13Mar24 How Does AI Work? Scientists Aren't Sure

Using free speech to free minds. You are listening to the David Knight Show. As a clock strikes thirteen, it's the thirteenth of March. You're of our Lord, twenty twenty four, four years to the day after that ominous Friday that kicked off the lockdowns, the mass, the six foot social distancing. But today we've been talking about that this week, and so today we're going to focus on something else, and that's going to be the control mechanisms

that are being put in place. And I think a key part of these control mechanisms, by the way, artificial intelligence is going to be used. And we talked about the silliness with the picture drawing and the chat GPT and all the rest of this stuff, but there is some real serious abuses ahead of this technology. We're going to begin with that. Stay with us, will be right back. Well, you know, when you look at artificial intelligence, it is kind of interesting. A lot of people don't really have

a clue about how it works. Clearly it is copying and pasting and reorganizing stuff, and yeah, there seems to be something else happening there. Interesting thing is, if you don't understand how it works, you're not alone. The scientists say they don't understand how it works either. The AI scientists. This is this article from Futurism. Scientists have a dirty secret. Nobody knows how AI actually works. Our theoretical analysis is so far off what these models

can do. A black box mystery machine. Eh, well, they said, not even the folks creating this AI fully understand how it works. An MIT Technology Review had an interview with one of these key sciences. Obviously we're not completely ignorant, said University of California, San Diego computer scientist Mikyle Belkin. But our theoretical analysis is so far off what these models can do,

he said. The MIT Tech Journal explains many AI models are notoriously black boxes, which in short, means that while an algorithm might produce a useful output, it's unclear to researchers how it actually got there. And this has been the case for years, with aisystems often defying statistics based theoretical models. Regardless, the AI industry is creening a head fueled by billions of investment dollars and

a hefty share of near fanatical belief. Well, we do know that if these guys train it, we can do it, get it to do crazy stuff like Google's Gemini. They can train it to be racist biased, they can train it to rewrite and reorganize this, which is what they did quite obviously. So they can intervene and they can have this veneer of something that

is a chat bot. And again, from the very first time I saw it, it reminded me of a program that was around in the mid nineteen seventies when we were still using personal computers that we built for the most part, and I had a program It's called Eliza, and it was kind of just random open questions I think, you know, and say, how are

you feeling today? He says, tell me why you feel that way, you know, or something like that, and it just kept coming back with another question, you know, like a psychiatrist would do as you're sitting on the couch, that type of thing. And so you could look at it and say, well, I really understand how this is doing it. But it was still very effective, especially for somebody that would want to think about what was happening inside of the box. But AI is already everywhere, but

it's increasingly integrated into human life. The scientists building the tech are still trying to understand how it learns and how it functions. These are exciting times, said bo As Barack, a Harvard University computer professor. He said many people in the field often compare it to physics at the beginning of the twentieth century. Well, what happened with that? You know, it wasn't at the beginning of the twentieth century, but it was Richard Feynman when he started looking

at quantum mechanics. He says, anybody that tells you they understand quantum mechanics doesn't understand quantum mechanics. It's because we could say that anybody tells you that understand artificial intelligence doesn't understand artificial intelligence. He clarified it by saying, we have a lot of experimental results, so we don't completely understand, and often

you do an experiment and it surprises you. Again, I don't think there was a surprise for the built in prejudice and racism and Google they've been working on that for quite some time in different ways. AI models are no longer restricted to the metaphorical Silicon Valley test tubes, as they said here, but it is now big business, a financial behemoth. This is what is really driving the stock market this opium about AI, and it's these companies that are

clustered around AI that are driving all of the stock market gains. Really, like other technologies, a familiar move fast and break things approach in this industry, it's going to present challenges down the road. Belkan said, I'm very interested in guarantees. And if you can do amazing things but you can't really

control it, then it's not so amazing. Again, they have shown that they have quite a bit of control over its capabilities, and one pictures worth a thousand words and a thousand pictures speak volumes about what these people are doing to control us. And that is the key thing because typically you know, that was not subtle, That was in your face and everybody could see it. When it starts putting out narratives and other things like that, that's when

it's really dangerous. You. So, what good is a car that can drive three hundred miles per hour if it has a shaky steering wheel. I guess we could say that about the Tesla's It goes zero to sixty in one second. And I have some amazing news about how car companies are spying on you and changing your insurance rates. All righty, this is not something you opt it in. That's been around for a while. That's coming up as

well here today we're going to talk about that. But when we look at artificial intelligence, most of the time people will focus on something like some kind of a kinetic threat. By kinetic, I mean you know the military special forces, they talk about psyops or they talk about kinetic ops. You know, kinetic ops or the things where they're jumping out of airplanes and helicopters and stuff like that. Actual war fighting versus ssyops. And years and years ago

when we were looking at the asymmetric warfare and the asymmetric warfare centers. Admiral mcgraven who was at of Special Forces at the time, so we have to understand the Special Forces began as psychological operations and now everybody thinks of them as you know, the seals jumping out of helicopters into the ocean and blowing things up and stuff like that. He is, no, it's really about special it's about psychological operations. We would want to go in before there's going to

be a war or a coup that we do or something like that. We want to know who's going to be on our side, and so we would have special forces, green Berets and others would go in and make those kinds of assessments to know who's on our side and who isn't before we start that stuff, and to try to manipulate things. We can frequently win a war or without having to actually fight. It is what he said, and that's really what they're doing. And so we can look at the traditional threat things

like terminator and that type of stuff. And this is what the interesting article this went viral. This is some young engineers and they're playing around with some cheap commercial drones. The drone only cost them a little over one hundred dollars. And what they did was they just fitted up with facial recognition software and then they could program it to follow, or to chase, or to attack whoever it was that they had given it the facial profile of. And so

they got a lot of people talking about swarms of killer AI drones. And this is something that will happen. This is something that's been talked about for more than a decade, has been worked on for several decades by DARPA. Swarms of killer AI drones might sound like the plot of a ystopian science fiction thriller, but in a terrifying glimpse of the future, one scientist has shown just how easy it is to build an assassination drone to hunt down and to

kill people. This is from the Daily Mail. They actually put this up on Twitter and showed a short version of it, and a longer version of how they put it together went viral. Using AI facial recognition, of the drone was programmed to recognize individuals and race toward them at full speed. Although mister Weenis says he built the drone for a game, he also says he wanted to raise awareness for how easily this could be used for a deadly terrorist

attack. And of course, you know governments are also do terrorist attacks, don't they, And they don't need to have commercial, commercially available one hundred dollars drones. A little bit better capability and they'll spend millions and they don't care. They just print the money. In the post, he says, I thought it would be fine to build a drone that chases you around as a game. However, the video quickly shows how dangerous this could be.

The drone uses an AI object detection model to recognize faces using its onboard camera. Once it sees a face, the drone is programmed to keep to try and keep it in the center of its view, and to fly directly forward, chasing it down its target. In one mode, the drone will charge directly towards anything that it recognizes as a face. It also has a second

setting, which he describes as assassination drone. I was able to add face recognition to it and only make it attack someone it knew who it was, and it could easily identify that person from ten meters distance. Again, these are just a commercial drone one hundred dollars drone using that camera on there. It doesn't have great resolution. The video shows how the drone selectively chooses to

chase down its target, ignoring other people. He said, this literally took just a few hours to build and made me realize just how scary it is. You could easily strap a small amount of explosives on these and let hundreds of them fly around. Yeah, if you want to get freaked out, and you can talk about how easy it is with a Crisper CAS nine gene modification stuff for people to do really crazy stuff and their garage if they've got

a little bit of knowledge about that. See, that's the technology is getting way out of hand and of course being used by governments. Governments for creating this stuff, but now it's getting the point where it is spreading, very cheap, very easy to use. Elon Musk responded to this on X said, yeah, it's alarmingly easy. I guess I guess he realizing it also run people over with a self driving Tesla, but maybe they restrained from doing

that for the time being. Small explosive carrying drones are already having a significant impact in Ukraine. Ukrainian drone operators attached grenades, mortars, other explosive devices to cheap, commercially available drones to create deadly weapons. These first person drones have proven to be extremely effective and hunting down and destroying everything from individual troops, two tanks and two bunkers. And of course we've seen in this war.

This is the first war that's being broadcast on social media. So when one side takes out the other side, they like to put up their videos of it to show the effectiveness of what they're doing. So Russia has put up a lot of videos showing their drones taking out state of the art tanks from Germany, the Leopard two tanks or the con tanks, the Abrams that

were sent. They put pictures of them being destroyed by very cheap drones, relatively very very cheap, and point out, yeah, these Abram tanks burned just like the rest of them. It really is changing things. And so the crucial difference is these drones are operated by an individual who's always in control of the process rather than an autonomous AI when they're doing it in war right

now. But that's going to change as well. So the real danger is cheap, easy to produce swarms of autonomous drones released into battlefields, or is a terrorist event into public spaces. This is something that was a subject of a book, very interesting book by Daniel Swarez. He's written a couple of fascinating books about technical implications of things like DNA modification or in this particular case,

autonomous drone Owes. I kind of see him as a successor to Michael Crichton, and I'm really surprised that his premises haven't been made into movies yet by Hollywood. Well not really, I mean, you know, as I said, was it yesterday, I think I talked about the plagiarism or Monday, you know the fact that they completely as a film that got five Oscar

nominations that nobody even wanted to make ten years ago. Because that's how bad Hollywood has gotten, the low quality, the stupidity of it, the depravity of it. And so I guess I'm not surprised that they wouldn't do an

interesting film. That's where Hollywood is. You know. The other thing, too, is this this thing that they did with the wrestler John Senna I think is his name, you know, to commemorate the streaker that went across you know, forty fifty years ago whenever it was, and David Nevin was on stage and had a streaker go by, and there's a classy, cool David Niven who kept us cool and had a very snappy comeback. He said, well, after this guy displayed his shortcomings or something like that, you

know, it continued on a big laugh. Well, what they did was they decided they would have Johnson to come on, whether or not he was nude or you know, wearing a body suit or whatever. People are talking about that evertending that he was not wearing anything but just holding a little paper, you know, shyly in front of him. He announced the best costume winners, and I said, you know, it's kind of interesting. You

know, fifty years ago, whenever that happened. He said, you know, the Oscars at least put on a very classy front with somebody like David Nivin in a tuxedo, and the crass attention grabbers with the Streakers. And I said, now the Oscars have become the streakers, desperate for attention, no class, just desperate for attention for movies that nobody showed up to watch. It's surprising anybody watches these award shows. I didn't. I just picked

up those snippets. But anyway, getting back to Daniel Suarez, the new Michael Crichton. His book in twenty twelve was Killed Decision, and my son Whistler listened to it and then told us about it. We listened to it on a trip we were taking and in it it's autonomous killer drones, but not just you know, random ones, it's swarms of them. And it's very interesting because it's kind of a puzzle as a thing starts to come together.

It involves a scientist who is somebody who studies insects. And that's something about the way that they control these swarms of drones. I won't try to spoil all of it for you, but it basically read does all of the military industrial complex, you know, all the weapons are pretty much made obsolutely as we start to see now happening in Ukraine and Russia war and so DARPA

is reportedly developing a drone swarm weapon of mass destruction. As my son said, nothing good ever comes in a swarm, right, It's always a bad thing. They described it as a mass amass autonomous multi domain adaptive swarms of swarms, swarms of swarms. This is again right now. You know, we got the hoodies are shooting drones and things at the at the ship. So they can't do it in sufficient quantity to overcome their defense mechanisms. Yet

they may still get a lucky hit. But that's why they're looking at swarms of swarms. And so he says, you know, think about what somebody could do in a terrorist event. We have he said, we checked for bombs, and we checked for guns, but there's no anti drone systems for big events in public spaces yet. Well, maybe our defense is to have civilians owning fully automatic machine guns take these things. I mean, that's basically

what they're doing to defend the ships. Right. If you can't trust the population with weapons, now you've got bigger problems than the guns, don't you. As we see an eighty AI and the new kind of propaganda, and this is really I think where it's a very thoughtful article from off Guardian dot org about the way that artificial intelligence is going to be used with a new kind of propaganda and control, because folks, the pen is more dangerous than

the sword. The ideas that are out there changing people's minds is far more important than the kinetic stuff. Just as McRaven said it. People have said this throughout it history. The psyops are more important than the actual physical war that eventually comes, because it lays the foundation for that, and it can even affect people's knowledge or their will to fight, or their knowledge of who to fight. You don't know who's on your side. Just take a look

at QAnon and MAGA people. Take a look at how easy it was for them to manipulate the Left in twenty twenty. You know, they're running around putting you know, pieces of cloth on their face and they were freaking out when other people didn't do it. I mean, that's pure mind control. Stay six feet apart. Why why? Well again, I think it's because their facial recognition stuff's not going to work, so maybe we can identify you by other biometrics, maybe the way that you walk or other things like that.

But it was all just absolute nonsense, and they went for it hook line and sinker. And then you've got stuff that is equally ridiculous with Trump. Well, you know these vacs, I see them killing people. But the guy that created he has nothing to do with it. All of that stuff, oh he created. He rushed up the vaccine to get us out of lockdown that he put us in. That he put us in over and over again. Just the inability to think because they have trusted sources or because

they have been manipulated. And so this article from Off Guardian says AI technology for not only the purposes of classical propaganda or simple surveillance. No, we're talking about entirely novel methods of behavioral modification and narrative control. It's intended to get out ahead of the crystallization of discourses and even the formation of identities and world views. Worldviews, that's the core thing. How do you view the

world. What is your frame of reference, what is your foundation of what you've leave That's going to highly affect the way that you receive and process information. That's why we talk about a Christian worldview. You see the world very differently from that framework. But you know, social media gave us propaganda with

feedback. As I've said many times, I talked about the fact that you know, we always knew how powerful it was for governments to be able to use newspapers and radio and television to manipulate people, and it became more and more manipulative. You know, the newspapers were not as manipulative as radio was, and then television as it added visuals, it became even more visceral and emotional as it did it. But the social media gives them the ability to

do precise measuring of how their narrative is working and to adjust that. Now the AI adds a couple of a couple of other things. It adds speed so it can do this very rapidly and in real time. It adds believability, writing it better than most of the time. Then they would write it, and it allows them to have eyes on everything. It's like, you know, think of stazzi as or think of state AI as Stazi East German Stazi, where everybody was reporting on everybody else, but they were doing that

with humans and it wasn't that effective. If they can put machines out there that are constantly looking at everything and identifying what it thinks as a threat, whether it is real or not, they will still come after you. So think of it as a state AI the STAZI. The idea is use massive data collection and AI pattern recognition to premptively disrupt the formation of behaviorally significant narratives,

discourses, or patterns of information. You see TikTok. One of the reasons that they talk about TikTok. And I don't like the I don't like the that TikTok is being used. But I also don't like the idea that they're going to ban an app or they're going to ban a website or something.

That's a very very very dangerous precedent. And so I think what they should do, just like I believe in the First Amendment, I think the appropriate response to false speech or hateful speech is more speech to debunk it. I'm not going to change from that position. I'll always hold that because if you look at anything else, what does it do. It's a pathway to total to solitarianism. That's not perfect. You know, they they can overwhelm

you. They can. Maybe you won't be able to convince people of that argument. But the alternative of letting the state determine what is hate and what is not hate, and what is true and what is false, that alternative leads us to tautlitarianism. And so it's it's still it's not a perfect system because people are not perfect, but it's far better than to solitarianism. And so I think the same thing is true of TikTok. I think that the

as manipulative as it is. And you know, the big thing that people say, which I don't know if it's true, I have an evaluated or not, but what they say is that the Chinese government is using TikTok to push you know, if they identify as teenagers within a short period of time,

they're pushing very nihilistic, very depraved videos to them. It does just the opposite in China, and China it tries to instill good values and two kids in America messes with their minds, and our government knows that because it does the same thing. See that's the problem. You know, all of this stuff has been controlled by governments, and they're not good. They're evil.

They're all evil. It's like we got the Prince of Persia over here, we got the Prince of the US over here, the Prince of China. Guess what, you know, they're all satanic, but they're they're still you know, they're using this to not only spy on people, not only to get data for the scrape data for their AI stuff, but they're also

using it to push the population in a particular way, manipulating it. And our government knows that very well because they've been doing it with media, with entertainment, with education, and then with social media for a very long time. So they're quick to figure that out. Just like they don't want their control substrate of five G to be running on Chinese hardware because they want to be the ones to spy on us. They want to be the ones to

manipulate us. And so I agree with that part of it, but again I don't think that the appropriate response is to shut it down. He goes on to say it quotes from a long quote in here from a Department of Defense document, referencing back to what they've been talking about since the nineteen nineties. And again, you know, the internet goes back to the nineteen six

and darkenest psychologist JCR Licklighter who called it the intergalactic computer network. They shortened it up to Internet, but they said, as the excess of data now threatens to destabilize techno political imaginary of just in time information, artificial intelligence is advanced as the promissory solution to automating data analysis and reclosing the world. In other words, what they're concerned about is that we have this very complex infrastructure

of information. They say, well, it's getting out of control. And the thing that we thought we're going to be able to control is starting to get out of control, and so we need to use artificial intelligence to reclose that. It got too open, right, They got to close the feedback loop on it. They got to regain control of this. Because you see, with the Department of Defense, everything is war. They're war with everybody.

Their war with Americans as well as with foreigners. When they talk about fifth generation warfare, and this is a favorite term as I read to you yesterday, favorite term of these q andon shills, these anonymous q andon shills out there. Yeah, who do you think they work for? And people like Steve puchennik Oh, they love to talk about fifth generation warfare. Well,

that's simply playing mind games with you. Basically, that's what they're talking about, psychologically manipulating you, and they're telling you that they're doing it. It's just amazing to me to watch this whole process. So, the whole

process that works something like this. The AI scours the massive amounts of data collected in real time from social media and digital communication networks, and then you've then trained the algorithms to pick out disruptive patterns and communications that precede the various sorts of developments that you want to avoid, such as some piece of information

going viral. You don't want to be able to identify potentially robust clusters of information that won't necessarily go viral rapidly, to have the capacity to generate strong and enduring narrative frameworks that over time could threaten the status quo. In other words, some nascent idea. You know, it's like, hey, you know, this guy's got an observation about what we're doing here, kind of exposing a method. We got to shut this thing down right now and do

it at a very early stage before it goes viral. You see. This would include such complex phenomena as religious and political reform movements. You see, religion and politics has always been at the center of what the intelligence community wants to control and shut down our government, the American government going back to ge just special intelligence at the turn of the century. You know, they started it in the nineteen nineties as they were starting to fund a venture capital.

These different companies would become the search engines and the social media engines of control. The GEOS spatial intelligence was there to map out people's religious and political beliefs to anticipate what they're going to do. Anticipatory intelligence that AI. And so from the very beginning they were concerned about religious and political movements. Why well,

because you are not going to have an effect on them. If you don't have a religious and political framework, worldview foundation, you're not going to

have any effect. The people are worried about the Christians, folks, We've got a foundation, We've got a worldview We're not afraid of their viruses or their narratives because we fear God, because we have a confident expectation that there is a better life that is coming in this We're going to go down the path of what we believe, and they're not going to change us if we're sincere about this stuff. That's what they fear. That's what they look for.

That's what they want to shut down and control. That's what you have special intelligence is about. That's what the artificial intelligence is moving toward, identifying and shutting down religious and political reform movements. And so you pick out key influencers, and then you use some devious, run of the mill approaches like shadow banning or some kind of soft censorship that's new to this stage of digital propaganda, you know, the and so again understand this is a spiritual war.

Understand that our government, none of the governments are on the side of God. It is spiritual war. So they would then seed also besides a soft censorship and shadow banning, they would seed counter narratives. You gently and carefully nudge potentially disruptive individuals in the preferred direction to mold and to shape the flows of information over which they have influence, so you either move them or you essentially ban them. That's the way it's set up, as reported by

Leafing. One company that recently emerged in which has its sites set on quote keeping tabs quote on online conversations and actively employing counter measures they say at the behest of local corporations and Western governments. It goes by the name of logically dot AI, and so they've been used to do content moderation, fact checking. You know these euphanisms for censorship, artificial intelligence powered bots that produce in

real time original arguments, original arguments to dispute content labeled as disinformation. Goes something like this, is this the right one for an argument? I've told you once? When? Just now, No, you didn't, Yes, I did didn't didn't you you did not? Sorry? Is this a five minute argument or the full far time? Oh oh just a five minute one? Fine, thank you. Anyway, I did you must certainly did not. Let's get one thing. I most definitely told you you did not.

Yes I did, you did not. Yes I didn't, Yes I didn't. No, this is an argument. Yes it is. No, it isn't. It's just contradiction. No, it isn't. Yes it is, it is not it is. You just contradicted me. No I didn't. Oh you did. No, no, no, no, no, no you did just no, no nonsense. Oh look, this is futile. It isn't gave me I have a good argument. You didn't. You gave me an argument. One argument is not the same as contradiction can be.

No, I can't arguments and collected series of statements to establish a definite proposition. No, it isn't, yes it is. It isn't just contradiction. Look, if I argue with you, I must take up a country position. But it isn't just say no it isn't. Yes it is. No. It isn't an intellectual process. Contradiction is just an automatic game saying of anything. The other person says, no, it isn't, yes, it is not at all. No, Look, thank you, what that's it

morning? But I was just getting interested. Sorry, the five minutes is up. That was never five minutes. Just now, I afraid it was. No, it wasn't. Sorry, I'm not going to argue anymore. What if you want me to go on arguing, you'll have to pay for another five minutes. But that was never five minutes just now. Oh, come on, he's not going to say anything. Yeah. So you know it's not just Darker that's been doing this since the nineteen sixties. Money Python

was on in this game as well. And now we have social media that reproduces what you just saw there. But you're gonna have butts that are going to be just like the matrix, and you have Agent Smith being multiplied everywhere. They're going to multiply John Cleeses everywhere all over the Internet to argue with

you, to contradict what you'd do logically. Dot Ai is as spooky as they come, with their US headquarters in Arlington, Virginia, next door to the Pentagon and DARPA, allegedly founded at the tender age of twenty two by the strangely untraceable ghost with the implausible name of Lyric Jane Jai m Oh sounds

like Satoshi. They're really cozy with the major Silicon Valley players, including Microsoft, Google, TikTok, while Facebook uses them for quote unquote fact checking, rating posts and messages for suppression and downraking, and all of their social media

feeds. They're also working closely with Western governments and a line partners across the world, with an avowed role in psychological warfare to counter the influence of specifically Russia and China, as well as safeguarding Western States election integrity in the face of unwanted narratives. I'm sure they're very active with all of the pandemic as

well the climate. Mcguffin. Also, logically, dot AI is also the mainstream media's little sweetheart, being adored by all the usual suspects such as The Guardian, The Washington Post, the BBC. It has entered into formal partnerships with academic institutions all over the world. All this gives us an overall picture of their reach and their incredible rapid expansion, which in and of itself begs many questions, which serves to illustrate the astonishing potential for influence and operation of

this sort can possess. So the legacy media is being used as strategic force multipliers. While these are the troops on the ground, the multitude of John Clees's out there to take exception and to shut you down, get you arguing with them so that you don't get anything else done. And it's nothing but just the two of you in this little room, nothing will be solved by and we sign up to do it. Unlike this skit, you don't have

to pay for a five minute argument or a thirty minute argument. You can have it for free if you just get on social media with people and one really neat addition to the toolkit of contemporary digitized mass surveillance, censorship, and social media a social engineering rather is malinformation? Is it truthful? And isn't it interesting that these people are so concerned about the truth when they want to tell you that there's an infinite number of genders in people's minds that they imagine

they're completely postmodern in what they sell people. But then they use the idea of truth they fall back to that make themselves the arbiters of truth in order to shut people down if it's an undesirable narrative. It's not about truth or facts, of course, but it is about the control of socially significant narratives and nothing else. Again, Religious political reform movements must be nipped in the bud. Imagine that you or I express some unit of malinformation in our online

interactions. Let's say that this particular statement, even though entirely truthful, gets tagged with the moderate risk of supporting a set of conclusions that could have a negative impact on one of the major pharmaceutical brands with close ties to the state corporate power structure. Well, totally random example, he says, we know that's exactly what has been happening. What this ingenious AI propaganda system then does.

It's automatically cordon off this statement by shadow banning, down ranking and other forms of concealment, and the information it also tags us with being a potentially disruptive agent, increasing scrutiny of our online and our offline activities. Of course, you can also effectively separate disruptive agents from each other by automatically demoting their posts and each other's flows, no matter what the content, and through throwing

up all sorts of obstacles for their online interaction. But these are old strategies and we've all lived through them. Right. If you talk about any of these mcguffins, if you question the government narratives on these things that are very important to them and their corporations, you immediately get this treatment. We've all

had that treatment. What's added on top of this is the seating of counter narratives in the speed with which it can be done, and the two obvious ways that this can be affected is by situating the relevant statement and a context of contrasting or discordant and information. So both the disruptive agent, the John Clees, and the recipients of the not that he's not the disruptive agent, but he's disrupting the person that they consider to be the disruptive agent, get

a clear message. This piece of information is both contested and it is a minority perspective that should be socially ostracized. You're dangerous. At the very beginning of this, I remember seeing Scott Adams, the guy does the Dilbert cartoons, the unfunny cartoons that have no insight, but he has ingratiated himself to conservatives. I remember the very beginning of this. We were barely two weeks into this stuff, and he put out he says, it's getting harder and

harder to distinguish the quote unquote freedom lovers from sociopaths. One of the first people start calling us sociopaths. And I replied to him, and I said, it's getting harder and harder to tell these pragmatists from totalitarians. But that's you know they can do that a number of ways. They can have legitimate

shills, or they can have bots that do that type of thing. This can be further supported by counterintuitively promoting the Facebook post or the forum message in the flows of networks of singled out users that have been identified as loyalists,

loyalists proponents of the preferred views of government and corporations. Another potential aspect of this proactive seating of counter narratives is to employ bots, and interesting possibility is to generate fake short messages by actual users and your social network to produce these targeted responses messages which can't be seen by themselves and so will generate no interaction, but mimic their style and their tenor so. They already do this with

some deceased Facebook users. Is happening as the report of people are recreating deceased loved ones using artificial intelligence. They get lonely, so they can use Facebook to mimic the tone of people and to basically be able to interact with them, make it feel like you're interacting with them. There's, as this author

says, there's even a Black Mirror episode about that. So to sum up, we have these hugely connected organizations with tentacles throughout both legacy and digital media, closely associated with government and military intelligence, now proudly proclaiming the application of AI towards an entirely new type of generative, responsive, and predictive, predictive

propaganda. They also promise to control the very genesis of human narratives. And the brilliant thing is that most people won't even be able to connect the dots. Just to take a look at QAnon, MAGA people at the leftists massed up social distancing paranoia people. And when you look at both of these sides, what is something else that you notice about them. They're so heavily into group think, they're so heavily into political parties and that type of thing.

It makes them very easy to control, very easy to control. And that's why you got so much garbage from the MAGA people, so much garbage from the farm left that is out there. And these people are being you know, weaponized against each other and against us. They're agents of disruption and they don't even know it. They can't connect the dots. It truly is amazing to watch this all, you know, I'm gons have to admire the diabolical genius, because hey, you know, Satan is a genius and it is

diabolical. It is straight from the devil. Our government, folks, you don't realize that our government, the rest of them as well, under Satanic control. And I mean that literally. These advanced forms of behavioral control and

narrative of psychological manipulation technically not censorship per se. Even if the structures and the safeguards are not captured, this new form of predictive propaganda can't be targeted by our traditional legal regimes because hey, you know, we're just putting out some information here, and it's you know, in a sense, there's an element of censorship to a lot of this, but a lot of this they're generating stuff. And like I said before, you know, you fight using

the First Amendment, you've got to get out there and more speech. Well that's what they're doing. They use both the censorship and well, we need more speech, and we got artificial intelligence to generate more speech than you can ever generate, he said. A friend wrote me an email on the issue of how to organize politically and socially in this situation. He says, I'm still thinking about it. He's got a lot of insights here, but he

doesn't have any insight about what we do about this. And that's the problem. These people have been thinking about this for half a century. They've been working slowly towards us for half a century. How do you explain something that goes through multiple generations of people as if it was one individual behind it. Well, it's spiritual warfare. And if you understand that it's spiritual warfare,

now you've got a leg up on this thing here. And if you want to mount it and turn the horse's head, think about doing exactly the opposite of what these people want us to do. They want us to be isolated, They want us to be dependent and live in their digital world. Refuse to do that. And one of the best things that you can do is again, he says, so friend wrote him an email, Well, how

long is it going to be before they know they're reading that email? They are reading the email, how long is it going to before they stop the delivery of that email. You need to talk to your friend and one on one and you need to get involved in local one on one person to person contacts church. If you've got a spiritual warfare, church is local churches, person to person. It should be local anyway, it's person to person,

and it's going to be people who have the discernment about this. And so if they want to isolate, you counter that and go as hard as you can in the other direction, because that's the key. So we're going to take a quick break. When we come back, we're going to talk about a little bit more about AI and about the competition within AI. But I also want to get into the climate mcguffin that is there. We haven't talked about that for a couple of days. The insurance companies, everybody is watching

everything you do. It's not paranoia if they're actually watching you, is it. So we're going to take a quick break. We'll be right back. If you were listening to the David Knight Show, tell Alexa to add the APS Radio scill and have access to the best channels anywhere from Entree to blues, classic hits to news. APS Radio curates incredibly diverse playlists for you to

enjoy. Get details at APS radio dot com. All right, And in terms of what these various companies are doing, and of course it's a big economic impact on us as well. There is a company that calls itself GROK, and I'm not talking about Elon Musk. He uses the g r ok from sci fi novel. But they call they are Grock with a q Dickens with two k's that O'll skit from Marty Filman again John Kles. Now, this is Guawk with a q rock AI chip system. And that's the key

thing they have. They're not using these graphic processor units. They custom design their own IC specifically for large language models, and it is significantly faster than what is out there. And of course they say that it is an open source that they are not training it, they're not making it prejudice, so it's you know, you're getting the program supposedly that has not been manipulated, but much much faster. And of course in Nvidia has made a tremendous amount

of money. They brought the whole stock market up when they released their financial report. This is going to have implications for the stock market as well. Potentially, GROC the latest artificial intelligence tool to come onto the scene, taking social media by storm with this response speed, and it's new technology that may dispense with the needs for the need for GPUs. And these things are incredibly expensive. You know, they're getting massive banks of them, ten thousand dollars

apiece. They're incredible hogs of energy, even to the extent that they're saying, well, you know, for of course, the government is not worried about that. The government is worried about crypto. They're not worried about the NSA, the CIA or their AI. That's not a problem. But other people are saying, well, were we going to power for this? We're going to have to have a little miniature nuclear reactors for these things. A tremendous amount of power and a lot of money involved in this. The first

public demo using grock, a lightning fast AI answers engine. I talked about this a couple of weeks ago, just briefly, and it came out at the end of February. It writes factual sided answers with hundreds of words in less than a second. More than three quarters of the time is spent searching and not generating. The large language model runs in a fraction of a second. It can do five hundred tokens per second, versus chat GPT three point

five, which does about forty tokens per second. It's about twelve and a half times faster, and the demo that you see on social media, they show the responses scrolling up, and of course you know, if you're for most users chat GPT is going to be scrolling up faster than you can read. But this other one just goes straight up and it's there. GROC with a Q, the developer of the model, claims to have created the first language processing unit an LPU through which it runs its model, rather than the

scarce and costly graphics processing units the GPUs that run other AI models. And so again they say they don't train them. That is I guess going to be a selling point, because that is training is just euphemism for biasing them. It was founded in twenty sixteen. They trademarked the name and long before Elon Musk came out with his Grock with a K, and when he announced that, they replied to it say, we can see why you might want

to adopt our name. You like fast things like rockets and hyperloops and one letter company names, and our product, the Grock with a Q LPU Inference Engine, is the fastest way to run large language models and other generative AI applications. However, we must ask you to please choose another name and fast. Now. There hasn't been any legal wrangling with US yet or not, but perhaps there will be. Open Ai and many other AI developers though,

are also looking at custom chips to do this. Open Ai, though, with Sam Altman is aligning himself with all these different governments. He's the guy that's also behind world coin that was just banned in Spain and should be banned everywhere. Quite frankly, it's another one of these creepy, creepy biometric ties into a central bank digital currency type of thing. Is the CBDC that he's going to you know, he's trying to set up so they can give it

to governments. So he's always going in and telling the government how he's responsible, but everybody else should be shut down. He's now seeking trillions, with a t trillions of dollars from the US government in order to develop his own chip because he shouldn't have to pay for it, just like the people own the NFL stadiums or the baseball stadium, they shouldn't have to pay for their own stadiums. We should pay for those stadiums, whether or not we even

watched their games on TV. We should pay for their stadiums. Well, we should pay for his special GPU chips. And the government does have a real interest in that. It's quite frankly, the government has a real interest in keeping us locked into this sports paradigm. We pour all of our energy and attention into this distraction, right the bread and circuses thing. We look at this circus and we'reocused on it so totally. That's one way to shut

us down from doing any religious or political reform. On rock fan, Wes Robertson says totalitarianism throughout history always self destructs. The level of tech the world order has now is going to take millions of us out with a bang. That's right. You go to Garrison. I've talked to you many times, said we talked about the art elect wars, the war's over artificial intelligence, and they said it's going to result in giga death billions of people likely to

be killed. Well, I'm going to take a quick break because we're going to switch over now and I want to talk a little bit about what's happening with the climate narrative. We also have the health effects of EMF tremendous. It's amazing story that has come out now about one individual and the number of strokes that this affected them with. And of course we also take a look at politics. Yes, we have had now Biden and Trump have both cured

their respective parties nominations. What a surprise, What a thrill? Again, this is like announcing that Kim Jong on has won the North Korean election, because that's what this is. You know, these guys are getting you know, eighty five to ninety or ninety five percent of the vote because there's nobody else running against them. Everybody else has dropped out. They still want to get one hundred percent of the people who show up. We'll be right back,

Elvis, the People and the Sweet Sounds of Motown. Find them on the Oldies channel at APS radio dot com. You're listening to the David Knight Show. I like this comment from Drunk Silver. One of my favorite aspects of the Dune novels that didn't make it into the recent movies is that all thinking machines had been banned for centuries. I didn't remember that. I read

the Noon Things back in the seventies when I was in college. I stopped after the second one because it started getting into this kind of mysticism stuff, which you ever noticed that is these sci fi series, they always at first they introduced a very interesting world, lots of new gadgets and gimmicks and machinery, and you know, so it's kind of interesting to look at that.

And then just like Star Wars, you know, the second one, they start going into the force, you know, this mystic quasi religious and would done it was this messianic copycat thing that was happening there since I But yeah, it did have some interesting things in the world, and that is I

don't remember that that they'd banned thinking machines. And of course they would not put that in the movies today, would They don't want to give anybody any ideas that would be the simple solution before they turn the entire planet into a sand dune. Right, But of course you do have the people in Silicon Valley snorting some doesn't turn their eyes blue, but they're going heavily into psychedelics. That's what they're focused on. The pharmachia many different ways. Well,

people are hallucinating about the climate, aren't they. And nobody hallucinating more than this old fossil John Kerry, we'd be so glad that he didn't become president. What a tool, What a fool these people are. They go ahead and they picked the dumbest people to run for president. Don't they know? He was running against George W. Bush, just like we've got Trump and Biden. Now, you know, it's like the how low can we go with the IQ points? And they probably select the person with the lowest IQ

points out of that's a race to the bottom. So former senator, one time Democrat president presidential candidate, now the special presidential envoy in the bid deministration for climate and he said on Tuesday, the people around the world might feel better about the Russian government if it invests as much effort into fighting climate change as it puts into fighting Ukraine. What an incredibly stupid statement. And he said, maybe it would open the door for people to feel better about what

Russia is choosing to do at this point in time. In other words, we wouldn't you know? Okay, well, you know they're these people are stalling this narrative. All they did this unprovoked war into Ukraine, and yet they really are trying to clean up the environment. So it's kind of a little bit of slack, right, I guess that's what he thinks in this regard. Ask a reporter, do you think that Western sanctions are affecting global

efforts to fight climate change and the shared commitments under the Paris Agreement. Again, it's always goes back to this Paris Agreement twenty fifteen, you know, the one that Trump's picks and his daughter, you know, Ivanka, and Rex Tiller said oh no, no, no, no, you don't leave that alone. Leave that. John Kerry self ratified that, you know, he and Obama ratified that. Said carry, we don't want to touch that.

And so he says, well, I'll get rid of it. You know, he has two different camps there, so he's going to make everybody happy. I'll get rid of it, but not until after my first term ends, after the election. And so then after the election, yeah, he said, well we're going to get rid of it. And that was about a month and a half before Biden took control. But he kept it in place. Very important have that Paris Climate Accord in place. I remember

playing Humphrey Bogart when Trump did that. Well, I always have Paris sweet high, you know, and it's like, we're ever going to get rid of it? Trump's going to keep it throughout the four years, and all this stuff about getting rid of it if he re elect him and anything just a bunch of garbage, bunch of nonsense. Well, one thing that we should take a look at. This is sent to me by listener. Here's the the amount of CO two produced by humans in the atmosphere compared to everything

else. Now look at this chart. This is kind of interesting. So they have to put things in perspective our atmosphere. Where yellow is nitrogen, blue is oxygen, red is or is argne. You never heard anything about argon. I mean, they must not have a good pr you know. I mean it's like we've shadow band all talk about argone, I guess. And then the green is carbon dioxide. And when you look at this, it's this huge yellow square, smaller blue square, much smaller, much smaller

red square of argon. And then in a little teeny tiny square of green, which is the carbon dioxide. But that's all the carbon dioxide. That's not just what humans are doing. There's a teeny tiny little dot up in the corner, and that's human contributions to carbon dioxide. So he says, a little tiny white dot you can hardly make out in the upper right hand corner is carbon dioxide produced by human activities, while the rest of the green

is naturally occurring carbon dioxide. So don't tell me that we have to change our way of life. So we got to get into all kinds of hardship to minimally change what amounts to zero point zero zero one six percent of the atmosphere the human activity produced CO two. Well, that's the reality. But of course John Carry and these other people have worked very hard to keep us from seeing the reality, and they've been very effective. Do you stop and

think about it. Who how if it wasn't for mainstream media, if it wasn't for the entertainment world, if it wasn't for the institutional educational world, if it wasn't for social media, nobody would think twice about climate change and they would laugh this stuff Off's no evidence of it, And even when they put their models and their predictions out, it only serves to make it more ludicrous because they're all false. They're all proven false. This has been going

around long enough that it's all known to be false. Fifty years of false prophecies, lies and failed models and failed predictions, and yet it's still there, and they are having an effect with younger people who have been hit with this stuff as if it were fact and true all their lives. They may not know what gender they are, but they're absolutely certain that CO two is

going to kill us all. Kerry's clumsily awarded response is widely interpreted to mean people would feel better about the Russian invasion if Ukraine of Ukraine, if Russia did more to control US emissions there A more charitable interpretation might be along the lines of, well, if Russia has the resources to invade another country, it could do more to fight climate change. Yeah, if they can get to the moon, you know, can't well this problem at that type of

thing. And a July twenty twenty three MSNBC interview, Carrie asked viewers to think about all the greenhouse gas emissions from Russia's intense bombing campaign. What about ours? What about all these wars that we have started everywhere? That doesn't matter, It's only Russia's bombs. In February twenty twenty two, he pleaded with Vladimir Putin to think about the climate effects of dropping hot bombs on the frozen terrain of Ukraine. This guy is as dumb as Biden is senile.

It's beyond belief, isn't it. And yet, because the power of the institutions and the Internet and the propaganda, they are treated as respectable ideas. Not only that, but they laugh at us if we question this absurdity. Wall Street Journal pointed out that Carrie's visible comments in February twenty twenty two a gaff but a window into the Biden administration's dangerous obsession with climate. Well,

that's very true, and that is that mcguffin. This it's hard to tell, you know, whether it's going to be the climate mcguffin or the pandemic mcguffin that they're going to push the hardest. But I still think it's going to be the climate mcguffin because they've been rolling this out for the longest time. They've been used the pandemic mcguffin to bolster the climate mcgufin. Wouldn't it be nice if we just stayed locked down with all this stuff all the time?

kWt sixty eight says, self ratify. Can I call the I R S and tell them that my taxes are self paying? Yeah? Well, there's no constitutional authority for their Paris Climate Accord, for even calling it a treaty, and I just like, there's no constitutional authority for these people to be doing what they're doing with the I R S, you know, not even talking about the amendment and how it was asked by the tactics that they

use. Again, they set the template for bureaucratic control, for the removal of due process, the removal of the presumption of innocence, for giving powers of legislation, prosecution, and adjudication to these bureaucracies. When the technocrats intentionally sabotage a nation's energy supply. This is from Technocracy News. They said the head of the UK government's climate watchdog told officials to kill a negative story using

technical language, and this was discovered by the UK Telegraph. They did a freedom of information request. What they were doing at the time was trying to obscure the fact that they're not going to be able to supply the energy that the country needs using their so called renewable energy sources of solar and wind, because even though they call themself sustainable all the time, they're not sustainable. The sun does not always shine, the wind does not always blow, and

so at a very real level. They can't sustain a constant output. Notice why they pick these things though, right you look at what is the vulnerability of these new energy sources, Well, they can't sustain themselves. Oh, we'll call them sustainable. What is the problem with a smart city, Well, people that have to voluntarily go into some kind of an open air prison here. That'd be pretty stupid. We'll call it a smart city problem solved.

On the face of it. Urging colleagues to kill a reasonable request for information with technical language looks like an attempt at obfuscation. That's putting it mildly, isn't it. That's exactly what they do all the time. Now,

they don't always try to bamboozle you. For example, right now, you've got Bill Gates, and you've got Joe Manchin, and you've got a Republican Congresswoman, Carol Miller from West Virginia, and so the West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin, a West Virginia congresswoman, And it may be the only one that I think they're big enough to have more than one congress person. I'm not sure, but I think they do. But anyway, she is a member of Congress and she's a Republican. Joe Mansion is a Democrat. She's a

Republican congresswoman. And the two of them have joined forces with Bill Gates because they want to shut down West Virginia's coal industry. And they're not trying to hide it. Bill Gates is putting this out. He's putting out charts about how he wants to kill energy from cole. He's putting out blog posts. He's got a blog site called Gates Notes, and so he's making no secret of it. In the UK, they're trying to obfuscate it, but he's

bragging about it. They want to destroy the lifeblood of the West Virginia economy, and they want to make sure that America is never energy dependent again, because if you look at it again, when you look at this whole thing about peak energy, which is a lie that was created and sold by the CIA back in the seventies, and then when the Arab oil embargo hit, and I've shown the magazines many times, Time and Newsweek both had you know,

the same, they were just marched in locksteps. So both of them had on the cover it's the end of energy for the West, and all the rest of this stuff. We're going to be out of oil and natural gas by the mid nineteen eighties. They said, absolutely certain, All the experts said that. But then they said, we've got six hundred and sixty six years of coal. Yeah, six sixty six at the rate of current. But we got to get rid of the coal because you know, it's

just because of air quality and stuff. But you can clean it right, you can clean it up, and you can still burn it. They don't want it, though, because it's energy independence and they don't want us to have that energy. So they've got to go after what we've got in abundance, had more coal, more energy and coal than Saudi Rabia had and oil.

So let's shut that down first of all. So in West Virginia, Bill Gates is taking his global as standy energy policies right there where he openly says that he hopes to destroy the coal industry, and he's doing it with the help of the state's bipartisan political establishment, including Senator Joe Manchin a Republican Congresswoman Carol miller I. Like what one listener said to me. He said, referred to him as bail Gates because of his deppopulation orientation is bail Gates.

Gates openly states his plans on his web pages. He posted a graph joined the engineered collapse of the American coal industry, calling it a step in the right direction. See if you can find that chart, Travis on that. According to his own blog, gatesnotes dot com, he and his associates are preparing to quote get rid of unquote America's natural energy sector all together. And yeah, scroll down, it's a chart there. Oh, there, there all are. And that's even got the governor justin what is his name

anyway, he's a guy who flipped from being a Democrat to Republican. And why why did he need to do that? Well because Hillary Clinton ran on the same platform that Bill Gates is doing. We got to kill the coal industry here. But let's pull that back up and go down to the chart that he's got there there, it is right there, and so I see he's got a step in the right direction killing coal. And you know, renewables are going up above coal, and then natural gas is going up.

But he's not happy about that either. US carbon de micheals has fell in twenty twenty three, as coal use tumbled to new lows. So he's saying he's trying to convince the public that destroying an entire nationwide industry will quote benefit everyone, including those workers and communities who depend on fossil fuels. He's directly quoting Hillary Clinton eight years ago that had a big part of her losing that election. But of course, you know he pays her to say that.

I guess he's alread announced through the media that he is working with the federal government to shut down hundreds of coal power plants in West Virginia and replace them with nuclear energy facilities. These plans are in alignment where the World Economic Forms called to meet a net zero mission goal by twenty fifty. Look, when you look at a coal plant and you can clean up that coal plant,

there isn't any source that doesn't have downsides. I mean, you've got to mind the stuff that's going to possibly be an issue, but the downside on the nuclear stuff, you've got to guard that waste for centuries, for centuries. This is really ultimately kicking the can down the road to somebody else. Is a case like that. I'm a big fan of using the stuff that is simple, cheap, and works but that's why these people don't like it.

It's worth noting that when coal towns and others convert to nuclear energy, the locals are left behind, often supplanted by foreign workers brought in on visa programs to benefit the corporate class. Yeah, exactly right. But it is world economic form that once says, this is a letter that was sent to me by listener talking about a US power grid shutdown. So the implosion takedown

of America is at our doorstep. In the next to twenty twenty four or twenty twenty five, you could have four nuclear missiles, two over the West coast, two over the East coast, could be fired by North Korea or Ron respectively, could effectively cause an EMP knockout of the national power grid and essentially bring the Great Satan down to its knees. But of course, you

know we've also are self destructing with massive amounts of debt. A national cyber attack against the US power grid infrastructure would accomplish the same objective if a nuclear EMP strike is ruled out, so they don't have to do an e MP, as we've talked about before, just take down, do a cyber attack,

and of course we'll never know who did the cyber attack. It's just the perfect thing for a inside job, a false fly, because we've already seen with the tools, or they don't want you to remember fault seven, they can disguise that. They can make it look like they're anybody they wish. And by the way, those tools are out in the open, so it's not just the American government that could do that. Any government or private

actor could disguise their hack to make it look like they're any government. An EMP strike would get these obscene gas guzzling trucks, SUVs, planes, helicopters, all of them off of our streets, out of the air space. Is no more electricity for the gas pumps or the aviation pumps. The power grid shut down was similarly in the antiquated hydrocarbon economy and bring down these right wing gun toting, climate denying, meat eating conservatives. So yeah, that's

right, it's a real possibility. But again, what they want you to not know is the fact that their solar and wind cannot possibly provide left electricity. You say, you could take it down suddenly like that, or you could do it just slowly, and as Fauci said iteratively, iteratively, They are definitely doing that. Whether or not they will then suddenly do something to bankrupts go gradually then suddenly remains to be seen. When will politicians accept that

wind and solar power cannot replace fossil fuels. This is a daily skeptic out of the UK. The disortion of truth has been going on for at least fifteen years. In two thousand and nine, Scientific americanublished an article citing a Stanford study which predicted that renewables could become one hundred percent of the world's energy

needs by twenty thirty. In March of twenty twenty one, Carbon Tracker we can guess where they stand on this issue posted a report saying that renewable energy was capable of meeting energy demand one hundred times over Two years later, twenty twenty three, the World Economic Form jumped on the bandwagon with a study that mistakenly claimed that we have reached peak fossil fuels. Where have we seen this before? Yeah, we saw that before about forty five years ago. Again,

a narrative that was put out by the CIA. Still being sold by these climate people, especially by the World Economic Form. They're all on the same team. Aren't they. Well, the problem is this, they said, People intuitively agree with that because you can feel the sun on your face, and you know, that's a lot of energy that's come out of us. If we could just harness that the wind, you feel that all the time as well. I mean, you can step outside and instantly feel all

of this energy, solar energy, wind energy all around you. The problem is though, that it's intermittent, that it's unreliable, that it has not been concentrated. And of course the real issue for any of this stuff to be practical is that it has to be economical. And even though they talk about these things as being renewable and sustainable, these solar panels and these windmills don't last forever. Like everything else on this earth right subject to the second

law of thermodynamics, it wears out, it goes down. And so when we look at California, for example, having to pay thirty cents per kilowatt hour people live in California and still suffering from rolling blackouts and brownouts. Compare that to even other liberal states. Are going to Washington, they're eleven cents per kila white hour or thirteen cents per killa white hour respectively, and yet they're paying three times that much in California, and it's not sustainable. That's

why they're getting the rolling blackouts and brownouts. So fossil fuel is stored energy, concentrated energy, solar and wind or not. And regardless of how you put this stuff together, it's going to wear out and have to be renewed. So here's their solution to some of these battery operate electric vehicles. Microwave energy. Microwave energy could fix the biggest problem facing EVS. And they've talked about this in a variety of different ways. They've talked about highways, building

highways. I think there's actually one under development in Florida building a highway that is going to charge your car using inductive charging as you drive over it. This is a little bit different, and we're going to talk about that when we come back, because I want to use that as a lead d to the health effects of EMF. Everything that we do this world has a trade off. There's no perfect solution, even though these people always tell us is

going to be perfect. You know, if we all go to nuclear power. The thing I heard when I was a kid growing up, go to nuclear power, it's going to be so cheap you won't even meet it. We still hear that about fusion, and people still think that about solar and windmills. If we just build it once, we'll have free energy forever. Looking for better information, apsradionews dot com features articles and commentary, along with audio from all the top news from around the world. Apsradionews dot com.

Here's a little song I old you might banto here in your you'll own and be happy. I got no cash, I ain't got no car, not two empty four booster shots in your arm. Own nothing to be happy. You can't even buy shit in the store because of your low social credit score. Own nothing, be happy. You will own nothing and be happy. Be happy at eat some bugs. Yeah, that's a great number anyway. Microwave energy, it'd fix the biggest problems facing evs. Frigid weather showed their

shortcomings. We saw the life of batteries by different manufacturers had different effects. BMW's were affected tremendously by twenty percent reduction in range. Tesla's had less. It was eleven percent, but still significant reduction in range. Why they don't talk about in this article because it's a lot of g whiz green technology type of perspective. Why they don't talk about this in fact, that people can't get them charged at all, you know, not even the range. But

you couldn't even get it charged because the battery is too cold. We can't charge the battery for whatever reason, it's got to warm up. People sit there all day and wait for the battery to warm up. It wouldn't warm up, luckily. A handy solution could be around the corner, an energy storage system that combines microwave energy and chemical heat pump to produce heating or cooling on demand. Well, isn't that great? And you know that's nice that

people are working on always changing stuff. But how complex and how expensive is this? And is it safe to us? You know, the microwave energy, And maybe what you ought to do is to see if people want to voluntarily try this, and you can then try to perfect the technology. We might find that there's some major flaws in it, as we found out with

the Evy battery driven cars over the winter. The energy costs can be minimized by coupling with a smart meter to charge the system when energy is cheap, and the stored energy can then be used at any time, So we put it into this little black box they called an e thermal bank designed as a secondary energy source for evs to harness electricity to drive a high density thermochemical based system. So basically, yet another battery that you put in the car to

charge the other batteries. It just keeps getting more and more complex, doesn't it, without really addressing what consumers want. How expensive is this? Can we afford it? Do we want it? Is it going to be shoved down our throats whether we want it or not. Well, the five G and EMF stuff that is coming out is being shoved down our throats and every other part of our body. This is a story from Children's Health Defense.

A woman diagnosed with fifty one strokes after a new cell phone tower was erected nine hundred feet from her home, and so she's planning ensuing. In two thousand and seven, this woman and her husband built a dream home out in rural Minnesota so they could live close to nature and close to her family. They didn't know that AT and T and T Mobile would soon be building a

cell tower just nine hundred feet from their home on adjacent property. Nearly immediately after the cell tower was upgraded into twenty nineteen, she became disabled from intense levels of radio frequency radiation emitted by the town, and since then she has suffered fifty one strokes, vision loss, hearing loss, headaches, sleep disruption,

chronic fatigue, cognitive impairment. She experiences ongoing issues the balance, orientation, and mobility, but now the legal team at Children's Health Defense is going to work with her to sue under the Americans with Disabilities Act. She said, we didn't know what they were doing. They put up a big crane and did it multiple times. They didn't tell us what they're doing. We think they upgraded this to deploy five G, but they won't admit to what

they did. They just say they don't have to tell us. On the weekend, after the worker is completely the upgrade, she was at home began feeling dizzy, as if something just didn't feel right. She called her husband, said something's wrong in my head. I don't know how to explain it. I just feel like crap, and she did she need him to come home? She said no, I'll be fine, But the physical in sensation, she said, was awful. In addition to dizziness, she had headaches

and nausea. I couldn't pick up my head off the pillow without the room spinning and feeling very sick. The sipsus continued. On Monday, they went to the urgent care and was diagnosed with vertigo. She returned home. A few days later, she had blind spots in her vision and tingling in her arm with almost a numb feeling. She called the on call nursing center. They told her you need to come down to the emergency room. We think

you're having a stroke. An MRI of her brain showed numerous damaged areas called lesions. She was admitted to the hospital October tenth, twenty nineteen, diagnosed with strokes, vision loss, and balanced difficulties. After three days in the hospital, the strokes stopped happening, meaning that the MRIs of her brain no longer showed lesions, and she returned home. But before the end of the month, she started feeling the same thing again. She went back to the

emergency room and they were back more brain lesions. A neurologist told her the MRI scan of her brain looked like a starry night because of how many white spots or lesions appeared, but they didn't know what was causing them. After night or two at the hospital, she began to feel better, but after returning home, her symptoms would reemerge and she'd have to return to the hospital. Each time she came back there were more strokes. So they started thinking,

well, there's something about this here. They moved to a different location temporarily. During one of her stays at the Mayo Clinic, she said, you just woke up with a strong sense that the cell tower radiation was causing the symptoms. So they started doing some research. They started piecing it together,

and they said, well, let's try this. In March of twenty twenty, so this is five months after this stuff started, they and their son moved into her parents' house a mile further away from the tower, and she got a lot better and the strokes stopped. By June, she was talking about returning to school. She said, we would go fishing every night. She had a lot more energy. Around the same time, the doctors of the Mayo Clinic had her taking pill chemotherapy. Of course, you'd put

you on some drugs. But in October her parents moved back, so the two and their son moved back their house close to the tower, and in a week all the stuff started happening again, So now we know it's it's here, most likely the cell phone tower. They became more and more convinced the RF radiation from the tower was making her six. So the caledon a guy who was a certified EMR specialist to measure the wireless radiation levels throughout their

home. He showed peaks of up to eighteen milliwatts per square meter, eighteen times higher than the standard of building biology considers to be the extreme limit. So now they know what it is. So the first thing she did was to build a fair day cage, a box, and she could go in there to get some temporary relief, and it did. Whenever she would start

to bother her, she would go in there and kind of detox. But she said she could feel her head relaxed, and she's in the fair day cage, but anywhere else in the house or the yard, her head feels loud and full, like a motor is running. Then their son started having some problems. This is something that the fact that the husband's not having a problem, but the two of them are related. So he starts having negative health episodes and he was sixteen years old at the time, so you know

this, this definitely looks like that's what this is. There's going to be a lawsuit there. But just consider the fact that in New York people woke up New York City, they started rolling out these five G antenna locations, and people woke up the next morning and all of a sudden, there's one right there at their window, I mean, right up against their window. In some cases it was the room where they kept the baby, even, you know, and one person looks at it and it's got a sticker on

it and it says don't get closer than ten feet. Well, you know, it wasn't even a foot away from their window. And so she called the company and they said, we'll be right out. They came out, they didn't move it, they removed the sticker that warned people about it. It's the money involved, it's the corporation's involved. But of course it's also

the government agenda. The government wants to have five G. They want to have that extra bandwidth because that's going to be necessary for them to do the real time surveillance, to do the kind of you know, social credit scoring and all the rest of this data intensive stuff that the digital technology is being used to create a prison, and so they need to have that five G there. So when you look at all the different sources of there of course

many people and there's articles about that. We'll talk about the long term effects of cell phones Wi Fi in your home. But of course even some people susceptible to the the EMF that comes from the power lines, from the electrification of our different of our homes. Everybody's got a different metabolis. That's one

of the reasons why. Of course there's a big variation with the shots, a big variation in the shots and the intensity, and they can track that by lot and they can see that most of the people who had serious adverse effects where who died, they got the higher concentration lots. So it was a lottery, wasn't it. But you know, they're playing around with it, they're playing around with different dosages. They know exactly what they're doing.

But there's also individual variation that accounts for the fact that not everybody immediately had a problem with it, or have not shown up to have a problem after a period of time. The PA takes a very different stance on EMF radiation we have some of the highest allowed amounts of radiation. But of course, you know, the EPA doesn't really care regulatory capture by the businesses by the government, they've got another agenda. The government wants to surveill and track us.

The companies want to make money, and the EPA obliges. But of course, you know, this is the same organization that's out there supporting fluoridation of the water and covering up any internal reports that talk about negative health effects with it. But it's not just limited to the kind of she had strokes.

Even electromagnetic fields may even affect heart health, they say animal studies, exposure to radio frequency radiation has been associated with structural and biological or biochemical changes of the heart and two long term animal studies, one done by the US National Toxicology Program, another conducted by Italian institute, the Ramazini Institute, heart

turmors were observed with lab animals that were exposed to radio frequency radiation. So like some of these things, it doesn't really matter whether or not you do the study and show them stud Just as we saw with all of the vaccines and all of the different drugs that were being pushed on people, as the solution. The facts don't really matter. It's going to be the big elephant in the room. It's whether or not they can conceal people talking about this

and when they can put out their faults narrative. Are we taking the risk of five G seriously enough? Two months ago, the state of New Hampshire introduced a bipartisan bill requiring wireless intennas to be placed at least five hundred meters away from residences, businesses, schools, as well as putting measures in place to inform the public about the health risks of frequency radiation that will never happen.

By the way, in a place like New York City, there wouldn't be any place for them to put If they had to put it five hundred meters away, it's going to be close to where people are working, where people are living if you put it anywhere in the city. So again, is there a difference in where you live. That's what we're going to talk about when we come back. I had a listener write me a letter.

I'm going to give you their argument saying it really doesn't matter whether you focus on local elections or not, because they're just another extension of the federal government. I disagree with that. I'll give their opinion and I'll tell you why I disagree with that when we come back. Stay with us. We'll be right back. You're listening to the David Knight Show, Elvis, a Beatle and the Sweet Sounds of Motown. Find them on the Oldies Channel at apsradio

dot com. Well, before I get back into the news, I just want to make a quick statement about some great news we had this morning. Just as we were about to go on air, Travis's wife found out that she's pregnant. So we would appreciate your prayers for that. We're all very excited about that. About what two years or so, almost exactly two years that you guys have been married, so we're very excited about that. Really would appreciate your prayers. And let me also, I'm going to read some

letters here about some different issues. As I said, we had somebody who said local level is just another arm of the monster, and I think that can be true, doesn't have to be true, but I'll give you what they have to say. But I've got several letters here that have been sitting here, some of them for a while, and this is from somebody who lived in Carrie from the years of said I remember you from the LPNC back

in the early nineteen nineties. Also remember frequenting your video shop at Waverley Place in Carrie. I have questions that I leave in the comment section as Liberty Tilt. I'll see if I can find those. Happy I found your program. It was recommended by Rumble and I mentioned that, and thank you for the letter. I won't mention your name. They want to remain anonymous,

but that's why we ask people please like the broadcast. If you do that people can find it who might like the show, and that helps us to at least at Rumble. I don't think that we are shadow band there, but we still need to go through the traditional things of getting people to find us. So if you like the stream, please like the stream, click the little button there. That helps a great deal. And so thank you

for this. Thank you for the donation. This is also another letter here regarding your recent viewer listener who was seeking to exit their job in mainstream medical system. At least one potential viable alternative exists at freedom Dash Healthcare dot us. This parallel system was founded by Julie Wentz, whom you had on your show previously a couple of times. Yes, I have also had have many

other potential resources, and so there are many opportunities for people. We've had questions from people who, as both patient and provider, would like to get out of this system that has been totally corrupted, totally corporatized, and taken

over by the government. This is from Gene who says, I apologize with a long delay in sending you a donation and a lot of very nice compliments here, but I appreciate that, and I get that occasionally from people say well, you know, I haven't sent anything for a year, or here is my annual donation and I'll do it all at once. This is another

one here. This is from Mike and Sharon. I wish this could be a gigant, enormous check, but it was a very large check and I really do appreciate that, I said for the year twenty twenty four, and so thank you very much for that support. And let me read off some names here people who have sent us checks in the last week or so.

Sally and Todd, d James F. Mike and Sharon, M. Nancy Z, Aaron F Lois, L. John Kay, Jeremy W. Greg in Kentucky, Charlie at aps Dale, L Tom and Nancy, Kay, Michael D, Tina and Michael G. HD, Linda E. And ARAVM. I think in Minuet I'm having trouble reading Karen's handwriting with this. John W. And Ryan F. Thank you so much all of you for the support. And I don't read off the names of the people on substackt that

would take us a very long time. But we really do appreciate the people who support us on a regular basis, and that helps us with a base of support that is there. Let me read this letter. I've talked about here that a local level is just another arm of the monster, and so I'll read it and basically without any comments, and I'll comment at the end. Let me just say before I read it that certainly we all underst then

that government at any level is not angels. Right, We're not not even enough to think that, as the founder said, because we're not angels, we need to have government. But because government is composed of men, we need to have some way that we control them. Right. Who watches the watchers is the old question? And so that really is why we talk about the local level, because at the local level, we have a better opportunity. Not perfect again, you know, just like we're talking about free speech

and other things like that. It's not a perfect opportunity, and we don't always win, but we do have much more control, much more transparency. And you know, whenever it is local, whenever it's smaller, whenever it's closer to us, we have a better opportunity. Not may still lose, we have a better opportunity to make an effective change. But this person disagrees and says this, I have to disagree with you. On local level politics. It was a local level that enforced the co COVID con and its non

mandates. They ordered people to stay in their homes. The local cities, the local counties, local mayors and governors. Yes, the whole con game was local. Without the local level, they would not have succeeded as far as they did. Without local police to brutalize people, run down children in a foster home, to force inject them. It was a police at the local level who did it all. They are the ones who carried it out.

Voting for local is no different than voting for FEDS. If the people that are elected, lie, cheat and steal, and go back on everything they promised. They're not a government that adheres to the will of the people. They are an enforcement arm for federal mandates and for federal money. The churches held vaccination clinics and were paid handsomely for poisoning their flocks. The preachers received bonus money. It was all done at the local level. The stores

carried it out as well. They became the enforcement arm for the laws that didn't exist, for a COVID that didn't exist. It was never found out or identified outside the diseased minds that created it. With a simple thought, the entire system is corrupt and needs to be taken down and new guards put in place. Not a new government, new guards against tyranny. The old

guards failed. Write any bill of rights you want. If these monsters choose to ignore it, and people choose to let them ignore it, then nothing changes. The brutality in the tyranny continues. The local arm is just another branch, another arm of the beast, an enforcement arm, nothing more. You have to know how true it is, David. Local politics ensures the same system continues unchecked. If they were not there to enforce the will of

the state governments and the FEDS. Then no matter what they decreed, nothing would happen if they had no one to enforce it. It is the order followers that destroy freedom, those who obey it those who order it. As long as the disease of the mind continues, then nothing changes. Period. Well, I just have to say that we all know from the experience, don't we, that it was not the same experience in every life locality was it. And this is what I've said from the very beginning. Some places

it was incredibly bad, other places not so bad. That's one of the reasons why we're living here now. As a matter of fact, I just talked to a guy a couple of weeks ago. They moved out of New York City. He had a restaurant there, and they spent the better part of the year traveling around trying to find where things were better than anywhere else. And they moved to this area and have set up here, And so

there is a big difference in the level of enforcement. Yes, all politics is local, that has been an axiom, and that is clearly what you are observing here. But all local politics is not the same. The huge variation that's there, and again, we have a better chance to make a

change at that local level. If there's nobody good that's running for office, you have a better chance of being able to run somebody for a local city council than you do of getting somebody in Washington that is going to go along with all this. And I know they're not arguing to fix things from the top down, but that's the deception that they have put out for everybody. They understand that all politics is local. They understand, they say, think

globally, act locally. They don't want us to act locally. They want us to act and try to control the global government because we'll never succeed with that. That is the distraction. That is the distraction of people who are focused on Biden and Trump. That's the distraction of people are even focused on Congress. That is going to happen there, But there is a big difference from state to state level, and an even bigger difference at the local level.

So it's not a perfect solution. But just think of it as the inertia issue. The Titanic sees the iceberg there, but they can't change course. Right, There's a lot of inertia takes a long time to change course for a big heavy ship. If it had been a small ship, oh well, it's something would turn it right away, right, But if it's really big, it takes a long time to turn that thing around, and you may not be able to turn it around until you hit the iceberg.

A small ship you can do that. And again, we all know that everything was different in different locations in twenty twenty. I'm just trying to get people focus where they're going to have the most influence. And certainly you know that is not the case to say the churches held vaccine clinics. Some of them did, and some of them were handsomely paid, but a lot of them didn't. And there were a lot of churches and I interviewed them in

twenty twenty who never shut down, never shut down. One of the churches, for example, that I that I talked to, was a church and I saw the guy on Fox News in the morning. When I got in, I was making coffee and it was on the monitor that had interviewed him on the morning show. I contacted him and got him on and did an in depth interview with him. And this is an ill one of the worst places you know Pritzker there in Illinois, he wanted to shut everything down.

He was threatening to use the state police against any churches at stayed open. And this guy said, well, we're not worried about that because the sheriff, the sheriff, the elected office of sheriff. The sheriff goes to church here and he lives here locally. He said, he and his deputies are going to protect us from that. They interposed and they protected the people there from the state government. And why that happened because he was locally elected.

You know, you can when you're talking about the police, they are not directly answerable to the people in an election, but you do elect the people that tell the police what to do, whether it's the mayor or the city council or the things like that. And so you still have more of an opportunity even with an unelected police force than you do with office or with certainly

with federal office. And so that's what we're saying. You know, it's not a perfect solution, but it is a better solution that is there. This is from as a matter of fact, let me skip over to a discussion that was put together. I saw this on a Tennessee Paper here locally, and it was a response from a guy who is a lawyer. There's been several bills introduced in the Tennessee General Assembly about nullification, and so this guy who is a lawyer wanted to respond to that say that's not the right

way to go. We need to do everything through the courts, and we need to ask permission from the federal government to do this. And I couldn't disagree more with him. He says, nullification movement is not constitutional. Yes, it is. Matter of fact, the people wrote the Constitution also were involved. You know, you had wrote the Constitution, the Decoration of Independence.

They were involved with nullification at the very beginning of the republic. He said, these bills are being introduced to nullify federal law and the Tennessee Journal Assembly are not constitutional, despite seemingly being an easy fix to federal overreach. He said, a lot of people these days come up with these theories and these solutions of problems, and they sound good, and then he goes ahead and offers us his theory, his so called solution that he thinks sounds good.

They call these things opinions, when even when the Supreme Court issues these things, because that's what it is. It's their opinion. The Supreme Court as a politically appointed body. Their opinions change over time, and they don't have the final say under the Constitution. If we're going to follow the Constitution, there's no reason that they should have it. But the reason I wanted to cover this is because this is what's been sold to people pretty much all

my life. This is not the Constitution as the Founders wrote it, and this is not what they understood for generations. Again, you go back and you look at Andrew Jackson. Supreme Court issued an opinion about what he was going to do with the Cherokee. They didn't like it because it was a reprehensible policy, but he had the authority and the power to do it under

the Constitution, and so they changed their opinion within a year. And he said, well, they've issued their opinion, let's see them enforce it. We have checks and balances. And the Founders understood that the court system, they believed and said they thought it was the least dangerous of the branches of government because they didn't have any way to enforce their opinions except by our acquiescence and by people who tell us that we don't have the rights under the Constitution

that we clearly do have. The law is on our side, and we should not back down because of these types of opinions and theories for solutions to problems he talks about. He said, one bill in the Tennessee Senate would establish quote processes by which the General Assembly may nullify an unconstitutional federal statute, regulation, agency order, or executive order. The bill was called Restoring State

Sovereignty through Nullification. He was introduced last year, but it failed to make it out of Committee State and Local Government Committee, and the Attorney General here Jonathan S. Commetee, said that it was in his opinion. In his

opinion, he said it was constitutionally infirm. And he said why well, he said, we have the supremacy Clause in the US Constitution that prohibits state legislation aimed at increasing the limited authority of state courts to nullify unconstitutional federal action. If this is a correct interpretation of the supremacy clause, it doesn't really matter because we have a very clearly written Tenth Amendment that superseded that supremacy clause.

The supremacy Clause a part of the main body of the Constitution. The Bill Rights comes after anything that's in the Constitution. So there's nothing in the Constitution. Whether you want to try to claim that you got the power with commerce clause or the supremacy clause or whatever, these are things that were never

done before the people who wrote it. And as we talked about prohibition, many times they will had to have a special amendment for prohibition because they said the federal government can prohibit whatever it wants, and it'd be very dangerous that they do, because we've seen the results now when they do that kind of stuff. And so everybody, whether they were four or against alcohol prohibition, believed that they needed a constitutional amendment, which they then put together and then

undid that with another constitutional amendment. That's a lot of bother, isn't it. If you can just do it because the commerce clause or because the supremacy clause or some other made up rationale. And again, these are made up rationales. These are opinions. They're perverted, twisted opinions, in my opinion. But we don't even have to make that argument about the supremacy clause or the commerce clause, because a tenth Amendment is clear if these powers are not

specifically delegated to the central government, it doesn't have them. End of story. How can it be more clear? It's very very clear, just like the Second Amendment shall not infringe, you don't even touch it around the edges, shall not infringe. But they have infringed it. And the best that we can do is what a lot of people are doing in state in local areas saying we are not going to allow the ATF to do this or to

do that. We're not going to allow them to ban pistol braces. And they've already stood in the gap and said we're not going to enforce it. And by the way, even the Supreme Court has said that states can refuse to participate in the enforcement of laws, and the federal government at this point in time does not have enough of an army. Course they're working on the irs to have eighty thousand people with that that maybe they won't need local law

enforcement. But the bottom line, first of all, they can't force state or local officials to assist them in any of this stuff, and they always do call on state and local officials to enforce it. As the person rightfully said, that's where the arms and legs are. That's where the rubber meets the rogue. That's where why all politics is local, because they can make all these agendas, but they can no more enforce them without local enforcers than

the un can. And that's why that's where the fight is, and that's why they don't want us fighting there. They want us fighting over Trump and Biden. It's a massive siop for people, and both the left and right partisan members have fallen fully and as hard as they can for that scam. Focusing on who's going to get elected in a federal election, folks, is a scam. It is a distraction from the things that could really make a

difference. And again, you're not guaranteed to get the right government that you want in a local area, but you can move to another location, and there's a big difference in those locations. So anyway, he goes on to say, and this is unfortunately the opinion of the Attorney general here in Tennessee and this lawyer. We have a constitution that has a supremacy clause that says federal law is supreme over state law, but not in all areas, only

in the areas that they have authority. Right they don't talk about Interesting that the Tennessee Attorney General didn't talk about the tenth Amendment and this lawyer that they wrote this is the Tennessee Star, but they wrote the article about he doesn't talk about the tenth Amendment either. They don't tell us how the tenth Amendment doesn't apply here, because it clearly does. It's very simple. It's right in your face, so direct, so in your face, so simple that

they simply ignore it. Yeah, Jefferson and Madison did not, and as a matter of fact, even the Supreme Court and earliers did not. They can change their opinion. Well, again, everybody's got an opinion, don't they. He said, the way to solve conflicts with between states and federal laws the states disagree with is you get your attorney general and we have a really capable attorney general Jonathan's committee, who doesn't seem to know anything about the

tenth Amendment. You get them to go to court and you challenge these things. Wait a minute, is this job security for the attorney general? The attorney general says, you need me, You don't know if I with the legislature. You need me to go and beg permission from the federal government. Did they do that with the British. You know, we keep hearing, oh, you have no right to nullification, you have no right to seceession. Again, I don't think that secession is the best way to do it.

I think nullification and non commandeering is the best way to do it. But nevertheless, you know, King George said you don't have the right to self government, and they said, we'll watch us, right, you want to try to stop us, and so ultimately it may come to that. We'll come to that if it is a session. That's why I say nullification. We have to have a system where if the federal government makes a rule, it's the rule. Well, then you're going to need to have a

different constitution. Sir. The guy's name is Pulliam the lawyer. We don't live in a dictatorship. We have a constitution. These people swear to pull the constitution. They're temporary stewards, they're not kings. The constitution is the king. And so if you want a system where the federal government makes the rules and does it without any pushback or any checks or balances from the states or the people, well that's not the constitution. That is the form of

government that we have now, but that's not the Constitution. He went on to say that he personally thinks the federal government has become the deep state and it's doing a lot of really bad things. I'm not defending the Leviathan that the federal government has become. All of these things are serious problems. That serious problems require serious solutions, and nullification is not a serious solution. Does he know what happened with Does he know what happened with the nullification of medical

marijuana? For example? He didn't have a war over that, And whether or not you agree with that policy, it's one of the best and biggest examples of contemporary nullification we've got. Where's he been? You don't have to have a war, and you don't have to have tyranny, and I think nullification is the rightful intermediary step out of all this. Another letter from listener Seth talking about Tom Rintz. He said, I noticed on the show Monday

particular interest in a piece you read from Tom Rintz. I actually had lunch and dinner with him late last year. He was in the Chicago suburbs where I'm from for speech. I was invited by a friend It was billed as a CBDC speech, but it turned into a MAGA rally because attendees only wanted rents to talk about Trump. Isn't that typical? I mean, we saw

the same thing. You know, DeSantis wanted to pick some some issues to talk about, right, but nobody wanted to talk about anything except Trump and Trump's personal problems and issues and his vengeance and all the rest of That's all anybody wanted to talk about, even to the extent that DeSantis took the lead on talking about CBDC, and he did a half hour presentation. He had a sign on the podium says stop Digital Big Brother Money, or something to

that effect. And he lays out the problems with CBDC. He talks about what they're doing with the Uniform Commercial Code of the UCC. We're going to prohibit CBDC from being used either domestic or foreign. CBDC cannot be used to subtle debts. We are going to allow cryptocurrency like bitcoin, traditional money, gold and silver and things like that, but not cbdc's And so he gets finished with the presentation talking about all of the traps and the dangers of this

and this is an existential issue. The media doesn't want to talk about this. They want to talk about all the usual things we've been talking about. What about abortion, what about gun control? Those are important issues, but they don't want to talk about these new, existentially threatening issues. And so the end, the very first question, what about President Trump in this Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg and all this kind of stuff they don't want to talk

about. And then when he issues an opinion, well, I'm not going to you know, I'm not going to extradite Trump if he wants Trump extradite or something. And then Trump attacks DeSantis over that. It's like he didn't he didn't throw you under the bus. But of course, you know, Trump wants to look like the victim, and Trump and Laura Lumer and all these these hacks and this Jacobin mob we call Maga, the Maga mob. They went wild with all that stuff. So yeah, same thing with him

that the people there didn't want to talk about anything other than Trump. They want to talk about CBDC. They didn't care about the tyranny of the CBDC, says Seth. They cared about how to get their faux savior back in the white house, he said, just illuminates how big the Trump cult is. With that, said, my friend who invited me and I stopped to get some food before the speech, and Rince was there and we wound up

eating together. The one thing I found interesting about what he said to us was that he said he was never involved in politics, never paid attention to politics, and never voted until COVID. It baffled me that he who claimed to be against COVID tyranny, said that COVID was the reason he voted for the first time in twenty twenty, and he voted for Trump. That's why I said, in twenty twenty, this is the first time I'm not voting. First time, I'm not voting because of the COVID tyranny and because I

don't have a choice, and because it doesn't really matter. If everybody's going to lay down and do whatever Trump pays them to do or Biden pays them to do, what are we even voting for. We're going to be under medical martial law run by bureaucrats. So I wasn't interested anyway. So the one thing I found interesting about it was he said he was never involved in

politics until that. I wasn't expecting that, he said, and I regretted not pushing back war, but I tried to get to the point across to him that the local level is where we need to focus, and that I have no plans to vote for president. But I find it interesting that there's a lot of people like Rents in the Trump orbit who were never involved in politics one bit prior to Trump running. And these folks are the same ones

who foisted up people that we're now listening to. The people who have experience in this are not listened to, he said. I've been following politics, been politically active my entire life. I was in college Republicans my first year of voting two thousand and four. By the way, I repent of my sin for voting for George W. Bush. I started waking up to the system in twenty twelve as a Ron Paul supporter. Now I have no plans

on voting, So I'm the exact opposite of Rents. Somehow, this man who claims to oppose COVID tyranny got motivated to vote for the first time for the man who initiated the tyranny, who he says he opposes. Well, I think he got waken up to the fact. I think he woke up to the COVID tyranny, and then he realized, like a lot of these people, that there's a big maga cult out there and there's a lot of money to be made to pandering to that room. I mean, I can

see it. We all can see it, right, We all know that that personal accused me. I you know, I don't support Trump. Oh you're you're evil and you're just doing this for money. No, if I was doing it for money, I'd be seeing the kind of stuff that Alex Jones is saying. I would have kept my job with Alex Jones if I was doing it for the money. It's just, you know, it's that type of thing. The people who are lying to you or doing it for

the money. The people who are supporting this stuff are doing it for the money. And then so let's take a look first at Biden. Here. You know, we got this guy. I always want to call him Ben Her. His first name is not Ben. This is special Counsel Her. And he wrote his chariot into Congress, and he was talking about and as people got a chance to see in more detail the testimony of Biden when he was opposing him about these documents. These documents are just, according to Biden,

just somehow appeared on the garage floor there where his corvette was. And you know the story. He comes back and he says, yes, it was deliberate, Yes it was a violation of the law, but no, I'm not going to do anything about it because he's just a senile old man, and we don't want to throw grandpa in jail, even as they're throwing lots of grandpa's in jail, who many of them not even protesting anything,

certainly not violent. On January the sixth, the's trio of men a father, son and another elderly man, and you know, the father and the other guy, both elderly, in their seventies I think, and they just wanted to use the bathroom. They asked the police, going to use the bathroom, Yes, right in there. They go in and they leave, and now they're looking at what could essentially be a life sentenced. This is

incredible, the dual standard that we're seeing with all this stuff. But before I go into Biden's testimony, I got several things here from all of you. Jason Barker, good to see says. Decades ago, they determined that six hundred feet was a safe distance from high voltage power lines. Even power

lines can affect health. Yeah, that's right. And again everybody's got a different standard about what level of power is acceptable, and ours is the most is the highest level of power allowed anywhere anywhere, orders of magnitude higher than they allow in a lot of places in Europe. Sword Saint seven a poll. Do you think DK will endorse Trump today? Yes? Or no? Just kidding? Yeah, don't hold your breath. Sixty one. Thank you

for the tip. I appreciate that, and rumble something for the diaper fund for Travis. Congratulations Travis and family. May God bless you. Thank you, Guard Goldsmith, Thank you for the tip. Guard. That's very kind listening and celebrating the news for Travis and his wife from New Hampshire. Here's to wonderful days and years ahead with big smiles and faithful prayers, thanking God for his gifts. Great news. Thank you Guard, that's so kind.

I appreciate that. And it is a wonderful gift, isn't it. And we do celebrate that children really are blessing from the Lord. And we know that from experience, they become less of a blessing. If you turn them over to the government to raise. You're not there with them to enjoy them. But they they can really come back and launch you. You know, it's like turning your dog over to somebody who abuses it all the time. You know, here, you watch my dog during the day, and the

whole time you're they're watching your dog, they're abusing it. Somehow this thing turns into this vicious creature that attacks you when you get home. That's what the schools are like, if you want to think about it. But yeah, we're really excited about that, and we really would like your prayers that things would go well. Well, let's talk about Trump, not Trump, but Biden. One of the things he said was my corvette go BurrH What he said. It's one of many strange things that he had to say.

Again, they got into some details. The MPR put it this way, description of Biden as a quote sympathetic, well meaning elderly man with a poor memory. So we'll just leave him alone. Biden actually made room room car noises and chuckled in response to questions about classified documents. And so this is what it looks like. Here's the transcript. He says once it was while lamenting that he could drive his vintage Chevy Corvette only the length of his driveway.

And the reason for that, let me just interpose here. The reason for that is that as a vice president or president, they didn't allow you to drive cars. I would say, well, we're going to change that rule, Especially if I had a vintage Corvette, I would say, we're definitely changing that rule. But you know, he abided by that rule and he could only drive it the distance of his driveway, he said, I said. The other time was during a lengthy exchange over the torque of electric

vehicles. So Biden asked her. He says, by the way, you know how it works, it's really cool. Her says, sir. I'd love I would love love to hear much more about this, but I do have a few more questions to get through. Will you step your foot on the accelerator all the way down until it gets about six seven grand it's about the RPMs. Then all of a sudden it'll say launch, and all you

do is take your foot off the brake. The transcript then indicates that he made a car sound and laughed, her responded, well, it's on my bucket list, before he turned to questions regarding classified documents that had been discovered at the pen Biden Center of the Pennsylvania Biden Center, and then more confusion and delusion during the interview. So Biden says, and so this is I'm at this stage in two thousand, Am I still vice president? The date

is April twenty, two thousand and nine. Biden says aloud, what was I still vice president? I was, wasn't I? Oh? Yeah, well if it was twenty thirteen, when did I stop being vice president? I ate there all the time. Biden said, what I do there at the four seasons? Who'd I have lunch with? Well, he's having lunch with Hunter's Chinese executives. Kirkbaum interjects, Actually, I'm not sure, he said. Still, I have to figure that out. Well, I don't

remember. Biden concluded, and this is what he says, over and over again. I don't remember. And so this is I'm at this stage in two thousand and nine? Am I still vice president? Yeah? This keeps going back into this over and over again, beyond Biden having dementia and behaving like a Toddler. However, there is a real criminal element at play here. Now, see, this is where I disagree with a lot. I don't you know, maybe there is a criminal aspect to some of this stuff.

But you know, the only person that they brought these charges against is Trump. They didn't bring them against Pence, they didn't bring him against Biden and so forth. And you know, if these people of the president has the ability to declassify anything, and he does, even if he didn't formally do it, as Trump didn't do it, we clearly understand what's going on here. But the double standard is just the smoking gun with all this whether

and these people will want to hold Trump harmless and go after Biden. They're no better than the Democrats, frankly, and they say that because they say he was president and these guys are, you know, vice president. But again, it just goes to show how both sides want to lock the other guy up and leave and make excuses for their guy. Whatever's of all,

President struggled to recall so much, even about his son BeO. The transcript of HER's two day interview with Biden, reviewed by the Washington Examiner as part of a wider report released in February that concluded Biden should not be criminally charged for his apparent mishandling of classified documents. Her did not recommend charges because Biden's memory was significantly limited and so forth as sympathetic as I said, well meaning

elderly man with a poor memory. Both Republicans and Democrats, for different political purposes, yesterday had him testify before Congress. They're likely to contrast his findings with those of Special Council Jack Smith going after Trump, recommending criminal charges for Trump for his mishandling of classified documents, but not for Biden. So both Republicans and Democrats have a different purpose behind this stuff. There's a lot of

Democrats would like to get Biden out on the sinility thing. This is his off ramp, but he's not taking it. He's still setting in the driver's seat, going room room. Biden willfully retained classified memos, and he did it in order to write a book, and he made eight million dollars on that book. Well, I wish I could make that much on writing a book. I'd write one to give me some classified documents. First, majority

of Democrats suppose the certification of the twenty twenty four election. If Donald Trump wins, isn't that interesting the shoe on the other foot. Yeah, if Trump wins, what are they going to do? Are we going to have a January the sixth part due regardless of who wins. You know, if they say that Trump doesn't win, are the Trump people going to do it again? If they say that Trump does win, well, the Democrats want to do it now. Partisanship is killing this country, and that's what they

wanted to do. Fifty seven percent of Democrat voters would try to stop Congress from certifying the twenty twenty four election. They said, if Trump wins. This is from Rasmussen Reports, So they commissioned National Let's see who is it? National Pulse commissioned Rasmussen to do a scientific poll. Fifty seven percent of Democrats would oppose certification. Nearly two thirds of people who describe themselves as liberal

said they would oppose certification two thirds. But overall, thirty five percent of voters would support opposing certification. So the vast majority of the public is not with the Democrats. Fifty five percent would oppose lawmakers refusing to certify a Trump victory. And then if you look at these these four counts that are part

of this special prosecutor's movements against Trump for January the sixth. The four counts conspiracy to defraud the US, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, which is what these people want to do, right, They're ready to do it if it's the other way around, obstruction of an attempt to obstruct an official proceeding, conspiracy against rights, and the penalty for these offenses adds up to fifty five years in prison. And yet two thirds of liberals want to do what

the conservatives did on January the sixth. Like I said, when I began my program in August of twenty seventeen, my first guest was somebody from a secession movement in California, upset about the fact that Trump was present. And we saw that with a lot of different things. So this is the danger of rabid partisanship, you know, doing this for a party or doing it for a man. You know, the MAGA people say, well, we don't care about the Repulican Party. They don't, but they they you know,

even worse because what is the party. It's a collection of a lot of people. They're about one man. One man in North Carolina, there is a loophole in their weak voter ID law. I didn't even know that they had a voter ID law in North Carolina. They didn't when I was living there. And I've told the story many times that in twenty twelve, Karen's twin brother had a friend who went to vote. And I know the way it was in North Carolina. You would show up and you didn't have

to show them any ID zero zip. All you do is give them a name, and you'd give them an address and they would look through their computer print out and they'd find the name and address and then it would be marked there whether or not you had voted. And so they told my brother in law's friend. They said, I'm sorry, you've already voted, so what And this other person who's already voted two at your houses And that's my mom. She's been dead for a couple of years. So he and his dead

mom had already voted. And I said, yeah, you got to get this guy. Let me interview him. You know, he doesn't want to go public. They don't want to go public with us. Well that was twenty twelve. The next year, and I wasn't aware of this. In North Carolina, they made some changes, and so the history of this was that the North Carolina Journal Assembly passed a series of election related laws the next

year in twenty thirteen. The state legislature then presented a revised voter ID law in twenty and fifteen that included an exemption to having an ID, and that was a reasonable impediment. If you said that you had a reasonable impediment and you couldn't get an ID, then you don't have to provide it. Well, they said this. Last Super Tuesday, March of fifth, they had one point seven million North Carolina voters, more than one thousand of them cast

what is known as a provisional ballot ID not provided. Of those one thousand voters, about half of them five hundred and forty six later returned to show their IDs, but another six hundred voters never showed a photo ID, instead simply signed a form claiming that they had a reasonable impediment and they couldn't present an ID. And so in this article they have signs pictures of signs attention

voters. Photo ID will be requested, but if you have no photo ID, please sign an affidavit and you can put any kind of excuse that you want to on that affidavit. So it's not quite there yet, but when I was there, they didn't have anything like that. It was totally wide open. And when this is being discussed in twenty fifteen, guests who was marshaling the forces to get this exemption put in George Soros? That's right.

When the Republicans propose or a vision adding a reasonable impediment exception, a source backed group called Democracy North Carolina spent weeks encouraging hundreds of citizens to attend and to speak out at hearings regarding the legislation and celebrated the inclusion of the reasonable impediment provision. You got to ask yourself, why does George Soros want to have district attorneys who turned criminals loose? Well, why does he want to

have no ID and all? It's self obvious, self evident, isn't it. Then we look at Trump and the liberals think they've got him. Now. I don't think anybody's really going to pay any attention to this, but it shows us what a loose cannon he is and how he doesn't really hasn't really thought about policy at all. I mean, he just it's about theater. It's about celebrity, it's about all the rest of his stuff. But he doesn't really think about the policies. Trump just opened the door to Social

Security cuts. Take him seriously, says Vox. Politico says, he just did an unforced error that is really big. Take it very seriously. Now, I could take I could believe that he would be capable of doing this if somebody pays him enough money, because if you go back and look at his tax cuts, they were mostly for Wall Street and things like that, and he is for sale, and he's never needed and wanted money more desperately

than right now. Frankly, with these cases. As president, Trump never pursued large cuts to Medicare or Social Security benefits, says Vox, and he implored his party to avoid them during a debt ceiling fight last year. Since the time of FDR and the time they put in social Security, the Democrats have always hung this on Republicans. You want to get rid of Social Security and all this stuffy and so they've been fighting that. In an interview with

CNBC, Trump said that he was open to cutting entitlement spending. Then his campaign said no, he's not. Trump's reflecttions on public policy tend to bear only a loose resemblance to coherent thoughts, and quite frankly, you can't trust anything that he says as a candidate. When he was running, it was border issue, it was Obamacare with big issues. He had a great medical program for Obamacare that he didn't follow through on, not any of it.

As a matter of fact, it was about a dozen different points. All of them are great. Let's give people purchasing power, Let's give them information as consumers, let's remove barriers to competition. All this type of stuff is all market based type of things. And as soon as he got elected, I remember covering that in detail, said, well, I don't know, I never hear him talk about this, but this is a great policy.

Does he just not want to talk about it because he thinks that it might be used by Hillary against him, or is he not talking about it because he doesn't care about it. It turned out to be that the latter, because as soon as he was elected, that page got deep sixth you could only find it on the way back machine, and he never mentioned it. He never mentioned it as candidate, he never mentioned it as president, and

he didn't do anything at all about that. Even though he was a Republican president, he had Republican Congress and a Republican Senate, so his remarks about entitlements on CNBC on Monday were no exception. In that exchange, the anchor told Trump something needs to be done about entitlement costs, and then he asked the former president what to be what should be do, what should he do?

And has he changed his mind about cutting Social Security and medicare. Trump said, well, so, first of all, there's a lot you can do in terms of entitlements, in terms of cutting and in terms of also the theft of the bad management of entitlements, tremendous bad management of entitlements. There's tremendous amounts of things and numbers of things that you can do. So he said, so I don't necessarily agree with that statement that there's nothing that

we can cut for entitlement. And so then Biden pounced on it. All these different you know, liberal things are pouncing on it. They're doing commercials about it. The Trump campaign replied and said, you if you losers didn't cut his answer short, you would know President Trump was talking about cutting waste.

Well, as they say, the rebuttal is disingenuous. He plainly stated, there's a lot the government could do in terms of cutting entitlements and also in terms of combating theft and bad management also, right, so he did both of these cuts and that. But you know, here's the bottom line. Social security again, let's there's somebody mentioned that, and they used to come after Iron Ran for that. Social Security is not welfare. Social Security

is a coerced Ponzi scheme. You're forced to participate in it, and it's not an option. They take money from you all your life, and perhaps they'll give you back some devalued you know, because of their inflation, some kind of some of what you paid in over the years. But it's not welfare. It is it is coerced Ponzi scheme. But politico Donald Trump's unforced error. They said for decades there was one tried and true staple of presidential

campaigns. The Democrat nominee would whack the Republican on the proposals to reform, cut, or privatize Social Security and other entitlements, and then reap the political rewards. And the most evocative example in twenty twelve, an attack an ad from a Progressive Agency Group showed a character strongly resembling Paul Ryan literally pushing a

grandmother in a wheelchair off a cliff. You remember that. Four years later, Trump changed the calculus after watching Republicans fight losing battles over entitlement reform. In two thousand and eight, for example, Obama's campaign outspent McCain on the issue by a factor of one hundred and fifty to one. Trump decided to avoid the political turkey shoot entirely, but not now. And now he's the

turkey they're shooting at because he stepped in it. So whether or not, you know, he's just lost a couple of steps on this or whatever is happening, he is gloating, nevertheless over retirement retirement of a Republican who began

to oppose Trump on this election stuff. Ken Buck a conservative, and he is a conservative, and he's not a liberal Republican, and he was somebody at the very beginning of all of this was got into a lot of trouble defending Trump and saying we need to take a look at this election and make sure this stuff was lejit But you know, by the time they you know, after they got to a certain point, he opposed January the sixth. Like I opposed January the sixth. I said, already gotten too far.

They haven't done any That is not a solution anymore at this point time. And that got him the ire of Trump. Trump welcome the news that ken Buck is retiring, he says, good news for the country. The problem is is that ken Buck is a lot more conservative than Trump, and he's a lot more principled than Trump is. And as he leaves, now they get a super thin margin, had a super thin margin in Congress, but they have made him so angry, this Trump mob. Then he's just like,

forget about it. I'm out of here. I don't want to be here. This place is a clown show. And so now their razor thin margin gets even thinner. See, Trump is not really playing forty chess. He's playing revenge and he doesn't really care for him. Revenge is winning. He doesn't even want to have a majority in Congress. And it's kind of interesting. As his daughter in law takes over the RNC, we have another person who is a Trump loyalist. You know, she said, we got

one job and that is to elect Trump. And then she comes back as she's put in. She cut we got one job, and that is to get Republicans in the control of the Senate and the Congress and Trump elected. Well that's three jobs, isn't it. She's like the Spanish inquisition, we

have two techniques and so forth. Anyway, he announced his retirement. He said he's disappointed the Republican Party continues to rely on this lie that the twenty twenty election was stolen, and rely on the January the sixth narrative and political prisoner's narrative from January sixth and other things. So I disagree with him on that. I think the January the sixth prisoners are political prisoners without a doubt. But if you look at him on these issues, and again, you

know, people have then driven away of all. If you don't support Trump, you know we're going to kick you out of the camp. And it makes them more hardened. I mean, it is a literal civil war in the Republican Party. What Trump is doing to this country as well as to his own party. It's self destructive. He is sixty four former federal prosecutor, a stringent conservative, but nevertheless now a Trump critic and a video post

of social media. He repeated his message to the party, said too many Republican leaders are lying to America claiming the twenty twenty election was stolen, describing January sixth as an unguided tour of the Capitol and asserting that the ensuing prosecutions are weaponization of our justice system. Well, I mean it was actually a guided tour for some of the people who actually had guards taking Well, I mean it was, and people are being persecuted. I don't have any other

term for it. When you give people such long sentences, made them wait in jail, kept them incarcerated under torturous conditions, that is political persecution. But I again, I think that any concerns that you've got about the election, they failed to really even do anything about that. As I pointed out the other day, I had this election defense fund. They didn't give any money to that. He kept all the money himself. The whole thing was

a fraud, and they had planned it from the beginning. Steve Bannon said, well, you know, this is the way it's going to work. He said to his Chinese backers, his Chinese backers, let that sink in. This is the way it's going to work. Yeah, they're going to come out and claim that they won, and we're going to come out and

say f you, and we're going to run this whole thing. One thing he didn't say was we're going to grift our supporters make lots of money, but they did that as well anyway, So he had some other things to say. He said, I'm retiring so I don't have to lie on behalf of Trump and the GOP. He said, we've gone from a time when the Tea Party stood for conservative principles, for constitutional principles, to a time where they have taken over the Republican Party and really are advocating things that I

believe are very dangerous. And I'm not going to be I'm not going to lie on behalf of a presidential candidate, on behalf of my party. And you know, when it comes to the things that were happening under Trump, he opposed the lockdown, he posed the vaccines, he posed the trillions of dollars in aid, he posed the mass, the six foot distancing, all all that stuff that was being advocated, paid for bribed by Donald Trump at the time, he said the House has become dysfunctional. He said it was

the worst year. Of the nine years and three months that I've been in Congress, and having talked to former members, it is the worst year in forty to fifty years to be in Congress. So where is this guy on some of these issues? Again, a legitimate conservative, a staunch fiscal conservative who, unlike trillion dollar Trump, multi trillion dollar Trump of the bankruptcy king, he did not want to fund that stuff with a lockdown in December.

But you know, he was not always against this election questioning. In December of twenty twenty, he was one of one hundred and twenty six Republican members of the House Representative to sign an amicus brief in support of Texas versus Pennsylvania, a lawsuit that was filed at the US Supreme Court contesting the results of the twenty twenty presidential election. So he was one of only one hundred and twenty six Republicans to contest this election that to sign a brief to contest it.

But he later became one of a group of seven Republicans who did not support their colleague's efforts to challenge the results of the election on January I think he was right on these issues. I think they should have challenged the election and had more transparency and investigation about it. But I think the January the sixth thing, and I said it, that's why I got fired. I said, it's it's going to be a catastrophe. People are going there's going

to be agent provocateurs there. It's a trap. And before the trap, they're fleecing people. It's nothing but a griff by Alex and Trump. The stop to steal money that went to Alex and who knows what he did with that, checked the Caribbean foreign bank accounts that he's got, and then you know the money that that Trump got, the two hundred fifty million dollars that

he kept and split with the RNC partners in crime. So these seven Republicans signed a letter that, while giving credence to election fraud allegations that Trump had made, said Congress did not have the authority to influence the election's outcome. And that's absolutely true. Thomas Massey said that as well, and Pence was right about it when Massie said, they didn't give us anything to work with. They didn't go to any of the state legislatures where it was razor thin

thing and convinced the state legislature. They didn't have to only go to the courts. They could have gone through Republican legislatures. And I talked about that on December of the fourteenth, which was the day that the Electoral College votes were turned in, and said, so here's what they failed to do. They had four states razor thin margins. All four states had Republican legislatures, two of them had Republican governors. They did not go to make the case

that there were small number of votes that were counted the wrong way. If they had done that, even at the legislatures, and if the state legislature had sent these electors, then there would have been something to discuss. There would have been a lawsuit over that. The Republicans could have said, well, you know, we've got we've got a group of legislators. We got a group of electors that have been sent by the legislature, another one that's

been by the executive branch, by the Board of Elections. What do we do with that? I got two different but they didn't have two different ones, not a single state. So where was he on things like abortion? Well, he opposed abortion, unlike Trump now right, he opposed abortion without any exceptions except for the life of the mother. On COVID nineteen, he opposed the restrictions of COVID restrictions. He said in Denver, he said,

we went like lambs to the slaughter. We can't allow that to happen again. He voted against the American Rescue Plan Act of twenty twenty one. He called it funding for pet projects that Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer's home States wanted, and for funding for planned parenthood. He was much better on this lockdown and garbage is then Trump. Trump was one who was funding this stuff and

he was opposing it, led by like lambs to the slaughter. On education, he wants to completely revamp the Department of Education or get of it. He said, there's no constitutional authority for there to be a Department of education. Trump never said that. On the environment, he rejected these climate change narratives. Endorse the views of Senator James Enhoff. He said Inhoff was the first person to stand up and say this global warming is the greatest hoax that's

been perpetrated. The evidence just keeps supporting his view and more and more people's view of what's going on. What did Trump do? Trump kept the Par's Climate Accord because his green oily Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said to do it, because his daughter said to do it. He kept it the entire four years, refused to get rid of it, just like Mitch McConnell would not

call a vote over it. So again, on this issue, he's far more conservative principled than Trump is. And this is why I'm going over, just to show you the fact this is nothing other than a cult of personality worship. It's not about conservatism. And just like the listener said earlier, these are people who've never been involved in politics. They've never paid any attention to it before they got into it because of Trump, and they don't see

anything other than Trump. None of these things matter to these maga people. Foreign policy, in twenty twenty, Buck voted against the National Defense Authorization Act, which would prevent the president from withdrawing soldiers from Afghanistan without congressional approval. How do we get this upside down? You're not supposed to put troops in

a war unless you've got congressional approval for a war. Instead, they put in the NDAA saying you can't stop the war unless you get congressional approval. See how they turn everything upside down. This is it's that way. Everything in Washington is that way, exactly upside down and opposite of the Constitution. In June twenty twenty one, he was one of forty nine House Republicans to

vote to repeal the use of Military force authorization against Iran. This is the thing that they have used to say, We've got justification to go anywhere that we want, do anything that we want, the authorization for the use of military force. He was against that, only one of forty nine House He's not only a conservative, he's one of the better conservatives there. In September twenty twenty one, Buck was among seventy five House Republicans to vote against the

NBAA, which contained a provision that would require women to be drafted. In twenty twenty three, he was among forty seven Republicans to vote in favor of a resolution to direct Biden to remove troops from Syria within one hundred and eighty days. Now, unfortunately he voted to support Israel in the current war. So he's got one wrong vote there. But he's opposed gun control. He's being is endorsed by a gun owners of America, the people who are really

serious about Second Amendment, not the NRA. On LGBT issues, he's pushed from for again, he's been there for ten years. He said, I believe that being gay is a choice. I think birth has an influence over it, just like alcoholism. But I think basically you still have a choice. The log Cabin Republicans came after him in twenty fifteen, he said, I think the militaries don't ask, don't tell policy is the right way to go with this stuff. In twenty fifteen, he condemned the Supreme Court's decision

that held that same sex marriage bans violated the Constitution. On June nineteenth, twenty twenty two, he voted against the Respect for Marriage Act, so when that passed, Trump had a big LGBT rally at Marlaco. When Biden passed the Respect for Marriage Act, and then of course Trump has been pushing the LGBT at Jennifer transgenders back when he had the party on LGBT rights. In other words, Buck is one hundred percent aligned with a conservative view. Trump

is one hundred percent aligned with New York Democrat view. In twenty one, he opposed the Equality Act, saying it would force doctors to treat LGBT patients despite their religious objections, forced them to do mutilating surgeries on people. In twenty twenty three, co sponsored the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act, a nationwide ban on transgender and intersects girls. Taking over these things on national security. I just got a couple more of these on national security.

Over the debate over the USA so called USA Freedom Reauthorization Act, he said, let's rename it. It's not the USA Freedom Act. It is a bill to be known as the Federal Initiative to Spy on Americans Act, which spells out FISA. See he's onto that game, right. We know that FISA was supposed to stop them from spying on Americans. Instead they used it to spy on Americans, just like they, you know, turn everything upside down. I said. He only got thirty five votes to change the name

to what it really is, Congressional prohibition on stock trading. He was part of trying to push that, and of course fiscal responsibility. One of only seventy one Republicans who voted against the final passage of the twenty twenty three so called Fiscal Responsibility Act, which had no responsibility at all in it. So he's far, far, far more conservative and principle than Donald Trump on most of these issues. Trump was with the Democrats then or now. These are

the people that are being driven out by Trump. And this is what's happening with the MAGA cult. Truly is amazing to watch it happen again. Don't focus on the federal elections for these reasons. Focus on your local elections. It's hard enough there, as the listener pointed out, it's hard enough. It's difficult enough to at good people and at the local level, but it

is at least possible. If you like the Eagles on the cars and Huey Lewis in the news, they say the hors you'll love the Classic Hits channel at APS Radio, download our app or listen now at APS radio dot com. You're listening to the David Knight Show. Well, you know, when we look at these two clowns, one of them completely senile and the other one starting to get there. But of course it doesn't really matter because he

doesn't have any principles or base to start with. We have the White House of Biden, White House claiming that borrowing sixteen trillion dollars over the next decade is fiscally responsible, he said, they don't. They keep using that fiscal word, but I don't think they know what it means. You're the princess bribe, I guess battling bee to talk about what's happening with inflation. Due to inflation, Subway has introduced new five dollars inch long subs one inch long

sub But there is a lot of talk. This is coming from Michael Avery of Rabobank. He says there's because of breakdowns that are happening geopolitically everywhere. He said, there's a lot of talk about a new monetary golden age or a digital one, and so that's that's the issue. You know, what are we going? Which way are we going to go? Either way? When you look at it, there's two different options that people are hoping we're going to get them outside of the dollar. People are prepping in a number

of ways. But again my instinct is just to get as far away as I can from anything that is digital. I just see it all as at trap. What you're talking about games, vr AR, you know, the cryptocurrency and that stuff is like I'm done with that stuff. I'm turning into a real luddite. That's my perspective on it. I want to have something that is physical, that is real. I don't even like the paper money anymore. So that's one of the reasons why we're glad to have Tony Arderman

supporting this show. Has been a big help to this show, and it's great to have a resource that I can recommend. You know, a lot of people ask me about medical stuff, and medical stuff is not there yet.

You know, there's a lot of people are trying to put things together, but it's still in its infancy, and I think that's going to happen and other ways that people can prep but it's good to know that we've got somebody who is on our side, who is honest, that you can get large or small gold or silver, that you can even set up a savings program on a regular basis, take advantage of group buying. You know, even if you're buying a small amount, you can still get a better price

because it's a group. That's what he's got with wolf Pack, and so you can get to Tony Ardbin's Wisewolf Gold David Knight dot Gold will take you there, and it'll let him know that you came through us. But everywhere we look there is all of these governments aren't exactly the same page. Just as they were with the pandemic lies the pandemic mcguffin, just as they are with the climate mcguffin. They're all on exactly the same page and lockstep with

each other. The World Bank president has advocated a global digital ID scheme at another tech conference. How many times they have to do this. Every person who is at the national or international level is pushing for this in one form or the other. It truly is amazing to see the unity and all of this. But let's take a quick look at some of the news. I said earlier that I was going to talk about what's happening with car insurance. It truly is amazingly subversive, and I want to get to that. But

first, an update to what we talked about yesterday. The Boeing whistleblower who died very suddenly in the middle of doing this testimony. He's been working on this stuff for years. His attorneys were amazed at all this stuff, and now they're speaking out even more and it gets even more suspicious and this is actually an article coming from a leftist publication. He was in very good spirits set as lawyers, and he was really looking forward to putting this phase of

his life behind him and moving on. They did not see any indication of a suicide risk with this Boeing whistleblower, who with all the things that were happening with Boeing, this you know, suddenly shot himself, they say,

in his car or something. The sixty two year old Louisiana based whistleblower traveled to Charleston, South Carolina to finally be deposed for his twenty seventeen OSHA complaint against his ex employer, when his attorney, Brian Knowles, told the Corporate Crime Reporter blog that he failed to show up in one of the sessions over

the weekend. In an initial autopsy report, the coroner's office said that the thirty two year old thirty two year Boeing employee he was sixty two years old but he'd worked for them for thirty two years, appeared to have died from self inflicted gunshot wound. But his lawyers are urging investigators to take a closer look, they said. Honors in the midst of a deposition in his whistleblower

retaliation case, which finally was nearing the end. They said he was in very good spirits and really looking forward to putting this phase of his life behind him and moving on. We didn't see any indication that he would take his

own life. No one can believe it. Although Barnett did not indicate that his time at Boeing, where he spent thirty two years in quality control and multiple decades as a manager, resulted in stress, but they said previous reports have not suggested that he had any deeper mental health issues or experienced any suicidal ideation, and so futurism rights. So to be fair, people who planned

in their lives don't always show visible signs of risk. But given that Barnett was, as his attorneys point out, during the end of his protracted battle, the circumstances surrounding his untimely death do indeed seem eyebrow raising. Over and over again, we see people who are whistle laws talking about very powerful institutions and then suddenly they commit suicide, and nobody can understand why that is happening.

Doesn't seem like there's any and this is another one of those The whistleblower's attorney said in their statement that they urge investigators to look into his death fully and accurately, and added no detail can be left unturned. We are all devastated. We need more information about what happened to John Well as we see that there's another There's a documentary four part true crime series documentaries on Netflix.

Maybe you've seen it, American Conspiracy The Octopus Murders, and this is another person who suddenly committed suicide. Can't understand that an expose about the irvocable damage that can come from falling down the rabbit the political conspiracy of the century. But as I said, since this is a Netflix document the documentary of the people that did it, they said, it becomes a portrait of the hazards opposed by such thinking. So I guess I'm going to pass on this.

They're going to make this and say, see, he just fell into this rabbit hole as a conspiracy theorist. But they said it was designed to make one's head spin until it hurts. American Conspiracy, The Octopus Murders. The tale of Danny Cassillaro, a writer who was found dead in a Sheridan hotel bathtub. Police swiftly dubbed this a suicide, since he had been alone and his wrist had been cut, and he had left a farewell note. Those

closest to the outgoing and loving man, however, thought otherwise. And here's why his wrist had twelve separate slash wounds that were so deep that they severed the tendons. How'd he do that? Had he several of attendants on this hand, and then he takes that hand and he severs attendants on the other. Moreover, there was blood all over the room in places that made no

sense if he had been simply ending his own life. Most suspicious of all, though, was the fact that just a few short weeks before his demise, he had told his brother that if something had happened happened to him, it would not be an accident. We see that over and over again, don't we. As a matter of fact, there was a few years ago, I remember the case about ten years ago somebody that's working with a BBC five, m I six or something like that, and a similar situation of

this. They had become a whistleblower, and somehow they ended up dead and stuffed in a suitcase and so I call it the spy in the bag case. And everybody was looking at this and saying, come on, you know, you can't die from being stuffed into a suitcase and sealing yourself in there. And it was so ridiculous everybody was laughing about it. So what they did was the British spy agency hired a small woman who was a contortionist to get into the into the bag. And oh, by the way, his

fingerprints were not on the outside of the bag either. But they they hired this woman to get in the thing and to zip it up. It's like, okay, well then she can get back out again if she zipped it up, and let's see you do that without leaving any fingerprints on the outside of the bag next time. But she was way smaller than this guy was.

I mean, it just ridiculous stuff. There was another one about a Hollywood writer who got wind of some stuff that was happening with the CIA, and he was writing about it and he told his friends he was getting death threats and things like that, and then he just disappeared, and a decade or so later they found him. His car was in the water where there was a bridge, but there was No, he didn't go through the bridge. Nobody ever, didn't break through the railing or anything. There's no sign

that he'd crashed off of the bridge into the water. The car was just in the water under the bridge, and when they pulled him out, his hands had been cut off. Maybe that explains how he drove the car into the water, had no hands, right. You see this stuff all the time, and it's absurdly put out there as if it's suicide. It's just amazing, you know, we're supposed to you know, artificial intelligence can't hallucinate

any better in terms of coming up with improbable stuff in these people. Castilaro's death and the theory they had been murdered soon became local news, since he hadn't been any old scribe. By nineteen ninety one, he was knee deep into reporting on a supposedly bombshell story about a multi multi tentacled conspiracy that he referred to as the Octopus, which involved software engineers, businessmen, drug dealers, gun runners, organized crime, the CIA, FBI, NSA, isn't

that redundant organized crime? I mean? And various individuals related to the Ronald Reagan White House. Cassilaro had stumbled upon this while employed by Computer Age, a newsletter about computer business. And it all began with Inns Law, a firm founded by Bill Hamilton that had created a revolutionary nationwide criminal case tracking system

for law enforcement agencies known as Promise. In the second year of a three year contract, the Department of Justice abruptly stopped paying Inns Law for Promise, forcing the firm into bankruptcy. He did, lawsuits and telephone threats to Hamilton ensued, all of which were so over the top that it made Hamilton and those aligned with him, including former Attorney General Elliott Richardson, suspect that the

DOJ was up to something that was much dirtier. And then Watergate, well, you know, we know Ron Contrary, we know about the you know Bill Casey, Reagan's guy that he was his campaign director and then he became a CIA director, and what he was doing with Iran at the time that Reagan was running an eighty with the hostages. Anyway, what he believed he uncovered was a web of interrelated offenses that suggested a clandestine world of spies,

wheeler dealers, and psychos. We're describing the federal government here, aren't we just in general determined to wield power and the shadows. Castilaro eventually planned to write a book about all this, only to die before this came to fruition again, you know, cutting both risks so deeply that he cut the tendons and blood all over the place before he got to the bathtub. You know, this is not the Godfather or a Roman suicide here. But I said

I was going to get to the insurance companies. Automakers are feeding your trip data into insurance companies without you even knowing about it. You're not opting into this, and of course this has been something that has been put out there. I've talked about it many times. In the UK, they wanted to keep young people from having cars and growing up with that experience, and so what they would do is they made the car insurance extremely expensive, so expensive

that siblings would have to go together on car insurance for one car. So they co owned the car and copay for the insurance. And then you could only drive at X number of miles a month. And it had a black box there that was measuring how much you drove, how far you drove,

and how you drove. And if it didn't like the way that you drove, it would raise your rates, and so you're but you know that you are submitting to this getting something of a discount there by submitting to this black box which is going to be looking at everything that you do while you're driving. But this is different. This is General Motors Ford and others who are reporting and snitching on the way that you drive to the insurance companies. So

the automotive branch of transportation. If you go back to the nineteen thirty four Technocracy study course, this is from Technocracy News, and he says that this is all spelled out how nobody would have a private car. This is in the nineteen thirties when you had the technocrats wanted to install a technocracy. You had people like HG. Wells, You had people like Elon Musk's grandfather literally try to overthrow the government and do that. And so they described all this

stuff. But I don't have time to get on it. It's interesting, but here's what happened. A mister Dall sixty five was surprised in twenty twenty two when the cost of his car insurance jumped by twenty one percent. Quotes from other insurance companies were also very high. One insurance agent told him that his Lexus next this report was a factor, so when he requested it, they had to send him a two hundred and fifty eight page report under the

Fair Credit Reporting Act. What it contained stunned him. There were more than one hundred and thirty pages detailing every time that he and his wife had driven their Chevy Bolt over the previous six months, and it included the dates of the six hundred and forty trips, the starting and ending time, the distance driven, and an accounting of any speeding, hard braking, or sharp acceleration. And the only thing I didn't have was where they had driven the car.

On a Thursday morning in June, for example, the car had been driven seven point three three miles and eighteen minutes, where there had been two rapid accelerations and two incidents of hard breaking. According to the report. The trip detail has been provided by GM, the manufacture of his Sevy Vault Lexis Nexus analyzed the driving data to create a risk scre for insurers to use, and that's what happened with it, So you better get an old car.

And then, as he put this up on a forum for people who were fans of this, all these other people started looking into it. They said, wait a minute, I had a similar situation like that as well. It's not limited to drivers who willingly participate in this. In fact, they don't know. Ford Motor patented and application acknowledges the reluctance of drivers to actively share this data. So we're going to passively grab it through Internet connected vehicles.

So just like you know you have your phone before they had the GPS in it. Even they could make these kind of extrapulations. One person who had a Cadillac in Palm Beach County, Florida, asked not to be named because he's considering a lawsuit against GM. He was denied auto insurance by seven companies in December. When he asked why, they told him look at your Lexus Nexus report. By one agent, he said, there was all this

stuff about heartbreaking and hard accelerating. He said, I don't know what their definition of a hard break is. My passenger's head is not hitting the dash the same with acceleration. I'm not peeling out. I'm not sure how the car defines that. I don't feel like I am driving aggressively or dangerously. You know all this is happening as Tesla is talking about their new roadster going zero to sixty and one second. Folks, it's a trap if you do

that. If you do that, you're gonna wind up never being able to ensure your car because they'll be spying on you with all that stuff. He said. He finally wound up having to go to a private broker and they charged him double what he had been paying simply because uh Cadillac thought that he was breaking too hard and accelerating too hard. I would never be able to get insurance the rest of my life. Have they had something like that on me? Thank you for joining us, Have a good day and get an

old car that doesn't have all the electronic bells and whistle. Thank you. Let me tell you the David Night Show you can listen to with your ears. You can even watch it by using your eyes. In fact, if you can hear me, that means you're listening to the David Night Show right now. Yeah, good job. And you want to know something else, You can find all the links to everywhere to watch or listen to the show at Thedavidnightshow dot com. That's a website