Mon 2Sep24 David Knight Show UNABRDIGED

four year of our Lord. I'm Gardner Goldsmith, sitting in for David on this holiday, and I welcome you to it together Today until noontime Eastern time, we'll be looking at breaking stories, gathering some pertinent information to carry along with us after the fact, and we'll be joined by guests Donald Jeffries, historian, author, political commentator discussing his new book, and we'll look into freedom of speech with a man

who knows very well what technology can do. Marty Gotdisfeld, will be joining us later in the program, as well as your opinions on the David Knight Show. Welcome to the David Knight Show. One in all. I'm Gardner Goldsmith, sitting in for David, who's getting a much deserved day off on this long weekend, and I hope you're enjoying it whatever time zone you might be calling home. Thanks for making this your home Monday through Friday, the David

Knight Show nine am Eastern Time until noontime. You can join us inside the chats, and of course you can leave your comments after the fact. Please give the show the thumbs up and share it as much as you can, whether it be live or after the fact. If you're familiar with my work, it's probably because of my efforts with MRCTV. You might have also seen my program which is on six pm Monday through Friday on Rockfin and Rumble, and that is The Liberty Conspiracy. Because freedom is out

of fashion nowadays. David Knight has great and I am so glad that you are here, whether you're watching on Rumble, on Rockfan, on David Knight's Twitter slash x feed which is at Liberty Terrian, if you're just catching it, please follow David, and of course on d Live d Live getting that audio out there already, I can see that people are inside the chats, and we've got a lot of really good folks who are populating there, including Mary

Ellen Moore and fellow Liberty conspirator. I can't believe Jason Barker is also in the house. He's, of course the one of the two co founders of the Knights of the Storm and did a great show this weekend at ten am on Rumble. So check out Jason Barker as well, and you can follow him at real Jason Barker on X. Well, my friends, it has been some weekend. It's been an absolutely beautiful, beautiful start to the morning. I hope you're

having a beautiful day wherever you are. I want to give you cheers, lots of wonderful, faithful hope, and I want to thank right off the bat before we go into any of the stories. Towards the end of the program, I found out that someone contributed as we closed off the month of August, someone contributed to the program to David Knight's show to the Family for the Love of

the Road, and David actually text me about it. So if you are watching right now for the Love of the Road, thank you for what you did to close off the month the way you did, and thank you to everyone for being here to start off the new month. So let's do it in high fashion and great style. Let's offer our opportunities to discuss items with each other, and of course, if you would like to donate to help the David Knight Show. That is how they propel

this program. So it's good to be here. I'm delighted that I get the opportunity to be here with you on this holiday. I hope you've had a fantastic holiday weekend. And in fact, before we do anything as far as the news is concerned, I want to show you a Bible quote that they came across today and I think it starts things off beautifully. This is from what David suggested to me to visit the Blue Letter Bible. It's a wonderful Blueletterbible dot Org, a wonderful site. Here is

today's Bible quote. And wisdom and knowledge shall be the stability of thy times and strength of salvation. The fear of the Lord is his treasure. That's from Isaiah. That's great wisdom and knowledge. Well we get a lot of that from David Knight, that is for sure. So everyone, let's see what's on tap for the David Knight Show today.

Mentioned we're gonna have some great guests today and we're gonna dig into a lot of very major issues today on the program this Labor Day beginning of September, and let's start it off with a bang. Everyone. The David Knight Show nine two twenty four. What's on tap today? Everyone? Wow? Look at that. Jeez, the whole team here put together a lot. You guys are working hard. You have to may be better food and drinks and pay I think let's see, we've got the news flash. It's our Silence

of Dissent edition. Yes, of course that's going to roll into the first major story Brazil. Robert Reich and both of them, a lot of others going up against free speech X and Elon Musk. What are we to make of these developments as X has been banned in Brazil and VPNs have been banned in Brazil, but some politicians

are openly defying the judicial order. We'll talk about that, give some of the details of how this has built up over the past few months out of Brazil, and what some people seem to be making of the reason why this is happening. Perhaps some political frustration on the part of many of the people in Brazil. Definitely, we'll look at Aurora, Colorados talk about political dissent, how they

are worrying about migrant gangs taking over apartments. Saw some discussion about this, saw that it was disputed and then saw that it was confirmed. And then we'll take a look at California as Nancy Pelosi inkes Ronald Reagan to promote a California statute handing home loans to illegal aliens. We'll also discuss the Berkeley lawdean who has joined MSNBC to very flamboyantly and wonderfully, almost as if it was rehearsed,

quite too rehearse. When you see the video, I think you'll know what I mean to call for the trashing of the already trash US Constitution, sorry to say. And we've got Don Jeffries as our guest on his new book American Memory Hall, and guest Marty Gottisfeld on online privacy and government corruption. So welcome to the program everyone. I hope you had a great weekend. I hope it's a great day. Hey, let me know on the five y five if the audio is coming through strong for you,

put it in your comments. I see already we've got Martin thorn Is saying good morning Guard from the Shadow Band Mruskrat Lounge. Well, I'm sorry your shadow band, my friend.

And yes, let's talk a little bit and get your personal opinions about free speech, especially on X. As you might have heard, Eric Peters joined us last week and on Friday, and it was quite interesting because Eric's been working on whether or not everybody is really enjoying the fruits of the free speech totem of X. We'll find out, and of course we're going to be welcoming more and more viewers as they pop in. So thank you everyone for recycling and giving it the thumbs up. I want

to say hi to everybody inside Rumbleland. I see Lieutenant Oracle of Truth is there? I salute you. I see Princess Wrong Think. I love that. That is great, What a great title. Judy Wrinkles, where are you people coming from? This is great? And Gold's nugget as well as the real Jason Barker RUFUS sixty nine firefly is saying yo, I like it very good. Reminds me of like was Carmen Maraguso or something was one of that was like the boyfriend of one of the women on Laverne and Shirley.

Was that his name Carmine the Big I don't know, but he always said yo. Anyway, thanks for being there. Steve Swan inside Rock then Lazy Toad thanks for being there, Lazy and Nancy as well. Eco Taxi. Good to have you there. And again big thanks for the love of the road for ending last month, and let's start off this month with a bang as well and send all of our affection and an energy over to you know who,

David Knight and the family. Hey, by the way, everybody, if you want to follow me on X it's at Guard Goldsmith. That's at Guard Goldsmith, and I do want to give the thumbs up and thanks to the people at MRCTV. I just found out that there is a person who owns eleven small television stations out west and he's made a deal. It's just a you know, like a sharing deal to provide some of the material that we do on video for MRCTV onto his television stations,

which is just great. It's just terrific. I'll find out more details and give it to you. But I spoke with Eric Shiner, the executive director of MRCTV, over the weekend, and that was wonderful to hear, and the man liked some of the videos that I was doing and so on, so thank you. I'll have to speak to him directly, and I thought that was really nice to see, very very good piece of information over the weekend, A nice addition to everything. Well, everyone, let's give a nice addition

to the start of this program. I usually start Liberty Conspiracy on Monday through Friday at six pm over on Rumble and Rockman and my ex by going through a quick take on some of the things that have been happening in the news. And you know what, I thought of something special to put behind this. It's all about

free speech. What's going on in Brazil and the wonderful Robert Reich as Rush Limbaugh used to humorously poke fun of him as he used to give his pieces on PBS and and then with Robert b Reich on the News Hour. Well, let's talk a little bit about free speech, shall we. It's time for a little derivation from the Liberty Conspiracy for the David Knight Show. It's time for a newsflash everyone.

prop up the Hamas government. There Prime Minister benjaminata Yaho of Israel not only tolerated those payments, he encouraged them. And when the cuttery officials asked David barneya the head of Masad, should we stop this, he said, no.

Knight Show. Of course, David giving me the opportunity to fill in for him, I want to make sure I do a really good job presenting the news to you and getting feedback from you as we break apart these news stories of the and so the first story will be about the sounds of silence coming to us from Brazil and elsewhere, following up on the heels of what the French government has done with the CEO of Telegram, plus the Telegram employees fleeing their former place of employment

in cutter No, United Arab Emirates. So let's look at my Sunday news assembly. You can see this every Sunday, and I put out instead of twenty stories yesterday, I decided I would split it into two Sunday news assemblies for the long weekend, so there'll be another section of

it coming out today later on today. The first major story, of course, was the French attack on durov and the departure of Telegram employees from the UAE, mixed with what is going on in Brazil, and, as I wrote in line with the French attack on pav al Durov and the departure of telegram employees from the UAE over fears that they too would be arrested, the leadership in the Brazilian government is going full on attacking Elon Musk and X. Now, how do we adjudge Elon Musk's efforts at X his

parentage coming from technocratic parents, how does one judge the immediate situation for him and his legal fight there? He's definitely spending a lot of money to try to remain operative, and he could be arrested if he goes down there. Well, a man named Judge Demorris, as I noted on Substack, appears to be both doing the bidding of President Lula

and acting on his own rancorous behalf. Demores has banned X, and I wanted to offer a reminder to the fans of the United States government who you who seem to be very delighted with the fact that the US government is banning or forcing the sale of TikTok de Moores in Brazil is banning X because X has not complied with his censorship orders with specific posts that he wants users to be and specific users he wants banned, including members of the Brazilian Congress that he wants banned from X.

And X has not served up a so called employee to participate with the government, in other words, to get arrested and probably stand trial for what. Nobody's really sure. Now. There is a very good piece on this that comes from Mario Nafaul and he says telegrams do buy office where pa val Durav moved the company in twenty seventeen. Oh sorry, I'm skipping over. I went to the wrong one. That's that's incorrect. Sorry about that. Here is the key paragraph. Yes,

so this is what I want? Yes, all right, it says here. Mores order calls for the immediate, complete and comprehensive suspension of X in Brazil, directing the National Communications Agency to enforce the ban within twenty four hours. Judge Mores also threatened to find of eighty nine hundred dollars many people have been hearing that number over the weekend

for anyone using tools like VPNs to circumvent this block. Additionally, the judge initially demanded that tech giants Google and Apple, along with Internet providers implement measures to prevent access to x, though he later softened that order. Now want to head over here to play you a little bit from Glenn Greenway and system update on Rumble, and there may be a commercial or may not. We'll see, Hey, football, there is a quick one. Glenn Greenwald was living in Brazil.

He's not in Brazil anymore. In fact, I believe he's back in the United States, which is not going to be a friendly place for Glenn Greenwald either. I don't know whether he's going to be here permanently because of course he worked with Edward Snowden. Here's more from Glenn Greenwald, as I know.

apps becomes a criminal subject to arrest. In France, and then presumably in all of Europe as well. And I can assure you that this has captured the attention of every single founder and CEO of big tech platforms who are all billionaires and travel the world freely and are very concerned now that their liberty can also be constrained, if not outright denied, by this precedent set.

those countries can go as well. Every time there's a disinformation conference or a hate speech conference or a combating online harm conference, they invite all these Brazilian judges and all of these Brazilian think tank experts and all these Brazilian prosecutors and experts, we're all cheerleaders of the censorship regime to come and talk to these fancy conferences in Berlin and Paris and Amsterdam and Rome and Spain and Portugal about exactly what it is that Brazil is doing

because the EU wants to copy it.

people have not been convicted of any crimes. It's just this very politically motivated judge ordering these people banned from the Internet with no due process, and X doesn't want to cooperate with that. And so once this issue was this threat was issued, We're going to arrest executives with X inside Brazil unless you comply.

great investigative reporting on this as well. You can find Schollenberger's Twitter coverage of this, the X coverage of this on Michael Schollenberger's feed, and I'll give you a quick taste of what we're talking about here. And he has a number of thumbnails. He has a long, long series of post about this if you want to get really deep into this, and we're going to get semi deep here, because things are moving very rapidly when it looks that

when we look at the X information. In fact, things were changing even this morning, I was doing some updates to the plans for the program. So here it is. This is what Schellenberger says. Twitter files Brazil. Brazil is engaged in a sweeping crackdown on free speech led by a Supreme Court justice named Alexandre de Moores. Demores has thrown people in jail without trial for things they posted

on social media. Sounds like England. He has demanded the removal of users from social media platforms, and he has required the censorship of specific posts without giving users any right of appeal or even the right to see the evidence presented against them. And as we heard Mike ben say, what has the US State Department said about this incredible attack on one of the bedrock principles of the United States system zero, except we're monitoring the situation and Mike

Ben's has some thoughts on that. I'm going to show you in just a minute. And of course, so a lot of people are saying, where did Mike Ben's come from? What's this guy's background? Well, you know, I got to say, I saw him offer a presentation about a lot of the information on Ukraine and the CIA connections there with the Deep State and the Atlantic Council. He was right on the money. So taking each piece as it comes out,

saying do I find this valuable and trustworthy? And this one I want to get your opinions on when we present the Mike Ben's information. But right now, Schellenberger's got

this covered very well, he says. He says, He says, this judge has demanded the removal of users from social media platforms, and he has required the censorship of specific posts without giving users any right of appeal or even the right to see the evidence presented against them, now released here for the first time reveal that de Moores and the Superior Electoral Court that he controls engaged in

a clear attempt to undermine democracy in Brazil. Now, of course, We have to be very careful of the term democracy, and we'll discuss that in further detail and a piece that I wrote for MRCTV if we can get the time time of it. But democracy is, of course two wolves and a sheep deciding what's going to be served up for lunch. There're supposed to be protections against the tyranny and the majority. So let's say hypothetically that this man, this judge, was a politician who had been elected by

the majority. Would it be any better if that kind of a person cracked down on free speech? No, it wouldn't. Of course, of course it wouldn't be any better. He says. This is what the judge is attempting to do. He's illegally demanded that Twitter reveal personal details about Twitter users who used hashtags that he didn't like. Next, he has demanded access to Twitter's internal data, in violation of Twitter policy, much like what the French government wants Telegram to do.

They want the back doors, they want access, as I mentioned, exactly like Joe Biden's early twenty twenty four executive order that demands that any company that is creating algorithms, any programs that could have an application for biological research or chemical research or communications. He says, they've got to turn over all of their programs and their back doors to him, which means anybody, anybody working on any program because it

could potentially be used. A word document could potentially be used for a company, a digit, a zero or one in binary code could be used. Finally, Schellenberger says, the man has so to weaponize Twitter's content moderation policies against supporters of former president jar Balsarano Balsonaro, sorry Balsonaro, so Bolsonaro of course, pushed out by Lula and now they've got the backup on the judicial side. What a shocker,

of course, painting all the political opposition. As you saw a little bit earlier with Luke at the beginning of the newsflash, there are a lot of people who are opposing Lula and favor some alternative, perhaps Balsonaro. Coming back. The files show the origins of the Brazilian judiciaries demand for sweeping censorship powers, the court's use of censorship for anti democratic election interference, and the birth of the censorship

industrial complex in Brazil. Now, to let you know, I've reposted this one and you can follow all of this thread. There are many many pieces in this He's got a lot of information, He's got the documents, and it goes back to February of twenty twenty, as he mentions. On February fourteenth, twenty twenty, Happy Valentine's Day, Twitter's legal counsel in Brazil, ralphae Al Batista, emailed his colleagues to describe

a hearing in Congress on disinformation and fake news. Batista revealed that members of the Brazilian Congress had asked what you got? It had asked uh where am I? Had asked Twitter for the content of messages exchanged by some users via dms, as well as login records, among other information. Batista said, quote, we are pushing back against the requests, which were illegal because they do not meet Brazilian Internet law Marco Seville legal requirements for disclosure of user's records.

Batista noted that some conservative Twitter users had gone to the Supreme Court after they learned from the media that the Congress was trying to get their IPS and DM content. In light of this, the Supreme Court granted an injunction suspending the requirement given its failure to fulfill legal requirements. So you can see where this judge has completely flipped the switch on his own and people are saying it's the judge who should be arrested. That's Michael Schellenberger's coverage.

And of course Michael Schellenberger did excellent work previously exposing a lot of the Twitter files. Now I want to give you something along the more speculative lines. Mike Benz, of course, sort of rose to fame rather rapidly as a whistleblower who had a lot of information about spying and censorship. Great conversation, hour long conversation recently with Tucker Carlson.

A major portion of what Mike Ben's had to say about Ukraine, I know is one hundred percent verified because I had friends who were working in the Obama administration at the time who spoke to me. So and Mike Benz for what he's offering here, this one really starts to tie in the United States. So here, let me give you this and get your opinions on this.

Has not threatened, sanctions has not threatened, the retrenchment of US business interests has not threatened, getting rid of the two hundred million dollars in foreign government assistance to Brazil.

Say it as a censored man in Congress. But do you know that the US government actually funded the Brazilian NGOs, the Brazilian think tanks who are part of the legislative development of these censorship edicts, and who pressured Brazil's government not to create a carve out for congressional parliamentarians because it would give a free pass for Brazilian members of Congress to spread misinformation online. So the US government funded the pressure for the ability to arrest that politician.

of nation states. And of course we can't forget that the United States government has not lifted a finger about Ukraine banning journalists, arresting Gonzalalira, seeing him die in prison, likely killing him, eliminating the Russian Orthodox Church, and then last week eliminating the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, doing everything it

can to silence people. And of course we can't forget that Rumble had to move out of Brazil recently, and yet the United States not only is not doing anything in Brazil, they're continuing to take your money out of your pockets to give it to the Ukrainian dictator, who of course has long since gone past his bogus election period and is still sitting in power, getting our cash

and weapons. It's incredible to see the hypocrisy of these politicians as they go around and wave the floor on the fourth of July and talk about things like free speech, but want to do everything they can to silence speech, including the forced sale or closure of TikTok as they tell us that China, China is the repressive government. Oh okay, thanks, kettle meet pot.

Now they are between a rock and a hard place, which is why I believe the US Embassy finally issued this pittance of a public statement hours ago before the band that they're monitoring the situation. And this is because now there's a firelit under their ass And I'm sorry, but part that may have been because I generated over one hundred million impressions in the past forty eight hours specifically naming the US embassy, and I just went on

Tucker Carlson specifically naming the US Embassy. Not to be clear, I'm not sure if it's the US Embassy or it's the Western Hemisphere. What I know is it's the State Department and State Department dollars, and I have a thousand of these people in Brazil with confessions that they were coordinating with the State Department while receiving State Department book money.

can't break their own to graphic codes. So I think that that is a big deal. But also there's something else here that I think is very key. This coming from Reuters. The Brazilian judge is also blocking Starlink accounts in the country because, of course he doesn't want X to make any money. Well, Starlink is very important for many of the people actually in that country to function.

Brazilian Supreme Court Judge Alexander de Mores on Thursday ordered the blocking of the financial accounts of billionaire Elon Musk Starlink due to the lack of legal representatives in the country for social media platform X, of course, whom he would kidnap. A Supreme Court stars told Reuters Morris and Musk have been in a public feud for months and after X failed to comply with his legal orders to block certain accounts accused of spreading so called fake news.

So what so what are they direct attacks on people? No, this is a pretty big deal. It's unbelievable, and the trajectory of it is going to increase as the members of the United States political elite are doing everything they can to try to silence us and get back doors into things. Want to remind people of some of the information that recently came out via MRCTV. Want to give you this one on let me see make sure I

can find it here. Yeah. MRCTV via Newsmas they reported on this a number of months ago, so I thought that I would bring this back. Watchdog Google interfered in US elections forty one times. This is the Media Research Center that did this. They're the folks who contract with me for MRCTV works. The Media Research Center is the overall umbrella organization. Conservative Watchdog Media Research Center released a report Monday. This is back in March. This is Monday,

March eighteenth, twenty twenty four. Conservative Watchdog Media Research Center released a report Monday that documented forty one times over the past sixteen years that Google has interfered with US elections. That's direct interference. Then we've got other things like Zach Vorhees and the Google blacklist. We've got Facebook removing eight hundred pages after proper not which was an absolute farce.

It was a total beard for deep state connections to try to portray people like Ron Paul on his website as somehow potential terroristic Russian propaganda. Utterly absurd. I mean, it was just ridiculous. It's laughable. A ten year old child could look at that and say this is so stupid. Are you serious? I wouldn't even believe this in a cartoon. In a nineteen page report, MRC said that Google's impact quote has surged dramatically, making it ever more harmful to democracy.

Now is MRC calling for the shutdown of Google. No, they're not. They're not asking a judge to shut down Google. They're trying to get the information out to people. They don't want to use the weapon of government censorship, which is already being used via Google and others, like the prior owners of Twitter when the FBI gave them three

and a half million dollars. Like as we have seen the Supreme Court continuing to allow despite the fact that people like Jay Badikaria and other signers of the Great Barrington Declaration brought suit in the case that was retitled Merthy v. Missouri, and the majority of the Supreme Court a month and a half ago said, oh, I'm sorry. You know what, you just don't have any claim of harm, so you can't bring it to court. Seriously, honestly, what

do they determine this harm? And that's up to the state. See, I'm a voluntarist, I'm an anarchist, right I believe there should be no human being who claims authority over you, you have to voluntarily offer your decisions, operate according to your free will as given to you by God. Nobody else can tell you that they control you. As I mentioned on Friday, Jefferson said it. No man is born with a saddle on his back, and no man is

born with spurs to ride him. So I don't believe that any human being claiming over authority over you is legitimate. So when we see this idea that the United States government can work with these agencies to say, well, you know, that should be suppressed, and then someone's speech is removed, and then we see continued US agents in the Supreme Court then saying well, you know, I'll define for you what is harm, and that's not harm, even though even

if you were to look at it professionally. One of the people who was in the suit did, and she could find direct linkage between her removal from social media platforms and her profession. Okay, even if that weren't the case, it's not up to the state to tell us whether or not we've been stinking harmed. How about that? Because if that's the case, they can say we're never harmed. It's for our own good, it's for the public good.

We can be sacrificed, we can be silenced, even though what we're saying is actually the truth, and the stuff that they're spouting in the meetings with Donald Trump and Anthony Fauci and Deborah the scarf Burks are clearly lies. So one final thing on this point here, as this trajectory just goes skyrocketing with what's going on in Brazil, please remember the heroism of Zach Vorhees, who years ago

exposed the Google blacklists. And please remember that Zach Vorhees was trotted out of his house in San Francisco and guns were pointed at him merely because he exposed the fact that Google had a list of websites, including MRCTV, that should be suppressed in their searches. Did the United

States government do anything about that? Did they bring them up for antitrust violations the sort of thing that they're demanding of various groups and say we might bring anti trust against you, we might shut you down under Section two thirty of the of the nineteen ninety six Telecommunications That no, of course not. Because Google actually was started as a branch of the CIA. They got assistance from the CIA, and they've been doing the bidding of the

people who want to expand collectivism. So when they downgrade people like, oh, I don't know, talk show host Glenn Beck, and some people have problems with Glenn or the Daily Callers. Some people have problems with them their pro Israeli positions, that, so on and so forth. But Ron Paul MRCTV, those things, what do they do. The United States government doesn't do anything.

In fact, they like it. So thought that I would bring that up to you because I thought it was important, and also I think it might be wise to remember what the French you're doing with telegram and then talk about something else. Let's go domestic with a breaking story that has been coming around over the weekend and has a lot to do with the way that things are

portrayed in the media. I want to talk to you a little bit about this story about Aurora, Colorado, because it mixes both the immigration issue and firearms of all things. So let's go with a little theme. Sometimes I do themes on my program, and this is my theme that I use for immigration. It's that great song which is I think kind of a fun tune and it doesn't necessarily mean that all the migrants are coming up from Mexico. And again I'm actually in favor of people recognizing that

immigration is not a federal purview. Let's give you some information about what's going on in Colorado, and then what's going on with Nancy Pelosi in California as they're pushing for you got it, special home loans for migrants. We need a theme for this. Indeed, wala voodoo the world here on the road. Then the.

be up to the Congress. Naturalization is a power left in the constan Institution to the Congress, but the immigration issue is supposed to be left up to the states. And so now you get absolute mismanagement because nobody can figure out what to do, and we get major problems in places like Colorado. Migrants central command and control incentives double talk. Who always gets to claim power over your property to build the walls or to allow migrants to

work there. Whichever side you want to take, well, it's the government. So here is a little something of what's been going on in Colorado.

lot of people aren't discussing this part. The eight gun bills passed by Colorado's legislature this year and signed into law by the governor. This just came out June twelfth, and it's from the Colorado Sun. Governor Jared Polis signed into law eight bills passed by the legislature this year that titan Colorado's gun statutes. Colorado Ceasefire, a nonprofit that calls for tougher gun regulations, says that is a legislative session record for the state. Well, clearly the people with

criminal intent really care about that. Interesting that, especially in Aurora where everyone is so sensitive about guns. Of course, after a man went into a movie theater knowing that there wouldn't be people who were armed there, that people should come into Aurora and target it as they carry firearms and people are vulnerable without firearms. These laws impose new requirements on people obtaining concealed carry permits, the way firearms must be stored in vehicles, and how weapons and

ammunition are sold. Yeah, and CENTIPIL three authorizes of the Colorado Bureau of Investigation to probe gun crimes, including illegal firearms purchases. It also sends one point five million dollars to the agency for that work, the Bureau of Investigation, and that will be spent hiring ten employees next fiscal year, which starts July first, And strangely enough, it's way past July, isn't it. Well, there's more guns are a banned schools,

so kids will be highly vulnerable there. That's wonderful, isn't it. Then, of course they're banded voting sites and at the state capitol, except the course for the armed guards who are hired by the agents of the state. But if you want to be armed yourself walking around the Capitol, sorry, not any any luck there. They have to be surrendered by people's subject to a temporary domestic violence restraining order, despite the fact that no one has been actually tried or

given due process. So that is a violation of the Fourth Amendment, of the Second Amendment, violation of the Third Amendment, violation of the fourth Amendment, because of course the agents of the state will be allowed into anybody's place to inspect it. That's essentially like quartering of troops. The fourth Amendment is you have to have a judge's warrant specific to an item, and the judge has to determine if

there is a probable cause. Now, I don't like to leave it in the hands of the state to determine what is probable cause. The Fifth Amendment says that if you were going to be punished with something, you have to be accused of a crime and have a speedy trial. Of course, it leaves it up to the state to decide what is a speedy trial in front of your peers. With the sixth Amendment, the eighth Amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. Well, how can you be punished if you've

actually never been charged with a crime. Well, Colorado is throwing all that away. They don't care. They don't care. They want to disarm people at a time when they've got guys walking around with automatic rifles going into apartment complexes, and then everybody's debating as to whether or not it's

fake news, and you can report on this. Well, regardless of all this, let's just get a quick lesson out of this, which which is one thing that is for sure, you will not find the word immigration in the US Constitution. This is supposed to be left up to the states. So if there's a problem in Texas, they're supposed to handle it in Texas, where in eighteen sixty nine when they passed their state constitution they actually have a Bureau of Immigration in it. It's supposed to be left up

to Colorado. So they're not going to get my money for screwing up what's going on in Colorado. I don't have to pay for that. I don't have to pay for the federal government to go and then give my money to Alejandro Majorcas who doesn't do anything about what is evidently a problem on the Texas border. According to the people who live in Texas. I don't live in Texas. He doesn't seem to be doing anything about what's going

on in Colorado. And let me tell you, if you know any local cops, they have major problems with the Feds. I spoke with local cops here in New Hampshire. They have major problems with the Feds because the Feds often prevent them from being able to add apprehend criminal wrongdoers whom they know are illegal immigrants. This is a big deal.

And again, as a voluntarist, I want to mention that for me, it's extremely important to note first, on the constitutional level, your central command and control system isn't giving you what you want. And so if conservatives think they're going to get a better deal by putting Donald Trump in for a little while, well it will eventually revert back to where it was because you're systematically looking at

it in the wrong way. The Constitution doesn't give the federal government the power to handle immigration only if states ask for the federal government to participate in assisting them and maintaining their constitutional form of government, and that is in the Constitution. Can the federal government ask the members of the militia to go in and help out. The

legislator of a state. Legislature of a state can do that, or if the legislature is not in session according to the constitution, then the governor of the state can do it, which is exactly what Abbot did. And I'm not a big big fan of Abbot, okay, but this is exactly what he did. Now, as a voluntarist, I do want to bring up just like in economics, and I brought this up before in my show, just like in economics, no one can ever say that anything the government does,

any political system does, has any value. Why because logically speaking, all politicians are not spending their own money on it, and the people who are paying for it are forced to pay for it, so it doesn't reveal their preferences, it doesn't allow them to show their voluntary interests. So the entire system negates free will, it negates the revelation

of preferences. So technically, logically speaking, no one, no one can ever say that a political border that is put up by the government by taking people's property right, that that actually is the place where someone wants a border. The only place where you can tell someone wants a border is if it's on his own land and he's spending his own own money, not forcing somebody else, and saying it's my preference that you will put that border somewhere.

And this is the thing that strikes me. And we'll get into the Nancy Pelosi story in a little while coming out of California and her utter hypocrisy. But the people who are upset about these Venezuelan gangs coming and taking property are also many of them in favor of the federal government coming and taking people's property to build walls.

How does that comport? It doesn't, unless, of course, you come up with the idea of it's for the greater good, which is a pernicious and very poisonous philosophical consequentialist outcome that has nothing to do with individual morality or the recognition of the sanctity of the individual, which can be turned back on yourself. At least when the founders wrote it up, they allowed for differentiation. They allowed for the

states to handle this themselves. As Thomas jeffers And said in the Kentucky Resolution of seventeen ninety eight, number four, he wrote, resolved that alien friends on the soil of any of the signatory states now existing are under their jurisdiction. I'm paraphrasing in the last part. James Madison said almost the exact same thing. And the Virginia Resolves in seventeen ninety eight. They wrote them simultaneously aware of what the other people were doing because of the Alien Act under

John Adams, which was patently unconstitutional. Why people can recognize the unconstitutionality, the utter, the utter affront to the very concept of the Constitution, which itself was a usurpation of the Articles of Confederation. Why they can't recognize what's going on today as similar the concept that the federal government is going to come up with rules over who can

be here on the soil of the states. That was utterly, utterly talk about alien alien two people of that time, except people like John Adams who wanted a centi things. So I wanted to make sure that I brought that up.

And then we'll discuss that video clip of Bill Maher and Nancy Pelosi a little bit later in this hour, but right now going to take a break, and then when we come back, I want to talk to a man who has looked into a lot of American history, and he has found that Americans seem to be operating based on what he calls the American memory hole. A

lot of things in US history have been forgotten. So while we take this opportunity, I want to thank again for the Love of the Road donation last Friday was great and reminded that remind you that if you want to maintain the David Night Show, feel free to donate. And we're gonna hear a little wonderful music that David composed for the program.

Civil War. It's a wonderful movie. In fact, it has such strong pro liberty themes. And I know people have mixed feelings about ein Rand, but there's actually a train called the John Galt in the film. So check out Shenandoah and check out the work of this next man. I want to introduce this gentleman to the stage. If you follow him yet at Don Jeffries on X you will discover a very rich vein of thought and knowledge.

And of course you'll discover that the author of the new book American Memory Hole has a lot to offer us, especially about censorship, about the United States handling of the border, and a lot more. Donald Jeffries is with us, Don, Good to have you here. How are you welcome to the David Knight Show. Great to see.

Harris that a lot of people seen in some video. Now, this is actually a reprint from Robert Reich's Guardian piece. So here it is Elon Musk is out of control, says this constant government parasite. Here is how to rein him in, and he goes through this is a very

strange piece that actually reads from left to right. He goes through all these things and he says that he thinks that Musk either should be arrested or he should be gone after by the US government for anti trust and that the the the folks and the Securities and Exchange Commission should do something about him. On your X feed, you have the video of Kamala Harris, and you have imagined that letting people speak to potentially millions without any

oversighter regulation. Yes, Kamala doesn't like that is almost like we have a First Amendment or something. Now, you come from more the left tradition. You've mentioned this before, and it is I come from the punk rock tradition where I started to see that the people who had been portrayed as or portrayed themselves as leftists shouldn't have been believed. You could start to see it as I was a teenager.

What's your take on the X attack out of Brazil and the status of many of the big whigs shutting down TikTok on the Republican and Democrats side, Kamala Harris and her utter disdain for free speech, and Tim Waltz claiming that so called misinformation as he describes it, has no place in our discourse despite the First Amendment. It's just stunning.

who didn't have them. Now they're trying to take rights away from people who kind of still have them. And that's all they're about. They're trying to suppress speech. I mean, I remember back in the day is all about free speech, and most of it back then was they were fighting in the Catholic Church and they wanted more nudity and sexual stuff. That was pretty much the fight back then. But now it's all about suppression and hate speeches or welly in term, and it's become accepted. I put out

many times like what what does that even mean? Hates the human emotion? Who's it's in the eye, It's in the eye of the beholder. We all hate something that doesn't make any sense to say, Hey, so hate speech contradicts free speech? Misinformation and disinformation. You know, you have

the right to be misinformed. I mean, ninety percent of the American people is misinformed about everything, you know, So yeah, so I mean that you have the right to be wrong, and uh we just Robert Rice exemplify as somebody that he said a few good things economically, but he was a member of the of the Clinton administration, and I know from my friends on the left were talking him up and said, you know, talked about my book Survival of the Riches, and he would never read my book.

And these kinds of statements are the reason why at heart he's he's an authoritarian and somebody like Elon Musk, and you know how we all all about Elad Musk. I don't think he's the champion of free speech, but he's been put out there as that that's what his that's what his role is at this point is to try to defend free speech. And even his version of free speech is too much for these people, and the idea that they could arrest him, and again, these are

it's like Trump getting arrested. You know, it used to be impossible to rest a billionaire for anything, and now you're going to arrest a billionaire for having I mean x X is the only platform I'm still shadowban there, but it's it's eased up a lot under Musk. But the idea that this is the only social media platform where at least the guy pays lip service to free speech and talks about it and seems like he's more willing. But that they don't. They hate that, they don't want anything.

And I said all along guard that when when the Internet came into being, they got it out of the Pentagon. It really they were beside themselves because they want an FCC to regulate this thing, and and there's no see you now. They finally came upon the social media. And that's how that's how they've gotten a lot of us is because we're so dependent on the social media platform.

So if we lose this one, if you lose X and of course you know, I'm the only place I'm not cheating to van is substack, and I live in fear that they're going to get there because that's that's the last free speech platform. That's where I make most of my money nowadays. I hope they don't go there. But these little incremental processes, and when you look in the heads of somebody like a Kamala Harrison, you know, she said, you can't what do you mean if you

And this is this is the left's notion. This is what pousses for the left today. They used to be again civil libertarians, free speech purists. Now it's well, you can't say, I mean, we have to regulate, we have who has to regulate? How is that? How is that possibly in line with the First Amendment? But they don't believe in the First Amendment guard The recent poll said fifty three percent of Americans think the First Amendments come too far, and that's exactly what Tim Wall said. Millions

of people support him. We're out numbered, my.

thing to navigate here. And I'd love to get your thoughts on this, because back then I saw the shadow play that they were and I mentioned, you know, Plato's parable of the Cave. They were projecting the idea that they were free speech when they were really authoritarians. It was very easy to see. They would tell us look at this television show, look at this news, look at this newspaper, And I'm like, are you aware of Reason magazine? Are you aware of my dad's favorite human events? No,

you don't want us to talk about those things. You already have your preferences. You already are acting as an authoritarian. And that was the problem that I found in college at Boston University. And now the question is whether there's some grander shadow play going on, as we say, see some of these blips pop up with Telegram, and it seems to be accelerating with Elon Musk and X and we saw what happened previously. I think people try to differentiate and say, is this all on the ground sort

of stuff? Is this Google blacklist for real? Yeah? It's for real. I was on the Google blacklist, you know, MRCTV was on it. I get hit by NewsGuard. I have to write letters back to NewsGuard. That's the on the ground question I can answer that is, yes, they're trying to censor us. They don't like it, and they're trying to portray us as the dangerous ones. You know, a piece that I write about climate change, I've got the hyperlinks in there, and they don't click the hyperlinks.

So last time I mentioned on my show, last time I had to write the back. I said, if you think it would be constructive, maybe we could just have a debate and you could bring your information, we could bring ours. We go up on the stage and do it for charity, and you could offer what you have to say and it might be constructive for people haven't heard anything back. In fact, they downgraded MRCTV before before they even got through our emails back to them. That's

what NewsGuard is doing. So it's unbelievable to see what they're doing. And of course the way that you have been treated with your books, masking the truth, all those different things, whether it be on Amazon and so on, you yourself have been directly affected by this. And so I'm wondering if you look at something like X, some people might say this is a grand shadow play. I just don't know where to assess that. But on the ground, these immediate things, I'm taking them as what they are.

I think there's a big battle in Brazil for political control. I think the United States was involved with getting the French to go after paval Durov. I know that they have gone after me, so these are direct things. I think this is you know, whether Elon Musk is playing some larger long term game, I don't know. But what's going on in Brazil, I don't think as part of some grand strategy that they're pulling off right now on some theater.

they quickly changed. I mean Abby Hoffman stayed good. And I have the respect for Abbie Hoffin and anybody that writes writes a book called steal this book, and he wanted people to steal it. So I mean he he, I mean, he was at least being true to his credo. But most of them were were not, you know, the real deal. And as you knowed, they they were very controlling, even if he watched the arguments between Meathead Carl Ryder, who in real life, you know, exemplifies what those guys became.

He is in real life, that's what he is. And the control freaks, and what really really repelled them were the Archie Bunkers of the world, the old guard, their antiquated beliefs and because they were constantly lecturing them.

investigated with people like Senator McCarthy. So let's talk about American Memory Hole, your new book, how people can get it, and of course hopefully it won't be Memory Hold. I really want to suggest people find the book and it's literally just out on its a real public run just over the past few days. People could order it a little bit beforehand, tell us about American memory hole and maybe mention how this sort of fits the theme for what we're seeing with silencing of information.

the twenties. And most of these people, ad my hl Make and these are classical leftists who would be considered white supremacists and they'd want to put in prison today just because, but they were the liberals of their day. Harry L. L. Barnes, you know, he they established returned on him when he realized, well, you know, all these millions of people died World War One. I can't figure out why. You know, he said, there's absolutely no reason

for this to have happened. It was a blood lending beyond belief, and once he started to go against the narrative, there he was drummed out applied society and he ended up his life, you know, speaking at revisionous historical conferences because nobody else would have him. He was also an

early victim of what I have in the book. We talked about how FDR you know, was inventing cancel culture back then, and Barnes was a typical victim of that, where FDR and the administration would go after their critics and just like you would see today, and they would instead of getting a drum doff social media or maybe talking to the big publishing houses, they would talk to the newspapers and the radio stations and the magazine boy John T. Flynn, who was ahead of the American chapter

of the America First Committee in New York, who was again a liberal and good standing road for the nation and all these periodicals. FDR called him up and said, hey, look, get rid of this guy. Don't hire him. Yep, he doesn't want us to get in World War two. And so that's where you can so these things when you

look at what's happening today, these things are connected. I mean they come up to the point where you can have a Robert Wright or Tim Walls or Kamala Harris running for president where they can openly come out and speak against you know, and talk against free speech, and it's not controversial. In fact, it's popular to millions of people. And it just I mean, that should ruin what Wall said and what Harris said regards to anything else. Uh, that should have ruined their chances right then in an

honest electorate. But it won't because at the end they're running against Trump and you know, anything at the Trumpetstein Project, So people are going to vote for them no matter what. And I've I've talked about it with enough good some formally good I thought, good people in the jfk assassination research community who have lost their minds oyah, And I said, you know, you're you understand what Kamala Harrison's district attorney of San Francisco. I wrote an article in American Free

Press years ago that was had such an impact. Paul Schrad, who was a victim who was shot in the Ambassador Hotel, just died a few years ago and the idea. He contacted me and said how much he loved the article Kamala Harrison at that time said I don't care if there was a second shooter, it doesn't matter.

It's a flip comment about how he might say something like, you know, the media, it's the enemy and the American people, right, then they amplify that to say, you know, he is he's going to arrest journalists, he is going to shut down free speech, He's going to do all these different things which he has not done, right, And they don't even mention that Obama and Biden as president and vice president tried to use the Espionage Act against more whistleblowers

and journalists than all the other presidents prior to them combined up to when it was passed during World War One. They've got the uh, they've got the gall to bring this sort of stuff up while they have surrogates like NewsGuard being fed with federal money to shut down people. Well, they've got the FBI going into going into Twitter and paying them three and a half million dollars to thank them for their efforts to silence people, and it has

a direct effect on people's lives. Because we were talking about don't take the jabs, watch out for the masks. They don't do anything. This stuff from Fauci is bogus. Here's the story about how they can't actually say how many people died from this virus because they're subsidizing the hospitals to claim that they've got the virus. The PCR

tests are bogus. All these things that are verifiably true, and even if they weren't correct, as John Stuart Mill said, and on liberty, openness to opinions and in information allows people to exercise and argue and debate. And to me, one of the big things that comes out of this, and I'd love to tie it into American memory, Hold, Don Jeffries, is this There seems to be this this constant push for them to try to portray anybody who is speaking and they don't like as the big guy

in a sort of cultural Marxist way. So Robert Reich is portraying Elon Musk as the big guy who runs X and so therefore the great paladin of the people. The Securities in Exchange Commission which shakes down people all the time. It gets our tax money, whether we like it or not, has nothing to do with the Constitution. He wants them to go after Musk, he wants Musk arrested. He's calling for a guy who just wants to open up speech to be arrested, and he thinks that he's

standing for the little guy. It's just stunning. It's so completely inverted from anything that has anything to do with individual morality. And yet they're the ones who try to claim that they stand for the little guy. Which gets right to some of your information on things like McCarthy and you know, revelations about Abraham Lincoln and others that you have come out with in American Memory Hall, I'd

love to put this on the screen. Don So tell us some of the things that surprise you, for example about Senator McCarry.

of how historically a literate Americans are. If you look at his name has been added to the dictionary, McCarthy isn't to represent an air I supposedly, And you know, they add there's probably one percent of Americans that even though that's Joe McCarthy. They they you get asked them and say, well, there was somebody named McCarthy, and they must figure somebody was named McCarthy. They don't know who

or anything. And I'm sure they get him mixed up, maybe with Eugene McCarthy later that ran, you know, against Johnson, but uh and anywhere. This guy was a genuine and again you know I feel about war, but he was a war hero. His name was tail gunner Joe. He wasn't a chicken hawk. And that's how he's elected to Congress. Like a lot of these guys JFK and all of

them war. But he he has been unfairly represented. He's tied in with the Hollywood ten, the blacklisting and Hollywood and all this stuff when he had nothing.

And that's when you know he all the list of how many people his list, by the way, it was very similar to a list that came out of the FCR administration earlier. But you know he once he did, he got to kind of press. That's although it wasn't bad because you said, more of a conservative press then, but the liberal press that drew Pearson's of the day, young Jack Anderson people like that. They went after him with the viciousist that you're used to seeing and with

Donald Trump and the guys. As we show in the book, he was probably the first conspiracy theorist openly in public to talk about FDR. Knowing about Pearl Harbor advanced and he was. You know, he was a friend of the kendidate's friend of James Forrestall, who was pushed out of the window at Does Naval Hospital. And you know, I used Forrestall's quote to McCarthy all the time when he told me, you know, McCarthy is this wasn't a giant conspiracy. Once in a while they'd make a mistake in our favor,

and I use that all the time. They never do. It's there's no randomness at all involved at all. That's why you know this is organized otherwise randomly, Once in a while something different would happened, something good. But McCarthy, like Forrestall, died Test Naval Hospital. He went he went in there at age forty eight with a knee issue. Two days later he's dead, no autopsy done. Jack Anderson instantly attacks him and claims he was an alcoholic and

he drank himself to death. And that's that's the story. You know, later, you know, you roll back decades later in The Idiot, George Clooney makes a movie, you know, exemplifying L. G. Morrow, who was you know, a typical journalist of the day, was you know, completely biased and and smearing McCarthy so that's the way he's gone down in history. And again I think it's terribly unfair. He was also good friends with old Joe Kennedy, and as you know, I think I'm the only person you know

that's trying to restore Joe Kennedy's reputation. And he wasn't a bootlegger. All that stuff is nonsense. It all comes from CIA and mafia sources. Joe Kennedy was really good friends with Forrest so and McCarthy was a godfather to Robert F. Kennedy's oldest child, Kathleen, although they try to deny it now, that's how close he was to the family.

And this is one of the things. When I was eleven years old, I was arguing with my teachers about this. It's like, how can you say that those people are on bias. They're human beings. We all have biases, Like, how can you be so stupid? I couldn't understand it. It's like, just look for alternatives. The most you can ask is for a journalist to be at least fair and open. That's all you can ask, you know. So

I'll give you an example. I was at Boston University where they heralded Murrow, they loved Murrow, and they had a panel on objectivity in the media. Every person that they brought in was from the Boston Phoenix, the Boston Globe, or some left wing radio station like public radio or whatever. Every person on the panel and they almost all repeated the same mantra. I got into journalism to fight the big wig in the three I mean it was almost word for word. It was uncanny, the big wig in

the big glass office in his three PCE suit. So then we went and got together and the teachers like kumbaya. Everybody turned their chairs to a circle, like you're ten years old, right, And it's like, so, what did you think, wasn't it? What'd you think of the And I raised my hand. I was like, did anybody else here notice that this panel on objectivity in the media was completely substantially biased? And she's like what I was like, I

went through every person. I was like, this person's from the globe, this persons from the Phoenix, Like who are you kidding? Like why do you serve up this nonsense? Hey, ed Don, if I can, can I read a little bit of this excellent forward and people can find this at Amazon. American Memory Hole is the new book from Don Jeffers. Everybody and you're probably familiar with hidden history and asking the truth, just great, great stuff. Here's the

part of the introduction from Sam Tripoli. I'm so glad that Sam wrote this. I'm gonna read it without putting it on the screen, Don, and I hope you don't mind, because it obviously is. It has a lot of great things to say about you, but in particular about the work. It's great, he says Sam Tripley. And the forward says, it is with great enthusiasm and admiration that I introduce you to John Jeffrey's latest literary endeavor, American Memory Hole.

I've had the privilege of knowing Don through his insightful contributions to journalism afield, where his commitment to truth telling stands as a beacon in an often murky landscape. Wonderfully stated, that's great. That is great, Don, and it's so true in the realm of investigative journalism. Don Jeffries is a name that resonates with authenticity and courage. His career spans decades, marked by an unwavering dedication to uncovering the hidden truths

that shape our world. From clandestine operations to gover ups, Don fearlessly navigates through the labyrinth of misinformation to expose the realities obscured from public view. One of the things that, of course Sam Tripley, host of Tinfoil Hat, brings to mind, Don, and I wanted to bring it up to you from American Memory Hole, which is just out everybody American memory Holes. Show it on the screen again, is there's a weird psychology that I noticed, especially in high school, which was

a form of defensiveness that becomes its own doctrine. They become doctrinaire and accept things without question as a form of almost a protective layer against criticism. So the McCarthy stuff, it's an easy go to. Nobody questions it. You've got different things like Edward armurraw, Oh, he's unquestionable, what a wonderful journalist he is, Walter Cronkite, the fact that he was a hardcore socialist. Nobody wants to bother talking about that.

That he might have been biased, Nobody wants to talk about that. And now we get to this idea of people like Robert Reich saying, well, of course, for the protection of our democracy, or Tim Wallas of our democracy. They always use that term democracy as if it would be okay if the majority wanted to take away your life or take away your freedoms for our democracy. Somehow, the highly much more democratic idea of open voices has to be stopped. It's recurse of and insane. But they

pushed this stuff. And I wonder as you saw the left become increasingly more authoritarian and totalitarian, did you have any friends who commented to you. I know that a lot of them went by the wayside that sort of felt the same way from your generation.

to mention that much I love Jackson Brown. She was friends with Jackson Brown. Jackson Brown asked her to present an award to it. He admired her that much. But what happened was once Obama came into office and she kept she saw, hey, he's doing the same thing he says, bombing even more kind. The left left her and so she suddenly it didn't matter anymore, and that she exemplifies

what's roth love is. Cynthia McKinney is another one who I admire very much, who was who will refuse to take the And she claimed there was an actual oath she had to take in Congress to Israel she wouldn't take. And I think they looked at her as just another member of the Black Caucus and then eventually said, well, you got to get rid of her, and there are people like that. I think Dennis Kucinich is still pretty good, and I think that Jimmy Dore I like very much,

you know. But so there's a left out there that that still stands up for some of these classical liberal ideals. But there aren't many of them, and there's very few. I've said I'm the last civil libertarian America, I think, but I feel that way sometimes. But you know, that's the that's the essence, is the essence of because the essence of free speech is what is what Patrick Henry said.

He was quoting Voltaire and he said, and it got me excited as a little kid, you know, learning is I love the Revolutionary Aaron I used to just gravitate towards that it read books on as a little kid. And I realized even then, God, there's not many movies about that. And I've written about that before. Hollywood avoids the subject. And when Meel Gibson made The Patriot and around two thousand or nineties whatever it was, it was very controversial. I mean, they went nuts over it and

it was nothing. He just told the story. Yeah, they didn't want anybody knowing. They didn't want anybody remembering that, Hey, this was that the United States decided to break away, to secede, if you will. And there's a reason why they called it the Articles of Confederation, and then later they became the Confederate States. They chose that name with the reason because they recognized they were doing the same thing. And that's why it gets to when you roll up.

While I write so much about Lincoln, because he's the secular saint of our civilization, that says a lot about your civilization when you have the greatest despot we've ever had. And so I'm trying to show the truth about him, but people need to realize that are whatever the founders were fighting for. They're under line principle was the consent

of the government. And in eighteen sixty those states no longer consented, and Abraham Lincoln said, no, you have to consent and crush them, and almost a million people died. The United States became singular insteadled plural, and that's that's the end. That was the end of the Founding Fathership. Most people don't realize that.

America is just phenomenal, just remarkable. And you know, as a guy who was the tall kid in fourth grade, I had to memorize and recite the Gettysburg address, have the stove pipe, pat have a fake beard that looped around my ears, and give, you know, give the four score. And it just sounds such, you know, such flowery language.

But yeah, you know, when you find out about Lincoln, when you find out why they called him leap in Lincoln, when you find out how corrupt he was, how he you know, he was in Congress, and the unconstitutional Transcontinental Railroad, which was not supposed to have been any sort of government project, but the scions of Alexander Hamilton and Henry Clay that wanted the special favors done for their friends, and the politicians who knew they could latch onto it.

Lincoln was one of them, bought a bunch of land just outside of Springfield and made sure that that rail line was steered that way, and then sold all that land back to the Fedes for more money than he made even as a lawyer during his whole career as a lawyer. That ought to tell people a little something,

even before he becomes president. And then the entire idea of the Emancipation Proclamation being this wonderful thing that somehow it freedes the slave It was a tactical move to try to generate rebellion on the slave plantations in a place where he didn't have jurisdiction anymore. And Northerners rioted, They had protest marches over the fact that he wasn't freeing the slaves in the north right.

need to know is that there we talked about. There was at least one example of when he there was a runaway slave, and Lincoln didn't represent the runaway slave. He represented the master. This is a great emancipator and what is the great amanster. But see you try to bring that up, and they don't let you bring it

up because obviously it ruins the image. You know, you're you're going to quit, so you're representing the master and you're and you're saying and all you need in Lincoln's first, in all your address, he's he he laid it out. He said, if I could free the if I could save the Union, but without freeing a slave, I'd do it. And people, you're exactly right. He did it for public relations purposes. And then Lincoln, there's all the evidence of

the world as Lincoln was an atheist. And then in fact he wrote a rebuttal to the New Testament when he was young, and that his friends said we got to get rid of this, and they burned it. And when he entered politics, and but still this this flaming atheist. He decided to a few years into the war, he started blaming God and invoking the Almighty, who he didn't believe in. So all those great speeches and he wasn't He was a good writer and he could turn a phrase.

him what to do. So yeah, and I know David Knight is over there, and you know, maybe more people will populate that and feel free to comment on that and bring in other comments. But I want to show the screen again because this slippery tongue devil of Abraham Lincoln, right, Don makes me think of Bill Clinton. And you've got something in here, the quote it isn't easy being a historian when most of America isn't interested in the past, and is woefully uninformed or misinformed about even the most

important events and personalities. In this book, we'll examine in greater detail the events of nine to eleven, the Oklahoma City bombing, and the depth of JFK. Junior. We'll also look back at the founding of the Republic, James K. Polk, Woodrow Wilson, Fdr. Joel McCarthy, and several other misrepresented historical

events and personalities. I often bring up things like Shay's Rebellion and how that was used toe to leverage people so that a lot of those very wealthy friends of Alexander Hamilton would buy those pennies on the dollar bonds from the US from the War for Independence, and then they were able to of course get them paid for by the central government, and the Whiskey Rebellion rebellion was put down in order to make sure they could facilitate the excise tax to pay for those bonds. I mean

it was incredibly corrupt. But let's talk about Oklahoma City, because when you look at Abraham Lincoln and the way that he was able to set up the firing the shot at Fort Sumter, I mean utterly, utterly corrupt, unbelievably corrupt, sending fake messages so that the South would think one thing, and then of course getting the South to be very

fearful and getting them to fire the first shot. Must much like the way FDR communicate with Winston Churchill to say I'll do anything I can to get the US involved in this, and then already breaking the Purple Code of the Japanese, moving all the valuable ships away from the cone where the Japanese would be traveling, then blaming the people who were there who didn't get the information from the people in DC. I mean, this is real, real dark character action. But we'll go to Oklahoma City

real quick, because I'll never forget. And I actually got it because I was going to write a book on the history of talk radio. When Clinton said we hear so many angri voices out there, you know, of violent voices, he was blaming Oklahoma City essentially on rush Limbaugh. Yeah, it was unbelievable. And you've got a lot of this information.

Pick any of those, don and let's let's extend our conversation as long as you can be here, because I'd love to continue this conversation and take questions from the audience and the David Knight Show.

of worship of the marketplace. And Clinton in the nineties transformed the left. He was the first one to feel your pain, and you know, identity politics he was all about, and that's exactly what so he would naturally look who can blame and that's and that was that was when the left started doing that. And and you see that that's right out of their playbooks. Something happens, let's blame

the white supremacist, let's blame you know. And instead of course they they never it's a conspiracy theory to even look into it. You have General Ben Parton. It was a nation's topic in general. You know, it must been something he was a general uh, the nation's top expert on explosives. He was trying to get on a t He couldn't get on a single TV show. I think Gallax Jones had him on to talk about it. They

had to be bombs in the buildings. And they know that they had the original coverage of Oklahoma City that day where they used to be. I don't know if it's out there on the line out, but it was for a long time where the original coverage where the story took hold. They have over and over again reporters, reporters and witnesses talking about explosions, finding bombs. They even talked about bringing bombs out. So yeah, And in this book I had the story of Corey Loudenslager or Mike

Loudenslager I think his name was. And despite that name, I can't find any of his family to talk to. But he was he was seen by many people. He was a hero rescuing people, and he was also seen arguing with government agents heatedly h their Their official explanation is that he died during the blast, and his death that all those people that saw I'm arguing and helping people nothing. And of course you can't find his family

to talk about. I had representative State Representative Charles Key on the that I've had him on my show a couple of times, and he couldn't locate a lot of these people. You know, the daycare center owner who disappeared, Chris Gray's worked a lot on that, and we can't find her. She's alive, she's gone into hiding. And that's you know. I actually talked to Timothy mcvey's father, very briefly. It was one of the few actually answered the phone.

I'm shocked, you know, but I have maybe thirty seconds of a conversation. He didn't want to talk. I said, well, I think someone was a patsy, and I tried, but he didn't care. No, I can't. He didn't want to hear anything about it. And that's that's where we are. The people that are associated with these things don't want to talk, you know, all down to seth Rich's family or anybody like that.

Doctor Henry film on Oklahoma City, absolutely excellent work. And I want to if I can, I'd like to show some of these great quotes here don on the book, these blurbs John Barbera of course from NBC television and producer, and he has take a dive down the memory hole with Donald and you will have the most brilliant memories of how our media and government underinformed and misinformed us. And want to go back to John in just a moment.

Then you've got a quote from G. Edward Griffin, author of course Creature from Jekyll Island, a very good on nutrition. He has this is not a giant tribe against America. It is a wake up call to recognize that the bigger a government becomes, the greater attraction it is to those seeking to use that government to attain personal power and wealth. Knowledge of this truth is the first step to realistic reform. And then you also have this from Daniel Estelen, who is a great writer, have numerous of

his book Memory many of his books. Yes, Jeffries rightfully teaches us that we must question what we are told. And this is why American memory Hole plays such an important role in helping us understand who is doing what to whom and how it is being done on a global scale. So if I can, if I can entice and gender even two or three people in the audience to pick up this book and get some of your other books as well, Hidden history, crimes and cover ups.

These books are remarkable. And then of course to follow you don it's at Don Jeffries at Don Jeffries on X right don yes, yes.

it's just it's it's ironic, is it, because TikTok. So many people on the right were uppolled at the you know, the yeah, purple haired tattooed teachers, and I was too, you know, with the lgbt he flags. But you don't shut the entire platform. And that's the essence of being a civil liberitarian. I mean, much as you know, I kind of blanted saying that they have rights too, I don't. I'm not going to sit down their free speech. I mean, they have a right to fly that flag and say

whatever nonsense they're saying. I mean, and that's you know, if you're if you're true to free speech, then you support their right as well.

actually a spy for Queen Elizabeth. And the idea that Marlowe was killed outside a pub in a fight was a trumped up thing. They had to move him out because of political pressures, and he lived the rest of his life in Corsica. And through analysis, it's very interesting and Sam Blumenfeld this was just one of his side interests. He was one of these guys with you know, Charlotte

izzerbeit very influential on John Taylor Gotto. And so I'm really good friends with my father, And when my dad was working with Charlotte in the Reagan administration trying to eliminate the education department, that's how he became friends with Sam. And Sam just became interested in Shakespeare. Very interesting stuff and perhaps perhaps Lincoln could have been a character from a Shakespeare tragedy.

Remember how almost lifelong figurative and literal nWo Nancy Patricia Dellassandro Pelosi's Nasty he abbreviates it. Political career evidently began as JFK's Oh is there a story that she was mixed up with JFK?

Sam Blumenfeld was one of the people who spoke up against the public school hegemony and try to tell people that most of the kids who are diagnosed as dyslexic, they're just not taught phonetic reading left to right the way the Phoenicians developed the alphabet. And I I you know, I I have. Sam gave me a bunch of his stuff before he passed away. He lived about an hour away outside of Boston, don and we we would have dinner together and stuff like that after my dad passed away.

So Sam was a good friend and he was a great guy. And it is interesting because he would take parents in and they would bring their kids in and he would teach the kids phonics, and by the end of the afternoon they'd be reading the street signs going home and they had been diagnosed as learning disabled and all these things, and then they would have been drugged. Pharmaceutical complex would have gotten hold of them. It's amazing

to see how and done from your perspective. One of the things that I found, just to sort of bring this around, I found that some of my left wing British friends in punk rock were right on the money regarding corporatism. And there's this fine line between recognizing the dangers of the corporate government fascist feedback loop and blaming business and endeavors and private property. And to me, the source of the problem is the corrupt power of the

state of the government. So the more that the government does and the larger the area of control, the more people it's going to hurt, and the more likely they're going to try to gain the system to get advantages. So that's one of the reasons I liked the centralation because there's an easier escape.

operating expenses of any state. He also his share of the wealth plan was going to exempt the first million dollars of income from any taxation. That would be twelve million dollars today, So you know who he was going after. He already knew about the foundations. He was already talking about them. Now, imagine what you say about the gate Side. There's we don't even know how much wealth is tied up in those foundations. And so he knew where the

money was. That's why they hated him. That's why Roosevelt, that's why they had him assassinated. But that's it. But populism looks at a bigness, too much concentrated power anywhere. So they don't like big government or big business. They don't know or you know, a big person. They don't want they want things, They want things spread up because they know power corrupts. The great populist Lord Acton, who is a good friend of Robert E. Lee, not not

Abraham Linken. His credo, of course power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts. Absolutely is remembered by other people. And that's what it is. So we have to it doesn't matter that you and me or anybody who thinks a great guy. Power is intoxicating, and that's why you have to what is it, Jefferson said, you know, hold him down by the change of the constitution. We have to start. Too much power, and that's what differentiates a liberal and a conservative.

You know that the conservatives defend big business. Liberals defend big government. Now, too much concentrated power anywhere is not good. And you see the results in the way the.

the way that Lincoln is portrayed as the saint. Well, Robert E. Lee is portrayed as the bad guy, and yet it was Robert Lee who actually cared about slaves, cared about human beings, and actually believed in natural rights. This is fascinating. Any comments you have on that and any of the other items that we might want to bring up before eleven o'clock, well we'll have Marty gotdisfeld is going to be here about free speech as well, because Marty's going to be talking to us about that

as well. Done.

I mean they talk about stealing theft on anti magical scale atrocity's burning crops, you know, destroying homes, the stuff that they did. And he was appalled by it. But he's he told them you are not to target civilians, no matter what the enemy's doing. You don't do that. And that's why you can't find these tales of atrocity, you know, otherwise they'd be trumpeted to disguise if you could.

Lee was a and again Lee was his You your friends speak well if the Lord Acton was maybe the greatest populace of the nineteenth century out of England, and he's just a great man, and he was he was good. He was rooting for the conveneracy and he at the end he said he weeped for what happened there, you know, because he weeped for the the surrender in appimatics and later Lee Lee once the hards of reconstruction came Lee

came up with that great quote. If I had known what was going to happen afterwards, I would have never surrendered my sword. And so you know, yeah, I think these these guys, and that's why when I look, I don't know that how many of you know heroes or what a hero is even, But for the most part, when you look at somebody like Robberty or Joe McCarthy, Joe Kennedy, people like that that are demonized in a life, and then you look at FDR and what the rules

in Abraham Lincoln, people like that Hamilton. Certainly, these people seem way more like villains when you just scratch the surface. So I don't know, you know what that means other than maybe they're just trying to mess with people's minds. But if you worship, if you worship people, if you if you believe that people ain't Lincoln who set all

these precedents. So look at today, if for instance, you had civil Libertarians in the ACAA, he was doing its job today and they were actually protesting the fact that the January sixth people have been held not all due process for over three years now. They were doing their job if somehow they got the government to respond to that, what would the government do. They would set Lincoln, they would cite Lincoln as a president. Well, you know, it's

an insurrection. Look what Lincoln did during what Well Lincoln did it. Okay, it must be fine.

based it's based on it. Again, to go back to Bill Clinton, when he rewrote the left, the left he lost all its freezing back then, you know, just before Trump and they started going to emotion. How does it make me feel? And that's what identity politics all about. And that's thanks to Bill Clinton. And you had the ultimate and Barack Obama with the left again, all these crazy especially white women, went nuts because, oh, to kill a mocking bird. All this is the this is the

culmination of all our dreams. We finally have a half black president and that was it. They wouldn't have cared what he did at all. They felt so so excited that that this was you know, this is their dream. It made them feel good. That's identity politics.

because they they feel that it's five. So in a way you get to the same destination as or well and room one o one. You know, it's just it's the Emotional Room one oh one, and I'll give you an example of the stunning hypocrisy. This is a piece that will will be published tomorrow at MRCTV don and you might have already heard about this as we close the off, I just want to give this one to you to show the absolute self delusion and confusion of

these people. The dean of the Berkeley Law School has a new book and you might have seen this where he is calling for the trashing of the Constitution because, as he says, it hobbles American democracy. So we talked about how the Founders try to explain democracy, as Benjamin Franklins said, you know, to Wolfson the Sheep. James Bouvart's done great work about that, and so he's on MSNBC and I mentioned this as we open up the show, and we'll talk about it more on Liberty Conspiracy tonight

at six o'clock. Everybody's so stream it. But the guy's name is Irwin Chemerinsky, and he's the dean of the school, the tax supported subsidized California school. And he actually says, get this, that there's not enough democracy around. So is what do they have to do? They have to. Of course, the constitution at self doesn't allow for enough democracy. It's putting so called democracy at risk. Well, the constitution was put in in order to stop the tyranny of the

majority over people. That was the point if you're going to establish the founder's thought democracy was very dangerous. But then the guy says, you know what, we ought to do something like have a constitutional convention and if that doesn't work, we ought to, oh split off and have the West become what's called pacifica, they should secede. So here you've got a left wing guy who hates the concept of southern secession. Yeah, doesn't like the constitutional confederate

system that's made up. And he eventually gets to the point where he argues for confederation and splitting off.

come out of that, they're going to be indoctrinated. And there's and so you see in the especially the antipa type margins, you see they're they're screeching like banshees. They can't even this is what it creates, and it's it's really a shame. But I this thing about threatening democracy, and again, what what I would if I'm up there and allowed to have a platform and say, well, first of all, like to find the anti semitism, to find white supremacy, to find democracy, which what what do you

mean by democracy? Because how how does free speech threaten democracy?

everything open. And yet they use this bizarre beard where they claim, like Liz Warren does, oh, we're working for the little guy and creating the Corporate Financial Protection Bureau, right, And they create this thing and she gens it so that she, as an attorney before she becomes a senator, will be hired by these giant corporations. It's not going to put them at risk, and she'll make money off the corporations helping them navigate the legislation. She wrote. It's just it's mind bogged way.

But I don't think it's It's not what I don't think of as democracy. Democracy supposed to be the majority rules, I mean, but maybe that's true now because you know, if the majority of people are against the first Amendment. I think they probably are now maybe they finally reached, you know, the point where they.

So he wanted a stronger central government. And then over the years he seem to learn like, oh, yeah, I see the problem, just like Thomas Hobbs. You know, Thomas Hobbs in writing Leviathan said well, you know, you've got to have some central authority because everybody's going to be arguing against each other and worrying about each other. And so then I go to the students, I was like I would draw a little circles. I was like, these are the individuals, you got to have the Leviathan around them.

Now let's go back a little further and have this monarch. Now we've got another monarch over here. They're both human beings too, So how does Hobbes answer that? No, you're just making it worse. You're centralizing the problem. You're removing more and more individual choice and decisions and valuation over things.

And what I think is kind of an interesting thing is as you look at these people who talk about democracy and all these different types of things, they constantly turn to the central government as the answer to protect the democracy. And Madison learns that is not the way to do it. At least the found had decentralization and a confederated system, and people look at that now, they've they depict that since the sixties as somehow commenting on state rights is a cipher to racism. You know, they do.

They it's a lingua non lingua. You can't even use the language anymore.

it many times. The Civil rights movement was based on not, you know, everybody having the right to eat in restaurants. And then you've had, you had. You know, Sarah Huckabee Sanders drummed out of a restaurant by the owner because she worked for Trump, and nobody saw the irony. I mean, okay, you can if you want to make that argument, then some other owner can make the argument. I don't want these people in here. I don't want somebody Trump'd be consistent.

place where I ate. That pub in bat is the first place I ate fish and chips with the mash piece. It was fantastic, It was so good. But I was so glad I gave the guy my money because he wanted Starmer out because Starmer was in favor of the lockdowns. And so here you have, you know, such a good recognition of private property rights. And in the United States, it's such a mixed bag.

a political office. But people are looking at these these choices and they're saying, well, you got you got a guy who was very against the jobs going in with Donald Trump. Now that's RFK Junior, his vice presidential candidate, said we were going to resist because Trump didn't apologize, and I would love to see Donald Trump at least and again, I don't know whether to trust him on anything. You know, he unconstitutionally occupied, continue to occupy Syria, the

JAB stuff, the Operation Wharf Speed's ridiculous. But I would love to see at least some honest conversation between a guy like RFK Junior that he brings in to say, you know, could you at least speak to these errors, at least speak to the Constitution. But they're not talking on the Constitution that I see. The founders wrote.

having a good impact on Trump. I don't know to you know, I think Trump's an actor, but you know what, I think that I think these things are decided in advance. I don't know what they're planning to do at this point, I think, but I think the only reason they would let Trump back in office is if they want the country to completely collapse, because that will happen because the left is completely insane and all they need to do is have a few of their leaders lead them out

into the streets and they will go nuts. They'll burn and loot on an unprecedented scale. Trump will do the same thing he did before. He won't send out the National Guard. He'll talk and tweet and all that stuff that he does. That's what he does, and that will

be you know, I think very sad. But on the other hand, what's you know, if you put Harrison them in there, then you're just going to have, especially if you're a white person, the great replacement's going to continue on abate And then don't I don't want my kids and I have grandkids one day, I don't want them to be second class citizens. It's like Martin, you.

to mention a couple of things. First, I want to mention that Steve Swan, who's I believe up in Maine, is over on X right now, and he comments, he said, I knew Sam Blumenfeld from libertarian conventions where I promoted Erwin Schiff Rest in Peace, Irwin Schiff as well, yep, and his anti income tax info. Erwin was a great guy. Sam was a great guy as well. And let's see, we've got William A. Martel on X says, I thought the claim has been made that RFK wouldn't allow visitors

into his home unless you had the JAB. I think his wife had a party, and uh, and he went with yeah, I think, and I think he said I kind of had to go.

read this book do. Cindy Sheen, activist and author of Peace Mom that all about the book American Memory Hole. Don, Thanks thanks so much. I hope I can again inspire a number of people to go out and get the book.

I picked up Del Lorenzo's The Real Lincoln. You're just flipping the pages, I'm underlining all sorts of stuff, like every page is under like I gotta remember this going up to people like did you hear this? I got to check this out. So great stuff, Don, Jefferies, and William. Thank you. Thank you, William. I appreciate that. I appreciate that very much. Inside X and I see Jason Barrett. We only up in the coming ambush by invalidating Kamala

out of office asap as ineligible. Yeah, I've heard people talking about that, and I don't think it's going to happen. Obviously I don't know enough to be able to comment on it, but I think that it's not going to be happening. But thank you all and thank you for the contributions. It looks like I'm just waiting to see whether our guest, Marty Gottisfeld will be able to join us, so I'll be looking for that very very soon. But while we have the opportunity, I want to maybe offer

you a little something else from David Knight. Another nice one from David that of course is musical talent and the video talents. They come together beautifully on the David Night Show.

I'm on contract with them RCTV, and I want to give you this preview of what will be coming tomorrow on the program on MRCTV. I'll be shooting a video about this as well. This is that story about the Berkeley WAW dean. This man who was on MSNBC. His name is Erwin Chemerinsky, and as I noted, it's really flabbergasting. I said in the opening, it might be difficult, difficult

to decide which is more offensive. The fact that a law school dean subsidized in the state of California can be either so toweringly ignorant or so dismissive of natural rights that he can spout this drivel, the fact that the dean's salary is tax subsidized, the fact that he can get a publishing contract to spread his curdled cream collectivism, or that he can get such a receptive audience on

the obnoxious MSNBC. So I'd like to juxtapose that with the man we just heard on the program, and saw on the program and listening on d Live just an audio, but saw Donald Jeffries Yeoman's work with great researchers, Peter Scosh, Chris graves helping him out. They are down down in the trenches. It's DIY punk rock. They're not getting promoted by MSNBC. He's getting shadow band. His book is being slammed.

His last one, Masking the Truth, got slammed by Amazon, not in reviews, but the tech was going after him. So strangely, Erwin Chermaninski Chermerinsky, who is of course on the payroll of the tax subsidized Berkeley Law School, is

getting a very easy ride from MSNBC. I So, whichever facet of this truly ugly political shadow play one studies, it contributes to one's understanding that many so called legal theorists and politically motivated media members, as well as many of their politically powerful friends, love to promote both the canard that the US government operates as a or our democracy folding you into it. It's all the collective. We

the most dangerous pronoun in the language. And they promote the idea that the Constitution is a clunky anachronism that puts said democracy at risk. So on the one hand, they're talking about the US system as a democracy, and then they claim that the Constitution, which is supposed to protect against democracy of course, puts their vaunted democracy at risk.

So clearly they don't like the Constitution. So the latest time profile deceiver in this regard is Erwin Schirmerinsky, who is the author of the scintillating new book No Democracy Lasts Forever. Oh yes, indeed, let me show you that on Amazon. It's looking really good. It's got the thread with the star and all that. It's like, oh, it's unraveling. Oh lamentations. Oh okay, fine, well we'll continue, I said, So of course one can see his democracy canard in

bold text. The subtitle is how the Constitution threatens the United States. Seriously, that's the subtitle, and I wrote for Emercy TV. I don't know if this is going to be edited out or not, but anyway we'll find out tomorrow, allowing us to wonder how the so called rule book that creates the federal offices and applies the limits to them also can be the thing that threatens itself. Again, the politicians don't swear an oath to the United States of America as much as John McCain said that that

was the case when he ran for president. When I ran for president, I swear a note to the United States of America and protecting America. No, don no, John, you didn't you swear a note to protect and defend the US Constitution, which evidently is why you went and hung out with Nazis like ol A Tiani Bach and the Slovada Party in Ukraine when you were preparing the overthrow of Ukraine. Yeah, I love it. I love Lindsey Graham.

He's so pro Israel. In the meantime, if you criticize Israeli government policies, the policies of a state apparatus, you somehow are anti Semitic, as they're crushing the Semitic peoples in Palestine and now the West Bank, those occupied territories. And yet Lindsey Graham is on camera shaking hands with a neo Nazi in Ukraine seriously, and so is Joe Bideny's oh man Ah. I guess maybe he couldn't quite feel the handshake because his hand was so slicked up

with oil from Barisma. I don't know, maybe I'm wrong. I could be off off base on that one, but anyway, we'll continue, I said, regardless of her. Perhaps because of these logical, historical and philosophical problems, MSNBC August thirtieth made sure to offer the Berkeley Waw Dean pl dee's the dean plenty of time to look the fool on morning Joe. So for NewsGuard, Hey, NewsGuard, here's a hyperlink. Let me show you. Ah, look there he is. Check this out, everybody.

This is unbelievable. They'll probably be an ad. So we'll take the ad off. I'll put my wonderful visage on the screen as MSNBC makes some money. Oh man, they want to trash the constitution, so we better make sure that we take care of this. It's very important to let them have their say, all right. So MSNBC, Oh yeah, tied to Microsoft. Of course they're wonderful. All right, here we go.

the Constitution, that needs a bit of an overhaul. Joining us now is Dean Irwin Chemerinsky. His new book is titled No Democracy, Last Forever. How the Constitution threatens the United States.

Why should we bother having a written constitution with an amendment process at all? He sort of blinked at Bradley. He started blinked, like you get a bad pass when he was playing in the NBA, Like, well, that came at me out of nowhere. What was that? And he said, well, he took him a second. He said, I consider myself to be more a child of the Declaration of Independence. I believe in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

And literally he said this, and I believe that here in America the government is here to give us these things. I'm like, boy, dude, First of all, you're not addressing my question. Second of all, you just flipped the concept of natural rights as expressed by Jefferson completely upside down. The government is here to give us these things. Oh man,

they're just insufferable. But here's the rest from MSNBC, not all of it, but you'll enjoy this, and then we'll go a little bit and round this off with that MRCTV piece as a preview.

free speech. First up, the Berkeley Law Dean revealed his disdain for the fact that the Electoral College in twenty twenty chose for president someone who did not win the so called popular vote. To even trust that, of course not, which makes one wonder if this law Dean has read anything by the founders, and if he knows that they were well aware that the electoral College was supposed to act as a check on large population states lording it

over small population states. Of course, the idea of state differentiation and the concept that there might be vestigial state semi autonomy, well, those are verboten, and mister Chermaninski's lexicon, it's us hedgemon. For him, it's DC created uniformity and that includes your individuality. Yeah, it's the tyranny of the majority, all for his tootemic religion of democracy, democracy, democracy. He and other collectivists claim to be fighting for individual choice.

It's their pretense, their fakery, that their tyrannical so called democracy means you get to control your life. Actually, the way to lead to greater self control is to allow for freedom, decentralization, and autonomy, not democratic pretenses that actually allow for gangsterism across an entire continent. If you want true individual autonomy, which you're claiming is included in your democracy.

If you really want to democratize things, get the government out of restricting their lives, taking their stuff, telling them what their choices can be. Oh, it's kind of crazy, isn't it? More individual choice, less government. I know, it's kind of weird. Not imposing your will on others through

the means of the state. And then he added two centers per state is undermining democracy, so I said, since the founders wanted the Senate to be composed of people who were chosen by the state legislatures, to represent state interest, again trying to balance population heavy states that might have more sway in Congress. And since many Americans view the nineteen thirteen Seventeenth Amendment as a massive cut against that principle, this law dean might want to return to the books

rather than writing books. Chermerinsky also decries the fact that, as he says, in the last session of Congress, there were fifty Democrat senators and fifty Republican senators. But the fifty Democrat senators represented forty two million people. So I wrote,

so what again? Not only was the Senate designed to be the legislative body, or state legislatures sent so called representatives for their state governments, The very idea of so called representation in any political system is philosophically and logically impossible. All forms of statism, be they democracy, monarchies, or constitutional republics,

are imposed on people. By definition, they are involuntary. If they were voluntary associations of people, again, by definition, they would be socially personally achieved organizations, and no one would be forced to be involved or to pay otherwise, I said. Likewise, so called representation in any political system is mathematically temporarily and ethically impossible. There would never be enough so called representatives in a political body to represent all the people

under the rule of that government. Every time some idea is debated. Elected politicians don't approach each person they so called represent to get their opinion on every new bill after they get elected. Political decisions affect multitudes who aren't even born. And if people believe in allowing their neighbors to truly represent their own interests, they can't ethically impose a government on them and then claim that those people

are somehow represented. I mean, the whole thing. It's so ridiculous. You know, I'm an anarchist libertarian, I'm a voluntarist, I'm an anarchist Christian anarchist. So it's just, it's just it's really really ridiculous. So the one thing I want to add to this, though, is MSNBC is not just promoting this guy's book. The New York Times is promoting this guy's book. So down the way in this piece, I wrote,

MSNBC is not alone and promoting this guy. On August thirty, firth, at first, The New York Times published a long, vacuous screed by Jenniferal. I don't even know how to pronounce this. I know that must have sounded terrible. S z a

l Ai Zally Zally, I guess pushing Chermerinsky's book. I know my tongue has been doing a lot of dancing with these names, ranging from her complaint that Donald Trump didn't win the popular vote yet appointed three Supreme Court justices, justices who helped overturn their gilded Roe v. Wade decision in twenty twenty two and return the question of abortion statutes to where they belong in the States, to her discussion of Chermerinsky's posit that if the Constitution isn't amended

to allow for more gang rule over individual rights, the West Coast States should secede to become pacifica. Slally also misses the point about freedom versus democracy. Here's the last bit I said. In fact, by arguing that West Coast states might secede to get away from the federal government, both she and Chermerinsky both tacitly admit to the benefits of decentralization over ruled by the mob. Oh Man, and

then I do mention at the end. I don't know whether they'll cut this out or not, but I mentioned Lysander Spooner. If anybody wants to read a great essay of how the Constitution doesn't have any an authority over you. You never complied to it, you never were there, you didn't sign it. You can't sign it for somebody else. Your grandparents can't sign a contract for you. Read Lessiander Spooner's great essay, No Treason the Constitution of No Authority was

published in eighteen seventy. He came from air Massachusetts, just over the border, and he was a remarkable guy. He's the guy who started up an alternative to the US Postal Service that yes, they eventually shut down because it was cheaper and more efficient and people were turning to it rather than the US Postal Service. Now, there is another bit that I want to get to for you.

First of all, I do want to mention just briefly, you were probably aware that inside the newsflash that I played, we showed Donald Trump talking about how he wants to

force insurance companies to pay for in virtual fertilization. I also did a piece about how Tim Waltz claimed are insinuated that he and his wife had two children through IVF, and in that piece, for MRCTV I noted that IVF is sort of a cipher to for those people who are involved with the pro abortion movement, because it creates embryos, living human beings who will never have a chance to live beyond that point. They're frozen, and then they pull them out, they try to implant them to see if

the woman will take them and become pregnant. So this has massive ethical problems. So the least we could do is ask Donald Trump not to force my neighbor to pay for it. Well, you might have seen that Lindsey Graham is in the news because Lindsey Graham has been said that he won't back Trump's IVF idea. I saw that reported in one area, But in fact he's actually saying that something could be done, they could work something out. I've got a little video of that. Let me see

if I can show that. I don't know if I've got that prepped up. Okay. And we also have his claims about Iran which are just stunning, and Hamas and you know we got to stop Hamas. Oh you mean Hamas that was of course being funded by the West and Nettan Yahoo. But here is Lindsey Graham the USA Today claims that he doesn't back Donald Trump's IVF proposal,

but says Congress could find common ground. And that was the last piece that you saw in the video where he says we could probably work something out as that Sounds of Silence song finished off. That was one of the clips that I played at the beginning of the show today. And here's a little bit in text form from USA Today. Lindsay Graham, Center of South Carolina Republican said he could see a bipartisan way forward to help

American families afford in vitual fertilization. One of the things that he mentioned on television was a tax credit, but that's often a cipher to subsidy, like, for example, the earned income tax credit. That's actually a subsidy. It's not a tax credit at all. Right, And then the left says, oh,

we gave the middle class a tax cut. No, actually, you put the US government further in debt and shuffled off money from some people who are earners to those people because you for were scheduled their Medicare payments and you're still promising the Medicare payments when they get older. So it's a subsidy. Well, Graham appeared on ABC's This Week on Sunday, where he said he would support a

means tested tax credit for IVF users. So means tested, so you see what that's already an indication that it's probably going to lead towards some sort of subsidy because means tests, of course, is progressivism Marxism built into who actually gets to write it off their taxes, and then they expand it to the point where even if you aren't paying taxes, you can claim it and then you'll get money back. You haven't even given it up. You'll

get money from somebody else. Now, interestingly enough, other people in the Republican Party are supportive of Donald Trump's idea. He says that Trump is he's not in favor of mandating insurance companies. Graham says he's not in favor of mandating insurance companies fully cover IVF, saying that there's no

end to that. Okay, So he doesn't like the idea that US insurance companies should be mandated to cover IVF, but he does like the idea that you should be forced to pay for weapons to be sent to Ukraine and for weapons to be sent to Israel. Okay, see if you can figure that out. Graham, who voted against a recent bill that would have protected access to IVF, added that he saw Trump's statements about IVF as a signal of support because, quote, we've been accused, the party

has of being against birth control. We're not. We're being accused of being against IVF treatments. We're not. Again, here's when Tom Cotton of Arkansas, also on Meet the Press, said that GEOP law makers support access to IBS services for American families. Well, again, it's not a federal issue. It's a state issue. So federal GEOP law makers should be saying, you know what, we have no say on this.

It's a state issue. Now. Technically speaking, again, if people are familiar with the Fourteenth Amendment, the fourteenth Amendment stipulates that states that have punishments and prohibitions, that have statues that protect people against aggression by other people have to apply those protect people equally. It's the equal protection clause. So, as former Senator Bob Smith noted that, technically speaking, would create a nationwide abortion ban if people actually wanted to

address that. Every state has statutes that protect human beings against encroachments. On their lives by other human beings, then you have to decide is the fetus at conception a human being? It is human, distinct DNA from the parents, and it is being. It's not anything else. It's growing. Otherwise, what are you trying to stop? So it doesn't matter morally, although morally that is the key. Logically, you can appeal to these people and say, just logically, do you want

to be consistent or not? If you support the state and you say that there should be statutes that punish people for taking the lives of other human beings, are you going to be consistent or are you going to call for the abolition of the state apparatus? The way

I do, I believe that the state is illegitimate. Philosophically, I can't force my neighbor to pay for the policing of anything, whether it be policing of a Borde Order, policing of what I think is the correct amount for police to protect people, or to protect a school, or for the school itself, or for mail carrying or anything.

And again it comes down to whether or not even if I think something is a bad action to take against someone, I can't engage in the bad action of making my neighbor pay to stop, to create a police force that supposedly will stop that. I don't have that right. It doesn't arise out of my recognition of trouble for another guy, or even for myself. And I certainly don't have the right to be parasitic off somebody else for my own protection. So the predicate for the state supposedly

is that the state is there to protect you. And as I mentioned, even Thomas Jefferson in the Constitution off he offers what John Locke did in a sort of mistaken way. Jefferson uses the passive voice in the Declaration of Independence. I mentioned to David and that I might bring this up. He doesn't use the active voice, which is it's a form of magic. In a way. He says, governments are instituted among men, well by whom some people.

It's not governments arise. And he says, because he says men are born, men are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, life, liberty, in the pursuit of happiness, governments are instituted among men. No, The point is that men claim that people have a right to be left alone, and then they undercut that by saying, in order to protect your right to be left alone, we're going to create an agency that won't leave you alone, and it'll be run by other people. That's all it is. That's

what the government is, that's what the state is. And then they come up with all these various arguments to protect different kinds of people because they say, well, that group is, they're taking advantage. So we got to do this, and it builds and builds and builds. So let's go over to the Nancy Pelosi story and show you some of this Nancy Pelosi story out of California. There are a number of stories out of California that I'll give you. First,

let's offer this one out of California. California passes a statute prohibiting localities from requesting voter ID. This from SCNR August twenty ninth, Hannah Claire Brimolo wrote, voter ID laws only subvert voter turnout, said State Senator Dave Minn Okay, what kind of turnout do you want? Authentic turnout or not? And again, the idea of voting to have a system that will then control other people's lives. That's part of the reason the founders tried to say that the state

can only do certain things. At least they tried to pare it down to person on person conflicts. That was supposedly what it was about. It in a amendment to Senate Bill eleven seventy four in California. Now the governor has not signed this yet, but if he signs SB eleven seventy four, it would override a Huntington Beach ordnance requiring voter ID starting in twenty twenty six. The state's Attorney General, Bob Banta, and Secretary of State Shirley and

Weber have already sued Huntington Beach over the ordnance. Just amazing. They don't want voter ID, Well, why I wonder why not? Maybe maybe it's because they want certain people to be able to vote. Maybe that's it. Let's talk about Nancy Pelosi, all right, And I've got a story that I wrote for MRCTV that will be out tomorrow, I think. And it's about Nancy Pelosi and that position that she had about making sure that Californians get one hundred and fifty

thousand dollars in home loan subsidies. Okay, well, this is the story and it should be out tomorrow years old fully grown normalcy bias is a tricky animal, and former House speaker Nancy Pelosi's latest smorgasbord of socialist sober quays in favor of California housing loans for undocumented migrants is

a perfect example. So get this. Appearing Friday with Bill Maher on his HBO program Real Time, Pelosis succeeded in not only avoiding the touchy matter of her role in perpetuating the centrally controlled and utterly messed up federal so called immigration system. She perpetuated the corrosive idea that government

has an ethical role in providing home loans to people. Well, even as she invoked you got it, Ronald Reagan and fatuously to fatuously add what she seemed to think was a patina of patriotism and Americana to the fantastic feast. So she not only was saying that home loans should be provided by the government, but she invoked Ronald Reagan. Let's go to the video. Let's go to the newsreel footage, and here it is. This is provided actually by Disclosed TV on X and we showed a clip of this earlier.

Here's a little bit more.

cease to be preeminent when we shut the door. Now that's I don't do justice to the great communicator.

other people probably noticed too, So hopefully I said. Appearing Friday with Bill Maher and his HBO program in real time, Pelosi succeeded, and so on and so forth. She gave this Patina, patriotism and Americana to the fantastic feast. Ma appeared to want a serious discussion about the new legislation, California's AB eighteen forty, which the State Assembly passed wednesday.

It's a statute that, as the Daily Caller noted August eighteenth, will quote amend the California Dream for All Shared Appreciation Loan program. Okay, that's the California Dream for All Shared Appreciation Loan program. It would amend it, and it would,

it would. It's an initiative launched last year that provides first time home buyers with a loan of up to twenty percent, according to the Daily Caller, and it would allow illegal migrants living in California to be able to apply for a piece of that, so they would get twenty percent of a loan that would be twenty percent of the house's purchase price for down payment or closing. The day. Billy Caller also noted in that piece that now that the Cares Act, federal handouts to states have

dried up, California is sixty billion dollars in the red. Okay, so they're offering this loan subsidy and they're sixty billion in the red, I said, but that isn't stopping the panderers like Governor Gavin Newsom from not only promoting the idea that it's perfectly fine to have taxpayer subsidized loans for first time home buyers, it's also not stopping Pelosi from widening that insane normalcy bias to imply that it's only fair to expand the toxic state tax funded loan

idiocy to migrants who have moved here, contrary to her central government's immigration statutes. Mar introduced the topic to her by correctly stating, the California lawmakers just passed a law. It hasn't been signed by Governor Newsom, but giving Democrat, it gives Democrat, it gives government a siy distance to undocumented immigrants to buy houses. That's kind of a different place than the Democrat Party used to be on immigration. And we showed the clip of Pelosi from years ago,

and she had the exact opposite sort of position. Pelosi, says, I said, like a Palomino of platitudes. She bursts from the corral with, well, let me just say immigration has always been a bipartisan issue, and that wasn't the point. Mark kept focused on the matter at hand, he says,

but not free housing. And then she says, well, it's not free housing, Pelosi claimed, And then she avoided the reality of what it is, which is tax supported loans that will artificially pump home building and direct resources where unmanipulated market participants normally would not have put the resources,

which we'll see recipient's default. And as we have witnessed in the nineteen nineties and with the two thousand and eight twenty twelve so called Great Resis Session, which technically was an economic depression, could see numerous banks count the loans as assets, see the mortgages become unpaid and toxic, and sea wider systemic problems throughout the state economy. Yeah, she avoided all that. It's not about tax subsidized unnaturally

pumped up housing demand from undocumented migrants. Instead, Nancy spoke about dreams, dreams. She says, it's it's she seemed to fish for something, the American dream being available to more people.

And so I wrote, did you know that, as with most normalcy biased reinforcers, she kind of skips essentral parts of the American dream, those aspects being self reliance, self achieving work, merit, investment, and not being a parasite regardless of whether one is a migrant or one is born here, and made things even more offensive, trying, yes, to add a shine of Americana to her pablem by mixing Ronald Reagan into the dream world. As she said, but understand

this about my immigration. You heard what she had to say about the great communicator. She pretended to respect him by calling him the great communicator. So I have a hyperlink to the actual speech. If you want to hear Reagan's speech, there's a video of it there.

in America and become an American. Yes, the Torch of Lady Liberty symbolizes our freedom and represents our heritage, the compact with our parents, our grandparents, and our ancestors. It is that lady who gives us our great and special place in the world. For it's the great life force of each generation of new Americans that guarantees that America's triumph shall continue unsurpassed into the next century and beyond.

So she says, now, I don't do justice to the great communicator. Google it. It's a fabulous speech. So we go through some more. She talks about how George W. Bush push for this, and I said, mister Maher appeared to be very aware of Pelosi's grand, eloquent attempt to deflect from the actual points, so he offered one final attempt to get a real answer from her, So you'd

vote for this law? And Pelosi appeared, I wrote, flustered, and of course deflected, again invoking her position as a federal politician in order to avoid answering about the ethics of the California statute, then claiming that the state was trying to help people achieve the wondrous American dream. Making the American dream of home ownership available to all people is something we have to do for people who are here now. As I mentioned, that's the same sort of

problem that George W. Bush pushed. After Bill Clinton pushed for banks to have to give loans to people who shouldn't have gotten loans because they didn't have the income for it. George W. Bush claimed that he wanted America to become the home ownership society, and we saw what happened in two thousand and eight after they pumped up the home buying market and everything collapsed. Yeah, there's a lot to be said about not trying to promote any

area of the economy through artificial means. Nancy Pelosi doesn't seem to get it, and of course she wants to pander to people that she evidently thinks will vote for Democrats. And yes, even at Huntington Beach, they're trying to make sure that only citizens vote, and even in California news and doesn't want that. So we have this, I said. She also implied that those people are undocumented migrants and the Feds have come up with a way to fast

track citizenship for them. So this is our opportunity to get some important points into memory to avoid normalcy bias. I said. First, just because California or any other political gang hands out tax backed home loans does not mean that such a baseline action is proper on a moral or economic level. I have no more right to make my neighbor pay to back another person's home loan than I do to force my neighbor to pay for anything.

Taxation is theft period, and as noted above, when the government engages in such activity, it warps the market, seeing monetary, human, temporal, and other resources pushed into those new homes when the homes normally would not have been built and the resources would have gone elsewhere based on honest market decisions made

by what should be free people. And finally, Pelosi's attempt to claim that migrants should be on the same socialist get a government subsidized home loan footing as legal residents mixes into it the idea that she wants the FEDS to create a way to grant more migrant its legal status and not be deported. This brings us to the final and very important level of normalcy bias, about which I have written numerous times for MRCTV and by the way, Yes NewsGuard, here's some hyperlinks for you. It is the

fact that immigration is not a federal issue. The word doesn't even appear in the US Constitution. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison both noted in seventeen ninety eight that it

was a state purview. There's Jefferson's Kentucky Resolution number four, resolved that alien friends are under the jurisdiction and protection of the laws of the state, wherein they are that no power over them has been delegated to the United States, nor prohibited to the individual States, distinct from their power over citizens, and it being true as a general principle, and one of the amendments to the Constitution, having also declared that the powers not delegated to the United States

by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved in the States respectively, or to the people. The Act of the Congress of the United States, passed on the day of July seventeen ninety eight, entitled an Act Concerning Aliens, which assumes powers over alien friends not delegated by the Constitution, is not law, but is altogether void and of no force. Of course, I don't see what the day was stipulated there. Then we have Madison

who said the same thing in his Virginia Resolutions. There you go, Virginia Resolutions twenty one December seventeen ninety eight. He goes into it as well, and there's a lot more. I said. They pointed it out. Texas had a Bureau of Immigration in its state constitution. Here is the image of the Constitution Article eleven of the Texas Constitution, Immigration Section one. There shall be a bureau known as the Bureau of Immigration, which shall have supervision and control of

all matters connected with immigration. The idea that the federal government should have anything, anything at all to do with immigration is ahistorical and anti anti constitutional. And it came about in eighteen seventy five, as I mentioned in my article with the Chai Long v. Freeman decision, that was about a California statute that blocked migrants from coming into California because of course local workers didn't want the low

price competition. They fatuously claimed that it was to stop possibly disease carrying women from coming over from China and becoming prostitutes, but they also were stopping men from coming into work in the gold mines and on the railroads. And so it went to the Supreme Court in eighteen seventy five, and that's where the Supreme Court just made

it up. They made it up, and ever since then, Ellis Island, all that lovely black and white footage of all those people coming in enter here, all that stuff, it's utterly preposterous. It has nothing, zero, zero, zero to do with their claims of being constitutionalists. And this is a message for conservatives. Please look, if you call yourself a constitutionalist, I'm an anarchist. But I'm familiar enough with this that I'm conversing on it, and I hope that

people will just at least honestly know what was happening. Then, even if they can't agree to say I don't want the federal government involved, it's not constitutional. It doesn't decentralize things. If they do think that there's something that has to be done, at least they'll know that they're operating in a manner contrary to their principles according to the Constitution. At least they'll know they're taking attack that isn't legitimate.

At least they'll be honest with themselves. Even if they hold the double standards, they could admit it. I've had, as I mentioned, I've had debates with Pat Buchanan, Tom tan Credo, JD. Hayworth. They all agree, they say, you know what, you make your arguments right, you have a sound argument guard and they're good guys, you know, they're great, great guys. But then they go back to exactly where they were. Now the federal's government's going to do something

about this, then they claim that there's an invasion. So the final point on this, if there is an invasion, if the federal authorities want to claim that there's an invasion, an invasion by whom by what, well, it could be one of two things, by agents of an invading state, and in that case you address it by addressing the invading state with a declaration of war capital w it's state on state. If they're non members of the state's military and they're not wearing the uniform of the state.

The only way to address it on a federal issue a federal level, if you're going to try to do it that way and inspire it from the federal government first is to claim that they are coming in and you will not declare war, but you will issue letters of mark and reprisal against them. They haven't done that. They won't do that. That allows the president to hire mercenaries and to go after these wrongdoers. Okay, they won't do that. There is the final part, which, as I

mentioned earlier, Ray Abbott brought up from Texas. States can request the militia from the federal government to come in to protect their constitutional form of government from invasion. Or insurrection or violence. This is why Trump couldn't go into Minnesota, because he wasn't asked to go into Minnesota. This is where I should have brought this up with Don. This is where no president can just waltz into a state

with federal troops. They've got to be asked to come in by the legislature or by the governor if the legislature's not in session. Those are their rules. I didn't sign up for them. I'm just asking them to be honest to at least just give me a breather, right and let me say, Okay, at least, if you're claiming control over me, you're going by the rules of the claims control over me at least. I don't know how. I mean, that's kind of weird, but there you go.

So listen. I got a message from Marty Goddessfelt and he apologized that he couldn't be with us. I'll try to see if Marty can join us on Liberty Conspiracy sometime this week. That would be great. And yeah, so we'll try to talk to him. I'm really looking forward to talking to him. And I want to thank Don Jeffries again. The book looks phenomenal. I have to get a copy. I'll probably buy a couple copies and give one away on Liberty Conspiracy. I did that with his

book Masking the Truth. And I want to thank everybody for being there. American Memory Hole is the name of the book. Thank you so much everyone for being part of the David Knight Show today. It has been phenomenal. And I think we had one more contribution over at Rockfinn. This from Eco Taxi again, he says, dynamic Christian Libertarian duo Garden don my belief that nasty nasty Oh yeah, oh so okay, yeah, I saw that. Okay, so we're all set on that one. And and Rumbol I want

to thank you everyone for being there as well. In the Fruit Stripe Gun thank you very much, Texas Coast South, he says, guard kicking you know what very well, Thanks buddy, appreciate it. And again check out Davidnightshow dot Com, Davidnight dot Gold of course, connecting to Wisewolf Gold and Silver Exchange, Tony Ardiburn, what a great guy. Rockfinn, Rumble d Live David's ex at Liberty Tarrian and David everyone, thank you for bringing me the cheer and the contentment and the

faith and the hope and however things go. Everybody, you're part of a great team. So thank you for being part of the David Knight Show audience. Thank you to everyone who's been here. I'll leave you with a little something from David's program, The common Man, and also big compliments to the whole family, the Night family. They're awesome. I'll talk to you soon. Talk to you tonight six o'clock.

Do tune in. Gives me a great opportunity to mention liberty, conspiracy, rumble Rockfinn and my ex is at guard Goldsmith and of course my substack that's the Gardner Goldsmith substack. Be seeing you everyone, Take care, God bless thank.

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 Davidknightshow dot com. Thank you for listening, Thank you for sharing. If you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers. The Davidnightshow dot com