The David Knight Show - Wed Episode #2302: — The CIA Was Rehearsing Pandemics Years Before COVID

Episode Date: July 8, 2026

────────────────────────────────────────[00:02:09]CIA Investigated Unvaccinated Employees for Espionage — Filed Suit After Agency Refused to Remove RecordsContractors who questioned the vaccine were treated as national security threats; nobody fired, but permanent black marks placed in employee files.────────────────────────────────────────[00:04:55]COVID Did Not Come From a Lab Leak — It Came From "Dark Winter," a CIA Germ War GameCIA ran 20+ pandemic rehearsals per year; first was two months before 9/11; a former CIA director played the president in the simulation.────────────────────────────────────────[00:11:52]19th-Century Doctor Chase Found That Patients Who Dewormed Annually Never Got Cancer — 80% Success RateAfter 40 years, deworming patients had no serious illness; those who never dewormed developed cancer; anti-parasitics and cancer share the glutaminolysis pathway.────────────────────────────────────────[00:31:51]Trump Escalates FCC Lawfare Against ABC While Claiming to DeregulateFCC targeting The View for not being "bona fide news"; the FCC itself ruled it was in 2002; America First Legal filing against station licenses.────────────────────────────────────────[00:41:42]Ken Paxton Running for Governor While Still Married — Living in His Mistress's $2M Dallas MansionVoted in six elections from an old address while warning voters it's illegal to misrepresent your residence; his wife voted to convict him at impeachment.────────────────────────────────────────[01:01:50]NY Post Hit Piece on "TradWives" Is a GOP Attack on Marriage With No Counter-TestimonyNot one person in the article has a working traditional marriage; Knight and Karen have been married 47 years; the GOP has fully internalized liberal feminist Hollywood values.────────────────────────────────────────[01:26:22]Trump Restarted the Iran War After Soccer Humiliation — "Attack on Three Ships" Has No Casualties or DamageNo dead, injured, or disabled vessels reported; if this is real there would be evidence; reads as an excuse after the World Cup embarrassment.────────────────────────────────────────[01:30:45]China Buying Gold While Wall Street Hallucinates AI Profits — Central Bank Bought 15 Tons This MonthShiller P/E still at 41; OpenAI burned $20.9B in 2025; Palantir CEO Carp: generative AI has no business case and encourages waste.────────────────────────────────────────[01:42:10]UK Police Arresting People for Filming in Public, Standing Still, and Covering Their FaceMan fined 90 pounds for covering his face; white assault victim restrained while black attackers walked; every element of this is being prepared for America.────────────────────────────────────────[01:46:46]Europe's Birth Rate Below 1.5 — Far Below 2.1 Replacement — Cardinal Calls Mass Immigration a Deliberate DesignThe clash of cultures is engineered; schools weren't supposed to work; the immigration crisis isn't failure, it's functioning as planned for divide and conquer. ──────────────────────────────────────── 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” For high quality made in America products go to HomeSteadProducts.shop and use promo code “Knight” for 10% off your purchases 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-show Or 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.

in a world of deceit. Telling the truth is a revolutionary act. It's the David Knight Show. As the clock strikes 13, it's Thursday, the 8th of June. You have our Lord 2026. Well, we have a conservative Republicans trashing traditional marriage. Yeah, this is an editorial that came out of the conservative Republican New York Post.

A very shallow hit piece on family and on. Christ. And so you have this kind of technocratic obsession that is happening with the, about eternal life, the transhumanists and the technocracy all merging together. Musk is taking a different point of view. He talks about the societal virtue of death. What's up with these people? Meanwhile, they've got artificial life. They say they've created in a lab. They grow it and they can eat and reproduce. But it's also demonstrating something that They didn't realize. Meanwhile, after humiliating mockery at the soccer field,

Trump has gone back on the war path in a big way. And there's a nagging silence about the core excuse for restarting the war for Israel. We'll talk about that as well as UK policing, which has become a model of tyranny beyond Orwell's dystopian imagination. Stay with us. We'll be right back. Well, let's begin with the overall news here. We have the CIA, we find out, investigated officers for espionage because they didn't take the COVID-19 vaccine.

What is the espionage? That's what they do. Now, the interesting thing is they didn't fire them, but they've got a black mark on their record, and that's why they are being sued. I guess espionage doesn't get you fired as a CIA agent. CIA has investigated thousands of personnel and contractors. And remember, this is the real, I think, insidious part of what happened with vaccine mandates. The fact that they used it against people, if you do business with the federal government, you're not going to do that business with the federal government unless you inject all your employees.

And that was true whether you're talking about, you know, the, certainly the CIA, these government agencies, but that's true whether you're talking about a military industrial complex contractor or whether you're talking about anybody who has any connection with the federal government, especially the hospitals. That was why that was pushed through there. And so I would just say to Congresswoman Luna, how about investigating this? You know, you people there in Congress love to have big show hearings where nothing ever happens.

Think back to Benghazi. The only thing that happened with that is that Trey Gowdy got a gig at Fox News, but nothing happened about that whatsoever. And so if they want to talk about M.K. Ultra, and look, that is a horrific program. And it gets right to the core character of this vicious satanic evil organization, the CIA. And that's right. It should be talked about, but they don't have anything new. this is all just a show trial, showboating and virtue signaling. Do something about what is really happening now. You know, you can talk about something that happened 50, 60 years ago,

whatever the amount of time, I think it was like 60 years ago, maybe 70, where this all started out, began with Operation Paperclip and metastasized and this type of thing. Yeah, talk about that, but do your work and stop. this kind of stuff is happening, the vaccine mandates. Has there been any legislation coming from Congress that would prevent that from happening in the future? No, not even for government employees. But of course, the kind of economic blackmail, a bribery and blackmail that the federal government uses against private businesses. That's what really needs to be stopped.

And they'll do it all again. The only thing that came out of all this stuff because of their misdirection to say, Well, it came out of China. It came out of a lab. It was a lab leak. It's like, no. This stuff did not come from a, from bat soup. It didn't come from Pangolins.

It didn't come from a biosafety level four lab leak. It came from dark winter, which the CIA was heavily involved in that. That's one thing that I thought was very good about, I thought the best part of RFK Jr's book about Fauci was the chapter about, about how Fauci worked with the CIA when they ran these germ games. The very first one was Dark Winter two months before 9-11. And the CIA was very heavily involved in that. All the usual players that were running the pandemic.

You even had the former head of the CIA who played the role of president in their rehearsal. And they did 20 of those rehearsals every year at least until the actual thing they pulled off. CIA's counter-espionage department was told to investigate all unvaccinated. contractors and workers within the agency. Plaintiffs said in the lawsuit, which is filed June 30th in federal court in Virginia. And so any employer contractor refused the vaccine was treated as a threat to the U.S. government in order to be investigated as a threat. Let me tell you something. This is an admission that this whole thing was their program, Dark Winter.

That is the origin of the pandemic. Forget about labs and forget about bat soup. The CIA declined to cite an authority for the investigation order. How about you cite an authority for the CIA to exist in the first place? There's nothing in the Constitution that authorizes that. And, of course, when they had the church committee hearings looking at the CIA and the Senate, they had in the House at the same time the Pike Committee hearings that looked into the NSW. say, both of whom were spying illegally and unconstitutionally on American citizens without warrants.

And when the Pike Committee hearing said, well, we know that the CIA was created in this particular way. We got their charter. Can I see your charter? They were created by an executive order by President Truman. And the head of the NSA said, no, you can't see it. I'm not going to show that to you. So people started joking about them being the no such agency, the. NSA. Well, one of the unvaccinated employees formally asked the CIA to remove all the material

about investigation's information from his employee files. The agency never responded, therefore they are suing. And again, as I pointed out before, none of the workers affected by this investigation have been fired. Nobody got fired at the CIA for not getting the vaccine. That was military that they purged people out of. But hey, you got a black mark on your file. The CIA was spying on a group, including the CIA, changing its assessment of the origins of COVID-19. So if you talk about that, the origins and the changing lies and narratives about the origin, that got you as an enemy of the state.

It's absolutely right. The suit seeks certification of a class of employees who did not take the vaccine and were investigated. They want the court to declare the order from the chief operating officer. I want the court to declare the CIA illegal. And for the CIA to remove any information yielded from the investigation, from employees, and from contractor files. Well, I've got reputation to protect, right? Meanwhile, when we talk about this, of course, at the center of this is informed consent,

isn't it? Well, what about informed consent? What about parental rights for treatment? that is something we're going to be talking at an interview yesterday with someone who has an organization, has written a book about Child Protective Services. That'll be aired on Friday. And of course, it is so vital and important that we understand what these bureaucracies are about, how self-serving they are, and how their very power depends on overthrowing parental rights,

overthrowing informed consent because this is one of the things that would get you investigated by CPS in the United States. This happened in the UK. A mother fought for seven years to prove that doctors were wrong about her daughter's disease. And the daughter went through six cycles of chemotherapy. Horrific. Because they misdiagnosed the real serious diseases she has. So she still has this disease. They haven't helped her with any treatment. They have no cure for it. But boy, they can make your life hell on earth with the chemotherapy, can't they? And so when you look at all these things that are coming out now about ivermectin, fimbibendizol, and menbindazol, and these other things, all these

anti-wormers, what is going on with that? Why do parasite medications appear to work so well? And, of course, don't expect that there's going to be any studies for it. There's no profit and sense. for it. The FDA is not about that. The FDA is there to make sure that the drug companies are free to do anything. That's what FDA stands for if you are a big pharmaceutical company, because you're free to do anything to make money. But if you're not one of the big pharmaceutical companies, you are FDA forbidden to do anything. We also know that certain parasite medications are very effective, can be very effective in targeting glutamine. Okay, Mben Dazol, Fenn Dazol, we're working on that right now.

Why would a parasite medication be effective in killing cancer? Because the parasite and the cancer cell use a common metabolic pathway, the glutaminolysis pathway, which is a substrate-level phosphorylation in the mitochondria that we just published with Derek's big paper. And, of course, there are different types of pathways there. And so that's why these three different deworming medications are apparently effective and also used in combination. But this is something that has a long history as people are going back and looking at this. One is resistant to worms and parasites. And look at the 1800s.

We go through the 1800s. What did the doctors do then? They dewormed you. As the further I got back in history through the 1800s, I started finding books, books that were published by doctors through the 1800s, books that they read and books that they learned from. And lo and behold, out of every single book, were deworming programs. Parasks. parasite programs all through america all through canada all through the world parasite programs and pictures of parasites that they had that they had found in flesh for doctors in those days

did optopsies and they found parasites and the mess man i like in america's doctor chase out of chicago he wrote three books you can get him in the library in the old book section dr chase In the center of his book, he's got a whole bunch of remedies for deworming. And you know what? He kept records. I love it. And here's what he stated. For some strange reason, after 40 years of practice, I have asked everybody how often they deworm.

And the people that deworm every year never come in for anything. They come in for checkups. They're healthy. And the people that never deworm except for two or three years down the road need some doctoring. And the people that never deworm, well, we're starting a new clinic for them because they have this strange new disease called cancer. And Dr. Chase got an 80% success rate right in Chicago in the 1800s of getting rid of cancer by deworming. So we started to search for parasite programs just to see what was going on, to see if maybe something was happening that we really didn't understand. So I did myself first.

Lo and behold, I got 8-10-inch critters out of me. They were white. First of all, they were in a toilet water, and they were all bunched up. I thought it was mucus. Until, just for a curiosity, I threw some hot water in the toilet to warm it up, and then went, and gosh, they strung out and they were swimming all over. And I thought, oh, my heavens, look at that. They're usually white. And there's some of them that look like tarantula spiders. Some of them look like grasshoppers. Some of them look like little tiny miniature sailboats. Some of them look like little spacecraft. Some of them look like Trump or Biden. This is really strange stuff. And every single person I have dewormed, I have never yet dewormed anyone where they didn't tell me, hey, I feel 25% better.

Isn't that interesting? And of course, we were getting one testimonial after another. And they say, well, anecdotes don't matter. Well, I think they do. I think this anecdote about a child put through six rounds of chemotherapy after a misdiagnosis. I think that matters. Do they have to do it to how many kids before it matters? How many kids need to die after the Trump shot before it matters, right?

And of course, they're not going to do a study about that. They never studied it before they put it out, or maybe they did, right? But let's talk about this prostate cancer case and how this deworming stuff was effective for that. Sometimes truth is stranger than fiction. I just did an interview with a guy that got prostate cancer in 2019, scheduled his surgery in April. COVID makes it so that he can't get the surgery done. So he moves the surgery into the summer of 2020. In February, he starts taking Finbenzazol, which is a dog dewormer medication.

And by the time that a surgery is scheduled in the summer, they can't have cancer anymore. His PSA levels, which is what measures prostate cancer. gone from like an 11 to a three or four. And so he cancels the surgery. And it's been five years since that first diagnosis of prostate cancer. And the cancer has never come back. He quit taking Finn Benazol in 2022. He actually just wrote a book, Finding Finbenazzole, Roger Rasmussen, on his journey

through prostate cancer. And it's very science-backed. It's a great resource guide. If you or someone you love is facing any type of cancer. Um, his brother actually got prostate cancer a couple years later in 2022. And same thing. Doctors are like, we got to get this prostate out. And his brother takes this finbinozol ivermectin protocol and his PSA levels go into normal ranges again.

They can't find the cancer. So I'm stoked for you to see this episode. It's going to come out in next week and check out finding fenbendizal if you're interested. Absolutely. educate yourself. And by the way, go to R&C store.com. You can find a world without cancer by G. Edward Griffin and many other resources about natural treatments and preventions for cancer, which the establishment does not want you to know about. And by the way, use the code night at rnc store.com to save 10% off of the supplements that are there as well as. And of

of course, when I say supplements, they have apricot seed and you get natural apricot seed or you can get it in pill form because it has a bitter taste. But B-17 and amygdalin is something that has another thing that has also been found to be very, very effective for this. After seven years and six rounds of chemotherapy, home injections and a muscle biopsy, this child was finally referred as the parent kept begging them. to you. Can I get a second opinion? Finally referred and correctly diagnosed with a muscular dystrophy type two, a disease for which there is no treatment. But of course, the treatment was maltreatment

and malpractice that they did to her. Put her through absolute hell. In 2019, she took her daughter to the hospital because she noticed her daughter was not running and jumping as well as the other kids her age. Doctors ran initial tests, but they overlooked her observations. She said she told him she couldn't walk 200 yards to school and she would randomly fall. I had to take videos and pictures to prove it. The doctor was very flippant about it. They just threw medicine at her, but nothing would make a difference. And so they don't care about your informed consent. They don't care about parental rights. They don't care about any of this stuff. She was about seven the first round of chemo. She got so sick, it was awful. She couldn't be near anybody

because it took down her immune system. She said it was horrific to watch. So then she contracted viral meningitis as a side effect of a blood product a doctor gave her, and she was forced to stay in a dark room. And they tortured this little girl for six years. Well, there's other ways that the government can torture you. We have a cancer of bureaucracy. And now the Trump administration, which is saying, we want to deregulate. We want to have, if you're going to create a new regulation,

you're going to have to get rid of 10 old regulations. regulations. Well, you know, there's a difference between different regulations. I mean, you can have very minor insignificant regulations and you get rid of 10 of those and you can have one regulation that completely destroys people's lives and businesses. They are not something that you can just numerate, right? And this is the absurdity of what's there, especially because the absurdity is the fact that they know that these bureaucracies, like the USDA, are conducting regulatory abuse. That's the title of this article from the Epic Times. The Small Business Association, SBA and USDA to combat regulatory abuse lawfare aimed at farmers and ranchers. And of course,

they're not the only ones who are getting it, but it's especially egregious there. We just had the massive culling of millions of chickens because of bird flu. And if there were small businesses, it put them out of business. The big businesses made a lot of money because the chickens that were left and the eggs that were left, they could charge a lot more money for. But if you were just a small operator, they came in and ran one of these phony PCR tests, which, again, you can find anything that you imagine. If you use a PCR test and you magnify it with enough cycles. They magnify this stuff with the standard cycles that they were using during the pandemic fraud

up to a trillion times. And so as the guy who invented it, Carrie Mullis, and he got a Nobel Prize for it, he said, you can find anything if you're magnified enough. And it's not legitimate to magnify it. And he said, you can't use it to diagnose the presence of any kind of disease. Because you're magnifying it so much, it's insignificant. It's not necessarily the cause of that disease. It's just present that's there.

So it was really lawfare that was being waged against these small business. and farms. The strategic use of legal proceedings to hinder targets. But the Trump administration is no stranger to regulatory lawfare or any other kind of lawfare. Trump loves to sue people. The SBA's agreement with the USDA gives producers a direct line to report the regulations and the rules that are driving up costs and impacting the productivity.

Well, that probably should have a T-shirt. kill the USDA, not chickens. We should have done that when they were doing this back with a bird flu. The USDA will run a centralized portal that will receive lawfare complaints involving federal agencies and investigate itself. But any complaint involving the USDA will be handled by the department. Other complaints will be referred to the Small Business Association for the appropriate agency. So they're going to police themselves. Don't worry, everything will be fine.

Well, get rid of yourself because there is no authority and no need. need for a federal department of agriculture. If the states want to do that, the states would be the ones that would be doing that, but not the federal government. Family farms should not have to spend time and resources that they don't have, fighting crushing regulations or costly legal battles, waged by radical environmentalists, whether they are inside of or outside of the government. And that is absolutely true, but that is the reality. And so Trump, in a directive in January of 2025, signed a directive called Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation.

It's too bad he didn't read it. Instead, he did tariffs. Tariffs are taxes. Taxes are not going to unleash prosperity. As I've said from the very beginning, it is, you know, it's the taxes, stupid. That's what's strangling this economy. The taxes and the regulation. That's what strangling manufacturing.

You put tariffs on. All that does is add another degree of regulation and expenses to people when they try to make things. Because we don't have a country right now that is completely self-sufficient. So you've got to get stuff from abroad. If you've got to get your metal from abroad, now your cars are more expensive and they're non-competitive with other people. So stop doing that. Just get the boot of government off of people's necks. For each new regulation issued by the agency, Trump ordered that at least 10 previous regulations be identified for elimination again.

Not all regulations are created equal. What you really need to do is you need to stop the rule by bureaucracy. Bureaucracies are making the rules, and they are the rulers. And if they make a rule, they claim that you have no due process. You have no presumption of innocence. They say, that only applies to laws. that are created by Congress. Well, Congress doesn't write laws much anymore. They create agencies, just like Nancy Pelosi said. We have to create it so we can find out what's in it.

Obamacare. We're going to kick this over to the agency to run this. And they will write the devilish details in it. We can't be bothered to do that in Congress. We've got show trials to run here. And we have contributions to collect. And so the Congress doesn't do its job. It abdicated its job. and then they come up with this legal fiction, which is what has happened with the IRS, where you are guilty until you can prove that you're innocent when they come after you. It also is something we see with the drug war, but now it happens with all of the bureaucracies. And they say, you know, it's why when they say civil asset forfeiture, if they come in under the drug war and steal your property, never convict you,

never even charge you with a drug crime, but they convict your property, because I think your property was somehow connected to some kind of drug, quote-unquote, crime, then you have to sue them in civil court. And you have no presumption of innocence. You don't get all the protections that are enumerated and the Bill of Rights. It's all just thrown out the window. Fixed that. That is such a simple solution.

And it is foundational to all these federal abuses that are there. So we're delivering real protection under the farmer and rancher, Freedom Framework, says the USDA. Well, that remains to be seen. Meanwhile, you know, this article from wired.com, people used to control machines. They don't anymore. Yeah, we can't even control the machinery of government. Humanity has become disconnected from the physical world, and he uses a couple of examples here,

from stick shift cars to postcards. And, of course, Eric Peters has talked about this a lot so have on. and this is an interesting take on it from one guy who's a philosopher who wrote a book about this and that's referred to in the Wired article. The problem snuck up on me, he said. Probably snuck up on you as well. Slowly over time, the world started withdrawing from us. Automation took over ordinary tasks.

Things that used to have buttons suddenly did not. Basic activities got taken over by computers. I was slow to notice it happening too, but But once I did, I saw it everywhere and every day. I can't tell you when the realization formed fully in my brain. But a turning point came on an unassuming day as I piloted my car home from work. He said, I drive a little Volkswagen hatchback, hot hatch. You know, like the, I think it started out with the Volkswagen rabbits.

I had one of those back in the late 70s with a stick shift. A lot of fun to drive in part because it comes to the manual transmission or at least did. when I bought mine more than 15 years ago. But he talks about the death of the manual transmission. He said in the year 2000, CarMax said that more than 15% of its new and used cars had stick shifts. By 2020, that number had dropped to only 2.4%. Car and Driver magazine even launched a campaign to save the manuals in 2010. They said learning to operate the entire car would offer drivers a better experience.

and that's why I wanted my kids when they learned how to drive on and learn how to drive a stick shift. You know, the more things become automatic, and that even includes a transmission, the less you have to pay attention. I mean, if you are driving a stick shift, you're thinking about what gear you're going to be in when the car up there slows down or this or that. And so you're really more focused than in the processes. One of the things that makes it more fun, but it also makes you safer because the thing that is the most dangerous is not speed necessarily. But attention, it's attention and focus that keeps you from having an accent. The speed only magnifies your mistake. Natural bonds between action and perception are necessary, not only to operate a motor vehicle

safely and effectively, but also to fully be human in the age of machines. A car or a computer or a paintbrush or marshmallow is a prosthesis. When you put on a suit, you become yourself, but different. Just like the jockey rides a horse, so the driver who, who pilots an automobile. That's right. I think it's kind of a joke with my miata. A lot of people say you don't sit in a miata.

You wear it. It's so small that you kind of wiggle yourself into it. And it really is like a suit. But it's a lot of fine. Crawford, the guy who wrote the book, tells a different story about test driving a 400 horsepower Audi RS3. It had all the options, including paddle shifting and automatic transmission. Very powerful and capable, he said, but he could not connect with the car.

You know, something that the guy, the comedian, British comedian, plays Mr. Bean. Rowan Atkinson said once, and really stuck with me. He said these new cars, these sophisticated cars, because he's got a lot of money. He can buy a hypercar. He said, you don't really drive them. You manage them. That's pretty true. He said this lesson was emphasized for me when he published a Stick Shift article.

A guy liked it so much that he sent him a very, ancient postcard that he had and put in some old stamps. And as he looked at it, he thought, well, you know, this is another example of the physical world that has disappeared from us. And that is the loss that we now all face. And of course, there's another loss that we are all facing. And that is the loss of our liberty and the core liberty. The reason it was the First Amendment is because of free speech. So when we come back, we're going to talk. about how the Trump administration is going after people whose speech they don't like. And it's not just a Trump administration.

It's several conservative organizations. And I've got to ask, what are they trying to conserve? Certainly isn't the Constitution they're trying to conserve. It's not our liberty they're trying to conserve. It's not our freedom and dignity because free speech is foundational to that. No, they're trying to conserve something else. Their political advantage. We're going to take a quick break, folks, and we will be right back.

You're listening to the David Knight Show. In July of 1896, exactly 130 years ago, I warned this great nation of the government's plan to crucify mankind upon a cross of gold. Of course, that was before they started to bleed us dry with a death of a thousand fiat paper cuts. But after you bought every single command. David Night Show coin in gold color. The podcast's gold reserves are depleted. They issued 100 numbered gold colored coins and declared the mint closed. The people cried out, free silver.

Well, the likes of J.P. Morgan can't stop this all-new commemorative coin. Now in silver color, while supplies last, this commemorative coin does not contain precious metal, but does keep the show on the air equal to the gold color. This limited run is numbered 1 to 100. Get yours today at the David Knight Show.com. Hurry, because supplies are disappearing quicker than the purchasing power of the dollar.

And so is free speech disappearing faster than the Fiat dollar. And it is disappearing by Fiat and also by lawfare. You know, the Trump administration says we're going to deregulate the bureaucratic, attacks on farmers and there are many of those and those should go. But they are escalating the lawfare and the bureaucratic attacks on these different networks that they disagree with.

If you don't support the freedom of people to say things that you disagree with, you don't support free speech at all. Don't we understand that yet? I mean, that is an axiom. And it just is another example of the utter contempt of the Trump regime for free speech. speech. You know, they talk about deregulation, but it's just a joke. Donald Trump himself has engaged in lawfare over and over again. He's got a $10 billion lawsuit against the BBC right now because he doesn't like what they had to say. He didn't like what ABC did in terms of, I think

it was ABC or what, no, CBS, I think. The interview with Lala Harris. And even though he won the election, he comes back and he says, well, I don't like the way that you edited it. Are you kidding me? and they didn't change anything in it. We always edit. Everybody has to edit because you've got a fixed amount of time and you have to fit this stuff into that amount of time. So they didn't do it to make it look better. But that isn't the issue, even if they did it to make her look better.

That's within their prerogative to do that. That's their opinion, their viewpoint. And although I disagree with that, they have a right to do that. So the FCC led by Brendan Carr, Is targeting ABC show now the view? You're not allowed to have a view. Get the point? And they're attacking them because it said they're not a bona fide news outlet.

Seriously? I thought they were news. No, they're not. It's opinion. So what? That comes into the rubric of free speech. Why would you have to be a bona fide news network? Well, again, that's because the uncomforts.

constitutional FCC carved out some rules and said, well, if you're bona fide news, you don't have to be balanced. But if you're not bona fide news, you have to balance the politicians that you got on. They're very upset about the fact that they platformed this darling of the left, this guy who says, I hate Christianity, but he's supposedly a Christian seminary guy, saying to be a pastor, Tala Rico in Texas. What a fraud of this guy. And they're concerned. that they can't expose him. If you can't expose Tala Rica, you might as well hang it up. This guy is just a target-rich environment.

But the Disney-owned broadcast network is telling the FCC, quote, these reply comments arise from an unusual posture that is one of attacking free speech. They said ABC did not come to the Federal Communications Commission asking for anything. The commission compelled ABC to file the petition for a. declaratory ruling at issue here, directing the network to explain that the government should not dictate what political candidates may appear on the view, even though the commission itself resolved that very question in ABC's favor more than two decades ago, ruling in 2002 that the view is a bona fide news program. Whenever I see that, especially used this way, I always think back

to brother where art thou. That was one of my favorite. I probably, the favorite George Clooney film I've ever seen. It was done by the Coen Brothers. And at one point, you know, oh, she's bona fide. You know, this is somebody that has credentials. And the bottom line is that free speech doesn't have to be bona fide. Free speech doesn't have to be correct. Your opinions don't have to be correct.

And they don't have to align with the government. Whatever regime happens to be in power. And free press is. It's just another example of that. If you don't have free speech and a free press, you don't have a free people. That's why when you look at these attacks that have been started by the Zionist lobby against free speech, and the Republicans have jumped in with this with both feet, this is a direct threat on our freedom, our fundamental freedom, and our liberties fundamentally.

So, bona fide news shows are exempt from FCC equal-time rules. where do you find any equal time rules in the First Amendment? I don't see anything at all about that. As a matter of fact, I see a clear prohibition of the government restricting speech at all. And so this is all happening, by the way, as we look at the hypocrisy and the Trump regime of consolidating all media under the Zionist Ellison billionaire family. I mean, they're buying up everything. and they have a point of view, which I disagree with. But they are going to purge any point of view that they don't agree, that doesn't agree with them.

So you've got conservative organizations are now fighting against license renewals for ABC stations. A group of prominent conservative organizations. And again, what are these conservatives trying to conserve? It certainly isn't free speech. It certainly isn't the Constitution. Maybe what they're trying to preserve is a system of, monarchy of tyranny, a system of King George, as I usually call him King George the turd. They want to deny license renewal.

Eight local television stations owned and operated by ABC. And they accused the network of political, racial, and sexual bias. Again, conservatives should be pushing against the licensing of speech and the licensing of the press. Instead, they are accepting that and weaponizing it. ABC engages, they say, an explicit racial and gender discrimination. ABC cozies up to the Communist Chinese Party and it airbrushes over religious and ethnic cleansing, presumably by the Chinese Communist Party, but if there is religious and ethnic cleansing by Israel, don't you dare oppose that? that is the conservative rules.

So we should not be ruled by anybody in terms of doing it. Who are these organizations that are doing it? Well, the first one they mentioned is Media Research Center. Again, they should know better. I mean, it was Britt Bozell, the founder of Media Research Center, whose son was caught up in all this January of the sixth stuff. He went there to peacefully protest, which is also part of the First Amendment. You throw out the First Amendment and guess what?

you and your kids are going to get arrested by somebody who doesn't like your speech. It wasn't about him being violent or destroying property or anything like that. Then there's the Article III project. A legal group started by conservative Trump-aligned activist Mike Davis. Again, you should be fighting for free speech in court. And instead, they don't want to fight these bad ideas with their ideas. Another petition was filed by the Trump-affiliated

conservative advocacy group, America First Legal, co-founded by none other than Stephen Miller. That should tell you everything, shouldn't it? Well, as we look at this, the political slime that is in Washington right now is truly amazing. We have, in Texas, we have the unfortunate choice.

I'm not in Texas anymore, but we have the unfortunate choice of having to choose between Ken Paxton and Talarico, I don't even remember what his first name is anymore. But Ken Paxton is going to be upholding the faith and family flag there. As he gallivance around Europe with his mistress. This is the Daily Mail. They first exposed that he had a mistress.

And he has a wife who was in the Senate, and he was Attorney General. He's had one scandal after the other. But, of course, the way you explain all this stuff away, It's just to say, well, it's just political attacks that are made on me. I mean, we've heard that over and over again. We heard that in terms of the House paging scandals. And there's nothing to see here. We don't have any Republicans that are coming after kids.

So that's just the left doing that. And you had the guy who was Dennis Hastert, who was the longest serving speaker in the house. He goes on with Rush Limbaugh, and he just poohs all that stuff. yet Dennis Hastert himself was a pedophile. We found that out later. And the same thing is happening with the Democrats with their candidate in Maine. And it's on the view where they're saying they're saying, well, I got to say I just have to hold my nose and vote for this guy.

So you're doing the same thing that you accused Trump people of holding their nose and voting for somebody who appears to be a pedophile. And so over and over again, we see the fact that it doesn't matter to them what the person's character is. it doesn't matter to them even what their principles are. And certainly their policies don't matter if their principle and character is not there. You can't trust them to do what they say they're going to do if they don't have any character. And so when you look at Ken Paxton, Daily Mail got footage of him and his paramour, as they call her, a Christian influencer, Tracy Duhon, 58.

they started their affair. Ken Paxton, the guy who is all for conservative values, anything, and this Christian influencer, began having their so-called affair, their adultery, well before they got divorced. As a matter of fact, he's still not divorced. She divorced her husband, but he's still not divorced. The pair jetted off to Iceland for a romantic getaway last weekend. As Americans celebrated the country's 250th anniversary, Paxton was in England walking side by side with Duhon.

The Daily Mail first exposed the affair between the two in September, revealing that Paxton and the Christian Influencer Mother of Seven became romantically involved in May of 2024 after meeting at the Kentucky Derby when they were both still married. She has since divorced her car dealership mogul husband, as they describe him in the Daily Mail, and she has bought a $2 million mansion in Dallas suburb, which Paxton is now listing as his official residence. And more on that in a moment here. Paxton, however, is still legally married and his wife, when they had impeachment charges brought up against him, he was impeached in the House. But they didn't convict him in the Senate.

His wife voted to convict him. She said, hey, I know he doesn't have any convictions. Let's give him one. Ken Paxson and his mistress have been together again since May 24 when they were both married At that point it appeared to dawn on When they were following him around the camera

They said at one point it dawned on him that he's being filmed He storms ahead, leaving her behind She's seen bending over As if to pick up something and then walking on herself You know, this is something When they televise all the stuff And put on social media, the wedding of Taylor's Swift. You had all this parade of celebrities that were there. And Karen and I just looked at,

see if we could identify the people, because they look really different when they're not all, you know, there's not so much preparation made to make them look good for the camera. And I said, okay, who's that guy? Yeah, I know. I recognize him. And it's like, why is he walking so far ahead of his wife? And they were all doing that. It's like they didn't want to be seen with their wives. It was kind of crazy. Anyway, um, uh, they said, that it's not the relationship, however, that's got Republicans running scared. Look, a lot of Republicans don't care about the affair. They just want to have a Republican in, and they don't want this other guy in.

Didn't we see that from the Democrats when it was Bill Clinton? Didn't we say from the Republicans when it was Donald Trump? Aren't we seeing it from the Democrats again now when it is this guy in Maine who's running for Senate? And now here we are in Texas with the Attorney General. is it any wonder that our country is circling the drain and going down the drain? Because we don't care about character. We don't care about integrity. And so what do you get?

We've got sleeves bags who will tell you anything. And they will not love you in the morning. Not in the morning after the election. After they get what they want from you, they're gone. There are criminals who betray voters just like they betray their spouses. If they don't have any fidelity to a spouse, what makes you think they're going to have fidelity to you? Paxton and his wife were married in 1986 after meeting at Baylor University, Baptist University in Waco, Texas. And this, of course, is where Ken Starr went and covered up the sex scandals of the football team that was there after he had been the co-defender along with Alan Dershowitz of Jeffrey Epstein.

I wonder why it is that people don't take Christian. institutions seriously. Maybe the Christian institutions don't take their principles seriously. He's so smug. Any other politician would be out campaigning over the 4th of July, but he thinks he can do whatever he wants because he's got the president's endorsement. That's exactly right. And there's going to be a lot of money that's going to come into the race and the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars to support Paxton. That's why he's not worried about that. That's why he goes to London. with his mistress over the 4th of July weekend rather than waving the flag and campaigning.

So, you know, send your money to this guy, this philanderer, so that you can stop the Christ hating Tala Rico. This is what we wind up with when we only have two parties to choose from. We have this duopoly system. And it's never going to change. As long as we've got only two choices, you're always going to have this. Well, you know, vote for me because I'm not as bad as this other. guy. It's always that kind of moral relativism. And that's exactly the kind of moral relativism

that you see with the people who say, well, I'm just going to hold my nose and vote for this guy. You know, what about your candidate? Yeah, you've got people that you support that do this as well. It's always that. You know, when we talk about them violating the Constitution or violating their oath to their wife, any of this stuff, it's always, yeah, but what about your guy? He's even worse. It's like, throw both of them in jail. that's what I say. Don't make an excuse for them. That is the worst kind of moral relativism.

I call it what aboutism? Yeah, well, what about your guy? What did you do? What did he do when he was in office? And I would also like to point out that whenever you have first past the post voting, that will always wind up with a two-party duopoly. So the path to reform is first fixing it with something like, you know, approval voting or the type that they have with the runoff elections.

Yeah, ranking and that type of thing. Yeah, that's an important. Well, we did have multi-party candidates until we went up to the Civil War. So there's other things that are there as well. But you're right, Lance. We do need to get rid of this first-past-the-post type of thing. But historically, it always winds up going to a two-party duopoly

when you have first-past-the-posts, since it doesn't really lend itself well to multi-parties. Yeah, when you have a parliamentary system, You have people, we've pointed this out, you know, usually the leading candidate in the election does not get more than 50% of the vote. Usually they get like 40% or something, and they have to put together a coalition of other minor parties to get past the 50% mark. Now, we can't change the Constitution to go to a parliamentary system, but the rules for the election really rightfully belong to the states and states can do things about this, the kind of things that, Lance is talking about. But it's also the ballot access rules, right? You're not even allowed to get on the ballot, I know, because I did this a lot with the third party. I'm so discussing both

Republicans and Democrats my entire life that I wanted to run as independent or work with a third party. And I did. And the ballot access rules are designed to preserve their duopoly. And then if you go through the Sisyphus task of rolling that rock up the hill and you get on the ballot, guess what? You get shut out of the debates. And the retort that they used was always the same thing that we heard about censorship by social media companies. Well, this debate is being run by the North Carolina Association of Broadcasters or whatever, right? This is a private organization. They can do whatever they want. If they want to shut out your free speech, if they want to deny the public an opportunity to hear all the candidates on the ballot, well, that's up to them.

There's nothing we can do about it. You wouldn't want us to go in and compel them to honor free speech. It's like, well, yes, I would. That's the purpose of government to protect our God-given rights, isn't it? So the attack that's being taken by some of the media on the left is because he's now living in a different place because he's now left his home with his wife, and he's now living in this $2 million mansion with his mistress, he has been using an address that he didn't live in

while voting in six elections over the past two years. While he's been warning voters that it is illegal to misrepresent your residence on election records, well, that is straining at a gnat and ignoring the major issue that is here. Major issue is his character. And, of course, also the character of his opponent, it, Tala Rico. I don't support either one of these guys. And so they're really reaching to do this.

Meanwhile, when you look at what is happening with Mitch McConnell, as we pointed out yesterday, handy as a substack, eye handy. And he was talking about in decades of experiences, EMS. He said, it's difficult enough to get a good outcome when somebody goes into cardiac arrest. But if they're found unconscious after cardiac arrest, rest. And typically they're found in the morning. He pointed out, just like Mitch McConnell, that means that he'd had a heart attack quite a bit before they found him, most likely, during the night while everybody was asleep. He said, in those types of situations, probably the best prognosis that you can have with that is brain death. And because of the denial of oxygen. And so the question is, when you've got Senate Republican leaders,

say that they have spoken to Mitch McConnell in the hospital, are they telling the truth? Or are they trying to prevent the Democrat governor of Kentucky from appointing a Democrat into his seat because the election is just a few months away? And then you have the Republican candidate running against an incumbent, perhaps. So do you think that they would lie to keep that from happening?

Maybe I think the only way they're going to be talking to Mitch McConnell is if they've got some kind of a seance so the witch of Indoor or something. Trying to make these politicians look more competent than they are to keep them in office. That would never happen. No, that would never happen. Meanwhile, when you look at the other side, Stephen King, as they said on X, it says, dark half in a bizarre defense of Graham Platner.

This is the guy who had had multiple accusations of sexual assault and rape, you know, just like Bill Clinton or Donald Trump. And they all just blew past it. That doesn't matter. He's got a Nazi tattoo. That doesn't matter. And he says, I didn't know it was a Nazi tattoo, right? It was something.

I forget what his excuse was. I don't really care. But he had it removed. So there was something about it that was unusual. And now a new, more detailed, I guess, allegation has come out from another woman. Stephen King made it very clear to everyone in social media that Platner was still his guy. He said, Graham Platner may drop out. I hope he doesn't.

But meanwhile, the abuser-in-chief. just keeps on keeping on. So again, they see Trump's sexual assault and rape. They see what he is doing to the Constitution. And yet, you know, and they oppose that. But they don't oppose their guy doing it. They don't oppose their people attacking the Constitution. They don't oppose their people doing rape and sexual assault.

That was the interesting thing about Epstein. The fact that Bill Clinton and Donald Trump are partners in all this stuff. He says, say what you want. if you knew the whole truth about everyone in the Senate and the House of Representatives, those chambers would be dead empty. Jesus said, let those without sin cast the first stone. Well, he was talking about adultery there, not about rape. And you know, whenever we get to that passage, many people have heard how it brought up before,

where was the man, right? If it was adultery, why did they only drag out the woman to kill her? Was this a setup? Was this another test of Christ? You know, the reaction to all this stuff, whatever happens, it's like, oh, yeah, well, everybody's doing it in the Senate. So let's just send another person, just like the people we have in the Senate and the House right now. Let's send another one up there just like them. You know, a bunch of rapists and pedophiles.

That kind of moralism, that kind of what-aboutism. Let's just embrace the corruption. We are Rome, Anthopotomac, and we've got 500, colophiles. Ligula's up there, who cares? You know, just give me my money. It's, yes, a sizable proportion of these people, if it were known, would probably be as bad or worse. But then to defend someone that you do know about it with this guy, it's like it's accepting that. Now it's okay for all of them.

And it's all because they buy into this tribalistic identity that is there. And again, we said this on the view. the same people that the Trump administration trying to get shut down. You have Sonny Hosten who says she loaths the GOP so much that she would still support a Democrat Senate candidate who has just been accused of rape.

That's the headline. And folks, this is the Hegelian route to hell. We need to stop the duopoly here and we need to stop the decadence that is there in our leaders. You know, when you go back to George Washington, what was it about him that was outstanding.

And it was his character. What was it that the, that other presidents, like John Adams said, he said, in order to preserve our form of government, we have to have virtuous people running it. That's why our form of government is absolutely dead. We don't have virtuous people running it. We have political parties,

and we have the people who have aligned themselves so closely with these political parties that they will not admit the evil that is being done, whether it is against an individual or whether that evil is being done to us collectively by attacking our free speech or by destroying the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. So as they were talking, you had Alyssa Griffin who kicked things off. She's the daughter of Joseph Farah, who has World Night Daily. She called the allegations credible and corroborated. She also called the allegations against Platiner.

damning and horrific and urged him to drop out. She said, then you had Sarah Haynes who agreed. She said, but like Alyssa, I was off of Platner a long time ago before calling attention to what she sees as a, quote, disgusting time in politics, where voters pick by party and not by person. Let me just say, I'm not a fan of picking somebody by the person either. That's what we did with Trump, isn't it? No, you pick people by principle.

You pick people by character. And the character is how you know whether or not they're going to stand by the principles that they are telling you about. You know, for most politicians, what they tell you when they run for office are just positions on issues. They don't have any principles on those issues.

She said, but if you're one of those people who are willing to plug your nose, you're the problem, singling out Hosten, who then offered her take. And she said, well, I guess I'm not. I'm the problem then because I am one of those people. The Republican Party, the bar is just so low. She said, and I can't believe that they want to try to assume the moral high ground.

Yeah, let's not even talk about morality. Let's just kick it to the curb. Hosten brought up allegations of binge drinking Pete Hegsseth. And, you know, again, this is why they always do. And this is what Trump's attorney general, who, Pam Bondi, who, when she went to the Senate, somebody would ask her a question, even about an issue. And she would immediately start up, yeah, but what about you? You are a wife beating.

Have you stopped beating your wife yet, that type of thing? And so she would not answer any questions. She would go on a personal attacks with everybody. And so Griffin came back and she said, well, why not condemn them all? Which is what I agree with. Joy Behard jumped in then to diffuse the situation and said, we all agree. This Plattner person should have been thrown. out after the emergence of the Nazi

sympathizing tattoo, which Plattner had removed after pleading that he didn't know what it was about. And it might have been some of the other issues as well. But again, that is the view, and I don't know why they get so much attention with it. I mean, the people who comment there

are just not even well informed, and they certainly don't understand the bigger picture. But it is a reflection of a worldview that is dragging this country down without any mistake about it. Well, we're going to take a quick break, folks, and we will be right back. Stay with us.

Defending the American Dream. You're listening to the David Knight Show. Well, we were just talking about our philandering politicians and the low standard that both sides hold their own party to. Here's the New York Post, a party to. promoting the kind of selfish lover of self-aditude that is destroying the society. They run a hit piece on what they call trad wives. And we're not talking about just the influencers.

That was the word where the term came up. You had a lot of young women who dressed up like they were I Love Lucy and became influencers and said, Oh, look when I bake all day and this and that. You know, that is a phony tipkin version of marriage, folks. That is not traditional marriage. And when anybody calls himself a trad wife, you got to say, well, I don't know where you got your view of marriage from. Did you get it from TikTok or the Bible? And, you know, when we look at many times people talk about, well, the founders, Christian,

well, we don't know. Only God knows those types of things. Nevertheless, what they did was they reflected a society that thoroughly has. had a Christian worldview. I mean, the values that we have of all men being created and being equal before God in terms of the way the government treats them, those are Christian values. And they embrace the Christian worldview of the society at large. And so when you look at the fact that we now have Republicans and Republican mouthpieces

like The New York Post attacking marriage, and this is nothing but just one, you know, Here's the headline. Divorced, destitute, and Left for Dead. The dark side of tradwife life after 35. Oh, you gave up everything to have a marriage and a family. Shame on you. You should have pursued a career instead. Wrong path. And they're quoting in the New York Post,

are quoting all of these feminists and everything. Nobody talks about the, it speaks to the other side. Nobody offers the Christian view of marriage. I mentioned the other day as, you know, I didn't talk about the big wedding of Taylor Swift and the football player, but the fact is that over the weekend, there was a tiny little story that I saw on one website about a couple, both of whom had survived to 99, and they were married and celebrating their 80th wedding anniversary. Nobody talks to them and finds out what it is. Actually, that one publication did.

It turned out that they were talking about the fact that you have to forgive each other. They were talking about the fact they were Christians and that was the center of all this, that yes, you're going to have things that you get upset with the other person about. But if you make Christ the center of your marriage, that makes all the difference in the world. I'm not talking just about, oh, yeah, we're part of a homeschooling group and we go to church every day. No, it's much, much deep in that. Listen to the way her case is presented here. She married at age 26.

She eagerly abandoned her dreams of pursuing a career in art to instead satisfy her man's every command. Okay, stop right there. They began by saying with her husband, hailed as king of the castle. No, no, no. Trump is not the model for marriage in case you didn't realize. Jesus is. and Jesus said, don't be like the,

don't be like the pagans who lorded over other people. If you are in a position of authority, don't use that authority to dominate people, all right? You have dominion without domination. That's the point. You have different roles. And that is the real issue here. And it's also about lovers of self.

You know, put your career and your personal stuff first over everybody else. That's the message. of this article in New York Post, along with the message of feminism that is anti-family and anti-child. Yeah, it's really amazing to me that they're trying to make the case that if you pursue a family over your career, you'll regret it in your old age. That's, I guess they're like, it's what the government does when they call their most unpatriotic Bill the Patriot Act or whatever. They're going for the obvious argument against it in order to, preempt it.

That's right. Yeah, when they talk about faith-based, you know, I've been to many weddings where they read the passage from 1st Corinthians 13. This is not a TikTok video, but it is the Bible. And love does not demand its own way, right? Love keeps no record of being wronged. And it's not about your own selfish interest. As a matter of fact, that we were warned was going to be a sign of the last day is that people would become lovers of self and not of other people. Whenever we see in the Bible, whenever society would turn back to God, it would start with God turning the hearts of the fathers back to their children. How about turning the mother's hearts back to the children? This is what the media, both Republican and Democrat, is working very hard to keep from happening.

And so from growing the family's produce in her private garden to gussing up in sexy outfits and cosmetics before he came home from work, she was just his slave, right? Well, again, a husband does not command, a husband does not dominate. God never made anything with two heads. There's always got to be one head that's there. And there is a give and take, and people need to understand that marriage, just like any of the, investment that you make, whether it's stocks or whether it's gold or whatever, it's not always up into the right. It's not always getting better with time. But there's times when it goes down. But the overall trend is better if you have the right values in place. And so they mocked the

idea that she would put herself second for anything. She found herself feeling like a prisoner in marriage, she said. And again, we've heard this all before. This is nothing new when we were in high school. I remember Carly Simon's song, you know, that's all, that's the way I've always heard it should be. You want to marry me? Okay, we'll marry. She talks about how awful her parents' marriage is.

You know, you've got two people who are married, but still alone, right? That was a line for another song. I was with you, but you were alone. And so that's what she's describing. That is not a real marriage. That is a phony version of marriage. That is a TikTok version of marriage. That is a media mischaracterization of that.

And so she says the New York Post is just one in the rising army of former tradwives, who after saying I do to a life of submissive servitude. Is that what the wedding pals really say? No, that's not it at all. Then they warn people about the not so Instagrammable dark side. Yeah. If you want a career in art, like a Taylor Swift maybe, she comes along with a 40-page prenuptial agreement that she had her football

spouse sign, and it has a $20 million infidelity clause there. And so you really hit you with a penalty there as well. There aren't a lot of trad wives, says the New York Post, over 35 or 40, because they've either been divorced or they moved away from the lifestyle after learning how toxic it can be. Well, you know, Karen and I never approached this in a formula. And as we have grown older and wiser, our marriage has become more traditional. So people use this term, but it really indicates an influencer mentality. As I said before, they're getting their view of marriage from TikTok, not from the Bible. These are people who are posing as, I'm the perfect wife.

Look at this. I wear these 1950s clothes and all the rest of this stuff. And the New York Post takes that characterization and uses it to attack marriage. Yeah, you would think pretty much the vast majority of marriages that last when people, people are in their old age are traditional marriages. But they say, oh, well, it never lasts after 35 or 40 because it is to them just about the posts on social media. And it's who they see.

They look at the posts on social media. They look at their friends who have the same values and they don't value marriage. They don't value their partner. New York City feminist speaker and author is who the New York Post goes to next in their diatribe against marriage. family. She asked a seemingly lighthearted question on social media. Where are they hiding all the 47-year-old trad wives? Well, my wife is here. She's not hiding. Karen and I have been married for 47 years. So he's older than 47 years. This is a stupid question. Why are they not out there

espousing how amazing this lifestyle is? Well, because they're living it. Because they're not a potent can village because they're not out there posing as this or that. They're actually doing the reality of it. That's the difference between an influencer and somebody who's actually raising a family, educating kids and involved in their marriage rather than social media. So she said, I got that point in the marriage where I was like, okay. Oh, man. No, no, she said, oh my God, it's what she said. Who is her God? I don't know. Is this reality what I want to do? with my life, you know, like anything, as I said, and just going to have its ups and downs.

And if you truly are faith-based, as they said, they didn't say what faith she was. But look, marriage and love either drive you, either drive the selfishness out of you, or the selfishness drives you out of the marriage. It's just that simple. As I said, people grow into this. You know, nobody comes in and says,

Okay, we had a wedding ceremony now. We understand how all this works. You have to work that out. It's a give and take. And the bottom line is that love does not seek its own. That is the key thing. So get your advice on marriage from God, not from TikTok, and certainly not from the New York Post or these social media influencers. She said, I just became dead inside.

And she said, and that's why they're not promoting the law. lifestyle like some of the young people and some of the popular trad wives online. Yeah, people stop giving me attention and praise for being such a good trad wife online. Yeah, that's right. It's all about creating this facade about how perfect your life is. That's one of the things about social media. So her own decision to escape from tradwifery came when she was 39 weeks pregnant at the hospital. That's when she decided that she wanted to leave her husband. How about that? So I told my husband, I wanted to get a job so I could, a little job, so I could retire him, adding that, quote,

most men in trad marriages enjoy feeling like he is your God, he is your leader, he is your mouthpiece to God. You should do everything to serve him. Again, as I said before, that view of marriage and the role of the man is not biblical. We are not there to dominate, to dictate to people. And again, she says, and I've found that most men in trad marriage, who are you to speak for that? Have you done a study? Why does the New York Post putting that kind of nonsense out? That's just a couple of people that she's known. Or maybe not even a couple. Maybe it's just her own husband that she saw being that way. How would you dare characterize all the people have traditional marriages that They have these experts like this New York feminist to weigh in on the issue of tradwives.

That's right. That's right. So she spent two years stashing cash. And when she had enough, she pulled a trigger and divorced him. And now at this point she's got a two-year-old, right? So she'd leave him to be, or she, to be raised by the father without a mother? Or does she take them with her to raise them without a father? and to make the kids fatherless. Well, it looks like she took them with her.

She's now responsible for herself and her kids, and she said her newfound freedom is crazy empowering. Yeah, this is, you know, the bottom line is if you've got somebody who presents themselves as embracing traditional values and Christ, you better be sure that they're not just selling you a line. This selfish anti-family anti-Christ hit piece by this GOP mouthpiece, The New York Post, is a one-side attack on marriage without ever having anything good to offer about marriage. And they never talked to anybody who had a marriage that worked. The GOP has really internalized liberal feminism and Hollywood's follow your dream religion.

This is why I say over and over again, the Republican Party has become the Democrat Party of my youth. The Democrat Party of my youth has become the Communist Party. And so when you look at this, this is another example of how media sells this. Of course, people are hit by this worldview constantly in movies and in school. So who is it that speaks for God and for a good family and what marriage should look like? We have to understand that it's not perfect. And I wouldn't ask her. So is your single parent life?

of the living the feminist dream? Is that a perfect life? Or does it have its trade-offs? You know, why did her marriage need to be perfect then? If her single family life is not perfect? And they talk about a lot of the challenges that she looks at. And they go to several people in this article. Finally, one of them, they end the article with a person who says,

well, I want my daughter to see me as an empowered woman, capable of making my own decisions and having my own identity. There you go. Feed that selfishness to your child and see how that works out down the road. Destroy their life, just like you've destroyed your life. Well, while we're talking about life, Elon Musk has his own answer to mortality. This is from American thinker. Elon Musk's answer to mortality, ask most Silicon Valley billionaires whether you think about death.

You'll get some version of the Declaration of World. war. You know, we're just talking about Brian Johnson, who spends millions of dollars a year, monitoring constantly, I mean, just this obsession with keeping the machinery of his body going. And it's like, is that all there is to life? Do you actually do anything? I mean, you know, go jump out of a plane for fun or something. That is, no, he's not going to do that because that could possibly kill him. He's got to not die. And so you're so afraid of dying that you can't ever live. Peter Thiel has funded life extension research for years and spoken out about fighting death and Jeff Bezos and Sam Altman. They all think the possibility of radically slowing or even

ending human aging and therefore ending death. Elon Musk, however, has had a different approach, which I thought was kind of interesting. The wealthiest of them all, arguably the most publicly concerned with the long-term survival of humanity, at least that's what he says. When he spoke at the World Economic Forum in conversation with Larry Fink, who's now taken Klaus Schwab's place there, Elon Musk said, well, you know, there is some benefit to death, but not the benefit that he's, that we're thinking about. He warned that dramatically extending human lifespans could lead to an ossification of society, that you would have the same people in charge all the time. Maybe he's looking at what wire.

Washington looks like right now, these people, even when they're comatose in the hospital, they're still our leaders, right? And so you have this ongoing system that just uses them as a placeholder. I'm reminded of a Woody Allen comedy that I saw back in the 70s, probably 50 years ago. I haven't gone back and looked at it. But at one point in time, you know, he travels forward in time. It had some really funny stuff in it. But the leader gets blown up. And they, uh, they preserve his ear and they're going to reclone him. So at one point, Woody Allen, when he's running from the authorities, he gets cornered and he grabs the leader's ear and he holds a gun to it and goes, all right, back off or I'll shoot it.

But that's basically what we're doing in our society. It is an ossification. In Musk view, mortality is not merely a biological limitation. It is one of the mechanisms by which civilizations renew themselves. He said, you've never seen someone with an old left arm in a young, right arm. You're arguing that such synchronized aging hints at a common biological mechanism. He said, once that mechanism is understood, and he speculated the solution may appear to be surprisingly obvious. Well, I guess he doesn't understand his cars because they've got some really

obvious problems that have not been solved. The Tesla's as well as Waymo, as a matter of fact, in the last couple of weeks, we've had two incidences where Tesla's and they believe that they were under autopilot when it happened. We have had two instances, one hit a restaurant, and another one hit a residential house. And in both cases, a person was killed and crashed into these things at a very high speed. And so there's something that he doesn't understand about even driving cars. Maybe we ought to get some of the humans that God created to drive the cars rather than Elon Musk. He appears to believe that aging is likely to become an engineering problem with an engineering

solution. See, everything is materialistic and deterministic to them. He doesn't see any overriding purpose and life. And he doesn't understand that there is a systemic cause. He's right to observe it. You don't have an old left arm and a young right arm, but actually I do. In a way, I won't go into my health details. But the bottom line with aging and with death, as Christians understand is sin. And it is a curse from the God who created us. And rather than looking at how he could reverse that curse, who it was that came and died on the cross to reverse that curse.

He just wants to stay in this fallen world forever. That's what most of these transhumanists want. I want something better than this world. I want a restored version of what God originally created. And that's what he promises. And there's only one way to get that. And it is free. But you just have to be open to the offer.

For much of Silicon Valley mortality has become the next great engineering challenge to be solved through biotech, AI. Let's trust AI to provide all of this stuff for us. And you lean on this and you're going to find out that cane becomes a stick that pierces your hand. Looks like you're trying to achieve immortality. Okay, I'm excited to start this journey with you. Let's dive right in. That's exactly the way it would sound, Lance.

Rather than focusing primarily on longevity, Musk has repeatedly argued that declining birth rates pose a more immediate civilizational threat. He said extending the lives of existing people cannot compensate indefinitely for a shrinking number of new people. His view is that aging is real and probably solvable. No, it's not.

indefinite life extension carries a risk of social stagnation and declining fertility by contrast threatens the long-term continuity of civilization itself. Well, that is true. And when we come back, we are going to talk about what is happening with the long-term survivability of civilization that is going on right now in the U.K. It is horrific what is happening there. But real quickly, before we take a break, scientists said that they

fully that they created a fully synthetic life form that can eat and reproduce. They call it spud cells. By the way, if you've got a life form that all it does is eat and reproduce,

don't we have enough of those around? The global elitists are always denouncing all of us as useless eaters and now they engineer one and celebrate it as a great achievement. And so why do we need synthetic life forms? God did a good job with the life forms,

and they'd keep trying to reinvent the wheel or something quite a bit simpler than that. As a matter of fact, they said that this thing that they've made that they call a spud cell is made up of anywhere from 150 to 200 molecules. In contrast, it is orders of magnitude simpler in contrast to a natural cell, which can hold billions of molecules. Wait a minute. You're talking about 150 to 200 molecules and just a regular cell has billions of molecules.

So what is this that you've really created, as a matter of fact? Is anything very complicated? And here's the thing as we look at, they say, well, the great thing about this is it's technology that will let people engineer biology. I read a book about that once. It's called Brave New World. They should read it.

Think about the consequences. Orgatica, you know, there's another example. If they can't read, they can watch a movie. But one of the things that they kind of fell into here, they said, I would say that Kate has constructed a cell, said a professor of bioengineering, but I don't think that she's created life. Well, I think what she has done is that she's proven that evolution is false.

Even when we talk about making something as only 150, 200 cells, molecules, they should say, versus billions of cells, it took a lot of intelligence for her to do this, right? All these people have been trying to create intelligent or synthetic life. It took a lot of intelligence. It took a creator. It took a designer. Why wouldn't the real thing point to a creator and designer? Well, actually, it does.

And she just pointed to it as well inadvertently. So when we talk about birthright citizenship, and hopefully we'll have time to get to that today, because I think that this has something to do with Trump's defeat in terms of birthright citizenship, people mocking him about the fact that he is falling behind this soccer player who is an anchor baby himself. And the fact then that he tried to rig the outcome of, or say not rig the outcome, but rig the coming out or the throwing out of that player over a penalty and get them to play in the Belgium game. And then after the U.S. was skunked by Belgium, and again, it was a deliberate humiliation.

The Belgian coach deliberately withheld his three best players and they still beat the U.S. 4 to 1. And there was mocking worldwide about Trump. Next thing you know, he is attacking Iran again in a big way. and let me just say, because we may not have time to get into that in detail, when you look at the justification for restarting the war, they say that Iran attacked three ships. Well, that's kind of interesting because they say nothing at all

about the damage that was done to the ships. Were they disabled? Was anybody killed? Was anybody injured? Not a peep about any of that stuff. Folks, if this is a real attack, there would be dead, injured people, there'd be disabled ships and all the rest of stuff. Iran has said from the very beginning of this that they have a very proscribed and prescribed area

that the ships have to travel in. And if they get out of that, they're going to do something about it. Now, what they did, I don't know. Did they shoot warning shots at it? Was that the attack? Did they send some things that would not sink the ship or kill people? I don't know. But they did it three times, and they had been saying,

we're going to, because this is wartime, we are going to confine your transit of the strait to a very narrow area and you will do exactly as we say. And if you don't, there's going to be consequences for it. Don't we do that? Doesn't Trump do that? Excess do that? Of course, we're different. We're exceptional in the fact that we don't have rules about any of this stuff.

So I look at it as an excuse to restart the war for his. Zionist masters that are out there. And perhaps there's an element of him trying to save face and to show what a tough gangster he is, after everybody called him a gangster, we're trying to rig the World Cup. And he got a humiliating defeat under that. I think both of those things are factors in this. And yet there is another interesting thing about the birthright citizenship debate that is out there. And that was the excellent decision that was written by Clarence Thomas. Brownstone Institute points out that he laid out the difference between an American version of citizenship and the old world notion of being subject to a sovereign because

you're born in a particular jurisdiction. Clarence Thomas's dissenting opinion says Brownstone was more than a passing disagreement. He penned a treatise of monumental importance to our time. is completely reframed the distinctly American idea of citizenship as a two-way agreement between the person and the political community. It is not conferred by birth alone, but it also requires domicile, which means allegiance and of the forsaking of other political loyalties. Well, you know, if we went with that kind of a definition, then you would say that these people who parade around in Congress in an IDF uniform, they have a divided loyalty to Israel,

and maybe they're not qualified to be a congressman, may not qualify to be a citizen at all. And when you look at these types of divided loyalty that are there, maybe that is the conclusion we should come to. He said blacks were entitled to citizenship because they were Americans. They had no other homeland. They owed no allegiance to any foreign power. That's what citizenship means. That means that you support this country and not a different country. Well, we're going to take a quick break, folks, and we'll be right back.

In a world of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. You're listening to the David Knight Show. Well, welcome back. This article, while Wall Street is chasing AI, Asia is quietly buying gold. China had a massive increase. The Chinese Central Bank had a massive purchase of gold this last month. You know, yesterday I talked about the Schiller Index and the fact that sets at 41 and how the average, and this is an index of the price to earning ratios, basically, to summarize the price to earning ratios of stocks on Wall Street,

it sets at an average of 17. When it got into the low 30s at other times, that's when we had the Great Depression stock market crash and other crashes that were there. Right now, we are not in the low 30s. We are at 41. And again, the average is 17. And so what is happening is AI has caused people

think that they've got an artificial income. That's what they look at AI as being. And I say that the stock market is suffering from AI psychosis. You know, we talk about AI psychosis as being people who, and we've had even people like Richard Dawkins, believe that there is a soul in the machine, that they're talking to a conscious thinking entity that's there

rather than statistical probability that's being used to create the answers that are there. And that is a fundamental error. And it is a fundamental error that is happening in the stock market right now. You could say that the stock market is suffering from AI hallucinations. And there was a very interesting piece, and I'll play this. It's a little bit long, but this guy is looking at generative AI, and we've had a couple of these lately. I don't like Alex Carp and what he's doing with Palantir. I don't like the surveillance state. And he is doing the surveillance state on steroids.

But he had a meltdown the other day on one of these financial programs where he was raging about generative AI, about open AI and about anthropic that created Claude and other things like that. And he said, that is useless. He said that is not something that's going to make anybody money. It's going to steal your intellectual property. It's going to threaten your business. And he went on a very long rant. It was about 20 minutes. and people were clipping that out and posting that.

But this is something that is, even though it's a little bit long, it is far more concise as to why generative AI is not making anybody any profits. And when people realize that, it's going to be a huge crash. This metric of price to earnings ratio of 41, meaning that for every dollar you put in, it's going to take you 41 years to get that. back in terms of their earnings. And so there's a lot of hope in this that the earnings are going to explode.

And yet, if the earnings don't explode, the alternative is that the price will implode. And so here's the pessimistic case for the stock market. Thanks for joining us here. So, you know, we don't really know at this point in time, right, what the actual financial picture of these companies look like. And they wouldn't be the first with bad financial profiles to go public. Well, they'd be the first to be this bad up in the weed work. And even then, this is so much worse than that.

Open AI burned $20.9 billion in 2025. That's the orative financials that the FT and I reported. And the problem with these companies is their margins are getting worse, and their costs increase linearly with their revenues. There is no proof that they can improve their margins, no amount of specialist silicon or supposed that Vera Rubens will bring these costs down. And we're at a point now where Open AI is now potentially pushing their IPO to 2027 because they couldn't get a trillion dollar valuation. It's clear that people are wising up to the problem of generative AI, which is there's not really a business there.

So that was something that was discussed yesterday on Squawk Box. The comments from Alex Karp, the Palantir CEO, making their rounds, I think we have a clip teed up. Take a listen. The general way these things were sold, and these people are, like Sam and Dario, There's nothing more fun than debating Dario in private. So I'm not throwing shade at them. But something is going completely wrong. And the basic view among enterprises in this country is I'm going to chillax and waste my time with tokens.

I'm going to get no value and they're going to get my IP. Yeah, so he was being sarcastic there, this idea that enterprises are balking at this idea, that they're going to be paying all this for tokens. They're not going to be able to control the dated usage and how the data is. is used and they're not able to really measure ROI. What do you make of those comments? I mean, hate to agree with him, but he's right. These companies, Anthropica and Open AI, they encourage waste.

He actually said that these companies don't charge on outcomes, they don't charge on success because you can't with large language models. They're inherently hallucination-prone, as proven by Open AI themselves, and so they encourage waste. They want you to spend a lot of money, and then they try and pilfer your ideas. Anthropic already tried it with Claude Design with Figma, and I believe they have a relationship with the company,

and Dylan Field even said he was shocked by it. And what's crazy as well is, is their copies of these companies not particularly good. They don't make great software. You'll notice that both anthropic CEO Dariama Day and Sam Wutman have both said, we can't wait to see what you build with this. Well, that's because they don't know what you can build with this.

They want everyone else to do their innovation for them, spend as much as they can on tokens, and then take whatever's left, except they lose too much money for that strategy to actually work. So then what do you think should happen? Do you believe that these are companies that should be nationalized. As we read in the intro, there's discussions reportedly that the administration and potentially some sort of sovereign wealth fund would take a 5% stake in Open AI.

I mean, is that a situation that you would like to see happen, or do you think that's more disruptive? No, I don't think there's any need to. They talk about, I think Sam Orman said, well, we can share the benefits of AI and the profits of AI. What profits? What returns? That 5% will have to get congressional approval. The sovereign wealth fund is still an idea at this point, But fundamentally, large language models are not the future. The only reason big tech is investing in this is that they've run out of hypergrowth ideas. They don't have a next iPhone. They don't have a new Google search.

So they've put over a trillion dollars with trillions more to come into a kind of a dead-end industry. Because when they, when that ends... And it's even worse than that. Because what they're doing is, and NVIDIA is doing it, they have this kind of circular accounting where they give these companies money to buy their products and it helps both of them, presumably. This is what is feeding. And again, we should not call it a bubble.

We ought to call it AI psychosis. Hallucination. That's what's happening in the marketplace. Well, China's not loading up on Wall Street stock. They're loading up on gold. The Chinese Central Bank bought the dip, and they loaded up with 15 tons. Load 15 tons, and what do you get?

Another day older, but you don't. get the debt of the United States. That's what China does not want. They want the gold. Meanwhile, Bill O'Reilly is giving people some of the worst advice, I think. He slams struggling Americans because he ended his broadcast. He said 57% of the people survey believe that the economy is getting worse amid an affordability crisis. He goes, okay, well, final thought.

Record high in the stock market. You might know that. You see oil prices going down. killing it, he says, right? So the stock market is a way to go. It's a way to amass capital. And I have a financial advisor. You know, you have to have one as well to manage your millions, just like Bill is managing his millions. He said, my portfolio is doing great because Trump and his policies appeal to big companies. But 40% of Americans don't participate in capitalism. A lot of them are yelling about high prices. Well, you're getting 4% inflation here. You need to live in

real world. News flash to Bill O'Reilly, the inflation numbers from the government are not real. They are cooked books, and they have been for a long time. They have reported about this over the last 32 years. They have changed the way they calculated inflation to their advantage eight times. And if I remember correctly, and maybe it was four times once every eight years. I don't know. Anyway, it was four and eight, 32. But the bottom line is, is that as Warsh is coming in, he's got an all new way to calculate inflation to make it look better for the government. Don't believe this. And don't believe what is happening in the stock market.

The gains in the stock market are very, very narrowly focused. It kind of looks like a pin, if you want to understand. So matter of fact, if you want to take investment advice from Bill O'Reilly, you might take a look. at the kind of travel advice that AI is telling people about. Trip advisors AI is telling vacationers that gruesome holiday or rather harrow gratters are wonderful holiday retreats. Take a look at this picture. This is one that is AI gave a wonderful review to.

So you need to whitewash, a horribly reviewed hotel or resort. That sounds like a job for AI to the rescue. And look, when we're talking about there's no profit case for artificial intelligence, you need to understand there's no profit case really for war, except for the people who are making the military industrial complex products, right? They make a lot of money. But the government does it because that's what the government wants, and they don't care about the correct allocation of resources

or whether anything is profitable or not. The government wants AI because AI is the perfect audit tool. It is what every tyrant throughout the history of humanity has always dreamed of to have a kind of big brother power to see what everybody is doing and to be able to drop the hammer on them and to prevent them from doing anything. To basically have everyone living as their slaves in a panopticon surveillance state. That's what AI is about. And people who complain about the profitability or lack of profitability of AI just don't get it.

Alex Karp gets it. That's what he is catering to with Palantir. And the people who push back on data centers, yes, as bad as the data centers are, if you push back on them simply because of higher electricity prices, simply because of noise and water pollution, you're missing the point. And we're all going to wind up as slaves. You need to hit the issue at the foundation of where it is. And that's exactly what these guys are not doing. Well, let's jump ahead to what's going on in the UK. There's a tremendous amount of insanity that is happening with the police state there. As I said at the top of the program, what they are doing is something that is beyond even what Orwell imagined in his portrayal of English socialism, what he called Ingsaat. And you've got

a cardinal. Cardinal Mueller, this is an article from LifeSight News, so they look at what a cardinal has to say. He said mass immigration of Muslims to Europe can only lead to a confrontation. Well, he's right about that, but he doesn't realize that's the plan. You know, for years, I've seen people talk about government schools and say, well, you know, Johnny can't read. And that's a problem. What's the matter?

Our schools are not working. No, no, no. They're working just fine. That's the purpose of the schools to make sure that Johnny can't read. They don't want people to know anything. It was a deliberate dumbing down of America. That was the title of Charlotte Isabee's a year. book. She went to Washington to shut down the Department of Education, which, by the way,

you know, Reagan promised to shut it down. It had been created by Jimmy Carter, and I think he created it in 1980 in the election year. He said, oh, I'll stop that. He didn't. He grew it for eight years. He grew it into maturity. And she was disgusted by that. She said the purpose of this is to deliberately dumb down the population. She was absolutely right now. Trump has also promised that he's going to get rid of the Department of Education, has he? Linda McMahon, again, we're talking about professional wrestling here, folks. Why would he put the spouse of the guy who ran WWE in office? Well, because it's all fake.

It's all a fake fight. He hasn't done anything to restrict the Department of Education. Nothing has been done. It should be shut down. They're absolutely right. But even when they were talking about shutting it down, what they were talking about doing was moving, it's funding areas. Okay, so we're going to still give people money

for doing what we want them to do. We're just going to distribute that to these other different bureaucracies that are out there that are also unconstitutional. And I said at the time, I said, that's the way they control everything. If you fund it, you control it. That was the mechanism for how they got

the 55 mile an hour speed limit to the pandemic error, the pandemic error masks. do they get all these things done? Well, they did it by blackmail and by bribery over money, giving that to the states, not because they had the power to do it. But when we look at what is happening throughout Europe, this is a plan. It is a design. They know what they're doing in terms of AI and creating this dystopian surveillance police state. And so they want us fighting each other, not fighting them in an art-elect war, an artificial intelligence war.

And that's why they have brought them in. They want to make sure that they know these massive populations are going to be in conflict. They know that they're not going to assimilate and adopt our values. And that's precisely why they brought them in. No question about it. It's just nowhere in this article. I mean, he talks about all the different issues. say, yeah, parallel societies are emerging.

That is by design. It is a design of divide and conquer. And again, it's no different than saying the schools aren't working. Well, the schools are never supposed to work. He talked about the case of Henry Noak, and we've shown that here as well, where he was stabbed by a Sikh who was allowed to carry a knife. Other people are not allowed to carry a knife. And when the police showed up, he said, I've been stabbed.

The other guy said, no, he hasn't. So they did, they handcuffed him and let him bleed out on the sidewalk and captured it all with their, with their body cameras. And the reality is far worse than any kind of summary could show you. It's even, the reality is even worse than the videos that you see and they're pretty bad. But it is a clash of cultures. And it is a deliberate clash of cultures that has been engineered. And so the, they say that,

There was a deliberate propaganda campaign against large families, and these parents are intimidated and then marginalized. And as I reported earlier in the program, look at the campaign of propaganda and intimidation against families, even being run by Republican media outlets like the New York Post. So the Cardinal said, well, now anything goes because they've decided that we need to depopulate, that we are overpopulated. So that's how we get into abortion and all the rest of these things. And he's right about that as well. And so he said most European countries have a birth rate below one and a half children per woman. None of them exceed the 2.1 rate that is needed for the population to just stay level in terms of replacement. You need to understand that Europe, and now really the West, is a cut flower society and has been for over half a century.

What we're seeing now is the petals are falling off of that cut flower as it dies. And this is what it looks like in the UK. Here is a man who is being threatened with arrest by a young female officer. She's in her early 20s. She's caught on camera confronting the man because he was peacefully filming in a public space. And these are people who are putting cameras everywhere, right? And in the footage, she claims his mere presence might wind people up. And so he mentions, he says, is this pre-crime?

You're stopping me before I do something wrong? Is this like Minority Report? And she doesn't even understand what he's referring to. That's how clueless and ignorant she is. You know, forget about reading Orwell or Brave New World, shows him and watch movies to understand the Minority Report. Breaking no laws. I'm not approaching people.

people are approaching me and all I'm saying is if you carry on then there will be issues all right with the people with the police why how is that possible when I'm not breaking any laws we've explained it many times

we can arrest someone to prevent a breach of the peace but they used to be doing something wrong yes we're arresting you to prevent it from you doing something wrong They're not going to leave you to carry on.

Arresting you and prevent you from going to go to something. Minority report, like a crime that might happen in the future. You're going to prevent it. She has no clue what he's saying about. Why don't you just tell people to mind their own effing business? Why? Because you're going to cause issues. We are here to stop anyone attacking anyone or anyone getting angry

because your behaviour, if you carry on with some of these people, someone might go with their gender. Yeah? And then that's going to cause a breach of peace, isn't it? Oh God, I should have just stayed in bed this morning, shouldn't I? Yeah, right. Yeah, we don't want anybody getting angry. Take your soma pill, you know. Yeah, it's actually much worse than Minority Report. It's, we're going to arrest you because someone else might commit a crime against you. It's, I wouldn't recommend you do that. They might get upset. So therefore, I'm going to arrest you.

Yeah, and that someone else committing a crime might be the police themselves. Take a look at this guy. You know, I was just talking about Minority Report. When I saw this clip, this is a guy, this is a guy, out of clockwork orange. And if you don't know that movie, you got this guy who's on this criminal rampage with two other guys. He goes over the edge and kills somebody. He goes to prison. The other two guys who are out of prison, and it's an interesting book. Actually, they had it as a topic and a course at the University of Warners. They're looking at the issue of crime and punishment, as well as individual culpability and responsibility for your own actions because it has aspects about that as well. But the two guys who don't go to jail,

they become cops, very sadistic cops as well. This guy actually looks worse than the two droogs of Alex, the central character in Clockwork Orange. Look at this guy's face. I mean, he is absolutely loving his authority and so eager to unleash it on somebody. causing other members of public harassment and distress. Oh, you love this. It sounds as a technically a public order offence. Is it? She can't be arrested.

Go on then. Okay. Do it. Okay, I can't. I can't. However, if you don't give me your details, I may arrest you. Oh, I'm not giving you my details. Okay.

You're under arrest, then, for public order. You don't have to say anything, but it may harm your defence. Do not mention one question. Something which later align in court and anything that you do say may have been in evidence. All right. I need yourself. To arrest you, to ask you your name and address? Thanks very much on that.

Yeah, this is a public space. Yeah. Yeah, what's he arrested for? Filming. Filming. That's not a public order, mate. I'm filming now. I'm filming now, mate.

We can film you because you're a public servants. We can film you because you are public servants. You know this. Yeah, we're not going to do anything. We're peaceful. We're peaceful people. We can be civilized about this. Yeah, well, they can film you, but you can't film them.

And there's a ton of these videos are put together by Steve Watson. It's an article that was picked up on Zero Hedge. And it's absolutely unbelievable to look at this. Here's somebody telling, here's the cops telling somebody you better calm down. But of course, the cops are getting very worked up about all this stuff. I guess the people just haven't had their calm down drugs today yet. No, wait for me. Don't wait.

Are you moving away? Wait, what was that then? I'm in a public place, buddy. No, people just removed, okay? I never been moved. I said, people, you're not listening. Not yet. I have a bit to me, please.

Sorry, I'm not talking, you. All right? So you need to move from this area. Don't we know. Let's do. No. Let's do. No.

You don't, you don't need to. Calm down. Calm down. Calm down. Keep walking. Keep walking. Don't touch me here. Thank very much.

Keep moving. Thank you. So what is this guy on? You like? The man being targeted remained calm and pointed out he had done nothing. illegal. It was the officer who was creating the tension as we see so many times. I was in Birmingham. In Sheffield, there was similar overreach, says Watson, after police used significant force on a 17-year-old boy during a protest, they slammed him into a metal

ballard. And they did it so hard that it bent the ballard. And then after realizing what they had done, I guess, they turned against the person who was filming it, because we don't want to have that go out. I guess the biggest causing up on them when they're trying to look somebody. What are you doing? What are you doing? Filming is a crime, is it? Sto, Peter.

I guess the biggest criminals of government. Look at that. A big relationship with a guy filming. It's a mob of people rushing him off. And even standing still, says Watson draws attention. London officers moved in on people simply standing around. in a public space doing nothing. And folks, this is an example of an antistate.

Look at the cops that they hire. Very young women who have been weaponized with this kind of power. They desire to have this kind of power. I've told people many times, I became a libertarian when I was in first grade because there was a classmate of mine who was given the power of authority by the special crossing guard

bright orange stripe that she wore across her shoulder. And she decided that she could tell me when I could cross the street and not cross the street. And I could see for myself when there were cars coming and not coming. I didn't need her help. I used to free range all the time. We did as kids. I used to the very place where I would ride my bicycle all the time. And she was never following me around to protect me.

But she was going to tell me when I could cross and when I could not cross, even though there was no reason to be told that. This is what is happening now with these 20-something-year-old girls are probably not even 20 when you look at them. I do you commit no crime. I'm not saying that. So why are you talking to me? Because we're just asking what you're doing because you're just standing here. But why?

What do you mean? You're standing here. I saw you like, walk. You saw me looking. Yeah, just watching, looking at people, not really doing anything. We're not meeting up with anyone. You're just watching people. So as I explained, we just walked around.

You didn't explain anything, just keep repeating the same thing. Just listen. We walked around here, okay, we walked around this where. Right. And we're just seeing you here at the same spot, and you're just standing there, like, watching people. How long? Two minutes? Yes, a couple minutes.

And we stood up there and was observed before. Well, that's what you were doing. And we're seeing you look this way, look that way, looking at people sitting down. So we're just wondering, like, if we're not here to sit in the park or wait for anyone, or just, like, we're just wondering what you're doing. Can you see from our perspective? No, no, at all. Because my colleague mentioned there's a lot of stuff. Fift.

Yes. So I did ask you, so don't look like... Yeah, don't look like I'm stealing. You're just sitting here looking at people. Well, that's what you're doing, actually. As a matter of fact, you can't film the police, but they can film you. And this is the heart of this next one here. In Chiswick, two police entered a pub and asked a man to step outside and threaten him over a tweet,

criticizing a counselor's plan to ban outdoor seating at pubs. Now, before I play that, because they may run out of time. I want to play this one about the facial van. If you cover your face while walking is not a crime. But they came after this guy because he had a mask on. Now remember five, six years ago, they would have come after you if you didn't have a mask on. But now if you do have a mask on, they're going to come after you. Well, there's a facial recognition van. You've covered your whole face like that. This man didn't want to be caught by the police cameras, so he covered his face. Police stopped him.

They photographed him anyway. There's no law. There's no law against covering your face. Yeah, okay, well there you go. You let him go then. Well, maybe it's because I don't consent to being on there. Oh, right. Okay, why's that?

Because I think it's a bit of a government overreach. Oh right, okay. Can we take your details down? Is that alright? Come on cover my face, I cover my face. Don't push me out of the way I look and don't see it. The police said this was disorderly behaviour, so they gave him a fine. I've got a £90 £0. There you go.

Look, look. You let them know that he's got a right to cover his face and he can walk away. The thing is, we live in a country which is free. We don't have to carry ID. So we don't live in a state where the police have the right to see your ID willy-nilly. This takes away my freedom because you're IDing me without asking. Yeah, they're going to fix that. You know, you get a fine six years ago if you didn't cover your face.

Now you get a more than a $100 fine if you do cover your face. and they're watching everybody and they're standing over there watching you to see if you're what you're doing and even if you're just standing still and looking at other people. That in and of itself is a crime. But maybe it's just who you are

and that is the essence of their true tier policing system. We just saw this situation happen. This was a guy who was attacked by three or four people who were black. He was white. And look at this clip. Immediately this guy's on the ground

and he's starting to get up. you have a Nanny State Policewoman come in and run him up against the wall. Do you. Do not. Put your ass you. Put your hands. What? What are you?

Yeah. Aye. I, aye. Gee. Do not fucking punch his fight. Put your hands behind you back. Yeah, nanny police women there. Birmingham, three black individuals assaulted a white British teenager.

Footage shows a female officer shielding the aggressors and directing aggression toward the white victim. You can see from that video, he never did anything to them. I mean, he pushed back against her when she slammed him up against the wall. The attackers walked away. Multiple police officers then swarmed the victim using foul language. They shoved him into the police car the wrong way. They dragged him out after a botched attempt. And then they restrained him forcefully.

A bystander trying to explain that the white lad was the victim was ignored in the same way that they did with the guy who was killed by the Sikh as they did with Nook because it is a two-tier police system. It is not justice that is colorblind, justice that is blindfolded. It is blind tyranny and we have to not be blind to the agenda behind this, folks. This is happening in the UK now, but all of the aspects of this have been laid as a foundation to be done in America as well. That is a global plan. It's going to roll out a matter of time, just like the COVID fake pandemic did. It's just not going to be synchronized

like that one was. 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. TheDavidnightshow.com.