Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

June 29, 2020 - Jim Fetzer

01:56:22

The Raw Deal (28 June 2020) with Deana Pollard-Sacks

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	When you attend a funeral, it is sad to think that sooner or later those you love will do the same for you.
	And you may have thought it tragic not to mention other adjectives to think of all the weeping they will do.
	But don't you worry, no more ashes, no more sackcloth, and an armband made of black cloth will someday nevermore adorn a sleeve.
	For if the bomb that drops on you gets your friends and neighbors, there'll be nobody left behind to grieve, and we will all go together when we go.
	What a comfortable, universal bereavement.
	We all will go together when we go.
	We will all go together when we go.
	All suffused with an incandescent glow.
	No one will have the endurance to collect on his insurance.
	Lloyds of London will be loaded when they go.
	This is Jim Fetzer, your host on The Raw Deal, and I'm very, very pleased to have as my final program on Revolution Radio, where in the future you'll be able to catch me at jimtheconspiracyguy.com Sundays, Tuesdays, and Thursdays.
	From 8 to 10 p.m.
	Central Time, including tonight where I'm doing part two on how to spot a false flag, covering between a dozen and 16 different events, is a professor of law at Texas Southern University.
	She is at the Thurgood Marshall School of Law, a professor of law, Deanna Pollard Sachs, and just add Deanna before I bring in, I've always been a huge fan of Thurgood Marshall and admired his obituary, which I've even suggested would be good for me to wit.
	He did what he could with what he had.
	And I just think the guy was a marvel.
	But you are a dynamo, and Dan, I'm just thrilled to have you here tonight.
	Welcome to The Raw Deal.
	Thank you for having me.
	I'm simply delighted that you have done so much work on such a wide range of subjects, and I'm quite certain this is only the first of any number of interviews we'll do in the future, if not here on Revolution Radio, then on The new show is going to be called The Fets Presents.
	That was a nickname of mine when I was in college, The Fets.
	So the real deal media, which is putting this whole package together like that for my Tuesday-Thursday interview shows, where we'll be live streaming over like five or six different platforms, it's going to be a pretty good setup, I think, and work very well.
	Now, I know, Deanna, among your works and publications are several in the area of sex and the law, and that you got inspired by reading a book on sex torts, and it tripped you into a fellow by the name of Jeffrey Epstein.
	Why don't you take it from there?
	Okay, I was actually writing the book.
	I'm the author of a Law Review article called Sex Torts from 2007 in the Minnesota Law Review.
	And that's a term I sort of coined because it's, you know, the counterpart to sex crimes.
	Sex torts is civil liability for the same conduct that often could give rise to criminal prosecution.
	For example, rape in the criminal law equals battery in the civil law.
	And so I was going through mostly originally the cases where a person transmitted a sexual disease.
	And a lot of people don't realize there can be liability for that.
	And, you know, a lot of people don't sue because the perpetrators oftentimes are judgment proof.
	But when there is, you know, some financial backing, Um, you do see people suing for especially herpes because it is a lifelong disease.
	So I was writing this book, Sex Torts, um, which sort of, you know, begins with the article called Sex Torts from 2007.
	Um, and then in 2008, I wrote another article called Intentional Sex Torts, and that was in the Fordham Law Review.
	So the book was going to go, you know, flesh these things out, talk about all the new cases and all the theories of liability.
	Um, you know, it's been recognized by civil courts in this country, but I ran across a case when I was looking into these various cases called, um, Cordero versus Epstein.
	And I thought, who is this Epstein person?
	I never heard of him.
	Um, Victoria's Secret was a defendant and a person named Les Wetzner was a defendant.
	And I thought, now this is odd because normally with assault and battery, You can't get responded superior liability, meaning the employer would never be liable.
	A store like Victoria's Secret couldn't really be liable for an intentional tort.
	I just assumed he was an employee of the store, and that's why, you know, the store was sued, but it turned out to be much more complicated than that.
	So I asked all my lawyer friends and several law students that if they ever heard of Jeffrey Epstein.
	This was about May or June in 2018, and no one had heard of him, which also seemed odd because as I got into it, I saw He'd been through all sorts of, you know, legal proceedings in Florida and whatnot.
	And so I kind of set aside my sex torts manuscript and started writing about Epstein.
	And it just was unbelievable the amount of things I started finding.
	It was kind of hard to a lot of things were just not easy to find.
	But I went to the court files, actually flew to Florida and met attorneys.
	Um, in some of the cases representing the, the young ladies who were just young teens at the time that, um, he was having sexual relations with them and paying them for it.
	Um, but anyway, that book then got so big, this was the book I was going to write about, uh, Epstein, Cosby and Weinstein.
	And it got so big, it ended up being two books.
	Jeffrey Epstein got his own book.
	There was so much involved that this had to be its own book.
	So that was the first one.
	This one just came out a couple, a few weeks ago.
	So, The textbook, Sex Torts, is still on hold because I was still, you know, I had to get these two books out first.
	There was so much going on in these books and so much in terms of the government involvement, prosecutors involvement, helping these guys, Hollywood people all the way to the White House.
	People were involved with the perpetrators, you know, the cover-ups and things like that.
	So I I'm still working on sex torts.
	It will be the next book I'll write.
	And then I, you know, came to the desert, as I was telling you before, to write the audio books or whatnot and rest.
	And I found out about this whole vaccine controversy going on online.
	And I heard that some of the law professors were saying that the government could force Vaccinate our people and I vehemently disagree with that.
	So I ended up writing another whole huge piece of work that's going to be submitted very soon.
	So I know a lot about the vaccine controversy now as well.
	Well, I've no doubt that our audience will be fascinated by both.
	I mean, you were doing Epstein before Epstein was front page news, which is utterly fascinating, Deanna.
	And then, of course, I think all of us are concerned about this idea of mandatory vaccines, which seems to me a manifest absurdity.
	And yet you have as imminent a presence as Alan Dershowitz arguing that we have to submit if the government wants to vaccinate us, for which I have damned him to hell.
	Repeatedly on different shows, Deanna, I find that so shocking, embarrassing, and hopelessly incompetent.
	So I'm really pleased to have you here as an antidote.
	Yeah, I've noticed that both Lawrence Tribe and Alan Dershowitz cite a 1905 case as if it supports their position.
	It does not.
	That case is called Jacobson v. Massachusetts.
	And what happened in that case, which a lot of people don't know, is Mr. Jacobson refused to get vaccinated.
	And it was smallpox.
	It was killing hundreds of millions of people.
	And the whole world was at risk.
	I mean, whole societies were at risk for being wiped out.
	It killed anywhere between 20 and 60% of people who got it in various communities.
	And so governments all over the world were panicking.
	What do we do?
	This was a terrible, terrible, deadly disease.
	And in that context, a law was passed in Massachusetts that everyone had to get vaccinated.
	And Mr. Jacobson wouldn't do it.
	He had a bad reaction as a child.
	His son had a bad reaction to vaccine at one point.
	He wouldn't get vaccinated.
	So he was tried.
	and convicted and the penalty was five dollars which in today's 2020 dollars would probably be around 143 dollars something like that so he did have to pay for not getting vaccinated but he wasn't vaccinated and he went to court seeking a refund and the supreme court went into some detail about the medical facts and decided that in this situation it was not a liberty violation to require
	vaccination or pay a fine so he paid the fine he did not get a refund and that's the case so that does not stand for or support the proposition that the government can You know, pull out your arm and jab me with a needle as I saw Alan Dershowitz put online.
	That is just not true.
	There's never been a truly mandatory vaccination law in this country.
	The one case from 1894, I think it was, where a vaccinator went door-to-door and forced to vaccinate a man.
	He sued and he won $1,500 and that would be about $44,000 today.
	So what our government has done instead of forcing vaccine is kind of coercive.
	I call it coercive vaccination because For example, your child can't go to school unless they're vaccinated.
	Well, how many parents can afford to stay home and homeschool to avoid the vaccination law for their child?
	Very few.
	How many can afford to hire private tutors, you know, for all of their educational needs?
	They can't do that.
	So it's coercive vaccination, but it's not mandatory.
	And one of the things that Jacobson versus Massachusetts said was there must be a medical exemption.
	You cannot ask someone to get vaccinated if they have medical reasons or a doctor, you know, explains this person is not a good candidate for vaccination because some people do die from vaccine.
	I mean, every, every vaccination, every type of vaccination has resulted in some death and some very serious harms to babies, children, and even adults.
	The justification for vaccination is that more people survive because of vaccination than are killed in the process of vaccinating people.
	So it's sort of this herd immunity concept, utilitarian concept, that justifies killing a few to save more people.
	And even that troubles some people.
	I'm not a utilitarian myself.
	I believe in the Kantian principle of respect, that the core of morality is always treating other people, other persons, as ends and never merely as means.
	Which of course doesn't mean you can't have a relationship where employers are using their employees as a means to work a business and make profits, and the employees are using their employers as a means to earn a living.
	Make an income, but that it should always be done with respect, so that the employer is not cheating the employees, subjecting them to unsafe work conditions, accepting exceptional work conditions, or inadequate wages.
	The employee is not stealing from the employer, you know, claiming to be paid for work he didn't perform, having someone else clock him in, and things like that.
	When it comes to vaccines, it seems to me that the fact it might be beneficial to the community ought not to overweigh the right of the individual to be treated with respect on such grounds as they may declare, presuming, of course, they're suitable and appropriate to the occasion.
	Well, that's what's so weird about vaccine laws altogether, is that we have very, very strong liberty interests in what's called medical privacy or medical autonomy.
	Sometimes the cases are called the bodily integrity cases, but those cases are pretty protective of the individual's right, and you really can't do much to a person without medical consent.
	The one exception that I can think of is state laws that, you know, ...require blood to prove someone was driving drunk.
	And the court has allowed that because the court said it's just almost no risk to drawing blood.
	But there's a couple other cases that the court said you just can't do that.
	For example, when a suspect was, well, the police saw him pop the morphine into his mouth and swallow it when they came in to arrest him.
	And they pumped his stomach to prove he actually had morphine.
	And the court said, you can't do that.
	You can't.
	They said it's too close to the rack and screw.
	We cannot allow people to force, or police to force pump People's stomachs to prove they committed a crime.
	The other example is a man had a bullet lodged in his shoulder and the police wanted to get a court order to dig in there, get the bullet and prove what gun the bullet came from.
	And the court said, no, you can't pull muscle apart and dig for a bullet.
	When he says no he's you know because there's too many risks we don't even know the risks involved and that's how the court analyzed whether you can dig into someone's body to prove that you know it's very interesting a bullet wound up lodged in the left thigh of John Connolly from the assassination of JFK.
	And many researchers were hoping to obtain the bullet after his demise, but his wife Nellie denied it on the grounds that if you wanted to perform that, you had to arrange it with John before the event.
	I went after Dershowitz on multiple grounds including the Nuremberg Code for crying out loud.
	Dr. Mengele was performing all these unethical experiments on prisoners of war and so forth without any informed consent.
	And we know these vaccines are very, very dangerous.
	One used in India, Gates vaccine paralyzed 500,000 girls.
	We know the H1N1 vaccine for the previous flu caused brain damage.
	We know most of these vaccines now given routinely to children that have mercury or aluminum bases Cause autism?
	I mean the statistical correlation is absolutely perfect.
	It grows with the increased use of the vaccine and diminishes with the reduced use.
	It seems in physician association after physician association declares, you cannot perform an intrusive or other medical operation on a patient without their informed consent.
	So they have to know all the pros and all the cons, all the risks, all the benefits, but all the risks.
	And it seems to me Dershowitz just sailed right over that as though it didn't exist.
	It was insulting to me and very, very dangerous in the precarious world in which we live, where the government seems to be intent upon in the relation to the coronavirus, where there's never been a successful vaccine for a respiratory disease infection.
	Well, I can't tell if he's just trying to get attention or what, but one thing seems clear.
	it's gonna be a way of chipping us that the ingredients in the vaccine are gonna do us a tremendous amount of damage.
	And I think Dershowitz was just blowing up.
	I just thought it was outrageous and disgusting. - Well, I can't tell if he's just trying to get attention or what, but one thing seems clear, he's not reading the cases.
	And for someone who supposedly is a constitutional law scholar, I'm very surprised by the positions he's taken.
	I also have a background in liberty analysis, and I do not believe there's Any valid way that the government can force COVID-19 vaccines in the public.
	The way they're likely to do it is state legislatures may require children to get vaccinated as part of the school vaccine requirements and those by the way have grown enormously in the past several years.
	I mean children now get I think 70 It's absurd, Deanna.
	We had a few when I was a child, and I remember when chickenpox went around and my mom was told, you know, take the girls over there, let them get the chickenpox because they're so young.
	And it's not that risky as a small child, but if you're older and get chickenpox, it can be more dangerous.
	And my mom didn't want to do that.
	She didn't want to subject the girls to that, you know, intentionally.
	But the bottom line is chickenpox is extremely unlikely to kill a child.
	Um, and just, it's just not, the vaccine though has a lot of problems.
	So the fact that the governments have just gone kind of off the deep end with requiring more and more vaccines that are not related to things like smallpox.
	I mean, smallpox is one thing.
	I think the court got it right in Jacobson versus Massachusetts.
	And one of the things the court said in that case as well was he's running around town.
	You know, not only did he refuse to get vaccinated, he was out and about.
	So if he did, you know, get exposed, you know, there's like several days of a latency period before you actually show symptoms.
	So he was actually potentially risking other people and that's a very different story.
	Than someone who doesn't show signs, hasn't been, or there's no evidence they've been exposed.
	And COVID is just not killing that many people.
	There's a lot of controversy about how many people are dying from it.
	But as statistics are coming out more and more, what we're finding is that what we heard originally just doesn't sound like it's panning out.
	And I read recently, and I have in my new article, that now they're saying statistically 1% of people over age 60 die of COVID.
	And it's like 0.05 or 0.03% of all persons generally.
	So this is not a particularly lethal disease, even though it is being represented that way.
	This isn't compared to smallpox, and that was the disease at issue in the original case.
	And the Supreme Court has not reviewed a vaccine law seriously, really, since Jacobson.
	There was a case in 1922 where they upheld The state's delegation of power to the local authorities in relation to school vaccine.
	But it was a very short opinion because it was a procedural issue.
	It was really just it was a written mandate.
	So that case doesn't help us much.
	The real case is Jacobson versus Massachusetts.
	And the COVID hysteria is being promoted by an elementary fallacy of ambiguity.
	The word cases, they're talking about the increased number of cases.
	That just means positive results from tests that you have the CV virus.
	You and I and virtually all other Americans have it.
	That doesn't mean we're sick.
	So they're reporting this increase in cases as though it meant all these people were sick.
	When they are not sick, they're simply getting a positive result from having the virus.
	And when the number of deaths is actually diminishing, it means the rate of death is greatly reduced.
	Now that we know the vast extent, could be anywhere from 80 to 100 times the initial estimates of the prevalence of this virus in the environment.
	It's just not very potent.
	And I have that data in my new article because what I read online based on a number of studies was that some people don't even know they have it.
	They might not feel good for a couple days or I know I was sick for a long time.
	I was very sick in November before anyone knew about this and I flew to Washington DC for a law professor conference and Got in the plane and on takeoff, the woman next to me threw up all over the aisle.
	I thought, oh no, what on earth am I going to be exposed to now?
	And I got sick again.
	So I think that probably was floating around and it was a bad, for me, it was a very bad, like a very bad flu.
	And I kept going to hot yoga, kept thinking I'd get better.
	And I was, I just couldn't get better.
	And I couldn't fully breathe in hot yoga.
	So I know there was something that was pretty bad, but I hadn't had a day off in over two years when I caught it.
	And I still, Didn't get that sick.
	I think I might have missed a couple days of classes, which I normally never do, but I do think that a lot more people have been exposed than may know about it, and that when all is said and done, we're going to find out that, statistically, it was a smaller amount of people who died from it than we thought, because a lot of people just didn't know they had it.
	Yes, absolutely, that's correct.
	It's just stunning how the press has abdicated its role.
	One of the great benefits, I think, of having this president in office is exposing the fake news of the press.
	I think very few Americans take any longer You know, what they're told by the mainstream media as though it were true.
	Most of it turns out to be false.
	In fact, if it's a politically significant issue, you can be sure it's almost certainly false.
	And you'll notice, Deanna, how they've taken to telling you whether or not a report is true or false, so you know.
	Trump falsely suggested HCQ would be beneficial to deal with the coronavirus, when of course what Trump said was completely true and well substantiated by 50, 60 years of experience with hydroxychloroquine, and yet the press goes out of its way to tell us again and again and again things the president says that are in fact accurate and true, as though they were false and he were misinformed.
	I mean, it's stunning.
	I actually have a chapter called fake news in the Jeffrey Epstein book.
	And I just, you know, I did not hear the term until I heard Donald Trump say it.
	But the reason I have a chapter called fake news is because I went through some of the news reports on Jeffrey Epstein and they did not match up to the court documents and other things we knew.
	And I thought, well, that should be exposed because the media did not report accurately on Jeffrey Epstein and particularly with Harvey Weinstein.
	He bragged about being able to shut down reporters and told them what they could write, what they couldn't write, said things like, if you ever publish any photos from tonight, you'll never ever sell a photo again for the rest of your life.
	So there's definitely some control over the media by very rich and powerful people.
	Certainly Harvey Weinstein and Jeffrey Epstein and his colleagues or whatever you want to call them.
	There's, there's some real problems with the mass murder.
	Associates, yeah.
	Epstein and Weinstein were not employing the same modus operandi, but they were both disgusting creatures.
	I mean, Weinstein was exploiting all these young starlets.
	The story I get is he was treating Gwyneth Paltrow, who I think is a wonderful person, as though she were his personal sex life.
	I mean, The end of the stories coming out of Hollywood are just disgusting beyond belief.
	Well, I make some comparisons in the three of them, the Harvey Weinstein, Jeffrey Epstein, and Bill Cosby, and their MOs, believe it or not, had a lot of overlapping features.
	One of the things that Jeffrey Epstein and Harvey Weinstein, they were committed to photographs.
	They used them differently, though.
	Weinstein got photographs of himself with the women he assaulted, either right before or right after the assaults, normally at the same function, the same Film Festival or whatever and he did that so that later if they ever accused him of rape he could say well look at we have this photo together From the same day now, how could this be possible?
	Well, I mean look at the one with Ashley Judd and she's kind of got her elbow pushing him away and you can tell she's uncomfortable But she you know, she was a young actress.
	He's Harvey Weinstein.
	The cameras are rolling and she had to sort of stop and take a photo with him.
	She was in a pinch.
	But if you look carefully at that photo, you can see she does not look very comfortable.
	But he took that because he had recently done something to her.
	He did that with a lot of other people as well.
	So Epstein did something different with photographs.
	Epstein filmed very powerful men in sexual acts or in compromised position so that he could use those things against him if they ever came out against him or if he ever got in trouble.
	He called it his insurance policy.
	And Ghislaine Maxwell said the same thing.
	We've got an insurance policy.
	They can't do anything to us or we'll release the tapes.
	So one thing I thought was really interesting was those tapes have never come out.
	And if Jeffrey Epstein were really dead, where are they?
	Because his position was he had an insurance policy, and that is a very, very manipulative man.
	That is a person who planned ahead for everything.
	So it seems like he would have booby-trapped his own death.
	It seems to me he had these tapes, he had these films, photographs, especially from his island, and yet they didn't come out.
	So it makes you wonder, did he cash in his insurance policy, or where are those videos?
	So I'm not sure what to make of that.
	Well, it seems to me at least as likely that he's alive as that he is dead.
	We have a photograph of a body on a gurney that appears to be photoshopped, but it's actually in a firehouse.
	It's not actually in a hospital.
	The power going out, his disappearance.
	There were reports of a military dispatch that he was taken out of the prison.
	I wouldn't be surprised if Jeffrey Epstein is alive, maybe in witness protection, because he's a key player here in so many of these activities that were disgusting.
	I believe one of the reasons why the deep state people like Pelosi and Hillary and Obama and Schumer and all that are fighting Trump and wanting to destroy the country to prevent him from being re-elected is that they know he's got the goods on them with regard to all kinds of illicit activity, most of which involved the abuse of children.
	Some of which involve ritual or other murders of persons, and therefore they're desperate, and they're going to take extraordinary measures, even to the extent of, you know, destroying the nation to preserve themselves from prosecution.
	Right, yeah.
	I don't know about a lot of the things you just mentioned.
	What I do know is that Jeffrey Epstein liked young girls, you know, 13, 14, even as young as 12.
	And that a lot of his friends or buddies, whatever you call them, also enjoyed very young girls.
	I did not know about some of the other stuff.
	I do know that the one thing that really struck me, and I'm not even a nurse, but it struck me that when Jeffrey Epstein was being wheeled into the ER, you know, after he was found dead or whatever, I've never seen that happen.
	I talked to one of my students who is a nurse and she said, no, no, no, you can't do that.
	She said, until you actually hand over the patient to the hospital staff, you never take the ambu bag off because the person hasn't been declared dead.
	And if you take off the ambu bag, they could die.
	And then someone else said, you know, the person on that gurney, He looked kind of big.
	Epstein was a very small man.
	He was very into his physique.
	He was, had a very, very strict diet.
	He slept in a room that was 54 degrees every night.
	He was really into his bodily functions and his, and, and, you know, being in control of his body.
	He was lean and the person in that gurney looked kind of big.
	So I was kind of surprised.
	I'm not, I don't know what to make of that.
	The other thing that struck me was that apparently there was someone who leaked that he, um, Whatever, something happened to him at the MCC, the Metropolitan Correctional Center.
	And yet, at the hospital, there was only one cameraman, apparently.
	There's only a few photos.
	So where, where were all the people, the photographers for the press?
	I mean, that would be a hot, big story.
	You could sell those photos for a lot of money.
	And yet, there were really almost no photos released.
	So that seemed, it all seems odd.
	A lot of it just doesn't add up.
	And that's why I got so fascinated in writing a whole book about it, because there was so many pieces of evidence.
	It don't add up and I don't even think we know the half of it even now.
	Yeah, my take has been that Epstein was part of a Mossad intel op that was to compromise prominent American political figures on the island, on the plane.
	They had both audio and video equipment all over what is known as Zorji Island and, of course, on the Lolita Express.
	I mean, Bill Clinton flew 26 times.
	I mean, give me a break.
	And then they try to minimize saying he didn't really know Jeffrey Epstein.
	You know the painting, don't you, of Bill Clinton in a dress in the Epstein mansion?
	I mean, that's pretty bizarre.
	Well, Bill Gates also flew on Jeffrey Epstein's plane.
	Yes, he did.
	And then when it came out, his spokesperson said, well, he didn't know it was his plane.
	So he just got in a plane, didn't know whose plane it was.
	Of course.
	Of course.
	That did not sound like a very open person to me.
	I would think you'd know whose plane you're getting into.
	Yeah, that's ridiculous.
	Well, there's been a lot of problems with Bill Gates's veracity, especially with his U.S.
	versus Microsoft deposition testimony and the problems he had with the judge because The judge didn't like what he saw.
	We also have photos of Bill Gates with Barack Obama and Michael Robinson before he got breast implants and began calling himself Michelle.
	I mean, it's all stunning stuff, Deanna.
	You may not know the whole history about Michelle Obama.
	She was born Michael Laverne Robinson, played football at Oregon State.
	She was actually pretty good, had a large number of tackles, including for loss.
	Then she adopted a female persona, transferred to Princeton, began calling herself Michelle.
	Barack is Well, I called her Michael in front of the Joint Chiefs during public ceremonies.
	We have her physician during campaigning in New Jersey walked into her in a trailer taking a leak standing up and reported how he was paid millions for his silence, but he felt that the public deserved to know that Michelle Obama is not a man who has transformed his sex into a woman, but is a man with breast implants and a huge shaving bill.
	Well, again, you know, I have no personal knowledge.
	I'm not asking you to vouch for that.
	I tell you, I've done the research.
	I've done the homework.
	I got photographs that are quite convincing, believe me.
	But I have heard all sorts of strange things.
	And the internet is abuzz right now with all sorts of strange theories about a lot of our politicians.
	So, again, I'm sort of perplexed about a lot of this.
	Yes.
	And I also think, like I said, I always try to stay, you know, very close to what we know.
	Like, I call it the lowest common denominator.
	Like, what do we know?
	What does that show?
	Yes, yes, yes.
	Of course.
	From a legal point of view, particularly.
	And I, as a professor of logic, of course, care about premises and conclusions and the strength of evidential support for a position.
	I think that the fact we've had so many with rather unusual sexual histories or backgrounds may be one of the reasons why Common Core, as I understand it, this is a widely adopted curriculum for the public schools, talks about, you know, choice of gender for children who are far too young, in my opinion, to be confronted with such issues.
	I'm very disturbed about some of this, you know, and what's happened to our public schools.
	And of course, There's a whole absence of a background of education, social promotion, political correctness that I think has given us a generation of young people who are very ignorant.
	I mean, they're not just scientifically illiterate.
	They are vastly unknowing of even the most basic elements of our history and I think that has been a part of the motivation here to take down statues and so forth that are icons that help us to identify ourselves as a nation as an aspect of what is Broadly known as cultural Marxism, trying to transform the identity of the nation.
	But I've had other guests on that subject, and I want to take full advantage of your background regarding these sex torts, on the one hand, and vaccinations on the other, because they're so extraordinarily important today.
	Yeah, and you know, I was going to mention a minute ago, Nick Bryant wrote a book about the pedophiles in Nebraska.
	It's called The Franklin Scandal, and it came out about 10 years ago, and I actually met Nick, through that, we connected because I guess he found out I was writing a book and we talked about it.
	And I can tell you some of the reporters around Jeffrey Epstein also do not believe he's dead.
	People who know a lot about the people involved and the kind of power they have.
	So there is sort of a question to me about that too.
	And you know, Ghislaine Maxwell's father, Robert Maxwell, was reputed to be a Mossad agent.
	In fact, he was reputed to be a triple agent.
	So, other people have been saying, well, Jeffrey Epstein also was involved with the Mossad.
	And again, I have no personal knowledge, but there was a really weird, you know, a really weird fact I put in my book about the day before the 2016 election.
	His jet was flying over the border of Saudi, and what happened was the signal just went out.
	And no one can explain that.
	Like, when you're in the air, anywhere in the world, you are being monitored now.
	The plane just disappeared, and he was gone for the day of the election as well, 2016 election, then flew back over the border.
	And all of a sudden reappeared in the sky.
	You're talking about the transponder, the signal the plane emits that enables radar to detect it.
	The experts say you can't just turn it off, but he managed to somehow.
	So he has some very high-level technology behind him in some way.
	And that seems to support the idea that he has connections to intelligence agencies at a very high level.
	I'm not sure what to make of it.
	I put it in my book because I read the account of how the signal went out and how he was just gone on the election day.
	The day that Donald Trump was elected, he was no one knew where he was.
	No one knew where his plane was.
	And then experts said, well, he could have been in a few different places based on his altitude at the time the signal went out, based on his direction.
	He didn't land in Jordan.
	They said, you know, he was too, he was too high up or something like that.
	So I put it in the book trying to, I'm not sure how that relates to everything else, but there's a lot of weird pieces of the puzzle.
	I mean, I think it's like a thousand piece puzzle and we've got like, you know, a hundred pieces.
	So there's like 900 pieces missing.
	We don't know so many things, but we have a skeletal sort of outline of what's going on.
	And we really need to fill in the details so the public knows more and can hopefully make Good choices with politics.
	I think we're really operating without sufficient knowledge to choose our leaders at this point.
	Yeah, and of course, I think it's very obvious that Joe Biden actually is brain damaged.
	He suffered a couple of aneurysms.
	He can't make a coherent sentence even when he has a teleprompter.
	He most recently reported that 120 million Americans had died from COVID instead of 120,000.
	I mean, you know, the guy is unqualified.
	He's not I'm having a hard time seeing how the Democrats could go forward to even nominate the man.
	They're going to try to keep him under wraps or keeping him in his basement, literally.
	You know, you heard about the crazy uncle in the attic.
	Well, with Joe Biden that's in the basement, he's only being visited by like two people a day.
	I mean, that's no way to run a campaign.
	And of course, all the polls are simply absurd.
	Anyone who thinks that Democrats are gaining voters by defunding the police or supporting Black Lives Matter and Antifa and looting and rioting just has no comprehension.
	I mean, most of the country, including blacks, are rather conservative They believe in the normal values of law and order and they see, you know, society run rampant.
	They did a survey in Harlem and they were inviting, you know, interviewing men on the street about the idea of defunding the police in New York City.
	And one of these guys said, that would be suicide!
	You know, we need more police.
	That's well known.
	The more cops, the less crime.
	And, you know, Minneapolis now, it dumbfounds me, has voted, the city council, to demolish a police department and replace them with a bunch of social workers.
	I mean, Deanna, it is absurd.
	It is absurd.
	I would never have believed in my lifetime I'd see You know, ridiculous action taken by nominally responsible representatives of state, city, or local government.
	It's just astonishing to me.
	Yeah, you know, I was born in Washington State and I sold my house of 22 years, I think in 2015 or 2016, somewhere in there.
	Because I saw that the state was really a mess and I've never seen more crooked lawyers anywhere.
	It was a terrible experience up there with what I've personally seen.
	I do think the police departments have some problems.
	And I do think there is, well, I mean, certainly with regard to Jeffrey Epstein's case and Harvey Weinstein's case.
	There's corruption in the system from the prosecutor's office all the way down to the police officers.
	So we do have problems.
	I'm not sure, you know, how to fix those things.
	But it doesn't seem like right now what's happening is very productive.
	The only positive I would say is raising awareness.
	And you know what?
	Recently, I saw this thing online about destroying historical monuments.
	And what I wrote was, why don't we, instead of destroying these priceless relics, why don't we create bigger ones to literally, literally overshadow them, to literally be bigger and show that this is where we are now, that's where we were, and maybe even position them to literally throw and maybe even position them to literally throw a shadow on the past, the racism of the past, slavery and things like that.
	It doesn't seem like destruction is a good way to do it.
	I would say maybe a different tack to create better structures, more structures that more fairly represent who we are today and where we're going, but not just destroying things.
	And one of my friends, Alfred Brophy, professor at in Tuscaloosa and Alabama, he's an expert.
	He has a PhD from Harvard in history, antebellum self actually.
	And he says he would not destroy those things because they are part of our past.
	We want to remember and remembering is partly to make sure we don't go back to remember what it was.
	So I would say let's make some new monuments and literally overshadow the old ones, but not blow them up.
	That's really good, Deanna.
	I really like that.
	Now my own son resides in Seattle and of course I followed with fascination the Antifa takeover of Six blocks of downtown Seattle, calling themselves CHAZ, an autonomous zone.
	And of course, there have been all kinds of problems.
	They had to create their own internal police force to manage behavior among themselves.
	Then we had four days of shooting.
	We had someone killed, someone injured.
	The police were being locked out.
	They can respond to fire and so forth.
	The whole thing is now collapsing.
	But I would like to believe the country is learning a lesson from this little experiment.
	I think the president was wise to use the rope-a-dope, you know, Muhammad Ali strategy of letting them just show who they are and the absurdity of what they're doing here.
	I mean, Minneapolis, is just paving the way to its own destruction as an economy, as an economic entity.
	Companies aren't going to want to stick around a community that has no police force.
	Anyone who has the economic resources to leave will leave, and I say that as one who resided in Minnesota for 19 years, the last 19 of my 35-year career as a professor of philosophy, where I retired in 2006 and moved here to Wisconsin
	And of course we had our own little melee where they were tearing down one of the most significant statues right on the Capitol Square called Forward to represent the progress of women in America and they tore down the statue of a An abolitionist who actually had been a champion of the black people.
	And now we had a guy, the leader of this crowd right here in Madison, going to a restaurant with a bullhorn and a baseball bat, harassing customers, calling them out as racist and all this other nonsense.
	And I'm very happy to say they've now been arrested and indicted and charged.
	I mean, at least this isn't an idiotic response to the situation, but to me it's just absolutely stunning!
	It's just so complicated.
	I was one of the authors on a book called Implicit Racial Bias Across the Law, and what we did was look at various areas of law and show how there was racism really deeply embedded in the law, in healthcare, in all sorts of areas of law.
	And what we did, each author took an area of law and tried to figure out, what do we do to account for this?
	And I took tort law as an area and said, you know, there should be enhanced penalties, just like for race-based crimes, for race-based torts.
	But the problem is so deep because there is such a thing as implicit bias, not to mention overt racism.
	And, you know, how do we deal with that as a country?
	It's just so complicated.
	You know, I don't know what the answers are except education.
	And one of the things, because I've been researching racism for years.
	My thesis at Berkeley was about implicit racial bias.
	That was in 1999.
	But one of the things we know is having one-on-one relationships, having friendships with people from all over the world, all different races, all different cultures, that is the way to break down racism.
	You can't, you know, the in-group, out-group dynamics break down when individual relationships form.
	When you have friends of different races, friends of different religious backgrounds, and what we need to do is get away from the in-group, out-group dynamics, get away from judging people based on what they look like, or what they believe, or what their orientation is, and get into one-on-one.
	If we're gonna judge people at all, we should judge them on the content of their character and nothing else.
	And even the Bible supports that.
	It's not healthy to judge someone Anyone, based on anything other than their character.
	And I think that there's a risk right now with people, with hate growing and the hate being sort of in-group, out-group based hate.
	And that's the worst possible route we could take right now.
	And you know, they're even going after now statues of Christopher Columbus, of George Washington, Abraham Lincoln!
	I mean, this is just lunatic!
	I mean, all human beings have their own shortcomings and flaws.
	We're not admiring them for their shortcomings and flaws, but for their accomplishments!
	Columbus discovering America, George Washington founder of our nation, Abraham Lincoln for the Emancipation Proclamation, keeping the Union together intact.
	I mean, these are great accomplishments.
	So there's a total shift in attention to the negatives.
	When you come even to a figure like Martin Luther King Jr., whom we all admire in his speech about judging men by the content of their character, he had his own weaknesses.
	He had an affinity for white women.
	He had an affair after affair after affair of white women.
	J. Edgar Hoover would send these tapes of Martin having sex with these white women to his wife Coretta as a form of harassment.
	So are we supposed to say, well, we can't admire Martin Luther King for all he did to promote better relations between the races because he had an affinity of being a philanderer with white women?
	These people are ridiculous, they're ignorant, they're uneducated, and they're promoting a political agenda that is to destroy the culture of the United States.
	George Soros, who is, of course, the principal funder behind Black Lives Matter and Antifa, He even brought in bus falls, Deanna, to Charlottesville, brought them in together on the same buses to create the artificial events that occurred in Charlottesville.
	The whole thing was stage managed, except by the naive protesters who were supporting the non-removal of a statue of Robert E. Lee, another great American, for crying out loud.
	I mean, Soros has said his greatest wish before he dies is the destruction of America.
	That is his avowed objective.
	And it looks like he's doing a pretty good job of it so far.
	Yeah, again, I don't have a lot of knowledge about much of what you're talking about.
	I do have a background in racism and implicit bias and discrimination law.
	And one thing I would say, one possible positive coming out of this is I've noticed a lot of polite people out and about.
	I think people have realized how bad things have become among the races.
	And one of the things we know from research is that When people see other people who don't look like them, they tend to avert their eyes.
	They don't really make eye contact.
	And one of the things that all of us could do is to start really realizing that.
	And same with overweight people.
	People won't look at them.
	They won't look in their eyes.
	And they're uncomfortable.
	And so I think that we should take this terrible time that we're in and maybe learn some lessons.
	And one of the things we should learn is to really engage with people who don't look like us and who aren't like us and look at them in the eyes and communicate with them.
	You know, treat them like a human being, and just no judgment.
	Get to know them.
	Earth.
	You may find this astonishing, but it turns out the whole incident that precipitated all this, ostensibly the George Floyd death in Minneapolis, was itself political theater.
	They put George in one side of a police car, which is what you'd normally do to drive him to the precinct for booking, right?
	So getting a suspect into the cop car, that's the key move, but then you take him off to the police department for booking, They took him out on the other side, except what they took out, you know, was a mannequin.
	It's called, there's a 7 Sigma, it's a black mannequin they use for medical experimentation to show how you treat a person.
	That wasn't George Floyd who had the knee on it for a neck.
	In fact, when they put him up on the gurney, you can see it has no legs!
	It has no legs!
	I mean, it's just, the enormity of these scams is simply overwhelming.
	Yeah, again, you know, I came on to talk about my books and the vaccine.
	Of course, I know!
	I don't know about these other things.
	I have heard stuff about it online.
	I just, I really try not to say too much unless I have some personal knowledge or I've done some research myself because one of the things I say in my second book is all of us need to really stop and think twice before we repeat anything because unless you personally saw something, personally are aware of the situation, You really shouldn't repeat things because you don't know.
	I gave an example of this situation.
	encountered at a university and it just even law professors they turn around repeat what they've heard and they weren't even there you'd think a law professor would know better than to do that but all of us need to really realize we have to rely on ourselves on our own brains our own eyes and what we see because we're in an era where there's a lot of fraud and a lot of just you know fake news for lack of a better word yes it's true I mean it's it's online it's on the
	it's on the major stations and we all need to take a big step back and say you know what we need to think for Every single person needs to think for himself or herself and just take everything with a grain of salt.
	Because even if you see something with your own eyes, sometimes it may not be quite what you thought you saw.
	You have to really think it through.
	This is why I specialize in bringing together experts to collaborate on research on all these controversial issues.
	I've had one after another after another on this very show where we've been dissecting these various events.
	Danny Serra is an excellent example with his law enforcement background in dissecting these shootings.
	Which don't seem to follow standard operating procedure at all.
	And the death of George Floyd and a host of other issues.
	But, you know, go back to Sandy Hook.
	I brought together 13 experts, including six current or retired PhD professors, and we established a school that had been closed by 2008, that was damaged by hurricanes loaded with asbestos and other biohazards.
	There were no students there.
	They conducted a two-day FEMA exercise and presented it as mass murder to promote gun control.
	We even have the manual for the event, Deanna!
	We even have the manual for the event!
	So when I put it on sale on 22 October 2015 with Amazon.com, it had sold nearly 500 copies already in less than a month when they banned it.
	On the 19th of November they banned it because it did too good a job.
	It blew the whole case apart, Deanna.
	And think how much further ahead we'd be if everyone understood that they're promoting one after another manufactured event to manipulate us to promote their political agenda.
	It's a disgrace.
	What I know of that is I've been working on a case, so I really can't speak to that, but I would be happy to talk more about the vaccine.
	I wish you would, yes, of course.
	I'm certain that the callers are going to want to pursue Jeffrey Epstein sex torts and vaccines and whether they can be mandated.
	And let me give out the number already, since we're reaching close to the point.
	540-352-4452. 540-352-4452.
	Mitchell, field your call.
	We just want your name and your state, and you can join the conversation with Deanna and me.
	And just so you know, Deanna, about me, I mean, a professional scholar, I mean, I don't make assertions I can't support, and I completely appreciate you're not Granting or entering into confirmation for cases you haven't yourself investigated, just know, I do a lot of homework and I'm doing it like 24 hours a day.
	Unbelievable!
	Unbelievable!
	And I've had the benefit of a lot of great input, by the way, from members of the Revolution Radio, you know, fans of this show who call in, some of whom are simply stunningly good.
	I want you to pick up on the sex torts in your books and tell everyone what you write now since we just have a couple of minutes before the break where everyone can get a hold of more of your stuff.
	Well, the books are available on Amazon.com right now, and they're both called The Godfathers of Sex Abuse.
	And people ask me, why do you say Godfathers?
	I said, because they acted like Godfathers.
	They hired, you know, thugs to follow the witnesses and to threaten the witnesses.
	So The Godfathers of Sex Abuse book one is all about Jeffrey Epstein.
	Book two is about Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby, and the Me Too movement.
	And in a nutshell, what I do is I show that there's an elaborate system that is in place.
	The M.O.
	for these men is almost identical, not quite, but almost.
	There's aspects of each of their M.O.s.
	And when I talk about, I'm trying to paint a picture so we can understand what this monster looks like so we can fight it.
	And one of the things I said in the very end of book two was we need to privatize Sexual harassment and sexual assault complaints.
	The government isn't working.
	The EEOC hid documents from the New York Times reporters.
	You know, the EEOC's position is, oh, well, it's private.
	Well, why is it private?
	You're talking about a government agency getting complaints of sexual assault.
	Why should that be private?
	Same thing with attorneys and the state medical boards.
	You know, they say, oh, well, every complaint we get is confidential.
	What do you mean?
	You're supposed to be representing the public.
	Why can't the complaints be public record?
	So I, at the very end of book number two, I talk about how do we fix this?
	And I think the way to fix it is to privatize the repositories so that when you have a problem with someone at work, you can get online and find out, has he done this before?
	Because what we've found out with the sexual disease perpetrators, we call them the core transmitters.
	It's not my term.
	It's a scientist term.
	They determined back around the year 2000 that only about 3% of Americans are responsible for almost 100% of new sexual disease cases.
	What that means is the same mostly men, because the way it works, sexual disease is usually more easily transferred from a man to a woman than vice versa.
	So there's this small group of mostly men running around giving diseases to dozens and dozens of women who then transmit it inadvertently or otherwise to others.
	I'm going to venture to guess that the same small number of men are committing sexual assault over and over and over, whereas most men never do.
	And so we need to identify those people, the Harvey Weinsteins, the Jeffrey Epsteins, the Bill Cosby's in our society, and we can't do that if the government is going to hide the information from the public.
	So I'm advocating a, you know, I guess I'm already starting it, because I think someone has to do it.
	The Me Too movement has sort of gone quiet, and I know that just before they got very quiet, Bill Gates had donated a million dollars.
	Hold that thought, Deanna.
	We'll be right back with this marvelous resource.
	You want to call in, take advantage of this opportunity.
	540-352-4452.
	Listen to Revolution Radio at freedomsofence.com.
	We'll be right back.
	Thank you.
	Even the government admits that 9-11 was a conspiracy.
	But did you know that it was an inside job?
	That Osama had nothing to do with it.
	That the Twin Towers were pulled apart by a sophisticated arrangement of mini or micro nukes.
	That Building 7 collapsed seven hours later because of explosives planted in the building.
	Barry Jennings was there.
	He heard them go off and felt himself stepping over dead people.
	A U.S.
	geological survey conducted studies of dust gathered from 35 locations in lower Manhattan and found elements that would not have been there had this not been a nuclear event.
	Ironically, that means the government's own evidence contradicts the government's official position.
	9-11 was brought to us compliments of the CIA, the neocons of the Department of Defense, and the Mossad.
	Don't let yourself be played.
	Read American Nuked on 9-11, available at moonrockbooks.com.
	That's moonrockbooks.com.
	I will defend myself against their tyranny.
	Number three is my favorite podcast.
	I'm squarely in front of the public all the time, and they all know what's going on.
	We are opposed around the world by a monolith network conspiracy that relies primarily on expanding its sphere of influence.
	Hello, my name is John Wayne.
	Can I do a broadcast?
	Sorry, I think you are trying to reach another voicemail box that has not been set up yet.
	Please, try your call again later.
	Goodbye.
	Freedom and peace.
	Alright, we're on.
	And folks, I assure you we are in Defense Condition 1, Mission 1, as we journey perilously through this paradigm that we currently reside in.
	And I ask that you join me every Saturday 8 to 10 p.m.
	Eastern Standard Time, or the Uniquable Truth, Death Cloud, One. - Was it a conspiracy?
	Did you know that the police in Boston were broadcasting, this is a drill, this is a drill, on folk history?
	The Boston Pope is predicting that a springtube bomb would be set off during the marathon for the Pomp and Circumstance activities.
	Seth Martin was in it, in front of the library, which happened as the Globe had announced.
	Peering through the smoke, you could see bodies with missing arms and legs.
	But there was no blood.
	The blood only showed up later and came out of a tube.
	They used amputee actors and a studio-quality smoke machine.
	Don't let yourself be played.
	Check out And Nobody Died in Boston, either.
	Available at moonrockbooks.com.
	That's moonwalkbooks.com.
	All right.
	I want you to take a short break here at RevolutionRadioFreedomSource.com.
	And, yeah, we're going to get back to your notes.
	Yeah, I'm very pleased to see we have several callers already on the line.
	Very first, Daryl, go ahead, join the conversation.
	Let's hear your thoughts.
	Go ahead.
	We lost Daryl, Jim.
	We lost Daryl, okay.
	If he comes back, I'll let you know.
	Okay, that's fine.
	Giuseppe, Giuseppe, please join the conversation, my friend, from the District of Criminals.
	Hello, what a fascinating show.
	But considering this is your last show, I'm going to answer you this way.
	Love it.
	Love it.
	That's not actually Frank, though.
	I don't think that was actually the sonata.
	No, this is Frank.
	Oh, I love it.
	Love it, Giuseppe.
	Yeah.
	I love it.
	The greatest crooner of our time.
	Okay, let me turn this down.
	Yeah.
	Oh, that was very nice, Giuseppe.
	I like it.
	Absolutely!
	I want to just honor your time on Revolution Radio.
	I've been an enormous fan of yours for going all the way back to the early YouTube days.
	I stumbled on you and really your blend of academic acumen and passionate Well, that's just wonderful, Giuseppe.
	Those are very generous remarks.
	I have no doubt you also have comments and questions for Deanna, who is spectacular.
	The more I hear from her, the more impressed I become.
	I'm just thrilled to have her here for my final show.
	Yeah, no, she's wonderful.
	I've been looking at her website, and what strikes me is she's got the slightly detached, disciplined presentation of a skilled lawyer.
	She's clearly trained in what to say and what not to say, and it's admirable that within the... What's the right word?
	Within the limitations of the public space, she's really trying to push forward the envelope of what the heck is going on.
	And it really is criminal.
	If you continue to investigate that way, I mean, you'll get into the underage child trafficking.
	It's just horrific.
	And hopefully you will continue to, within the limits you face, With your standing and your teaching profession and everything, will continue to still go down that road.
	And my question is, you stated a few moments ago, judged by character.
	And do you mean by character, the individual's actions?
	Yes, I'm talking about, you know, if you're going to judge people at all, and we all do, I mean, it's reality, but the judgment You should be confined to what the person has done.
	And even then, I think it's hard to judge people because we don't know where they came from or why they reacted the way they did.
	People with PTSD, for example, may react in a very strange way, or someone with Tourette's Syndrome may react in a way where like, you know, be careful to judge people, period.
	But particularly be careful not to judge anyone based on what they look like.
	You know, someone may approach you with purple spiked hair and you may think, oh, you know, and take a little step back, but then you have to stop and say, wait a minute, you don't know that person.
	And it's just, you know, I'm, I'm staying in Palm Springs right now, Palm Desert, actually, and I've, I've hung out in Palm Springs a lot.
	You have a lot of very progressive and some, you know, unusual people here.
	But when I've gotten to know a lot of the people here, what I've found is you, you cannot possibly know what a person's like until you get to know them.
	So I'm saying is that to the extent, can we judge Ted Bundy?
	Can we judge Jeffrey Epstein?
	I think it's probably fair to say yes, but based on their behavior and nothing else.
	Giuseppe, Giuseppe, what impresses me about Deanna is that she's a real intellectual.
	She's a scholar.
	She does research herself in a whole wide area of subjects.
	She publishes.
	She's not simply an attorney.
	She's not simply someone who takes a case and does research related to that case.
	Digs far deeper, and she has a very broad background, which I think makes her just an invaluable resource, and why I'm so especially happy to have her today on this occasion.
	Well, that's certainly laudable, and I honor that.
	Pursuing the line of questioning about character, now you just mentioned you're in Palm Springs, which is a non-trivial Expensive place to live.
	By the way, Sinatra had a place out there.
	He had a helicopter put in for JFK to come visit and then for political reasons he wound up going to stay with Bing Crosby.
	So Frank got out there with a sledgehammer and started beating up his own helipad for JFK.
	That was a very sad moment.
	Well here's my question about character in more urban environments and based on the criminal statistics of murder, rape, violent crime, violent assault.
	So if you're walking down a street and you see three different people individually coming at you, a well-dressed in polo shorts and a polo shirt white guy, maybe about 40 years old, how will you feel versus The second person coming to you has tattoos all over his body, could be a white or a Mexican or a black, and has a very, very odd look in the eye.
	And the third one is the classic thug look of the pants below the buttocks and, you know, shuffling along.
	Now, you have a second to evaluate those three characters.
	And so, how do you possibly treat them all equally?
	Well, I've had a very unusual background, and I've seen some horrific misconduct among persons who attended top law schools.
	So, I have seen those, the white men in polo clothes or whatever, who are, you know, who I would never, ever— Not respectable!
	And then I also have friends who are, who are, at least who appear to be kind of on the wild side with the tattoos and the funny hair and all that.
	And so I've had an unusual background.
	I, you know, we all have knee-jerk reactions.
	It goes back to, you know, tribalism, how we would know whether we're in danger by whether someone looks like us or doesn't look like us.
	And I wrote about this in my article called Unconscious Bias back in the Washington Law Review, gosh, back in 1999, and talked about what, how, what, what, Where, you know, judgment derives from, where racism derives from, it comes down to the tribes.
	We had to figure out whether a person was a risk to us or not based on how they were dressed and what they looked like, you know, back in those days.
	I don't think there's any way of completely getting away from it, but one of the things that I find is very helpful is to look in the person's eyes.
	I think you see things there that you can't see from a distance.
	And so, You know, they say the eyes are the window to the soul, and I think that's something we need to all realize.
	If you really want to give someone a fair shot, look at them.
	Look directly at them and engage with them and don't just turn away or say, well, he dresses funny.
	He looks weird.
	He has tattoos.
	I know some very soft people who are full of tattoos and I think they may have even done that because they are so soft and they want to sort of, you know, push people away at a certain level because they're soft and sensitive and easily hurt.
	One of my friends has a son who's doing tattoos for a living and my friend is extremely conservative.
	So I, you know, I don't just say about that.
	I think it's just, you know, we all have to just, I think if we're conscious of it and we're aware of our knee-jerk, likely implicit biases, unless we work against it, that alone will help us to not make judgments off the bat.
	And just to remember, you have to get to know someone.
	There's no other way.
	There's just no other way.
	Giuseppe, I want you to stand by while I bring in the irrepressible Paul to speak to Deanna Pollard-Sacks.
	Paul.
	Yes, thank you very much.
	Deanna, correct?
	It's actually Deanna, my mistake.
	Okay, because I heard you say Deanna earlier in the show.
	Yes.
	So, Deanna, just let me be the first to go full tilt against your advice to repeat Or assume conclusions that you don't have personal knowledge of by informing you that, A, nobody died of Sandy Hook, and B, we never went to the moon.
	Well, I didn't know any of that.
	I thought we were in the moon.
	I was a little girl when I saw the footage of the moon.
	I don't know.
	I do value your character, and I like the direction you're going with vaccines, and I'm going to make some recommendations to you.
	And by the way, for anybody else who is listening, I'm going to go ahead and get your book because it sounds very interesting.
	And I'm going to make a recommendation for you right now.
	The title of the book is called Dissolving Illusions, Disease, Vaccines, and the Forgotten History by Suzanne Humphries.
	Okay.
	And I highly, highly recommend that.
	And also there's a video online you can watch called Are You Crooked?
	by Forrest Moretti.
	But all you need to do is type in Are You Crooked?
	And you will be blown away.
	Of course, if you haven't seen Vaxxed or Vaxxed 2, I can't recommend it enough.
	And also, Gary Null did a YouTube video.
	It's on now.
	It's Vaccine Nation.
	It's been out for quite a few years now.
	When you get into some of these other people I mentioned, such as Suzanne Humphreys, Dr. Andrew Wakefield, Gary Null, what you'll find is that what we think about vaccines and the whole idea of inoculation and immunization is mostly wrong and it's been part of an awful, and Sippy will know this well, an awful kosher brainwashing campaign to get these people to allow it.
	To take the poisons that they have ready for us.
	And I think that I can make this statement pretty firmly now, and I've said it for years.
	I don't think any vaccine has ever conferred any immunity ever.
	And I said this probably about four weeks or so ago now on Jim's show when he had on a guest called Judy Mikovits.
	And she's written her own book called Plague of Corruption, which I have not read, but I plan to.
	Anyway, she did not disagree with that statement, and by the way, Suzanne Humphrey did not disagree with that statement either, and that includes smallpox, which you mentioned earlier in the show.
	And I'll just take one little shot at something before I cede the floor to another caller, but you talked about this idea of look at someone's eyes, and we all know this is a nice anecdotal But here's a shot I'm going to take at you about looking at someone's eyes and maybe getting to know them.
	I'll make sure to pass that advice along to all the South African farmers that are being murdered by roving gangs of blacks or pass it on to the surviving kinfolk of all the Rhodesian or now Zimbabwe farmers that died in the same manner.
	Let's look them in the eyes.
	Paul, stick around too with Giuseppe while I bring in Scorpio.
	Scorpio, go ahead.
	Yes, Dr. Fetzer.
	Thanks for taking my call.
	I just wanted to take this opportunity to thank you.
	You truly are a giant in this field.
	Everything from JFK, to 9-11, Sandy Hook, to the Las Vegas hoax, and the Corona hoax.
	You've inspired countless people, and I think you've helped educate countless people, and I just want to make sure you know that, and I just want to give you a good farewell on your final show here at Revolution Radio.
	I'm very touched by those remarks, Scorpio.
	Thank you so much.
	I'm sure you have questions for Dino, but I'm profoundly appreciative of what you have just said.
	Go ahead if you have a question for Dina.
	I think I first started to listen to you back in about 2010 when Barack Obama was president and you were going over the phony birth certificate of his and I've been listening on and off ever since so thank you for all that you've done and I know that countless other people feel the same way.
	That's sensational, Scorpio.
	I can't thank you enough.
	Giuseppe, you want to come back in?
	Sure!
	Scorpio has its own fantastic show dealing with the realm of conspiracy.
	Saturdays 2 p.m.
	to 4 p.m.
	and I've been lucky enough to be a regular participant and we actually had Dr. Judy Michovitz on yesterday and she revealed that, you know, no one really tells you what the COVID-19 SARS-2 is.
	But what it is, is either intentionally or unintentionally a mutated bioweapon, a chimeric virus or microbe.
	And what she has noted is that there's already a 300% increased likelihood of you developing the actual manifestation of those horrible symptoms if you get a flu vaccine.
	So she It's been maintaining that it's contaminated flu that's triggering all these people and that's what, you know, reflects against Dina's observation earlier that most people don't show the symptoms, which is true.
	And even more shocking, Dina, I don't know if you're aware of this, that the two tests they're using, the swab in the back of the nose or the serum logic, neither one in any way actually tests COVID-19 SARS-2.
	In fact, when you scrape the back of the nose, there is all kinds of potential terrible viruses in there, including HIV, including Ebola, believe it or not, including hepatitis, all the nasty hepatitis, because we all live in a global Petri dish.
	We're all breathing in other people's air, but the beauty of The beauty of the human body is that healthy people have a robust immune system and what may be in the back of your sinus cavity never makes it into your bloodstream or gets beyond your lungs.
	And so the fact that this is just a massive operation of mind control and fear manipulation, operant conditioning, do you agree with that statement or what are your thoughts on that?
	Well, I do not know much about the testing.
	Here's what I know.
	I know that smallpox was fabulously, that the vaccine was fabulously effective.
	we know that it did prevent people from getting the disease.
	It was a derivative of cowpox.
	So we know that, but the problem, one of the things I identify in my article that is about to be sent to the publishers is that early on, yes, the vaccines did work, but that was a very different situation in a very different era with a very different political situation with the vaccine manufacturers.
	Today, what we have is vaccines that do not work, like the flu vaccine does not work very well, Even the Centers for Disease Control, which some scientists are saying are also corrupt, they're admitting that the flu vaccine over the last 15 years had an efficacy rate of 10 to 60% for an average of 40.25%.
	for an average of 40.25%, 40%, that's an F in my mind, 40%.
	So you're gonna, New York is requiring every baby six months old to 59 months old, And every health care worker to get an annual flu shot.
	They're making billions and billions of dollars, the manufacturers.
	And the number one cause for injuries in the vaccine court today is the flu vaccine.
	And it's 90% adults, by the way, now.
	Because when the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act was passed in 1986, it was the children who were having all these injuries.
	And they shoved all these cases in this little court No one's even heard of.
	So they've kind of kept it quiet, all these injuries from vaccines.
	But now what's happening is when the adults are being required to take the flu vaccine, they're getting sick or they're getting injured from it.
	So I think that the vaccines, the polio for example, the smallpox, the measles vaccines, back in the day when there wasn't this immunity, the legal immunity created by the Act of 1986, And then, of course, the market immunity created by the fact that you're required to get the flu vaccine to go to work, or you're required to get the flu vaccine to go to daycare or school in New York, for example.
	So I'm making comparison between the vaccines of the turn of the century or the early part of the 1900s versus today, and you really can't compare them.
	Chickenpox, for example, we talked about early on.
	Unnecessary.
	Chickenpox doesn't kill you.
	I mean it can, but so can other things.
	The flu can kill you.
	So I don't know why the governments would mandate a chickenpox vaccine for children or a flu vaccine when realistically they're nothing like smallpox.
	And I even have a question about requiring any vaccinations or at least coercing them.
	I call it coercion.
	It's not really mandating.
	It's, you know, either get the vaccine or you can't go to school.
	But, you know, we have this enormous problem with overpopulation.
	We have enormous problems in this world.
	And no one's ever thought about the fact of, you know, well, first of all, we don't even know that vaccines work.
	We assume they do.
	We know the smallpox vaccine worked.
	There you go.
	There you go.
	There was a bill that was before Congress several, gosh, I think about 10 years ago, and the bill was to do a study on vaccinated versus unvaccinated populations.
	It's never been done.
	We don't know.
	For example, in smallpox, some people argued the reason why there were more outbreaks in some areas than others had to do with the living conditions.
	They were living in poverty, living on top of each other, not taking care of themselves.
	They didn't have the means.
	They didn't have good food.
	So there were those, even back then, that said it's not the vaccination, It's the living conditions.
	Hang on one second, Paul.
	One second.
	Go ahead.
	Paul, Paul, Paul.
	Yeah, we'll come back.
	- Hang on one second, Paul, one second.
	Go ahead.
	- Okay, 'cause she said something so important.
	- Paul, Paul, Paul, yeah, well come back.
	Dina, Dina, go ahead.
	- Obviously there's layers and layers of issues.
	I mean, there's those who just don't believe we should ever force any medical procedures on anyone without informed consent.
	Period.
	End of story.
	Right.
	Then there are those that say, we don't know that it even really works, or we know it did work to some degree, but at what cost?
	In other words, maybe we prevented vaccines.
	We might have prevented smallpox outbreaks in some regards, but what did we get as a result?
	We don't really know.
	And then another thing is, Vaccines do not work the same as actually being exposed to disease and developing natural immunity, which tends to last a lifetime.
	Not always, but there's differences.
	So there's a lot of issues.
	I'd go into these issues in this new article I wrote, which is now almost 80 single-spaced pages.
	It took me a month to write this.
	Yes.
	And it's very, very complicated.
	But what is very clear is our government has chosen to immunize manufacturers of vaccine at the same time, meaning they're immune from market forces and legal consequences.
	Now, of course, people are going to start investing like Bill Gates.
	This is a huge high profit margin situation.
	And if you look at the amount spent per child on vaccines in, say, 1970s versus today, it's hugely higher today.
	And they're saying that right now it's between a $35 and $50 billion a year industry.
	They're saying it's going to double by 2024.
	Well, how is it going to double by 2024 unless they force more vaccines upon us?
	So there's a lot going on with vaccines.
	Paul, go ahead.
	Okay, so there is a lot, but it's important to focus in and to not leave.
	You know, I know a little bit about law, not a lot, but one of the things I learned very early on from somebody that I thought was brilliant is they said that in any case, you know, prosecution or defense, you find the defect, the first defect or the largest defect in that case, and you never leave it.
	So, you said something that is so important, and RFK Jr., who is a great man, and you spend a lot of time listening to RFK Jr.
	about vaccines also, and what he said was that there have not been, there are not, any controlled studies on any of these vaccines.
	So, if you're thinking like a detective, like a lawyer, what does that tell you?
	It tells you, quite simply, that they wouldn't like the results if there were.
	Yeah, they already know the results, and they know they're bad and unflattering to their product, and therefore, if the truth were released to the public, it would cut down on their profit margin, so they do not want the truth released, and they suppress it.
	You're right.
	100% false.
	And one more thing, the whole idea about, and again, Dr. Mikovits repeated this yesterday on Scorpio Show, when she said, essentially, that they haven't done Cox-Postelet on so-called, you know, viruses.
	In other words, they have not isolated them, cultured or concentrated them, introduced them into a test subject, and produced the symptoms that they're attributing to them.
	So therefore, they don't have science.
	Yeah, yeah.
	The reason that they haven't done this, I would make the simple conclusion that they can't.
	And then if they did try to do it, they wouldn't get the results they want.
	Because we're living under, as Giuseppe will tell you, No, it's good, it's good, it's good, it's good.
	Giuseppe Daschi in a comment on my blog I noticed just a moment ago was concerned that you were cut off when you explained that there is no test to isolate The SARS-CoV-2 virus, which is, you know, COVID-19 as we're told, that we don't have a way to isolate.
	Now, I think that just had to do with the internet problem we had with Mitchell and so forth, but I just want you to have the opportunity to reaffirm that rather crucial point.
	Oh, absolutely.
	Dina, so you know, I have my initial career was a I was a degree professional journalist in the 80s and then my midlife career changed.
	I became a doctor of oriental medicine, graduated summa cum laude from a top five oriental medicine university with master's of science in oriental medicine and a bachelor's of science in nutrition, eastern and western.
	And the reason it's a master of science is for every class I took in traditional Chinese medicine or herbology, I had to take a parallel class in western allopathic medicine to be able to explain to patients what I do.
	So I can't, if I tell a patient, well, I'm going to treat your toxic blood heat, they'll like look at me like you're crazy.
	But that's what my medicine calls cancer.
	And so, but I do understand and am trained in reading blood reports, trained in superficial testing and virology and all that stuff.
	And the crazy issue that's going on is you cannot, there is absolutely no test where they, Unless you were to take blood under an electron microscope, and very few hospitals or clinics have electron microscopes, and be able to see the SARS-2 system.
	So in my opinion, this is such an op, an operation at a monumental scale to operant condition and scare the bejesus out of the average person to be open to this mandatory vaccine an operation at a monumental scale to operant condition and scare the bejesus out of the average person to be open to this mandatory vaccine hegemony, which Bill Gates, there's Amazing
	Polly and other people have dug into the whole Gates octopus of his investment through his foundation, through his trust in the World Health Organization, in GAVI, in all these organizations.
	And the criminal testing he's done, and both in smallpox and polio, the lies, smallpox is never eradicated.
	Smallpox is an episodic virus or malady that reappears.
	And when it reappeared after they claimed it was eradicated, they called the mutated version monkeypox.
	That's just smallpox with a slight mutation and a new name.
	And that's what they do in polio.
	Bill Gates and his criminal vaccine crippled nearly half a million young Indian children, as in the country of India, and unable to walk, and their legs no longer work.
	So they claim Bill Gates goes on TV to this day and says, we eradicated polio.
	All they did is renamed what the vaccine gave these poor young souls to flaccid leg syndrome.
	That's the level of criminality and these oligarchs are implementing.
	Do you agree?
	I have a friend in common with Robert Kennedy Jr.
	I don't know him personally, but I have been.
	Of course, I ran across his website and doing my research.
	And I think that there is always a big problem when you have a multi-billion dollar industry with consequences for dangerous products.
	I think it's become a money-making situation.
	And I think that it's, as I say in my article, it's a recipe for abuse, what we've done.
	And when Ronald Reagan signed the bill, he said, gosh, I don't really feel good about this when he signed the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act.
	So what's happened is what I call the rational actor assumption.
	If you take away consequences, if you take away legal consequences and liability, you can pretty much expect the industry to start looking after itself more than anything.
	What is the incentive to make vaccines really safe?
	They're not gonna be liable and people have to buy them.
	So I think there's a real, real problem.
	That's why I'm arguing that it should move from what I call coercive vaccines.
	It's not really mandatory.
	You can keep your child at home.
	And that brings another area of how you're going to get herd immunity if people out there aren't getting vaccinated and certain people aren't.
	And by the way, there's a buzz that the Gateses didn't vaccinate their children.
	And of course they're denying it.
	I know Washington.
	I'm from Washington.
	It was a matter of checking a box back then, so it's really easy to just not vaccinate your child up there.
	But I think that the industry, the vaccine industry right now, the pendulum has swung so far in favor of Big Pharma in this regard.
	And I mean, look at the research.
	The public says Big Pharma is the least credible industry anywhere.
	And the second least credible was the federal government.
	And I have that in my article talking about how people feel.
	And you're not going to get herd immunity.
	All of this is based on herd immunity.
	Too many people are refusing vaccines right now.
	If we want to change that, if we want people to agree to get vaccines, they need to be tested better, they need to prove to people that they're safe and effective, and then they can get consent.
	And then we can achieve herd immunity, if that's what we're headed for.
	And I have a very strong feeling we're not.
	People are not going to get vaccinated.
	They will move out of the country.
	I've talked to people who said they simply will not do it because they don't trust The safety or efficacy of vaccines at this time.
	And for good reason.
	But of course, herd immunity is promoted by interaction with other human beings, not by lockdowns, not by wearing face masks that are recycling your depleted oxygen, depleted breath, which does damage your cardiovascular system and kill your brain cells, such that I'm projecting a five-point loss in the IQ of the average American by the time we work our way through this.
	Scorpio, did you want to come back with a question for Dina or another comment?
	Well, no, that was really what I wanted to say.
	I think I'll just leave you guys with this.
	The magnitude of the lies that we're living under is growing exponentially.
	This COVID hoax is such a bigger fraud than even 9-11.
	Yeah.
	And thank God we have people like you and Revolution Radio.
	to try to expose these lies that we're living under.
	We really do live under a sea of lies right now.
	And I'll think I'll just-- No, before you go, Scorpio.
	I'll look at your new material at Jim the Conspiracy Guy.
	Yeah, but before you go, Scorpio, let me just add.
	You know, I thought forever the moon landing hoax would stand as the greatest in history, but it's been overwhelmed by the coronavirus phenomenon.
	You're 100% correct.
	And I also want to congratulate... It's just incredible, and I feel the worst for the young people.
	You know, for example, one of my nephews just graduated from high school, And he couldn't go to the graduation.
	They had to do it in their car and sort of just drive by and honk and get their diploma in the mail.
	I mean, it's a major rite of passage that's been stripped from, you know, young people and it's really terrible.
	And I want to wish you success with your show on conspiracies.
	I think that's excellent, Scarpy.
	I'm very glad you're doing that.
	Okay, thanks, Jim, and I'll be looking for your new material, and you guys take care.
	I'll be listening.
	Thanks for all those wonderful comments, Scorpio.
	I greatly appreciated those.
	Paul, come back in.
	Okay.
	Thanks, Scorpio.
	And I echo those comments, and I think you know that, Jim.
	Oh, I do, Paul.
	I will send them to you in the email.
	I do, I do, I do.
	Yeah, no, with Dina here, it's just so wonderful to have her here as a resource.
	Right, so just quickly, I'm not going to spend a lot of time on this, but I don't believe any such thing as herd immunity exists.
	It's conceptual to begin with, but I think that if you, Dina Explore, for example, John Rappaport, he wrote an excellent piece and also did, you know, something on video about Uh, the ridiculousness of so-called herd immunity.
	It's just one of these concepts that they want us to live under.
	Um, but something that you said I find galling, but I know you don't really, I know the way that you meant it, but here's what you said.
	It essentially says there'll always be a problem with large, you know, industry and large money, and especially with deregulation.
	They're taking away the incentive to make safe and effective vaccines.
	And I shook my head.
	I go, what?
	I mean, why would any decent human being, okay, assuming that they are decent and that their intentions are good, and I think both Scorpio and Giuseppe and Jim would agree with me that their intentions are probably not good, but why would they need any kind of regulation, okay, or incentives such as a lawsuit could be filed against them to make a safe and effective product that's going to be injected into young children?
	See the thing that I find the most awful and I have a lot of time into this and I think you're just getting going if you haven't looked at all the things I just mentioned and more I know you put your own work in but this has to affect you on a deep emotional level when you watch and listen to the parents of these children and what they've had to undergo to see their child be destroyed or in many cases killed And it's just like, my God, how could this be allowed to go on?
	But the problem is, is that the government and industry act as one in collusion to inflict this upon us, and there's nothing good that comes of it.
	If you actually get into it, and again, Giuseppe alluded to it with the smallpox, you'll find that there's been fraud from the beginning.
	And there's a guy by the name of Stefan Lanca that uncovered the fraud going back a long, long way, including Pasteur, including a number of other people that were in this so-called business that he says were frauds.
	I'm sure Dina would agree that the CDC and the FDA and even the WHO tend to work as frontman PR operations for Big Pharma.
	I mean, it's embarrassingly bad.
	And obviously, Dr. Anthony Tony the Rat Fauci is out there promoting the Bill Gates medical mafia with the idea of inoculating everyone in the world, even though he estimates it's going to cost 700,000 lives to inoculate the whole world against the coronavirus, which is more than the deaths that would occur from the coronavirus as it runs its course, one would presume.
	Well, let me ask a question about the vaccine industry and why I said what I said about incentivizing or disincentivizing businesses in terms of their safety testing.
	I'm talking about the rational actor assumption, which is a neoclassical, you know, tenet that's been accepted for a long time.
	We know that if people don't have consequences, they tend to do whatever they want and not worry about it.
	One of the reasons why we have expedited trials oftentimes in the criminal justice system is because if you don't have swift and sure punishment, no one pays attention to the law.
	I'm talking about just the basic theory behind Incentives and disincentives.
	I think Paul appreciates that, Dina.
	Do you think there's any prospect of rolling back the immunity from liability for vaccines?
	I mean, this was one of the most horrendous judgments Congress has ever made.
	And what's worse than that, because in 2011, the United States Supreme Court looked at a case and they broadened the immunity to cover all design defects, period.
	So, I mean, you almost don't have, unless you have fraud in the actual disclosure statement or something like that, you can't get out of the vaccine court.
	You're stuck.
	So, the only way I see out of this, I mean, there's a couple things.
	One, the U.S.
	Supreme Court could do the right thing and make a decision that medical autonomy means you cannot be forced vaccinated.
	You can't be coerced into vaccinations.
	I give two examples in my recent article.
	Of laws that are unconstitutional.
	The New York law mandating flu vaccine is unconstitutional in my opinion.
	I apply strict scrutiny and I say, look, there's not even a compelling need, let alone narrow tailoring.
	If you talk about a 40% efficacy rate, how is that narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling state interest?
	So I think there's a real problem.
	If you go back to smallpox, you have like a 90 some percent, 99% efficacy rate or whatever in a deadly disease that was killing a lot of people.
	So even if you accept the 1905, it doesn't apply to flu vaccines, in my opinion, today.
	So I think the Supreme Court might take a hard look at this, which they haven't done for 115 years, and say, you know, it's gone too far, and the states have the burden of proving how their vaccine is really benefiting society, and if they can't do it, which I don't think they can, Then they cannot force vaccination.
	The other thing is the people.
	The people are, I see the people as potentially revolting, you know, refusing to get vaccines or whatnot.
	And one of the things I've said that needs to be done, this is what needs to be done.
	We need to organize neighborhood by neighborhood.
	We need to vote neither Republican nor Democrat.
	We need to, from a grassroots level, figure out who we want in office.
	It might be a local barber.
	It might be a local lawyer.
	It might be a local police chief.
	I don't know.
	Someone who all of us trust because we've been with around them.
	We've dealt with them.
	We've worked with them.
	The people that we trust in our community, they don't cheat people.
	They take care of business.
	We all know someone like that in our neighborhood or our community.
	What we need to do is get together, figure out, and write them in.
	Because neither party is going to save this country.
	I think those points are well taken.
	Giuseppe?
	Oh, I would like to suggest looking into the natural medicine perspective of herd immunity.
	We call it natural immunity, and the creator created this magnificent biosystem, whereas Chickenpox, for example, the young get it, it's no big deal in the past, not now.
	Now people act like it's the black flag.
	The chickenpox, you get as a young person, you spread it on to everyone, which proves that there is something that can be spread.
	It's not just a toxin or electronic frequency.
	There are diseases that spread among people.
	And then when grandma and grandpa come by to see how the kids are doing, they get their booster, which prevents shingles.
	That's how nature works.
	The bad, inferior, corrupt version is now a chickenpox vaccine that doesn't work.
	And introduces contaminants in these young people that cause lifetimes of health problems.
	And then because grandma and grandpa don't get the natural off gas, so to speak, the natural sharing, then they develop shingles.
	And people, even young and middle-aged people, are getting this shingle vaccine, which causes shingles.
	And it's just insane, absolutely insane.
	And you've alluded to it earlier, and even with calling your books the godfathers, it's like those sexual predators, those Hebrew sexual predators, are Bush League compared to the criminal cabal that is the biologics division are Bush League compared to the criminal cabal that is the biologics division of Because, like you said, it's insane.
	They're indemnified.
	It's like being a driver and nothing will happen so I'm going to run over people and it's okay.
	You're indemnified.
	You can run over whoever you want.
	It's beyond Believe that we've gotten to this level and one last quick point is that you're talking about what's driving this and right now the the pharmaceutical industry the biologics division is very profitable they've consolidated and there's only like six people companies rather that produce and so if they can somehow
	Use this fear epidemic, this scandemic, to scare enough people to agree that the biologics industry will go from a multi-billion dollar annual profitability to multi-trillion dollar.
	They will dwarf every other big business.
	They will make Amazon look like a mom-and-pop grocery store.
	Those are wonderful comments.
	I want to bring in Bill Grant first and then Bill.
	Yeah, hey guys, I just came back.
	I just typed in, be right back, and just got right back.
	So, thank you very much.
	You know, first of all, I'm going to miss you, Jim, and your show.
	I was a little confused until today if it was your last day or your last day on this slot, plus you were going to move to a different slot here and have your new show.
	So, you know, I'm going to miss you.
	You have a great guest again.
	You've always had great guests.
	And basically, um, also when you jump to, uh, you know, we're talking about repercussions, you know, they have no repercussions.
	Okay.
	Uh, to jump to that, I wanted to also say, remember, uh, we all know the, uh, phrase, you know, feed a fever, starve a cold.
	So I say, you know, feed a, uh, uh, I mean, starve a fever, feed a cold, you know?
	So basically I say, uh, feed a Corona.
	You know, Star of a Fever kind of issue instead, so feed the corona.
	Have a corona!
	It's because of you that I will someday, if I am ever able, I will do meticulous, you know, true path vectoring to the moon and really, really nail that down.
	Hopefully that will help you in the future.
	You're the only person who got me to think really seriously that they didn't use rockets to go to the moon, and I'm an elitist, okay?
	But of course, the game was so well played across the herd that it seemed plausible enough to go with, which is what every scientist is going to do, but to get to the herd immunity, What I never got to say, never really said in the past is they don't just want herd immunity to prevent the major diseases.
	They actually are trying to do a forced, accelerated, fast future evolution on people against their will to make the super immune person of all diseases, all sicknesses, period.
	That's what most people don't realize.
	They want to get rid of every single germ Period.
	That's the goal.
	Then maybe I'll jump in a little later with a couple more stuff.
	I'll let somebody else talk.
	Even the Centers for Disease Control, which some say are, you know, not exactly on the up and up anymore.
	On the website it says every single You know, disease comes back sooner or later, you know.
	And just a few days ago, I don't know, maybe June, whatever, June 10th, something like that, some researchers on the East Coast said they found what they called a poison arrow to kill anything.
	Okay, well, if history teaches us anything, these viruses, fungi, they're gonna mutate.
	We are just people.
	We're dealing with nature.
	Mankind versus nature.
	I'll put my money on nature.
	We're dealing with evolution, yes.
	We continue to try to fight everything and control everything.
	I believe we're going to see that going forward, vaccines are not going to work the way they did in the past.
	I think we're dealing with a very different era with diseases that are different in nature.
	Why do you think we don't have an HIV vaccine or really a flu vaccine that works very well?
	There's something going on that is beyond, I think, our comprehension as a species.
	For whatever reason, our powers that be want to just say, we've got to control, control, control.
	And I think, you know what?
	Maybe we should make peace with nature.
	Maybe that's a key here.
	And when I tell people, well, you know, I think that fasting can work and things like that's what I've done.
	And I've gotten over flus very quickly by fasting or just doing juice and soup.
	And they laugh and say, if you think that, you know, diet's going to help you in these kinds of diseases, you're crazy.
	And I'm like, well, we're made to fight disease.
	Our bodies are made to fight.
	The vaccine's just like a, It's a push, you know.
	That's all it does.
	We're still engaging our immune system.
	We're just getting a vector of some kind or something.
	So, I think that there's... So, there's just so much going on here.
	Yes, yes, yes.
	Before I bring in... Before I bring in Brew and go back to Giuseppe, just for clarity, Bill, I'll be on Sunday, Tuesday and Thursday.
	From 8 to 10 Central on JimTheConspiracyGuy.com.
	The Sunday show being The Conspiracy Guy, the Tuesday-Thursday show being The Fetz Presents, which will be an interview show just like this.
	In fact, I expect to have Dina back as a guest on the new show.
	It's just that it's going to be Live stream video on five or six different platforms, and I won't have to create my own video independent version.
	I mean, there are a lot of benefits, but I'm also going to be on five days a week on real deal reports.
	I've been doing these Every single day for 80 days now.
	I mean, we took one or two, we took this weekend off because we're now going to go to five day a week.
	But I've been doing a huge amount of reporting updates every single day on all these issues, which you can find on Dean Ryan's website, Mike Mara's website, and my own Twitter account, at Jim Fetzer.
	Now I want to come back to Brew.
	Come on in, Brew.
	Yes, I second what Bill Grant said with Barry Jim Fetzer.
	I want to be a real boy too.
	Anyway, let me think.
	So, Bill Gates doesn't vaccinate his children.
	Steve Jobs didn't let his kids have iPads or iPhones.
	And Monsanto, the creator and biggest regenerator of glyphosate and GMO foods and so on, serves only organic, real food in their cafeterias.
	Because that's how they roll and they play there.
	you know, with Ronald Reagan passing this immunity act with the vaccine, the pharmaceutical companies and the vaccinations and so on, he had George Bush senior as the vice president.
	So whatever Reagan was signing, Bush was behind it because pretty much we've thought over time that Reagan pretty much after he was shot really wasn't running his administration as much as we would.
	Yeah.
	That was a message to let George do it.
	Yes.
	But you know, but this is what they do.
	They backed, since then, since before that, and it still goes on today, they back these corporations, they run over us, they pollute the air, they pollute the water, they do this fracking, they get away with so much, it's all in the name of money.
	The more money they got, the more they're paying off Congress to do whatever it is they want.
	We know in Congress they get checks from the oil companies, they hand out checks from the pharmaceutical companies, and so on and so forth.
	You know, it's come down to, when people talk about the vaccines, no vaccine, period.
	No matter what your view is.
	And even Del Bigtree, who's an advocate for clean vaccines, okay?
	without all the junk in it, with all the aluminum and whatever it all is, peanut butter, whatever they throw in it.
	He's an advocate for clean vaccine, but it doesn't matter.
	No vaccine over time has ever worked for what they said it would do.
	It's only harmed and harmed and harmed.
	And since Reagan gave immunity, they needed that immunity because making vaccinations and harming people wasn't profitable.
	They needed an immunity to it.
	And since then, since that happened, that's all they've ever done is dump out these vaccine and create new ones.
	Currently today, as we speak, there is over, and I'm talking, when I say over, like 370, 380 vaccinations Under the labels, because they want to label it, vaccination, because we've got to have that label on there.
	And it gets their immunity to have it say vaccine.
	Gives them the immunity.
	380 in the pipeline.
	And each one is a billion dollars or more profitability for them.
	So this is the sick part we're in, which I think our guest here was starting to go down the trail of what I really, you know, people should be asking her questions since she's done all this research.
	Look, the President, this President, Donald Trump said, you know, when he was asked, will the vaccines be mandatory, he says, no, they won't be mandatory, but On the outskirts of this, what vaccine is technically like, as you I think you alluded to, really is mandatory.
	But there are, if you want to go to school, if you want to join the sports program, if you want to be a nurse, if you got to work at a hospital, you have to have the flu shot, this shot, the NMR shot, otherwise you can't go to school, otherwise you can't do this.
	So even though it's not mandatory by like a governmental law, They make it restrictions that you cannot work, go to school.
	Financially coercive.
	No one has the money to forbid it.
	Deena's calling that coercive.
	That's coercive.
	Vaccination coercion.
	People can't afford not to do it.
	And if they don't want to do it and they're forced to, that's a terrible feeling.
	And I'll tell you right now, yes, the vaccine industry was going bankrupt, which is why the act was signed in 86.
	But I know by sheer luck I met someone in the last couple months who worked in a major research hospital and this person told me there were fake certificates that people were paying for to not get vaccinated with the flu vaccine and continue to work.
	My point is simply that if you even question the safety vaccine, it's just bullying.
	It's like you're an anti-vaxxer.
	I've even been called anti-vaxxer.
	I just wrote a very objective article.
	I'm not an anti-vaxxer.
	I'm just a person who's concerned.
	And what I saw in researching the vaccines, I'm way more concerned.
	But the bullying that goes on, the labeling, the saying, well, you're selfish.
	You don't want to help participate in herd immunity.
	Well, you know what?
	I would never ask someone to risk their life for me.
	And if you want to go all the way back to English common law, there is nothing.
	No, it really doesn't.
	We are built on a history and tradition of people deciding for themselves when and how to help others and there is no liability.
	And I talked about that in my article too, because the courts keep saying, well, history and tradition, blah, blah, blah, about how that supports it.
	No, it really doesn't.
	We are built on a history and tradition of people deciding for themselves when and how to help others.
	And there is no liability.
	It's called the no-duty rule.
	So that's, to me, all of it, it's all combining to create a situation where people are really, really uncomfortable and scared.
	Paul, before we move on, I'm going to hang up in a second.
	So we can blame the pharmaceutical companies and the fact that they create the CDC to create these vaccines, but the real criminality comes between doctor and patient when the doctors You know there are pediatricians and other doctors that kick the family, the mother, and the child out of their practice when they say, I don't want these childhood vaccines.
	The doctor gets upset and says, you're no longer a patient here.
	Because, and why is this?
	The incentive plan.
	We've talked about this before on the show, Jim.
	When the doctors have an incentive plan.
	How many X amount of kids get vaccinated, they get this amount of money, or a trip, or a car.
	Well, it's deep in that.
	They're taught in medical-- But they're also taught-- But they're also taught in medical-- I hope you and Paul and Giuseppe and others will call into my new show on Tuesday, Thursday, because I will be taking callers a second hour on those shows.
	They'll be called the Fetz Presents, but they're at jimtheconspiracyguide.com.
	All three of those shows, Sunday, Tuesday, Thursday, the same time, 8 to 10 central, at jimtheconspiracyguide.com.
	Dina, it's just sensational, just sensational having you here.
	Thank you.
	I'm so delighted.
	Rudy, do you want to add a word as your party?
	Let me go quick, Rudy, would you?
	Go ahead, Paul.
	So just really fast, yeah, so I echo all that.
	You know we're all going to be calling them because your therapy is much better.
	Go ahead.
	What Christina said is very important about the fact that unless there's fraud, okay, you can't bring a case against these people.
	And that's precisely the point.
	The reason there isn't any fraud is because they tell you when you insert.
	Yes, they do!
	One of the most important things he said in a two-hour interview is that if parents read the literature, or parents read the inserts, they would never vaccinate their kids.
	So they're telling us, A, that it can and will harm you, and B, that we know they're not effective or safe.
	I got one more book recommendation, actually two more, Murder by Injection by Eustace Mullins.
	Dina, put that on your list.
	Murder by Injection.
	And the other, just keep the title in your head.
	You don't need to read it.
	It's called Side Effects Death.
	Side Effects Death.
	Well, you guys are wonderful.
	It's been a joy for me to have callers of the quality of you tonight.
	It's just wonderful and been very illustrative of my experience here at Revolution Radio, and having great guests like Dina Bollard-Sachs has just been a joy as well, and I've gotten such support from the staff here, Mr. Rowe, a mad painter, when Mitchell couldn't be here, and the ever dependable Mitchell Buff.
	How can I thank you enough, Mitchell?
	I wish you so well in every endeavor.
	I want Revolution Radio to continue to Thrive and survive and flourish into the future, and I'm going to be rooting for you all the way.
	Mitchell, it's just been such a pleasure.
	Would you like to say a final word, my friend?
	I'd just like to say thank you, Jim, and I'm sure I'll be calling in to Jim the conspiracy theorist.
	Actually, that's the FETS.
	The call-in will be the FETS Presents.
	But it's on the same location, yeah.
	Yeah, maybe it should be renamed The Conspiracy Therapist.
	Very good.
	Very good, Mitchell.
	You've just been superb through all this, my friend.
	You've just been absolutely wonderful.
	And fielding the calls and all that, and tracking them down and keeping it going.
	Oh, wonderful filling in when I couldn't be here.
	I'm just very much in your debt, Mitchell.
	And any time I can lend a hand, you let me know.
	Paul Giuseppe, Scorpio, you've been wonderful through all these years.
	Your calls have been sensational, just terrific, and I'm very, very glad that I can look forward to hearing more from you on this new venue.
	And I repeat, I'll be doing all these news shows every single day, five days a week on the Real Deal Reports, and you'll be able to find those on the internet.
	There'll be one every single day, five days a week, Monday through Friday, and then the Conspiracy Guy Sunday, and then in the evening, of course, The Fats Presents on Tuesdays and Thursdays.
	Dina, Dina, give us one more source where we can find your stuff.
	You're doing so great.
	I know you got the books on Amazon.com.
	Yeah, it's on a bunch of, you know, it's on Barnes & Noble.
	They're in bookstores.
	I don't even know which bookstores.
	I heard there was one in Oregon, but I'm getting the information sort of haphazardly.
	Dina, you are wonderful.
	Revolution Radio, I love you.
	I love you.
	Thank you all for being here.
	Thank you all for listening.

▲