Threats to our lives and liberties

0:00Music Helping to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, this is the Constitution study on the America Out Loud Network with your host Paul Engel. We talk a lot here at the Constitution study about threats to our liberties. However, there are things that threaten our very lives. Hello there, everyday Americans, pulling away with the Constitution study where we read and study the Constitution, teach a lesson in generation free. Glad you could join me today. Yeah, you know, threats of our liberties, that's kind of our our bread and butter here. But sometimes the threats go beyond that. They go to our very lives. I'm going to get to that. I'm going to start with some some threats to our liberty. I've been talking a lot recently about automatic license plate readers or flock cameras as a people often for them. And there's been a lot of pushback about them.

1:08And I think I've had a fairly fair viewpoint on this, but I saw an interesting commentary on the American thinker that was literally entitled a defense of license plate readers. So I figured I'd go through this and kind of give you my comment on it. I mean, let's let's look at the other side of the fence. You know, again, my my issue is not let's get rid of them all. Let's just make sure they're security around the data they collect. The article starts out with on December 13th, 2025, a gummin walked into an engineering building up Brown University, killed two students, wounded nine others and disappeared. The available images were poor and the shooter's face was concealed with little work with investigators initially detained the wrong man. Two days later, with the gummin still unidentified an MIT professor was murdered at his home outside of Boston. The break came when a citizen told police about a suspicious man and a gray Nissan center with Florida plates. Although this information was valuable, it was hardly enough to positively identify the suspect.

2:13Using this information, investigative search images collected by flock safety, automatic license plate readers within minutes, they were able to reduce thousands of possible vehicles to just two. Subsequent investigative work led them to the car and ultimately the gunman police located him five days after the Brown shooting in a New Hampshire storage facility where he had died by suicide. Now, I'm going to put a link to the entire article in the show notes. You can follow along. But to me, this is a good, this is this is how license plate readers should work. There's no any surveillance system should work. There was a crime and there was a witness that identified a gray Nissan center with Florida plates. Now, the question I have in all of this is, okay, what did law enforcement do in order to authorize the search? Right. Investigators search these images collected by flock cameras.

3:15Did they get a warrant? Did they say we have a probable cause? We have a citizen that's told us that this vehicle is a gray Nissan center before the plates. That's a suspicious man. We think we're looking for. We want a search for gray Nissan centers with Florida plates in this area. Did they get a warrant? Did they consider that sufficiently probable cause? Or did they just do the search because they needed to find this guy? Now, again, working the way these work, they were able to basically riddle down the possibilities to two. And then they investigated. In other words, they didn't just pick up these two guys because they got a hit on flock. They investigated and that investigation led them to the gunman. This is what I see. I'm not sure if they if they went through the reasonable search, right? Because you have to have either a warrant or I guess some probable cause. I don't know if this would be considered an exigent circumstances or was not a crime in progress. But what you have is I'm question about the search, but they didn't they did the investigation afterwards. That to me is the is areas where we were in the problems. I've written an article, should be posting in a couple of weeks about a scenario where they the people looked at surveillance footage.

4:38They got really a bad footage. They came up with a list of names, police targeted one of them and literally would not accept any evidence to the contrary. That is the problem. And to me, again, it's not the license plate readers themselves. You have no expectation of privacy when you're out in public. It's how that data is accessed and how that data is used. Now the author was his name Tim Hesail. I think I missed for not said I apologize. He makes a point that you know officers are routinely searched for database. They search vehicle databases and driver's license and the national crime information system. But here's what I think you went off as is the thing the fundamental mistake you made. He says consulting an ALPR database is not fundamentally different from querying a license plate or driver's license during a traffic stop or checking a suspect for warrants. There is a fundamental difference between those two. When you pull some over for a traffic stop, they've committed a traffic if it's a legal stop, they've committed a traffic infringement. Then you search the license plate and the driver's license for what if you have a suspect in order to check them for warrants, you have to have a reasonable article suspicion that they have been are about to commit a crime.

5:56There is a pretext. There's a presumption. There's something that has happened that has initiated that with an ALPR, they are searching your license plate without probable cause without any sort of belief that you've done anything wrong. And that is a deprivation of due process. The scenario he described first, they said, well, we were looking for a car. But to analogize this with, oh, well, you just pulled over for a traffic stop. These people weren't pulled over for a traffic stop. I don't know how many people were in the original search, but even when they got down to the last two, they had not been pulled over in a traffic stop. There was no probable cause that they have done something wrong. So these search needs to be based on a warrant. That's the fundamental difference. We have a, have we identified a scenario where this data needs access? Yes. Good. Can we support it with a warrant? Is it an action circumstance because waiting for a warrant would be too difficult?

6:58That to me is the issue with unacklicensed plate readers. It's not the AI. It's when we, it's the fundamentalists. Are we following the constitutional research in the data? And then do we do like these officers appeared to have done realize that is not proof that is not showing up in an ALPR report is not probable cause. There must be further investigation. And when they did the further investigation, they were identified the person. So I say, I understand I agree with you with the purpose of them. But my question, the point I want to come back to is, where is the probable cause for the search? Again, if you've been pulled over in a traffic stop, there's the probable cause for the search. You committed a traffic infraction. If you have a suspect in cause or detained, right, in order for that detention to be legal, in order to search them to demand their ID and search them, you have to have reasonable, articulate suspicion that they have, they have our, or about to commit a crime.

8:01You can't just say, well, this guy looked funny or you can't say, well, you know, she was in an area that has a lot of prostitution. No, no, you have to have specific, artichable suspicion that this person is committing a crime. And that's the part I think that gets that gets lost. I'm not saying we get rid of ALPRs. I'm saying we need to put legal and structural frameworks around the searching of the data to a make sure the data is secure. And being make sure that it's only accessed when due process and the constitution would authorize such an access. So, you know, that's where I don't, I don't disagree with some of his premise, but I disagree with part of his premise. Searching an ALPR is not the same as running a driver's license at a traffic stop. Searching an ALPR is the equivalent of stopping every person you meet on the street, demanding their ID, and then running that. That is fundamentally different. If this Mr. Hisaio is okay with walking down the street, when he walks every, every along force and officer that passes by says, hey, give me your ID, runs it.

9:06Okay, give me your ID, runs it. That's what he's talking about. And that to me is the, is it from disagree with me? Be my guest. Comment on this episode. Send me an email. Go to questions at constitution.com. Describe what I have wrong about this. I'd be more than happy to, in fact, if you, if you tell me you'd like me to talk about on the radio, I'd be more than happy to do that. Because I don't think I have all the answers. But I think treating an ALPR search as nothing more than, well, checking a person's license plate at a traffic stop is fundamentally misunderstands both what ALPRs do. How they function and do process as protected by the Constitution of United States. And of course, ALPRs are just one of these artificial intelligence tools that people are getting a lot of ads to about. Now, there was a, there's a natural AI opinion monitor. This is run out of Rutgers University is trying to track public opinion on artificial intelligence.

10:12Let's see in the let in the latest iteration, 72% of American adults say they have used at least one AI product that's up 50% from November of 24. So more people are using AI product. And again, it's becoming, it's everywhere. If you use a search engine, there, many of them come up with AI responses. I know duck, duck, go has a hole. There's my AI response and here's my normal search engine. Apple has adding AI to Siri, you know, their voice assistant. So it's everywhere. But here's the interesting thing. So it caught more than a majority of Americans want stricter government oversight of artificial intelligence. Now again, I understand the desire for oversight. I'm just not sure the government actors are the right people. Why? Few of them are AI experts. And let's face it. If the government's involved, it's going to become its political, not, not scientific.

11:13But I do recognize one of the statements for a made about this was Americans wanting a human in the loop for majority major life to fit decisions isn't all that surprising. In fact, it's human nature. People naturally going to want agency over high stakes choices like hiring loans or medical care. This is this is Jay. Zerno Zernoski. I'm sorry, I butchered the name is not my intent. He had the the technology policy for the consumer choice center during during an interview. And again, I see this AI is a great tool. But I don't want it thinking for me. Now, by the way, I don't use AI for any of my content that I generate here. I none of my articles, none of my videos, none of these radio programs are put together via AI. In fact, the own I've recently started using AI to create my little feature images for my articles. Not the radio program. America has a great team that does the that does the images for the radio program.

12:17But that's it. That's as much AI as I use. Although I'm interested in start playing with it's technology. I'm a computer geek at heart. So it's something I want to play with a little bit and do but understand. I don't take anything. AI says for granted. It's the that's the difference. I go back to the you know, the AI in the flock camera said, Hey, here are two possible matches for your gray Nissan central floor to plates. That led investigators to investigate. In other words, they said, OK, here are possibilities. It's not probable cause. We can't go arrest these guys, but we can investigate. And using that data, it made they were able to find the person they were looking for. Same with all the other AI, right? I don't tell AI to write my articles for me or to put together my show notes. I tell AI he says, you know what? I'm writing an article on this topic. Can you make me a featured image that goes there? And then I get the tweak it. I get to play with it. I'm maintained control.

13:19And I think that's what this national area opinion monitor is trying is is sussing out. You know, people. They're OK with AI, but they want a human to remain in control. I think that's a good thing. You know, I'm not ready to jump into AI automation yet. I need to be able to control what's going on. And oh, by the way, one of the things I'm looking at to play with. I've played a little bit with with a rock and a little bit with a Claude. Just to tell you the water investigating playing with what's going on. I have used the duck dot go AI. Sometimes it gives me the answer I want. It's top of the page. So that's fine. But I'm not ready to give control over. And before I let an AI assistant lose on anything, I want to make sure it's secure. Meaning I don't want it built on a public AI model. I want to have a private AI model so that none of that data gets leaked out into the rest of the world. Some people say I'm paranoid. I've just seen too many scenarios where government officials take this data and use it without considering the impact without any true human thoughtful oversight.

14:34So if you're talking about protecting our rights, AI is a tool, but like any tool, we need to make sure that we've put guardrails around the tool. And it's your job to put guardrails around your life. If you're going to expect government to do it for you, guaranteed government is going to want to back door. They're going to want a way to get around that because they're the government. They're here to help. And those are the nine scariest word in the English language, according to Ronald Reagan. Now, I do my break coming up on the other side, I actually want to start talking about vaccine, which I think it's really important that we understand vaccines, how they're treated and what our rights are as far as protecting our health and our bodies. The COVID-19 quote unquote vaccine, this mRNA disaster is a perfect example of what happens when we let politics outrun science and outrun common sense when it comes to vaccines. We have vaccine injury. We've had shedding. Long COVID is real. What do we do about it?

15:37Well, I'm not a scientist. I'm not a doctor. I'm not an epidemiologist. But people I know who I trust who show me they're good at this work. They put together something at the wellness company called spike support. It's designed to block and dissolve the spike protein. That's the inflammatory part, the toxic part of COVID-19. It's the part that makes you sick. It's the part that the mRNA COVID vaccine taught your body to make, which to me just sounds a little strange, but that's the truth. Now again, I'm not an epidemiologist, but it's I know back by document of research, it's been vetted by the chief medical board of the wellness company. And I've talked to people like Dr. McCullough about this. He's explained to what it does. It helps make sense. It helps protect your body and get it to flush this spike protein. I hope I'm explaining correctly. Here's the important thing. If you want to find out more, go to americatloud.shop and click on the spike support panel and then do your own research.

16:40Follow along. See what they say. See that read the testimonies. Read what's involved. Be an informed consumer. When you're ready to give it a try, use the code out loud to check out to get 20% off of your order. If you've been vaccinated or you've had COVID or you're just concerned of what might happen and you want something that'll help protect you, head to americatloud.shop, click on the spike support panel and then do your research. Find out if this will do. If you do what it says it's going to do, right, blocking is all that spike protein. Don't forget, when you do that, use the code out loud when you check out and it'll get 20% off of your order. See our health is ultimately up to us. We are the ones that are responsible for protecting our health. We're the ones that are responsible for protecting our body. And as I talked about during the COVID scare, protecting your body from a dangerous gene therapy, hiding as a vaccine is ultimately up to you. During treatment, city tap water molecules structure gets messed up so your cells can't fully absorb it. Yes, we have to purify our water, but what are we doing to fix the water structure so the body can actually absorb it?

17:57That is why we created our lab certified structured water devices. These devices restored water molecules back to their natural structure, just like a mountain stream, making them highly absorbable. It's not how much water you drink. It's how much water you absorb that counts better hydration, better energy all day. Get one for your home or on the go at chemical free body dot com for slash out loud for an exclusive discount. That's chemical free body dot com for slash out loud. I've got two questions for you. Have you been filling off since COVID? Are you struggling with lingering symptoms? You're not alone. As Dr. Peter McCalla says, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, introducing the wellness company's spike detox trio. This powerful supplement combines nano kinase, bromelene and turmeric to support your immune system and find off harmful spike proteins. Nano kinase improves circulation will bromelene boost antiviral defenses and turmeric reduces inflammation. It's not just another supplement. It's a scientifically back solution to help you bounce back from COVID. Imagine waking up filled with energy, filling clear headed and vibrant again. It's possible with spike detox trio.

19:08Re-claim your health now by visiting twc.held slash out loud and use promo code out loud for 20% off your first order right now. I'm Doug Evans, author of the Sprout book and I've devoted my life to helping people reconnect with food at its most alive stage. The Sprout. When you germinate a seed, you're not just growing food. You're activating potential sprouts grow without soil, sunshine or fertilizer right on your kitchen countertop. There are organic, fresh and cost less than a dollar serving. Its nature's fastest form of farming accessible to anyone anywhere. Discover the joy of growing your own food and the power of living nutrition. Visit thesproutingcompany.com and use the code out loud for an exclusive offer. It means country is not a certain area of land of mountains, rivers and woods, but it is a principle and patriotism is loyal to that principle. I'm happy to report that American patriotism flows freely once again.

20:22America out loud dot news is that place to awaken your hearts, soul and mind to the out loud truth. Welcome back every American. You rejoin the Constitution Studies. Today we're talking about threats or crimes and our liberties. We talked about liberties when we're talking about AI and license-related work. Now I want to take a look at threats to our lives and I'm going to talk about vaccines. I know they are a subject that a lot of people vary. Let's also say I have nothing against vaccines. A true vaccine is long as you have a choice about using it. My issue is not to be with vaccines. If you want to use a vaccine, use a vaccine. But as soon as people start pressuring you that you have to use a vaccine, that's my problem. Because it tells me two things. A, it tells me they don't think vaccines work. Because your argument is always well you need to take the vaccine in order to protect other people. Well that's the case and the vaccine doesn't work.

21:32If the vaccine worked, whether I encountered a vaccinated person or an unvaccinated person, I would be protected. That's what our vaccine is supposed to work. The other thing I'm concerned is there's more and more evidence coming out that the vaccines are not being properly safety tested. The informed consent action network and their attorney Aaron Siri have done some great work getting FOIA requests from the CDC, from the FDA and looking at these things and finding a lot of things that are being told would just aren't true about safety testing. And that of course brings up concerns because if you're being told stick this in your arm, it's safe and effective. But they've never properly tested for safety and they've never tested for effectiveness. Well then aren't you basically being told to risk your life on someone's wishes? That's a me as a problem. Now of course, COVID was a big deal. I talked a lot about it about COVID. If you want to take a COVID vaccine, I had absolutely no problem with it.

22:37Anyway, they tried to force me to take a COVID vaccine. We'd have a problem. But now that the course that also brings up another question. That is this has been gone for decades and that is vaccines to enter public school. Again, if vaccines work, then an unvaccinated child in school is a threat to no one but themselves. If vaccines work and unvaccinated child in a school is a threat to no one but themselves. If their parents have made that decision, you've got to show there's an actual threat to their lives. Here's so we end up with this scenario of you have government saying you have to get these vaccines. A whole slew of vaccines. I know Donald Trump signed an executive order to try and decrease the number of vaccines. But a whole slew of vaccines in order to go into public school, these vaccines are supposedly there to protect you even if you don't want them.

23:39You think vaccines are safe, you think they're effective, you want to have them or put them in your own, I have no problem with that. Every year I see signs everywhere. I see all sorts of people trying to get me to take a flu vaccine. I tell people I don't take the flu vaccine because I don't want the flu. Now let's take a look what's going on out in Michigan. Now if you want your child to attend school and you want a non medical vaccine waiver, in other words you didn't go to a doctor and say this vaccine isn't safe for this child for this medical reason, Michigan says well you have to be taken, you have to be reeducated. They don't they don't call that they call it a health department certification certification exemption. It's a course of build for the state by a professor for the University of Michigan, along with the public health nurses and others. And it starts, it opens up with three statements.

24:40The show up before anything else happens. I think vaccines are safe. I think vaccines are important for children to have. I think vaccines are effective. In other words, this is not about, hey, do you understand the, the doesn't appear to be about, do you understand the health risks of sending your child out into the wild without a vaccine? This sounds much more like an indoctrination class because you're given a five point scale answer from strongly agree, tend to agree, tend to disagree, strongly disagree. I don't know. You're tested about this and guess what? You're tested again at the end of the class. Now, you know what's not in that list? It's none of the state's business. There's no place to say no, I disagree with this. Well, you can't say I disagree, but you can say, you know what? It's none of your business. And I have to wonder. So you're saying I, you know, the, the, by the way, the Michigan law states that a child is exempt if a parent presents a written statement to the administrator of the child school to the effect that the requirements of this part cannot be met because of religious convictions or other objection to immunization.

26:00Hey, I object. That's why I have to have a written thing. I object to immunization. That's supposed to be it. Then you get your little reeducation camp. And I'm wondering if at the end of the reeducation camp, you don't give the right answers. What's the sake on to do? You know, what if your objections are, you know, there's evidence of a boarded fetal DNA in these things or in the development or actually in the vaccine itself. I don't want that that goes against my moral conscience. Or you simply say, listen, they've not gone through proper safety testing because based on the last deposition I saw from Aaron Siri, not a single. A vaccine given to child to a child in the first six months of life has ever been, has ever gone undergone a, a placebo controlled test or been based on a, a control that was placebo, it was a placebo control test.

27:05So, they've never simply said, I've got saline versus the vaccine and let's see what happens, right? It's not happened. So, there's not been sufficient safety testing. So, if you go and you say, well, let me see, how do I answer those questions? Vaccines are safe. I disagree. I think vaccines are important for children. I disagree. I think vaccines are effective. I disagree. More and more proof shows that vaccines are less, a lot of modern vaccines are not about preventing you getting the disease. It's about preventing you showing symptoms. So, these are not what we've been told that you get, you get the vaccine, you don't get the disease, you get the vaccine, you don't get the symptom. I'm going to take another issue. But now is Michigan trying to coerce parents into having the children vaccinated. Because while I haven't seen the entire curriculum, I doubt this vaccine education session actually goes into the details of the safety testing of vaccines.

28:05Put it this way, does a vaccine education session say that every vaccine comes with a safety data sheet and on that safety data sheet is a list of possible outcomes, possible negative effects of this vaccine that have shown up in testing. Does a vaccine education session say parents, you should ask your doctor to see that flyer to see what those risks are? Is that part of the education system? It doesn't sound like it to me. Again, I haven't seen the course, so maybe I'm wrong, but that certainly seems more like an indoctrination than education. Meanwhile, a New York mother has sued claiming that the New York states ban on her list's exemption to school immunization, well violates her rights. It went as far as she petitioned the Supreme Court of the United States to hear her case.

29:08The courts declined to hear the case, they did not grant social theory, and they declined to say why. The order was unsigned. Now Justice Zalito and Gorsuch both said that they would have granted the emergency application, but again, they did not explain why. So you have a mother that says, you know, they want to put her kid in public school. Or knows why the New York state says you have to put these injections in the child. No question of their safety, no question of their effectiveness. And again, the belief that if the child is unvaccinated there, if vaccines work, if the child is unvaccinated, then they're not, they're not a threat to anyone who is vaccinated. But this is the umpire, right? This is one of the reasons why I left the umpire. It's fine for me, but not for the we can control what's going on. You don't get a say in it. And of course, I'm not surprised that I should probably went to the New York state courts.

30:10I don't know if they did anything with it. But the Supreme Court said, no, we're not going to hear this case. Again, this is part of what comes out of um, you know, putting your faith in government institutions, including Supreme courts as far as protecting your rights. Now what do Michigan and New York have in common? They think they know better than the parents. They think they have it right. And again, it's a public school. It should be open to anyone. And if you're going to restrict access, shouldn't you actually have proof that vaccination protects others? I mean, that's really the basis of it, right? If you're saying, well, you have to do this to protect yourself, that's an infringement on liberty without to process of law. Because I'm not a threat to anybody else. But if you're expecting to say, well, they, yeah, these vaccines, they protect others. How do they protect others? Well, they, I don't know.

31:11Well, by by being vaccinated, we can put, we get rid of the disease, except again, most these vaccines don't get rid of the disease. They get rid of the symptoms. Just look at the recent measles outbreaks. You know, measles isn't gone. It's still there. It's just if you get the vaccine, you most likely won't get the symptoms. Of course, you may get the symptoms of the adverse reactions of the vaccine. But that's kind of the point, isn't it? You know, it's, it's what risk are you willing to accept and who gets to decide? Is it the parent or is it the state? If it's the parent, then why does Michigan have the thing saying, well, you know, you, you have to, you have to go through our indoctrination and survive the indoctrination to get the exemption or New York stages. You know, we're not going to, we don't care what your religion says in violation of the Constitution of New York, by the way, not the first amendment of the Constitution of the United States. That's his Kyusha, make a law. This violates the Constitution of New York article one section three reads, the free exercise

32:16and enjoyment of religious professional worship without discrimination or preference shall forever be allowed in this state to all humankind. So if you wish to profess to worship, how you wish, if you wish to enjoy your religion, if you're saying you can't be, you treat it differently because of a religion, whether it's we allow it or we don't allow an exception, that, that, that's problematic. It also goes on to say, but the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be so construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness or justify practices in the consistent with the peace and state or safety of the state. So again, if you're saying that vaccines contributed the safety of the state, then you tell me that you don't believe that vaccines work because if, if you don't take a vaccine, the only one you're endangering is yourself, not the state, right? Either that they admit that vaccines don't work the way you've been told they work, they don't stop the disease, they merely stop the symptoms.

33:19And again, if you want more, go to, I recommend the Informkins and Action Network. They've done a lot of great work. Their attorney, Aaron Seary has done a lot of great work, which exposes some of the myths we've been told about the safety testing of these vaccines, about the effectiveness of these vaccines. And is it all vaccines? I don't know. But it seems like a lot of them, they haven't been properly safety tested and they haven't been tested for effectiveness, which brings up a whole bunch of questions about this religious fervor to push vaccination, especially on children, when we're not exactly sure just how safe they actually are. Add to that the fact that Congress felt the need to violate the oath of the Constitution and claim that if you manufacture vaccine, you are immune from having to someone seek regress or grievance against you because your vaccines are so important. Well, they did that because the vaccine manufacturers are getting sued based on the harms caused

34:24by their vaccines, which tells me that they do know that they cause injuries. And they really just don't care. They just want to promote their vaccines instead. I don't know about you. Know that sounds really good. It certainly does seem like a threat to your life being promoted by our governments. Now I've got another break coming up, but before I do that, I want to talk a little bit about a threat to your freedom. See there are a lot of organizations that are promoting these things that are infringing on your rights. Vaccine mandates, the use of automatic license plate readers, other things that are designed to infring on your rights. And you may be funding them and not even know it. See a lot of corporations donate to these causes and that's why there are certain businesses. I don't do business with anymore. I refuse to buy their services or their products because they've shown that they're donating to causes that are trying to infring on my rights. But there is something you can do about it.

35:24You can buy from companies that believe what you and I believe. Let's sit together now more than ever and start looking at companies that are willing to stand for us in our rights. One of those companies for me, Patriomobile. Yes, they're America's only Christian conservative wireless provider. That's not why I joined them. They've got great 4G and 5G coverage and all the same networks and towers as the major carriers. That is not why I joined them. Yes, their customer support is 100% US based. That is not why I joined them. I joined them for one simple reason. They put their money where they're mouth this. They take a portion of every dollar to support organizations fighting for your rights. Freedom of religion, speech, press to be secure from unreasonable searches and seizures to not be deprived of due process. All the stuff we've been talking about today. They also support the safety of life, our veterans and our first responders. Now they support the Constitution study as well.

36:24That means if you go to page of mobile.com says Constitution and you sign up for a plan, a portion of every dollar you spend will go to keep the Constitution study up and running. By the way, use a code Constitution to check out. You'll even get your new line activated absolutely free. So join me at our only Christian conservative wireless provider this country has. Use your cell phone to defend your rights. And while you're at it, see if you're eligible for a discount. Are you a veteran or first responder, a family with multiple lines? You can get discounts on your service as well. But only if you go to page of mobile.com says Constitution find that plan and discount that works for you. And oh yeah, don't forget to code Constitution to check out to get free activation. I also hope you'll soon buy America out loud.news. I go there each and every day for news and information. Why? Well, because corporate means been lying to us for decades and they've been caught. So now where do you go? To live in the information age, information is everywhere. So you need sources of news that well, you can have some trust in you.

37:25It's still verified that what they're saying is true for me. One of those is America out loud.news. So why they go there every day. But I want you to do a bit more do like I do. Yes, read the stories read the articles. Then share them show them the friends, family, neighbors. Listen to a podcast watch videos and share those as well. Social media, maybe a local civics group. Maybe surprise I want from people say I never knew that. That's right, because corporate media didn't want you to know that. But you can make a difference. So when you share America out loud.news, you're not just sharing that website. You're helping to secure the blessings of living for all of us. We wouldn't go a day without washing our hands, brushing our teeth and washing our nose. Well, wait, we wash our nose. Yes. Number one place where bacteria, viruses, and pollen in their body is through the nose. So the average person breathes over 23,000 times a day. That's 23,000 opportunities for bacteria, viruses, and irritants to get into your nose and

38:28make you sick. For an extra layer of protection, wash your nose with clear. That is clear. XLEAR. Clear's drug-free nasal spray features xylitol and ingredient proven to block adhesion of many nasty bacteria and viruses and effectively clean, not just rinse like a saline, but wash your nose. Clear nasal spray quickly alleviates congestion, opens your airway and ensures your body's natural defenses are strong. Read the research studies for yourself at clear.com. That's x-al-e-a-r-dot-com. Protect yourself from the pathogens and junk you breathe. Pick up a bottle for you and your family today. Are you looking for a healthy snacks? But you've had enough of all the sweet sugary energy bars? Good news. There's new bars to try. That savory crunchy impact with goodness. Bare bars are based just on six simple natural ingredients, a certified organic veggie nut

39:31and seed bar. That's low-temper-dried, never baked or fried. Bare bars are plant-based, gluten-free and loaded with nutrients and protein. Head over to barebar.com slash out loud and get the exclusive discount just for America out loud listeners. That's b-e-a-r-b-a-r dot com forward slash out loud. Prepare for the next pandemic with the Wellness Company's Contagent Emergency Kit designed by Dr. Peter McCullough. Select life-saving medications like Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine, plus a free nebulizer and a guidebook for safe use. Order now by going to TWC. .health-forward slash out loud and use code out loud for $65 off your first order plus free shipping. Welcome back, everybody. I'm Eric Andrew Reed, joined the Constitution Study Day. We're talking about threats to our lives and liberties. Let's go back to threats on our lives.

40:31Now, there have been a lot of controversy about glyphosate. That's the primary component in Roundup. It's been the center of controversies around questions of, is it carcinogenic? Specifically, the exposure, or what amount of exposure to glyphosate leads to non-hodge cancel and phoma. This has been a discussion I've heard for years. This has been going on. And of course, when you've got discussions like this, you have litigation. In fact, there are approximately 65,000 lawsuits in federal court against bear who owns Roundup now. They've purchased it for cancer causing, for injuries from cancer. And again, this life is a, it is used not just in the stuff you buy in the store for your garden. This is used on major farms as both a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, as an

41:31herbicide, but as a drying agent, I understand. In other words, they will, but it, they will spray it on crops shortly before they're harvested to get rid of moisture so that it makes it easier to, to harvest. That's what I'm saying. I'm not a farmer. I don't clean one on TV. Now, to me, what's interesting is two things. If you remember earlier this year, the Supreme Court heard a case involving labeling requirements. And the question was a, a, a, a, a Missouri jury said that Roundup violated their labeling requirements to sell the product in their state by not providing a sufficient warning of the carcinogenic nature of this chemical. It was originally back, but this is, I guess it was Monsanto, which is bought by Barrett. Okay. I may have gotten that wrong, but it went to the Supreme Court. And the Supreme Court, wrongly, I believe, claim that, well, the EPA said, this is the

42:35label you need and you can't use another label. A kind of a weird twist on the supremacy clause because there's nothing in the constitution that allows the, the base says you can, you can regulate the environment or that you can set national policies for labeling. Now, Congress can regulate interstate commerce and you can make a, a, a statement that says, well, labeling a product as part of the selling of the product. That's, that's commerce. That's true. But to say that a state can't put higher restrictions on that. In other words, you can put that label on it, but the state can require more. That doesn't violate the supremacy clause. So that's, that was my opinion. I wrote about that. You can find it on America out loud. News. And of course, I also talk here on the radio program about Donald Trump claiming that glyphosate based herbicides are a national security requirement. There to be protected, which again, knowing their, their, their, uh, uh, carcinogenic

43:40nature, um, I mean, the World Health Organization's international agency for research on cancer, back in March of 2015, found that glyphosate would probably carcinogenic to humans. So the president said we have to have this stuff to grow food and, but exposure to the stuff can cause cancers. I guess, you know, fear of farmer, you know, cancer is just part of the, part of the deal now. Well, let me go back to what actually brought me to this case here. And that is a, a circuit judge in Missouri. And he is, has been weighing a, a settlement of those 65,000 lawsuits against, uh, Monsanto owned by bearer. Now they're proposing Monsanto is a seven and a quarter billion dollar settlement for these, um, for these claims. You see, oh, they say it works out nearly all of the 65,000 claims, not all, but, but

44:40the vast majority of them, uh, payouts would arrange between 60 and 165,000 dollars for farmers, gardeners, land scapers, maintenance workers, people along people who were, were, were exposed, uh, part of their job. It would also, I believe, award residential claimants. And others, if you use this stuff for your, in your garden or driveways, um, between 20 and 40,000 dollars. Now, again, seven and a quarter billion dollars is a lot of money, but of course, better cost 65,000 people or cases, uh, that does kind of get thinned out. And the judge is looking at this, deciding whether or not he will accept this settlement. Now on the one hand, all right, Monsanto, they're just trying to stop the bleeding. They figure if we settle for seven and a quarter billion, we can get out from under this. And if we go to court, it may cost us a lot, lot more. Um, the people on the other hand are saying, you know, we can spend years in litigation,

45:44um, you know, to get a better answer, but it's going to take years and well, there's no guarantee we're going to get to this kind of the way this adversarial process works. But I want to ask you, if, let, not that we know of the probability of cancer in glyphosate, if you were a, a farmer or a landscape, would you say that $6,000, $6,000,000 is worth, is worth not Hodgkin's lymphoma? I mean, that's really, from my standpoint, if I were one of these people, if, if I, I, I mean, I did use this for a short period of time at my home, uh, heard about the cancer causing stopped using it 20 grand, 40 grand, would that compensate me for the, either the either getting or the high, higher probability of an on the Hodgkin's lymphoma? That's a decision individuals have to make, right? You may agree, you may disagree, but we don't live in those people's lives. We don't know the other issues they're dealing with. And to this, it may be an answer now, a solution now is worth, worth more than a bigger solution

46:49later. And again, if you own stock in bear or Monsanto and you're saying, well, wait a second, $7.25 billion, what the bottom line is that worth it? We have to look at these things, but I also want to go back to what President said. This cancer cause causing herbicide is now considered according to his administration, a national security requirement. We have to have glyphosate based herbicides as a point as part of national security. Now let me back up and let me give you my twist on this particular scenario. The United States feeds most of the world. All right, we produce so much food. And in a large part, we produce so much food because of how efficient our, our, our, our agriculture has become. And part of it is our things like herbicides and others and fertilizers that help us

47:51grow more food on less land with fewer, with less people involved. All right, there's a lot of things to do that. But when we find that one of those things causes cancer, we really have to ask ourselves, is the food worth it? You know, one of the groups that so onto this program, the wellness company, I'm sorry, the chemical free body, they talk about how 85% of the nutrients we used to get from our food. We don't get from our food anymore because it's been farmed out, which makes me wonder, is the juice worth the squeeze is the extra food worth it if it's not giving our bodies the nutrition it needs is the, the extra is the cheaper food worth it. If it means the lives of farmers and other people being lost on on Hodgkin's lymphoma, I can't give you an answer for everyone. But I think this is a question we should be asking ourselves and then using to inform our representatives to say, you know, okay, I understand, I understand the importance of

48:55our agriculture production, the fact that we feed not only us, but again, large portions of the world and it has, it has a lot of benefits to the American people. I understand that, but is it worth cancer? And if the glyphosate causes cancer and farmers, is the glyphosate remain on the food when it gets to the consumer? We have to make this decision because in the United States, the people are sovereign. We have to make the decision and then we have to inform our representatives of our decision. And then their job is to go off and create legislation and regulations that are within the boundaries of the Constitution and support our position. Now just because they disagree with us, we, we, we, our position may not be the majority. In fact, our position almost certainly isn't going to be the majority. It's going to be a compromise to find a majority that will support it, but that's what

49:58as a free people, we have to do. Another example are these, these GLP1 drugs. Now those you haven't heard, GLP1 was originally developed as a diabetes treatment. And for people who have persistent diabetes, it was a way to help them manage their blood sugar. Also, by the way, led to a lot of weight loss, which of course gets attention of a lot of people. The probably the most well known GLP1 drug is ozempic, right? It's, it's, it started out as a diabetes medication. It was then pre-ing prescribed for weight loss. And it's been, well, it's, it's been, it's become much more popular in many different forms. But I found something interesting there. So the Democratic Socialist of America, we're at the Socialism 2026 conference in Chicago this year. And well, let's just say that it, one of the attendees, one of the speakers, I think

51:00he went off the deep end. Dishon Harrison is a self proclaimed activist out of Atlanta. He stated the political deployment of GLP1 is fascistic. Not because individuals take them, but because the conditions under which they become necessary are shaped by a world fixated on genociding fat people. Let me let that sink in for a second. Genociding fat people. All right, let's start with the definition of genocide. Genocide is the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political or cultural group. Being fat is not racial. I don't think being fat is necessarily political or cultural because every culture I know tends to have fat people. Now, they may have more fat people than they have less fat people, but fat is a medical condition, a condition which has negative medical impacts. In addition to diabetes, high risk of heart attack, stroke, high blood pressure, lots of

52:05things that are negative consequences of being fat. And he's claiming it's a genocide. Well, again, this is political hyperbole. He went on to say body fascism is not some relic from the past. It's an active feature of modern imperial regimes. Every time a government decides whose bodies must be protected and whose bodies must be erased for the sake of national imagery, that this is body fascism. Well, again, let's start with a little bit of facts. Are we supposed to protect fat people? Listen, if you eat too much, you don't get enough exercise from your fat, well, that's a consequence, along with the medical conditions that go along with it. I'm overweight. If you decide you're not going to do that, that's a personal decision. But the idea that the mystery has, that the only reason people are that they're promoting weight loss is to look good, is because somehow government says you have to look a certain

53:06way. Again, he's a few sandwiches short of a picnic. It's a question of health. And again, the government isn't forcing people to take these drugs. These companies are promoting these drugs because, well, they say, they can help you deal with your weight. If you don't want to take them, don't take them. But the idea of, this is a scenario where it's, everything is fascist. To a fact, just everything is fascist. And what he's talking about is the idea that we're going to genocide people for being fat, that there is an active, intentional system, systemic destruction of getting rid of fat people. Well, okay, I don't know that it's systematic, but I do know that the, for as long as I've been alive, the health, the medical community has said, being fat, they're not going to get fat, it's not healthy. And you shouldn't do it. Not that you can't do it, but you shouldn't do it. But then again, we're dealing with politicians, we're dealing with socialists, where words

54:09are mere play things to promote their own agenda. Why this person wants fat people around? I don't know. They tend to put an extra load on the medical system, which I'm sure he wishes were socialized, meaning it would be government run. So I, again, I'm not sure. I've pretty much given up trying to understand these people, but I do bring it to you for your own information. Now before I go, I want to remind you, I have a group of people I've said, a program I've said up, for people who really want to get into the deep understanding of the constitution and then living their lives based on it. It's called the Patriots program. Just go to constitutionside.com slash live patrons and read up more. It's got three phases, right? We've got the education phase, people who are reading and studying the constitution. We got the communication phase, because remember, patrons is not about becoming another group. It's about supporting the groups that are already there. And then it's got the activation phase, right? My minute men, men and women ready and moments notice to come to the aid of others, to support them with their knowledge, their skills and their abilities.

55:11Now if you want to find out more again, go to constitutionside.com slash live patrons. It is invitation only. And the only way to get an invitation is to first take the boot camp and pass it and then sign the oath. Now the boot camp you can find at the website, constitutionside.com slash patriots. It's a one hour video. If you'd like me to bring it to your event, I'd be happy to do that. Well, you can work out the logistics. But at the end of the test, and then there's a note that simply says, yes, I'm going to work to support the constitution. You do those two things. You'll receive an invitation. And then you can decide whether or not you join. No, not going to force you to do anything. This is not for everybody. These are for people who are really serious about better understanding and defending and studying. Now they're rights, but the rights of their family, their friends and their neighbors. Just again, find out more at constitutionside.com slash patriots. And if you want to take the boot camp, even if you don't plan on joining, take the boot camp and you'll probably learn something. Speaking of learning, I hope you come back and learn with us here at the Constitution Study every week, day four, PM Eastern time in America at Laudatog Radio heard on the

56:15I Heart Radio network. Listen on our media player or apps for Apple, Android and Alexa. And of course, you can also listen via podcast. It does take a day or two for an episode to go from talk radio to podcast, but you get to listen on your favorite podcast Apple. Do me a favor though. Subscribe to the show. Leave us a rating on Apple podcast. It helps the algorithm show the constitution study more people so they'll click the links and join us here. Speaking of links, you can find all the links you need at the homepage at america out loud.new. Please share those links, share this program and help share the blessings of liberty with everyone who calls this great nation. Oh.