reasons that are happening there. So they talk about Columbia University and other things like that. But libertarians and others worried about federal government outreach have always stressed that depending on state businesses or largesse or programs, left recipients vulnerable to pressure, intimidation control, the pipers and tunes and all that.

right he who pays the piper gets to control what's played right it has always been about bribery and blackmail money has always been the way of exercise control they want to control it they fund it so they can then take the money away and that is especially true of schools not just universities but k through 12 the vouchers the charter schools be very careful about that it's a trap really is So free speech. In 2025, the president launched factually absurd lawsuits against the New York Times, CBS, Wall Street Journal. They leave out on reason BBC. And look, I don't agree with any of these people. Their editorial policies or their other, New York Times just did a long hit piece on homeschooling saying it needs to be ended. I don't agree with New York Times, CBS, Wall Street Journal, BBC. But what Trump is trying to do is shut down freedom of the press. It's a very different thing. And people in my goal say, yeah, I don't like those people. I don't like what they say. I disagree with them.

So shut them down. You don't understand the precedent that's being said here in terms of going after or free press? Having threatened the whip hand of government behind him in the form of merger approvals or license renewals, he's convinced big media businesses to pay him off rather than deal with the hassles of winning in court and facing further retribution. Trump has suggested at least 15. times that broadcasters he disfavors should have their licenses revoked.

He's described critical coverage of the administration as, quote, really illegal, unquote. He's repeatedly characterized news organizations as, quote, enemy of the people, unquote. His FCC chair, Brendan Carr, this last year, threatened ABC to get them to temporarily cancel Jimmy Kimmel. How'd that work out? They undid the cancellation, and Jimmy Kimmel was, undeservedly bigger than ever. It's not funny.

He's not politically insightful. Trump actually helps him, you know, in the same way that the lawfare against Trump helped Trump. His defense secretary, Pete Hegesa, kicked reporters out of the Pentagon unless they signed an oath to not seek unauthorized information. When six Democratic lawmakers in November pointed out in a public video that members of the armed forces are not required to carry out unlawful orders, and they parenthetically put in, which was the main initial organizing principle behind the eventually Trump supporting oath keepers.

And I thought, you know, what is going on with Stuart Rhodes? I don't remember seeing anything about Stuart Rhodes commenting on this video, which, you know, people like InfoWords are calling them the seditious sex, right? It's not sedition to point out that you must not obey illegal orders. As a matter of fact, that's what oathkeepers was all about. So why is Stuart Rhodes quiet? I looked up what's going on. Stuart Rhodes is actually saying he's going to reconstitute oathkeepers.

On what basis, right? If you're not going to defend this. And again, if he reconstitutes oathkeepers, could Mark Kelly and this CIA senator, could they apply? Could they become members? Because they were prosecuted for saying that you shouldn't obey illegal orders? I mean, the whole thing is crazy, isn't it? All this left-right stuff really is crazy. Yeah, a lot of crickets going on there from the Oathkeeper side.

We've also grown accustomed to American presidents launching lethal regime-changing force against foreign countries, against whom Congress is not, per its constitutional prerogative, declared war. Trump regularly dispenses with the very notion that the legislative branch requires consultation, while also waving off both the international laws of war and traditional domestic and legal restraints on deploying the military internally. And so this is just a partial summary of what is going on. And again, tyrannical government's behavior tends to inspire violent reaction, which then occasions the imposition of still more tyranny, which is what we're saying, right? They double down. And that's

the real issue here. And when you look at our political divides here, the fact is they talk about how Gen Z is now breaking towards being the least partisan of any of the generations. Nevertheless, we still have a situation where about a quarter of the people are hardcore left, a quarter of people are hardcore right and the remaining 50% of us, how do we stop them from killing each other and us? That's the real question. And no matter what Trump does, no matter how corrupt he gets, they still have people who will not, who refuse to see his nature. Here's the latest from the Trump organization pushing their big developments in Saudi Arabia. They have the Trump family has made unbelievable amounts of money from Saudi Arabia.

This is for Trump mansions, Saudi Arabia. The place to be is Saudi Arabia. Say the Trump family. The place to be is Riyadh. The place to be is Dera'eya. The place to be is home. If money is the only thing that matters to you. International.

Wadi Safar, private, gated, limited. The hottest takes. in town. Inside these gates, the Trump mansions, where winners reside. Where winners reside, are you tired of winning? International Golf Club. Anchored by an 18-hole championship golf course, five-star services at Trump International Hotel, with anchored by corruption. Entertainment and fine dining, exactly as it should be. And beyond that, space, room to breathe, clean air, open skies, where you see more stars than neighbors.

Yeah, this is the life for the Trump family coverage. Come here to get away. You come here because you found your place to be. Trump International, where the safari-ri-up, the place to be. This is what they want, and this is what the people that they appeal to want. massive homes sporting giant pools shaded by palm trees in the middle of the desert in the middle of Saudi Arabia a horse running across the desert a woman swinging on a swing while overlooking the development i don't remember she had a burke or not but a woman with her head covered with a veil who is by the pool with her family is that the place that you want to be is that winning cars driving around a housing development that looks

like orange county uh the place to be where winners reside that's what they say the thing that I really question about that is, what was with that one frame, basically, of a samurai? Why was there a samurai and armor in there? That's not Saudi Arabian. That's not American. That is nothing to do with either of the two cultures in question. Because it just looks cool, I guess, you know? Maybe do you think he sliced a golf ball or something?

What was he there for? I don't know. He shows up very, very briefly, but he's there. What's going on? I mean, Japan is cool. Yeah. Well, maybe that's our next stop in Japan. The Trump organization is putting $7 billion into this.

It won't be ready for you to move in until 2029. But, you know, you can get in there just before 2030 happens. Isn't that nice? And, of course, Eric Trump was announcing all of this and helps to explain why Muhammad bin Salman, MBS, the clown prince is Gerald Sinti calls him, why he was there. Well, as I said before, the majority of Gen Z are identifying as independence now, and this is a change. It's kind of interesting when you look at the younger demographics in 2024 when Trump got elected, they're pretty evenly split between Republicans and Democrats.

You had 18 percent identified as Republicans, 17 percent as Democrats. So it's 18 Republicans, 17 Democrat. Now, after the first year of Trump 2.0, it's dropped to 5.5. 15 Republican and 20% Democrat. This isn't that interesting. He's losing that demographic. And so then the question is, you know, how do people identify? Conservative, liberal, very liberal, moderate, whatever.

These are the choices that were given by Gallup. They said at 35% more adults describe their views as very conservative or conservative, compared to 28% who described their views as liberal or very liberal, 33% identified as moderate. This is your Higelian choice spectrum here that they've got. While conservatives kept their lead, the seven point advantage is the smallest one that Gallup has measured in annual averages dating back to 1992.

And so I would ask, what does conservative even mean anymore? What are you trying to conserve? Are we trying to conserve peace? Are we trying to conserve money? Are we trying to conserve liberty or more? morality. I don't think so. As a matter of fact, Mises had an article, The Republican's conservatism is about defending the status quo.

And this is why they operate as the backstop on the ratchet. The liberals turn the crank and the conservatives protect the status quo. And Friedrich von Heik explained this in his article, why I am not a conservative. He said, given a choice between the progressive parties that destroy liberty, and the conservative parties that defend the status quo, the classical liberal will generally have little choice but to support the conservative parties. And what he means by that, of course, is the libertarian, the classical liberal. They used to be that liberals are people

who believed in liberty. But of course, the socialists, the communists, will always steal a good term. So they took that away. I'm once again going to break in with a quote from G.K. Chesterton. He said, you know, I'm as liberal now as I ever was. But there's a very. But there's a way. I'm, was a rosy time when I believed in liberals. That's right. It's a very different thing. That's why the labels really don't tell us too much about this. There's many parallels between classical liberal prioritization of individual liberty

and the conservative principle of limited government in countries with a tradition of liberty, said Hayek. Hayek argues that in the U.S., it is still possible to defend individual liberty by defending long-established institutions. but of course Hayek has long been dead. In this context, says me, this, conservatism aligns with the defense of liberty. In a country like the U.S., which is on the whole, still has free institutions, he said, during his life, decades and decades ago,

the defense of the existing is often a defense of freedom. This reflects that strand of conservatism and tradition seen in the Magna Carta, which limits state power in order to enhance individual liberty. However, the conservative principle of limited government was all but extinguished by Lincoln's revolution, and today's Lincolnites offer no meaningful opposition to the progressive encroachments on liberty couched in egalitarian language. They seem to fear that society will descend into a cesspit if people are not forced by the federal government to embrace equality on pain of being prosecuted by the repurposed Department of Justice for violating

civil rights. And again, what liberty has become and rights and things like that is really, when you look at the way the socialists use this, I always thought it was curious on the French revolution to talk about fraternity, equality, and liberty, right? And yet those things are mutually exclusive the way the socialist apply them. And that's true of the way Lincoln applies it as well. As I said before, Harry Turledov, when he did his alternative history of the Civil War, having it end early and most of the major characters surviving. And that alternative, the North loses, and Lincoln is hounded out of office, political office. But decades later, when the story picks up of his alternative history, Lincoln comes back as a socialist.

At first last I saw that and I had a laugh, but I thought, you know, that's actually spot on. That's where he would have been selling that kind of kind of, kind of. of French Jacobin equality, right? And so many people, including the GOP, within the GOP, see the GOP is a true party of civil rights, and they regard Lincoln as a civil rights hero who created what the Marxist historian Eric Foner termed the second founding of America, based on a plagiarized civil rights dream of Martin Luther King Jr. A recent example of a unipartisanism, was seen in the recent unveiling of the new statue of Barbara Johns. Many observers were rather surprised to see Mike Johnson,

Republican House Speaker, and Glenn Yonkin, Virginia's Republican governor, celebrating the replacement of a statue of Robert Lee that once stood in the Capitol with a statue of Barbara Johns, who was a 16-year-old who defied school segregation in Virginia in 1951. The fact that many Republicans welcomed the replacement, of Lee's statue with a teenage civil rights activist illustrates their general tendency to support progressive political measures. Ultimately, they bring up the progressive rear to defend and to indeed celebrate the new status quo. Hayek criticizes, he said, I doubt whether they can be such a thing as a conservative political philosophy. Conservatism may often be a useful,

practical maxim, but it does not give us any guiding principles which can influence long-range developments. In his article, remembering the right, Paul Gottfried said that it's not so much that conservatives lack any guiding principles, but more that the dominant form of organized conservatism, which he terms conservatism incorporated, functions as a form of media entertainment and partisan PR. Think all these Fox News people. Think about all the alternative MAGA media that is out there as well.

their leaders are conservative stars whose celebrity status is endorsed and rewarded for defending the GOP and for reiterating old leftist positions how many times have you heard me say that the Republicans of today are the Democrats of my youth the Democrats of today are the Marxists of my youth they've deliberately jettisoned the principles for which true conservatism once stood Yeah, so that is really where we are with this. They point out that if you look at, they quote R.L. Dabney, again, somebody who really understood education. And he believed that government schools were dangerous. They were unconstitutional.

He believed that they were the cause of the Lincoln Revolution, as we could call it, I guess, right? The Civil War. And I think this is absolutely true. I think we can see that today. And I think that we can see that the imagined end, that we're always promised for these things, does not justify the lawless means that they want to use to achieve it. Well, that's all the time we've got for today, and I almost feel like going another hour here, but our time is up.

Thank you for joining us. Have a good day. The common man. They created common core to dumb down our children. They created common past to track and control us. Their commons project to make sure the commoners own nothing and the communist future. They see the common man 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 Davidnightshow.com. Thank you for listening. Thank you for sharing. If you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers.

The Davidnightshow.com.