All right, folks. Joining us now is doctor Shiva Aya dou Ray. Glad to have him on. He's running for president Shiva for President dot com now. He livestream the debate on Twitter like a lot of other people did, and gave his comments in real time. So we won't talk to him about the debate. But as I was talking to him all there, he's very interested in talking about the Supreme Court cases and the First Amendment infringements that came from those, and I am too. I've talked about them some on
Friday. Thank you for joining us, doctor Shiva. Yeah, good to be here, David. How are you doing good? Doing good? Good to David. What I wanted to do was, as many people know, I was heavily involved, probably the centerpiece of the entire discovery of the fact that the government of the United States, in fact, all governments of the
world, have a backdoor censorship portal into every social media company. Yes, in my twenty twenty case, David, you may remember, I uncovered in courtroom testimony the fact that the government of Massachusetts had coerced Twitter or Twitter would never have thrown me off had it not been for the government of Massachusetts because I exposed the fact that the government of Massachusetts had destroyed ballot images, which
is a violation of a federal law. When I went to do my own audit of how possibly I could have lost my election to a guy who had no law signs nothing in Massachusetts and everyone can go to win backfreedom dot com. I don't want to go through that. I've talked about that extensively.
But it was my work, my representing myself in court, which exposed the fact bear view to half a billion people all over the world that the government of the United States starting in twenty well, it was Trump who created SAISA, unanimously proved by both wings of Congress. Both wings of Congress ninety nine
percent are funded by APAC right. Both wings of Congress supported the execution of a law which allowed the creation of infant structure for government to coerce social media companies to do their bidding, or more probably better to have a collusion between social media companies and government as one entity, what some people call state imperialism,
you know. So that's what I ncovered, and most important was my case showed conclusively with evidence that the government coer saying Twitter to do that period and that's why I won my federal injunction in court. Now, except you, David, and a few other people who covered that case. None of the mainstream media grifters, including Glenn Greenwald, wh I consider a grifter and we can talk about it, or I call him effort Carlson. Right,
I'll be kind on your show. Right, none of these They actually concealed it for two years, and they spoke about it in the so called Twitter files, acting like they had discovered this, but the reality was a concealed that during the most important time when it needed to be brought out. That's what these guys always do, called the limited CIA hangout. All right. Anyway, after I expose all of this, David, interesting enough, they
found two other brown guys people look like me, Indian guys. One of them is a guy called Jaye Battacharia who had promoted lockdowns in a scientific paper in twenty twenty all right out of Stanford. You know, my stuff was going viral. And this is what happens when an independent agent like me brings out the truth or you, David. What they do is it's a very insidious technique. They don't want to give limelight to the independent people bring out
the truth. So what they do is they hide that truth and then they put one of their controlled opposition people to quote unquote hijack that finding and own it. And that's what happened. So these guys in Missouri versus Biden file a lawsuit. And I was very very upset with Jim Hoff because Jim covered our cases from the Gateway Pundit never told me they were doing any of this. That's some true. I saw that he was one of the defend our
plans exactly exactly, and Jim covered our case extensively. Now when I read the case, because I read cases, I said, this is this case is going to fail. It's set up to fail because they couldn't show directly at the government, you know, at their bidding. Social media companies did it. Now, why is this important? Because social media companies have their First Amendment right. Government also has first Amendment right. Okay from the constitution.
The issue is did Twitter do what the government wanted? Because Twitter was Twitter would not have done it if the government didn't call them. You say, it's very important thing. I have first Amendment rights. Government has First
Amendment rights, and so does a company like Twitter. So it's a very important thing to show that if there is government forcing Twitter to do this, it's called state action by a very important ruling that you have to argue called Blum versus your ets Key, which I argued successfully in federal court in Massachusetts. That's why I got my injunction. I won that. It's the centerpiece
of the case. Now, after I won it and went on to the major trial, the judge was trying to bribe me to drop all the claims against the government, and they appointed me a lawyer who was colluding also with the judge and the government from all perspective, okay, and I wouldn't accede, and then they tried to come after me. And that's why I actually filed a new case in December twenty twenty three against the US government, not
just Massachusetts. So that case is live, okay. But everyone needs to understand that I am the one who has the actual evidence, David that can stand courtroom testimony, which is I have the big case of the century, which shows we have the courtroom testimony from the government social media director of the government of Massachusetts telling a federal judge, yes, I contact a Twitter. We didn't like its tweets and when they took it down, we were relieved.
Quote, it doesn't get any better than that. These clowns who filed Missouri versus Biden was flawed. And it's funny they found two Indian guys who knew about our case, and you would think if they wanted to strengthen it, they would have referred to our case. Yeah, so why didn't they
refer to it? So they set up a case where they filed it in you know, Republican centric federal courts that they'd win those in the Fifth Circuit, But when it went up to the Supreme Court, Amy Cony Barrett destroyed it because she said, you don't have exact evidence of the government actually coercing social media because because in the cases that they had, the social media companies already had these people on their red flag list, right, but my case
they didn't. I was never thrown off social media, you see. Yeah, so my case was a course. So why didn't they include my case when it was so well known all over the world. And we've seen this time of from the Supreme Court in the past. I've talked many times about as they were putting in the National Firearms Act and other things like that, and back in the nineteen thirties, they had a guide to establish that act.
They had a guy who was a convicted criminal at previous convictions, Miller, and he had a sought off shotgun, and so they bring this action against him, and that was the case that they wanted to bring in. They argued that he couldn't have a sought off shotgun because it was not a military weapon. And he even died before the case was heard of the Supreme Court. They went ahead with it anyway, even though the guy was dead. It wasn't a moot case. You know, when you look at something
like this, and Barrett says, these people don't have standing. It's like who had standing to decide a case of a guy that's already died. But when they want to establish a president, they'll do anything, no matter how ridiculous it is, you know. And I think what they're doing. What I'm saying here, David, is why didn't these lawyers. Why didn't these people who knew about my case reach out out? Yeah, why did they
even reference it? They intentionally concealed our case in Massachusetts knowing it was the landmark case here in Massachusetts. Why would you conceal it, David, That's the question and the only conclusion coming. Either they're really really dumb and incompetent, or was done intentionally. That's the only two conclusions. Either you're dumb
and you're an incompetent lawyer. And the most important case that knowing the history that I had revealed that, by the way, it was Trump who signed into law site which created that backdoor infrastructure, supported by both wings of Congress. You have this landmark case where we actually have the government telling a federal judge, yeah, I did it. I told Twitter to do this,
and I was relieved courtroom testimony. Why would you not include that when you knew this would go to the Supreme Court you did it intentionally either you didn't want to give me credit because you're jealous. But it's quite interesting they go find two brownsk Indian guys to be the centerpiece of that. Right, it's almost like a replacement strategy. But you don't bring out the most important findings.
So Amy Cony Barrett, if you read her analysis, and I read it very carefully, she says, in order to show this, you need the evidentiary proof that Twitter or Facebook would not have done this without government intervention. You say, that's like the smoking gun, that's what we have. So why would you not include the most important piece of evidence. Yeah, you see what I'm saying. Yeah, So they didn't include this because if you look at this, it was a six' three ruling by the Supreme
Court basically giving it to the government. So the government now and everyone should listen. Can this sets up a precedent ruling at the highest court in the land, So everyone else who gets thrown off social media by government intervention has to even go much harder, Okay, much much harder because of what these fools did. I'm talking about the attorneys in Murthy versus Biden on the plaintiff
side. You can't just blame the Supreme Court. This was a setup, right, So the Supreme Court handed it to the left or whatever you want to call it, the swarm as I call it, okay, by giving them saying that government can legally censor speech and they're retroactively protected. Now, which is what I predicted. What happened. This is very much similar to
the telecommunications. They did it through Congress, where Congress gave a retroactive immunity to the When the government was using telecommunications companies in two thousand under the Bush administration to spy on US citizens, they retroactively. Congress left and right got together and they passed a rule to indemnify these companies. So that's what just
happened here the left and right. If you look at this, there's three the far right guys on the Supreme Court, you know, Roberts Cony, Barrett and others colluded with the left to screw open Basically, they destroyed the First Amendment online destroyed. Now the next day, what do they do. They pass a They said, okay, but we're getting rid of the Chevron
doctrine. Now, remember the Supreme Court ruling that they just did. Basically says, any agency in the government, any government, can silence the speech of you American citizens, silently launder censorship through social media companies. It's okay because they've set the bar so high because of this ridiculous lawsuit that they did not include my findings purposely intentionally, that's what they did. They sabotaged the
American people, I say was deliberate. The next day, they then the Supreme Court again in a six' three, the same set of people right rule to eliminate the Chevron doctrine in nineteen eighty four and Chevron versus I think NRDC. The question has been this Congress rights laws. Right, the executive branch, that's a legislative branch. Executive branch is supposed to enforce the laws, and the judicial branch in the United States is supposed to interpret the laws.
Okay, So in that part sometimes Congress, probably likely on purpose, will write laws that are vague. Right. Oh yeah, let's say that's been a standard, that's been a standard thing. Pelosi said, We'll have to pass it to find out what's in it. Right with a bomb,
Right, Let's say they pass laws that are vague. They so this in the Chevron versus NRDC historic precedent setting case in nineteen eighty four, the Supreme Court ruled in those instances, an agency which has subject matter expertise in that area, we will defer to that. It's called agency deference. It's a
principle. So if the courts have to if there's a law that comes to be interpreted in front of the Supreme Court, the courts or any court have to defer to the agency within the government and get their opinion first, and if their opinion rules, so it's really a fourth branch of government. Okay. So that set up the Chevron doctrine for the last thirty forty years, right nineteen eighty four today, Now in the fishermen's case, I think it
was relentless. I forget. There's two cases that came up. The Supreme Court ruled sixty three to strike down the Chevron doctrine, which meant that Congress must put together clear laws so you don't have to go through this interpretation process. But here's the deal. It's a shell game because you're moving away the corruption from the agencies. Guess what to the lobbyists, because we know the lobbyists are the ones who are influencing Congress, who write the laws they ever.
So what you noticed was the right wing libertarians or even the Republicans are like, oh my god, this is great. Chevron doctrine has been smash. But if you go look at any of those people's Twitter feeds, they were silent on what the government did twenty four hours before or sorry, the Supreme Court did the quote unquote the Republican right wing Supreme Court did to destroy
free speech in the United States. So look at this. So so in twenty four hours, the Supreme Court passes it takes down the Chevron Doctrine, which had flaws with it, to throw a bone to the Republican right. So they say, oh my god, great, we don't have the deep
state now. And you can read those tweets and those Facebook posts, But those same grifters posting that David, not one of them said anything against the same right wing Republican court which had just allowed every agency, government agency agency
the right to silence speech, destroy the First Amendment. So on the one hand, they took down the First Amendment the Supreme Court, and they threw a bone of oh, we've taken away the Chevron Doctrine, but we know that that corruption that ruled the agencies through all of the Chevron Doctrine is just
going to get shifted and consolidated over to the lobbyists in Congress. Now I can see this, as you know, as bright as day, because I take a system's approach, David. The non systems people were out there, Oh my god, we got this over here. What's like, you know, showing the monkey the mirror over here. So you know, you don't show the banana over here, right. So, yeah, the big elephant in the room is the Supreme Court destroyed the First Amendment. The right wing
Republican Supreme Court destroyed the First Amendment. And that same Republican right wing Supreme Court threw a bone to the Republican right wing saying, oh my god, this is great. You guys can gloat over the Chevron doctrine being taken away. M that's what happened, David. I agree. Well, I think that you know, I agree that you know that is there is an appeasement
to people. I think a lot of people looking at this. I've talked about the power of the bureaucracy and how it has grown over the years. I talk about regulation without representation as much as taxation with representation. I got a couple of comments here. Let me pass these on to you and get your comment on ap rumble seat. Right, So, maybe we need people like doctor Shiva to establish legal think tanks state to state. Well that's kind
of what you're doing with your educational classes, isn't it. Yeah, So who is that rumble The user's name is ap rumble Seat. I'm not sure that ap rumble. What we've done is we've created a very powerful movement and the bottom line, you know, theme of our movement is save yourself. If you can see that, David, right, save yourself on these and then we tell people, David, on the back of these cards, look what's going on. This swarm is actually killing you. Lifespan is going down,
constant living is going up. So our position, David, is that the individual in the United States, if you want to be a real citizen, must take responsibility for your life. Yes, politicians are not going to do it. There's no savior coming to do that. The only person going to do that is you. You must save yourself. In order to save yourself, You've got to understand the way systems work. Now, the value that I'm bringing to in my run for president and beyond that is to explain
to people, look, I've discovered those tools. I have the tools. If you want to learn it, we're here. But if you want to outsource your future to one of these clowns, right, and all of these clowns, by the way, you know, are agents of Israel, every single one of them. They're all Zionus, and they've hijacked by the way Christianity, and they've duplicitly taken advantage of the American Christians to think that design
as an equals Christianity, which it isn't. But what our movement educates people on the fundamental view that the future is up to you and you have to learn how to fight. Now. I have created those tools. So that's what you're referring to, David. So in every state now, for that
matter, all over the world. Now we have we're in about one hundred plus countries in the United States, in every state, and our leaders who are running our movement, the first thing they're teaching people is if you want to vote for doctor Shiva, you also have to be willing to stand up for yourself. It's not about him saving you. Doctor Shiva will offer you, know, you the analysis of tools. I'll get on the ground and
fight every day, David. I've been doing that all my life, since I was seventeen years old or twelve years old, you know, as an activist. But the American people need to rise up, bottoms up and fight. And so if you looked at that debate that took place, you had one guy who's a complete liar and another guy whose brain is mush Yeah.
Right, it's the one unethical individual finding a very unhealthy individual. And I was hoping that maybe the takeaway from that, you know, before it, before it happened, there was one piece on reason they said, well, maybe the best outcome of this will be if it was really really bad, and it was really really bad, and I was hoping, and I said it on Friday, I said it again today. I'm hoping that people will see that there, as you point out, there is no savior coming.
That's what I try to focus on all the time. Work bottom up. That's how we got to do this, not top down. The top down is totally corrupt. And so I think that's a very important message that we both agree on that we've got to work from the bottom up. And I do want to talk more about that. I've got a couple of other comments here. Let me throw these actually before we get into the debate. Texas Coast South. It'll never change as long as their federal fiat money system to
corrupt all things like it has. What do you say about that? What about that the dollar status is reserve and the petro dollar and all the that stuff. Is that about to change? What do you think, Well, I think we don't want to put the symptom separate from the cause. Okay. What has happened, David for the last fifty years. And by the way, in late eighties, there was an academic meeting of the leading scholars in the world. They got together on the East Coast and the decision was
made, and we can do a whole video on this. At this meeting that in New York that we must demoralize the American public so they never build a bottoms up workers movement. Okay. And so, starting from that day to today, the effort of the elites has been to demoralize people to never actually get their hands dirty, go out on the streets and hand out flyers, mobilize the movement like we're doing for Truth from Health or our campaign.
They don't want working people out independently organizing, David, they don't want them doing that. So the viewer's comments there have two aspects. Yes, he's addressed saying one of the many facets of corruption and ways that the swarm enslaves us through a Fiat money system. There many ways they also enslave us by controlling the water supply and the food. So people can't even think about the Fiat money supply. Okay, they don't have they're losing their intelligence even to
think about that. You say, there's many, many ways that they shackle us, But regardless of that, the number one way that the establishment shackles us is to demoralize people to just pontificate all day, to talk about things, but never to get up and build movements. So if you think about a guy like Noam Chomsky, he writes a book called Manufacturing Consent, which is a detailed analysis of how the swarm controls us. But Chomsky demoralizes anyone
from ever building a bottoms up movement. So you'll see all these grifters on the internet talking, talking, talking, doing deep analysis, but they're not out there doing the hard practical work of how you build a movement, teaching people the tools and put the ownus on them. We're the only force right now on the planet doing that in a systematic way. No I would encourage the viewer there, come to our open house. We'll teach you how to
fight. What you're describing is a symptom. It's an obvious symptom. There are many things like that, but the root of it is that for the last seventy years, the American people have been demoralized to outsource their future to everything, to watch WWE wrestling all day, right to vote for one of these politicians. And when someone like me comes along bottoms up, it's so new they're not even thinking, wait a minute, this guy's actually out there.
We're actually collecting our signatures to get on the ballot. By the way, we're on the ballot in Utah. The first time a naturalized citizen has been is on the ballot in the United States for president. And people said, we couldn't do it. So and this goes to the heart of the founders of the United States, which believed in what the and a lot of people, a lot of ninety nine percent of the lawyers don't know about this
principle call non justiciable issues. The founders of the United States knew, the framers that there would be issues that come up that even their articles and their tenement, you know, the Bill of Rights, couldn't conceive of. So there they had a room for non justiciable issues movements that would come bottoms up, that would create new laws. And this is why bottoms up movements are central in the minds of the framers of the Constitution. They're in the subtext.
So you had stupid people like Arnold Schwarzenegger, Oh, you can't run for president you're from you're a naturalized citizen. Well yeah, just pontificating you can't. But if you build the bottoms up movement and you sa wait a minute, I got hundreds of thousands of people want me on the ballot, that becomes a reality. Like anything. Women didn't have the right to vote. Afghan women had the right to vote before American women. Well, there
was a bottoms up movement that was built. Right if you went to the late seventeen hundreds and you went to the Federal Supreme Court and you said, hey, I'm a black per so and I should be allowed into that white restaurant, they throw out the case. This is why we need movements. Movements came, we created the fourteenth Amendment, nineteenth Amendment, and that's what we're doing. David. The framers knew this concept of non justiciable issues.
Well, I agree with you on the bottom up solution, I absolutely do. I do believe though that you know, as a process for changing the Constitution, that would be something other than a large a large movement. And let me there's a couple of people have left a comment here about about rights, and I'd like to get your clarification about this. I'll read their comments
here. Texas Coast South says only people have rights. When you work for government, you have personal rights, yes, but not rights to trample on others. And then school down. Let me get the other one that was there. Another one rational lampooner says, we tell government what it's allowed to do. It has no rights of its own. Corporations are not people. I've said in the past and this is my position on it. Corporations are
creatures of the state. They exist by government granted privileges states. When we talk about them, and we look at the Tenth Amendment, it talks about the powers of the states and of the peoples of it's not delegated if the powers are not delegated to the federal government. So states have powers. Corporations are creatures of the state. They have privileges. People have rights because we're
created in the image of God, as the Decoration of Independence acknowledges. So how do you see that fitting in, Well, David, it gets back to the earlier point you said, as an aside, there are fundamental rights that exist independent of all government, you know, divine rights of people.
And I think the Founders had this in their notion right inalienable rights. So that's a central piece there now in the manifestation of the United States and laws, etc. Right, how these are translated, there's three ways these we get our rights. And this is something everyone. No rights are given to us because they're just inalienable. We as human beings have to fight for these rights. Yes, they may be inalienable, just like everyone is a beautiful
soul. But ultimately how you express yourself on this. You may be a beautiful soul. People say, oh, he's such a beautiful soul. Yeah, but he's a criminal. He goes and kills people. Right. So in the same way, when organizations get together, yes we have these inalien inalienable rights, but do we as a human organization exhibit those rights, those inalienable rights. Well, that's where you get into this contradiction. Why,
this is why we call the fight the struggle. We have to fight for them, We have to fight against these people inhibiting those and this is central to understand. So if you look at how quote unquote laws come into being
three ways or amendments. Right, we have a two thirds you know, majority of Congress, right, or you have a constitutional convention called or the fact that rulings take place at the Supreme Court level, presidential rulings and they are used like in the Chevron case for forty years, okay, because by the constitution those don't really exist, right. So yeah, and I have I have always had a problem with Marvray versus Madison because the it wasn't in
the Constitution, but the Supreme Court gave themselves that power. Jefferson said, well, that's it, it's over when he saw that. Essentially, so it is. It's kind of been a you know, very clever the way they asserted these these powers that are there. But yeah, so you have this, you have this fact that this there's these multiple interconnected things going on, which at a certain point in time what we call the law, right, and but key among all these things, I think people keep forgetting and
the established wants us to forget this. They're forgetting this other piece, which is the people. The political process of people rising up bottoms up because the original article says only she, only he can be president. For example, Well, how did that happen if it wasn't for women rising up? Right? They went to the Democrats to asked for the right to vote, right, they laughed at them. Then the nineteenth Amendment was created, which applied
the equal protection clause to women from the fourteenth Amendment. But none of that would have occurred if there was not a bottoms up movement. And this is what we need to understand. And I understand, I agree with that.
You know, I think the movements are important, but I think it's also important for them to you know, we have to have some kind of an established thing, just like you're talking about the nineteenth Amendment, or we had the eighteenth Amendment where they prohibited an alcohol than twenty one where they brought it back. So those types of things are driven from the ground up. But I think it also they need to know dot the iron cross. He but
David, that always comes later. Politicians never do. What's I mean? You look at in Trump versus Anderson on March Fords twenty twenty four, this is a very important ruling. The Colorado courts denied Trump access to the ballot in Colorado, and they said that he violated the Section three of the Insurrection Act of the Fourteenth Amendment, so by constitutional provisions he had violated that. They ruled on that and they threw them off the ballot in two court rulings.
Then the Supreme Court stepped in, swooped in, and they said, whoa, Whoaoh, you can't do this. Why because they said, we're going to have a patchwork. That's what was put forward, a patchwork of states, each with their own laws on how you run for president. Very very important ruling, and they said, even if you have a constitutional provision that's being violated at the federal level by a federal candidate, the states have no no right to deny ballot access. Is that was a nine to zer
ruling. Yeah, because they didn't want the United States as an organism to fall apart, which is what was post Civil War. Again, these are some very very fundamental rulings are taking place, and I think everyone needs to really understand what's going on. So that ruling is important to my running for president because when I'm trying to get on the ballot, some people are confused about what took place between naturalized and quote unquote natural born, which has never
defined the Fourteenth Amendment, the Nineteenth Amendment. You know Schneider versus Rusk, Bowling versus Sharp That there being other rulings, including Trump versus Anderson. So if it wasn't for Trump versus Anderson, which is a Supreme Court Trump would be thrown off the ballot in Colorado. So you do have long before constitutional amendments get passed. You have these Supreme Court rulings which are very very powerful. They sustain a body of law. So yes, maybe one day Congress
will do something. But what that ruling said was only Congress has a right to decide who becomes President's quite amazing this ruling. So when I'm getting on the ballot, it's the same thing. No state has a right to deny me ballot access by pointing to a constitutional provision. If I win the presidency, only Congress has a right to say, you know what, we now have to interpret natural born versus naturalized citizen, and then they had to have
to deny me access to the presidency. You say, but this is quite powerful. It basically goes down to the central part of non justiciable issues, bottoms up movements. So let me, I've got a person here mad mem thank you and says good morning David and doctor Sheiev. You are both throw on God's work. Go to Shiva for President dot com. I don't think we mentioned that earlier. That's your website. Is there a different website for the you know, the training classes that you got? Yes? Yeah,
yeah, so the operating system what I've created is Truthfreedomhealth dot com. David, truthfreedomhealth dot com. Everyone, If you want to save yourself and get off the plantation, I can't do it for people, go to Truthfromhealth dot com. Become a warrior scholar. That training teaches people how to think from a system's approach. It is the same training I used to teach at MIT. The elites learned this training. This is how the few are able to
control the many. And if you want to know more about how the few control the many, the website that I recommend people go to is Shatter the Swarm dot com. Shatter the Swarm dot com s h A T T e R. Now our campaign is fueled by this people who've gone through this training,
and everyone should get one of these bumper stickers. And people can go to Shiva for President dot com s H I V A numeral for President dot com and everyone should go there get one of these bumper stickers because this gives you the ability to use your own car as a very powerful vehicle to reach one hundred thousand people a day Shiva Numeral for President dot com. But and
every Thursday's David at eleven am and eight pm. We have a open house and people can go to Vshiva dot com slash orientation or come to our town hall Shiva for President dot com slash town hall. But those are some of the mechanics of people get involved, Okay, and so those there's links to those other websites at Shiva the number four President dot com dot com. Yeah, okay, good, yep. I've got another question here. This is
from d G eight. So, doctor Shiva, what's your thoughts on APAK bragging on their own website of the four hundred plus politicians they own America first. Well, it's not America first. That's so you know. And by the way, the biggest person who is a beneficiary of this, who's going to be even a bigger beneficiary, is Trump. Yeah. Trump is the biggest Zionist. And you can see what I said. I don't want to use those words here on the show. He you know, he serves Israel,
Biden serves Israel, Boobie Kennedy serves Israel. All of them do. To me, I'm the only anti Zionist candidate, and I've been talking about this for forty years. Anti Zionism is not anti Semitism. It was Trump in twenty sixteen who passed an executive order which said that we must equate anti Zionism with anti Semitism. Now, after October seventh, everyone knows that was an engineered attack on quote unquote Israel by Hamas, which is funded by Israel.
I mean, it's obvious, it's right in front of your face. Right after that attack took place, I started re educating people on the difference between Zionism and Judaism. One of those videos, in spite of all the shadow banning, got I think like fifty to seventy million views David globally. Okay, it was what Roy said, I'm the only presidential candidate who doesn't bleep. You know, zionis bleep. Okay, and people can go find
that. But that video went viral, and the difference here is that on So then on December seventh, Mike Johnson, a quote unquote Christian you know, Zionist pass to bill in Congress equating anti Zionism with anti Semitism. And then about four weeks ago the entire Congress passed to Bill three ten the House to seventy saying that going into the future they will be using the definition of antisemitism pursued to the Israel Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, which is a complete Zionist nutjob
organization. Yeah, they allsourced it, didn't even define it themselves. Yeah. Well, if you go read it, the seven of the eleven examples they give of what is anti semitism is if you say anything against the state of Israel, including if you say Israel is worse than their state, that's anti Semitism, which is really anti Zionism, Okay, which is a political ideology. So Trump is one of the biggest zion blah you know, bleep bleepers. Okay, you can fill that blank in Biden is so and Booby
Kennedy. Booby Kennedy said that Alastinian people are the most pampered people on the planet, and then he compared the people in Gaza to Nazis that we must go in there and wipe them out. And look at how great Germany became after we wiped out the Nazis. So if we wipe these people out, So why is this Because all of these people are part of the swarm, all of them they serve Israel. They do not serve the American working people.
And if we want to those people, even the Free Palestine movement has been infiltrated by quote unquote liberal Zionis who keep talking about, you know, cease fire now. They've been saying that for forty years. Ceasefire now basically means Israel gets to move two steps forward, one step back. It doesn't mean end the occupation. Very different slogan, David, we must end the
occupation of America. And this viewer is rightfully saying that that APAC is gloating that they control Congress, and Congress is a representative body of the American people, which means between US and Congress now is APAC, which means Zionism. Yeah, and central to the founders was that Congress ultimately is a representative body of we the people. So the House, five percent of those people are controlled by APAK. Cynthia McKinney, who was a congresswoman who just endorsed me.
She was thrown out years ago, years ago for bringing this out, for exposing the involvement of Zionism in Congress. Well, I think it's it's pretty clear. You know, it was also DeSantis jumped into that, you know, to get money, and equating criticism of a political state Israel with anti Semitism and then making it a criminal offense, the type of stuff that we're starting to see in this law that everybody's being concerned about it in Germany,
but also in Ireland. You know they're doing that as well. We're going to make hate speech an imprisonable offense and lack of people up in prison. Well, they started doing that. The Republican Party did that in Florida with that is so I think that's two very important things. I don't support any kind of hate speech regulation. I think you can't have it for speech.
You can't have freedom of speech if there's going to be such a thing as free speech, I think, But David, it just happened when it was it a couple of months ago, when they passed that bill in Congress. It was again, if you notice all of this is being done by the Republican right. That's right, that's right. The Republican right. Everyone listening, you magatards are the ones who are supporting this, yep, that's
right, wearing Make America Great Again and literally supporting Israel. So we have now a law that's going to go to Congress which is going to give the Department of Education infinite rights to take away money from schools that, let's say support Let's say mit tomorrow one invite me to speak on anti Zionism. They would say, you can't invite that speaker, he's anti Semitic. Equating anti Zionism with anti Semitism will remove your federal funds. Or let's say a high
school wanted to invite me to come speak, David. Right. And this is being done by the so called Republican right, not by the woke Democrats, but the Republican right is supporting massive fascism, pro Israel, anti American interests. And this is in the sphere. Out of it. This is Donald Trump. That's why when I looked at that debate, David, I don't know if you want to go there. Yeah, we're getting close to the end of the show, but we got a few minutes so we can
go over a little bit. Give us your take on the show. Now, you just like some other people, many people live stream the debate, even though from CNN, they did it on Twitter. Must said go ahead and sue me. This is important. So you had commentators who are doing it and commenting live. You did it as a candidate and responding to the questions tels bit about that. Of course people can see that. I bet you if we had streamed CNN, we would have been sued, but not
Booby Kennedy. Okay, after I decided to do then Booby steals everything we do. Okay, Booby Kennedy is an agent of the swarm. That's who he is. He's fake independent, He's a Zionist puppet. Okay, completely, they're all so. But anyway, if you looked at that debate separate from the fact, so what I saw interesting was we know Biden isn't on a set of cocktails, right that keep his brain from going mush. And we know here Trump is just a liar. He'll say anything he needs to
say to get as much money as he can. And we've had this discussion with other people like Alex Jones does the same thing. Right, even though he knows things are wrong, he'll do it to raise money. Okay, so Trump is a master grifter. So here's a lying master grifter who has sex with prostitutes, you know, while his wife is pregnant. And over here you have a guy Biden whose brain has essentially become mush. Now what I found fascinating is, again, if you go to Central principles, anything
you see on mainstream media is something they want you to see. Yeah, that's right. Okay, so they wanted people to see a decrepit brought Biden. Now what how do they do that? Did they change his medical cocktail mix before that debate because he looked horrible? And the next day they gave him the right cocktails where he looks really strong. So I was, I mean, it's it's amazing, right, So the puppy up er yea, yeah, right, So I would argue that someone, remember the swarm has
its own internal conflicts. Someone has decided they maybe don't want Biden, they want somebody else because they're going to serve Zionism even better. Okay, So I found it quite profound that they made we knew how bad they made Biden look. Yes, okay, and the next day is going So I just want everyone to alert people that everything that you see on media is theater. It is brought to you by the swarm to serve the swarm. And you know, looking at the the fact that they the timing that they did it.
We've always had the debates after the convention. Neither of these guys is been nominated as the official old person, right, but they're notting each other and it's all Usually the conventions are in late August. You don't have the first debate until the end of September, and then you have September, mid October, the latter part of October. I mentioned this many times to the
audience. This time they just let leapfrogged all that stuff, and I think it was for the purpose of sabotaging him and getting somebody else in there. You have any predictions after who you think it'll be, Well, I think I mean, I've said this from day one. I've always said that they wanted Gavin Newsom, you know, I think that's where they want, you know, someone in there. Maybe they'll throw a brown face like Kamala Harrison there, who's a Brahman who's also a Zionist all, you know, But
I think that's their game. But it was obvious to everyone watching they want Biden out. Whoever within the swarm right, they have their own internal conflicts, and you can see all of Silicon Valley supporting Trump. In fact, CNN is supporting Trump. Right. Everybody's like, how did this happen? And we never knew that he had any cognitive issues? Yeah, exactly, And the next day everyone should go watch his rally next Biden is all fired
up dot because he got the right cocktails. So whoever engineered, they say, make sure he got the wrong cocktails before the debate and the right and to your point, David, the timing of these debates, why would you do this debate when general election debates are not even supposed to take place after the convention? So everything people see elections are selections and it's all theater. Yeah, well, we're right at the end of the program. But let
me let me get you. You talk a lot about the swarm, that's your term, defined that a little bit for people. How do you see the swarm? Is that the globalist? Is that the bureaucracy, the deep statey, how do you see the swarm. Yeah, so, David, I have a much more precise and tangible and accessible definition. So takes away a lot of the quote unquote you know what the left or other people call conspiracy, right, And if people go to shatter theoswarm dot com, okay,
shatterform dot com, you will understand it. So I really encourage everyone if you want to start your first level of learning how to fight, start with knowing who the enemy is. Who's a swarm. They're not a particular geographical location Israel, the Pentagon or some location North Korea. First of all, it's not spatially based, nor is it not temporarily based something over time. I know at this location the swarm exists and now doesn't, okay.
And it's not consolidated in a particular set of people like the quote unquote the Rothchild, there's not, or the quote unquote the Jews, or the quote unquote Wall Street. It is a highly interconnected, telepathic, interconnected group of people who may have their own contradictions from time to time because they it's WWE wrestling, right, blah blah blah, But overall they move together as a blog. If you watch you know those starf I think these birds that move
over the ocean at that. See that they move like this. One time they're moving. One group may move this way, but they ultimately move together. Okay, that is what the swarm is. It's a much more precise understanding, Okay, of how and you can learn how the few control the eight billion of us. And so I've taken complex control systems made it very accessible. So everyone should go to shatterthswarm dot com. Step one, if
you want to save yourself, understand who the enemy is. Step two, David is everyone needs to understand this graph here, if you can see it, lifespan in the United States is going down, cost of living is going up. These people are literally killing you and everyone should go to shatter the swarm. But I am here to provide people tools on how to fight. But you must want to take responsibility for yourself. You have to want to save yourself. If you don't want to save yourself, that's why we're in
this condition. If you look at this graph, this has been going on since nineteen seventy, David, we keep thinking, Oh Bernie's going to do it, Ooh Trump's going to do it, Ooh Booby may do it now, Biden may do it. We got to get off our butts and be real Americans. We have to want to fight for ourselves. That is the only way out of it. Now. My run for president gives people the opportunity to have someone like me lead people to the extent my leading is,
Hey, here's the water. This is where you go. You want to be a good horse and drink the water. That's what I've created, that water. That mana which is truth, freedom, health. But if you don't want to do that, well please I will give you a recommendation letter to go vote for Biden or Booby because you're going to be flowly cooked like the frog. So that's what our movements about, David. It's really about personal responsibility. And that's what I like. That's what I like about it.
It's you know, I think we put way too much information, too much hope on the presidency and your message that we've got to do it ourselves. We've got to do it from the bottom up. That is exactly what needs to happening. And I agree with you about the swarm. Yeah, it isn't a particular place global governance is distributed. And yeah, it's a good analogy that you got with the flocks of birds that are out there. Thank you so much for joining us again. People can go to Shatter Theswarm
dot com or you can go to Shiva number four president dot com. Thank you very much, doctor Shiva. Appreciate it. Thanks David, be well, best to you and your son and your family. Thank you for having me show. Be well. Thank you, David, you too, Bye bye bye. The common Man. They created common Core, dumbed down our children. They created common past, track and control us their Commons project to make sure the commoners own nothing and the communist future. They see the common
man as simple, not sophisticated ordinary. But each of us has worth and dignity created in the image of God. That is what we have in common. That is what they want to take away. Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation. They desire to know everything about us, while they hide everything from us. It's time to turn that around and expose what they want to hide. Please share the information and links you'll find at the
Davidnightshow dot com. Thank you for listening, Thank you for sharing. If you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers. Ddavidnightshow dot com