All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 2, 2020 - Jim Fetzer
57:00
Need to Know: The Fetzer Report 01 October2020
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This is Jim Fetzer in Madison, Wisconsin with Giuseppe Vaffanjulo from the District of Criminals and Rebecca Carnes from Newtown, Connecticut.
We're here with all the news you need to know, and today we got some beauties for you.
So, let's get started.
There are massive efforts to spin the debate one way or another, and it looks as though
a key issue has been overlooked to wit that the guy who appeared on the stage with Donald
Trump doesn't appear to be the real Joe Biden, but a body double.
This sounds incredible.
Look at what we've got here.
Good morning.
Welcome to our channel.
We appreciate each and every one of you.
Thank you for coming.
It is the 29th of September 2020, and this is the debate after the debate.
This was a picture of the debate.
This is Joe Biden in the debates.
This is Joe Biden in the official picture.
By the way, this is brought to you by BioTrust Collagen, which seems to be giving me a lot of energy, and the link for BioTrust will be below.
It's the only collagen I'll eat.
It happens to be The glue that holds the body together, and frankly, I can use all the glue I can get.
And I think he could, too, in the picture.
This is the official 2013 Vice Presidential picture.
Notice the rounded chin.
Notice the earlobes.
Blue eyes, earlobes, rounded chin.
Brown eyes, dimpled chin.
No earlobes.
See how it even attaches to the skin and even sticks out there?
The original Joe Biden has a little brown spot over his left eye.
This one has it over the center of his forehead, right in the crease.
Triangular face.
Square face.
There isn't anybody in the media who will do this.
Nobody.
The first question that Trump should have asked is, like he did with the frazzled wrap, who was that man that wasn't Joe Biden?
That's Joe Biden.
That's the man who destroyed America.
This is not Joe Biden.
I think he's got it right.
It may sound fantastic, but that doesn't appear to be Joe Biden.
Hillary used a dozen, well, six to eight body doubles in the past.
Check out here.
After she collapsed from the 9-11 memorial, they sent out this younger Thinner, far more attractive and pleasant person.
Clearly not Hillary Clinton on the left.
I refer to her as a Meg Ryan double because she reminded me so much of the actress.
On a plane later that very, three days later or so, they sent another body double off to Charlotte, North Carolina.
You see her on the right.
She has a considerable overbite.
She has a very slanted forehead.
This is again, not the same Hillary Clinton.
Here's another one.
Amazing that Hillary was getting away with his right and left.
Look at the smaller mouth, the very different appearance of the eyes, the overall face.
Not Hillary Clinton.
Even during the debates, they use a body double.
It's absolutely incredible.
Even during the debates.
And of course, the reason is people are going to be far more drawn to a younger, slender, healthier, more vigorous figure than Hillary Clinton.
In early 2017, the New York Times, Michael Paulson published an article about Hillary's in the house of her having attended four different plays on Broadway.
I wrote to him and I said, That was a very interesting article, but none of those women were Hillary.
He never replied.
I'm not surprised.
Giuseppe, your thoughts?
Well, Jim, I think that Joe Biden, for the last 40 years, has been a big fan of cosmetic surgery.
He's had multiple hair plug surgeries.
He's had multiple facelifts.
And you could conceivably Have your chin altered via plastic surgery to have a dimple?
Anything can be done.
So that's the only possible explanation other than a body double.
But what's so weird about a body double is if you're going to use a double, wouldn't you want to use a young and vigorous Joe Biden, not a guy who looks so old and everything?
So that's my one concern with that gentleman, is that it could just be Joe has had a lot of face tugs and his chin altered.
It could easily be done that way.
No, you're wrong.
You're wrong, Giuseppe.
And nobody's going to alter their chin, especially at this age.
Look at the whole narrowness of the face.
I'm telling you, this is not Joe Biden.
And it is the guy who appeared at the debate.
I mean, just look at this.
The single frame is better.
This one.
Look at that.
Yeah, no, I see all the differences, but all of that can be explained cosmetically.
If you're pulling your skin back so tight, that's pulling the earlobes in.
I mean, and the chin.
So many Hollywood celebrities have had their chins done, Jim.
It's stunning, and he's such a vain dude.
Or it could be a body double, I'm just telling you.
Everything that you're describing can be altered surgically.
You can't alter the shape of the skull, Giuseppe.
Look, I've been at this a long time, okay?
That is not Joe Biden, and it's got nothing to do with surgery.
And you couldn't get away with bringing out a younger, more vigorous Joe Biden.
Hillary may have got away with it, but it would have been so obvious it wasn't Joe.
Rebecca, your thoughts?
Well, I know celebrities use body doubles.
There's Johnny Depp, who said to use a body double, and also Britney Spears.
A lot of it's done for logistics reasons and energy levels.
Whether or not Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden have some sort of body doubles, Enlisting people that look somewhat like them or something.
I have no idea.
I've also heard about this science fiction stuff, whether it is science fiction or not, of cloning and AI.
But who knows?
Who knows?
But I think you're right, Jim.
You have some good points and Giuseppe as well.
I mean, what are the answers to this?
Why do these two people look so much alike but have some interesting characteristics that there's discrepancy there, right?
So you got to wonder what's going on, right?
Remember, remember that Joe Biden has had an insert into his skull for his hearing.
This guy had a wire.
He would not have needed a wire had it been Joe Biden who's got the insert.
Joe Biden's team wanted breaks after every 30 minutes to change his diaper.
This guy stayed up there for 90 minutes.
He didn't need the diaper change because he wasn't Joe Biden.
I suspect It may have been the denial by the Trump team of the 30-minute breaks that forced him to use the body double.
You did notice he paused several times to concentrate on what he was being told, looking down.
But I guarantee 100% that's not Joe Biden.
Giuseppe is correct in principle about plastic surgery, and yes, Rebecca, you're correct too, that many Hollywood figures and others have body doubles, but I'm telling you, this was a body double for Joe Biden that was out there.
Giuseppe, did you want to add a further thought?
Well, it does make sense to use a body double who would have the stamina to go 90 minutes.
I mean, the Biden we've seen faltering and feeble on the campaign trail could not do that.
Yeah, I'm very, very positive that this indeed was a double.
And the more you look at him, the more you realize it doesn't look the same.
Here are the top five moments from last night's presidential debate.
I think this is, from a source, not overly sympathetic.
Trump calls out Chris Wallace in a top debate moment.
In the proceedings early on, Trump made it clear he was debating two adversaries, Biden and Wallace.
Fox News hosts accuse the president of never coming up with a comprehensive plan to replace Obamacare.
What in the world was he doing there?
Wallace Chargey only signed a largely symbolic executive order.
And Trump said, well, first of all, I guess I'm debating you, not him.
But that's okay.
I'm not surprised.
Trump gets Biden to say he does not support the Green New Deal.
I'll come back to this.
Very, very important.
Biden declaring the Green New Deal is not my plan.
Later on, Biden tripped up, saying the Green New Deal will pay for itself as we move forward.
When challenged on the flip-flop, Biden replied, I don't support the Green New Deal.
But even on his own campaign site, it says he does support the Green New Deal.
Biden believes the Green New Deal is a crucial framework for meeting the climate challenges we face.
It powerfully captures two basic truths, which are the core of his plan.
The U.S.
urgently needs to embrace greater ambition on an epic scale to meet the scope of the challenge, and our environment and economy are completely and totally connected.
Trump gets Biden to deny he called American soldiers stupid bastards.
Understanding what you may hear about me, I have incredibly good judgment.
One, I married Jill.
And two, I appointed Johnson to the academy.
I just want you to know that.
Clap for that, you stupid bastards.
He denied.
The president not only denied the famed Atlantic article that claimed that Trump had called soldiers suckers and losers, where 21 officials have forcefully rejected the Atlantic piece, but he followed up by claiming Biden called the military stupid bastards.
He said it on tape.
Biden replied, I did not say that, but they've got the tape.
This is very, very bad.
Meanwhile, Trump hammered Biden for saying he'd shut down America's economy.
Again, very powerful.
Democrats think they're hurting us by keeping their state cities closed.
They are hurting people.
Our country is coming back incredibly well saying the record as it does.
Forbes reports voters are more likely to trust President Trump on economic issues than Joe Biden and of course the reason is who should you turn to to rebuild the economy but the guy brought us the strongest economy in our history.
Meanwhile Trump stumps Biden when he asked him to name one law enforcement group that supports his candidacy.
Trump rattled off one after another after another, and asserted he doesn't have any law support.
He has no law enforcement, Trump claimed.
That's not true, reported Biden.
Biden fumbled badly when Trump demanded that he name one law enforcement group that came out in support of you, and he couldn't do it.
He couldn't do it.
Those were all very significant moments.
Giuseppe, your thoughts?
Well, as the video shows that I inserted, Biden clearly calls the troops stupid bastards.
I've watched it multiple times.
I was shocked because he did not use like a big smile and a grin.
Oh, you stupid bastards.
You're my buddies.
He just goes, you stupid bastards.
I mean, he was serious.
He wasn't joking.
And the other thing that's amazing during that debate was how he just out and out denied his son's guilt in the Burisma money laundering escapade.
He goes, that's not true.
That's a lie.
That's like, no, it's not a lie.
It's been proven by congressional Senate investigation.
It's been proven by dozens of skilled investigative journalists.
It's all true.
Beau Biden is an addict and he's out of control.
And he hit a gold mine of millions of dollars using daddy's, uh, daddy's, uh, uh, uh, connections.
And then daddy bailed him out of a huge deal in, in, uh, with Burisma.
It's unbelievable.
But Giuseppe, you mistakenly said Beau Biden.
You meant Hunter.
I meant Hunter Biden.
My bad.
My bad.
Hunter Biden.
Biden's there at the Council on Foreign Relations boasting about his corrupt act and getting, you know, threatening to withhold a billion dollars in foreign aid if they don't fire the browsing unit.
I mean, it's ridiculous.
Rebecca, your thoughts?
Yeah, well, just getting back to Chris Wallace's role as moderator, he was, you know, as moderator and as a journalist, you're supposed to be unbiased.
But, you know, Chris Wallace was entirely biased, if you ask me.
He went after Trump repeatedly, challenging him with follow-up questions and kind of interrogating him
in a way that was not unbiased.
And when Trump said he was kind of dealing like he had two adversaries there, he absolutely was.
Now, Chris Wallace did not act that way with Joe Biden at all.
So that was clearly a biased moderator questioning fashion.
And yeah, and I just have to say, Trump did an excellent job on really highlighting Joe Biden's
endorsement of the, I'm sorry, retraction of endorsing the Green New Deal and really showing him
that he does indeed have social leanings, but by rejecting the Green New Deal,
Trump said you just lost the radical left.
So Joe Biden waffles.
He's your classic cliche politician that lies and panders and Trump did a good job at highlighting that.
Yeah.
Let me add something that's emerged here.
I've had reports from at least two sources that what they saw broadcast live was not what they saw when they went back and watched again.
That somehow Trump's intensity was increased in the broadcast.
Giuseppe, you may know something about this.
But it looks as though they played a video trick to make it look as though Trump was even more... I mean, I thought he was very fine.
We had the C-SPAN broadcast, and I thought he was totally in control.
But they're saying they saw something that was different that made it look more as though he were out of control, Giuseppe.
Oh, that's really interesting.
Well, it was this, uh, people were watching a network broadcast?
Yeah, they were even saying on Fox.
Wow, that's interesting.
Well, we have the recorded C-SPAN footage.
I guess can look for a network broadcast and compare the two.
It's easily done.
I mean, they have so many digital effects that they can put in live these days.
They could easily have set up a filter that made him appear a little bit more animated, angry, and easily done.
Giuseppe, I'm telling you, these sources are so reliable, and they said it was different when they went back to look.
I believe it was done.
I believe it was done.
If we can confirm it, it would be great to run them, if you can track.
Yeah, yeah, I'll look into it.
That would be sensational.
Meanwhile, Trump accomplished his debate goal.
He got Joe Biden to turn against his radical Democrats.
This is very telling.
Trump supporters are already in the bag.
That includes plenty of moderate independents and even some defecting Democrats.
But what about the Democrat base?
This is Dan Bongino explaining that Trump was able to get Biden, who called himself the Democratic Party, I thought that was arrogant and astonishing, to turn on his left-wing base.
During the debate, Trump got Joe Biden to turn on Bernie Sanders, AOC, the Green New Deal, and other plans the radical left has been pushing.
Keep in mind, since Biden got the nomination, he's gone further to the left to win them over, Last night, thinking he was trying to win over moderates, Biden fell for Trump's trap and threw his base under the bus.
In fact, Trump admitted this was his strategy all along.
Chris had a tough night.
Two-on-one was not surprising, but fun.
Many important points made, like throwing Bernie, AOC, plus three, and the rest of the wolves.
Radical left is dumping Sleepy Joe.
Zero Democrat enthusiasm.
Weak leadership.
I think this is fascinating.
Key takeaways.
Dan Bongino explained Trump's debate strategy, pulled it off flawlessly.
Trump was able to get Joe Biden to turn on the radical leftist Democrats, his current base.
Biden turned on Sanders, AOC, the Green New Deal, and other socialist ideas.
The debate viewership fell from 2016 to 73.1 million.
That's still pretty significant.
An estimated 67.4 TV viewers watched the first presidential debate, a total likely to rise, but it falls short of the gangbuster rating for the debate in 2016.
Fox was the top network.
Trying 17.8, following ABC with 12.6, NBC with 9.7, CNN with 8.3.
We did well by going to C-SPAN.
Interestingly, they were trying to spin it that Joe Biden had won the debate, notwithstanding the fact that he clearly did not.
We'll return to this issue.
Giuseppe, your thoughts?
I don't think any presidential debate will come close to the blockbuster numbers of Hillary, because she was such a despised figure, and Trump was such a surprise back then.
It was kind of like a Muhammad Ali-Joe Frazier fight back in the day.
It almost transcended politics, and Biden doesn't have any of that charisma, any of that gravitas.
So those are still pretty respectable numbers, though, I would say.
And I think that anyone who thinks that Joe Biden won that debate wasn't watching that debate.
Or we're watching this exaggerated version.
We gotta track that down, Giuseppe, because it is fairly remarkable that I've had two people who are highly reliable give me that report.
Rebecca, your thoughts?
Yeah, I'm not surprised that Fox News had the highest viewership because there's a lot more energy and enthusiasm surrounding Trump's presidency and re-election.
I mean, Trump referenced several times the size of his rallies, and I think he burned Biden pretty well when he said, you're not having any because, you know, you could probably barely get a handful of people to come, you know?
So, and that's true.
There's low energy, low enthusiasm for Biden.
And that's a direct reflection of his demeanor, personality, and intellectual and mental acumen that he is exhibiting.
I mean, just dead on arrival, in my opinion, candidate in very many ways, right?
Yeah, and remember how even Angela Davis and AOC have acknowledged openly that Biden wasn't their best candidate, but because they felt he would be the most amenable
to pursuing the Green New Deal, another of their projects, which he's now thrown under the
bus. I think this is going to have a lot of ramifications and create a lot of division within
the party.
Meanwhile, Spanish language TV viewers said Donald Trump beat Joe Biden.
I find this totally reasonable.
66 to 34 for Biden.
I think that's a very realistic, appropriate assessment.
This is over Telemundo.
Now I do think that Hispanics like a more aggressive, macho male.
So I think the fact that Biden came off as wimpy and Trump as an alpha was very, very positive.
In 2016, Hillary had been deemed the winner by 62% of Telemundo.
Only 27% they thought Trump had the better night.
But this time, it was the opposite.
And if Trump wins a large share of the Latino vote, he stands to win the electoral vote of Florida and Arizona and gain extra voters in Texas, Georgia, New Mexico, it's gonna happen.
Meanwhile, here we have a report.
Donald Trump won the first debate.
Now the corrupt media want the two remaining debates cancelled now because they know Trump won and Biden lost.
Listen, Trump's always going to be Trump.
If people haven't figured that out by now, they never will.
He's just going to be who he is, and he's a president who doesn't give a mouse turd.
I love this!
About norms, because he knows the norms are all rigged by the fake media.
He knew moderator Chris Wallace would never bring up how Joe Biden enabled his son Hunter's breathtaking corruption and self-dealing, so he pounded and pounded and pounded it.
He knew Chris Wallace would stand in Biden's corner to help hold him up.
Asked questions of Trump that put Trump on the defense and of Biden that would allow Biden to look like a moderate.
So Trump did what he had to do to remind voters Biden is a racist, a liar, and a dummy.
I thought this was pretty damn good.
Trump knew presidents running for re-election always blow their first debate.
Reagan in 84, George H.W.
Bush in 92, George W. Bush in 04, even.
Barack Obama in 12.
Looked like they're caught in the headlights after being shoved out of the presidential bubble.
So Trump arrived loaded for Barron, full of energy and fight.
It was very important.
Here are three lingering impressions.
Biden is old.
He's been hiding throughout the campaign.
So to see him for 95 uninterrupted minutes was a shock.
He's an old, old man.
It was startling.
Waxy, wispy hair, barely hanging on.
Second, Biden stood before the country and called the President of the United States a clown, told the President of the United States to shut up.
Sure, Trump interrupted and pestered, but he didn't call anyone names or tell anyone to shut up.
I thought those actions by Biden We're very petty and demeaning.
Meanwhile, third, Trump is a fighter full of energy, full of piss and vinegar, eager to defend his record, refuses to give an inch, and that's a virtue.
Most of all, Trump got Biden to repudiate the Green New Deal, something Biden's own website says he supports, which will hurt him with the enthusiasts he needs on the list.
He got Biden to dismiss Bernie Sanders, a huge error, huge.
He also got Biden to admit he's going to raise taxes on the middle class.
And that's why I'm going to eliminate the Trump tax cuts.
And I'm going to eliminate those tax cuts.
Biden said that last night.
And that means your standard deduction child tax credits, Trump nearly doubled, will be slashed in half.
So if you're married, your federal taxes say 20%, you're going to pay 20% on about $12,000 in income.
You weren't under the Trump tax cuts.
That's a $2,400 tax increase.
Even without the caveats, Biden straight up said he'd repeal Trump tax cuts.
Trump did a brilliant job sounding the alarm about the coming catastrophe and left-wing corruption involving mail-in voting.
Trump won.
It wasn't pretty, but Trump won.
And that's why the corrupt media want to cancel the next two debates.
Giuseppe, your thoughts?
Jim, that's a major win for Trump with Telemundo in that poll because Telemundo is pretty left-leaning and there's other Latino channels that Mexican conservatives watch, not necessarily Telemundo.
So if Telemundo is saying he won, that could be extrapolated in a pretty dramatic way for For Trump when it comes to the Mexican vote, which would be really crucial.
That article from that fella, he really took it apart piece by piece and pointed out all the... It was like a heavyweight fight.
It was ugly.
It wasn't like a clean knockout.
It was like 15 rounds.
And Trump clearly won every decision easily.
And Biden, I thought that was totally inappropriate to call Donald Trump, who is the elected president, a clown.
And, you know, there's so many other descriptors he could have used, like liar or misguided, you know, with a little bit of respect, and he didn't use it.
And telling the president to shut up, man?
Yeah, that's just, you know, it's inappropriate.
This guy Nolte is really quite good, very penetrating.
He is really quite good.
So Jim, the last day or two I've been considering why is it that the Democratic Party, under the guidance of George Soros, is making such an apparently self-defeating play For the far left progressives, and the only thing I can come to is there's 86 million millennials who are now able to vote, and perhaps they think they can rouse that slumbering giant, but I don't see it.
I don't see them getting excited for Biden in any way.
Especially not with an ancient listless candidate who's wearing adult diapers, for God's sake.
Rebecca, your thoughts?
Well, I think the Democratic Party, they know that the Millennials don't have to get excited about Biden.
They don't need them to, because I think they know that they have the Millennials in their pocket, so to speak.
They're just going to vote Democrat, most of them, right?
So I think that's why you see Biden doing this little dance during the debates and on the media stage saying,
well, you know, fracking, you know, it's not entirely off the table.
Or he says, oh, the Green New Deal, you know, no, I'm not for that now.
He does this little dance back and forth to try and appease the more moderate Democrats that do.
Nevertheless, what was your take on the debate?
and socialist, and I think that's what we're seeing Biden do, especially during the debates.
But in terms of the millennials, yeah, I think the Democratic Party, they know the millennials
will vote Democrat, and they maybe, I'm guessing, don't care if the millennials get excited
for Joe Biden or not.
And I'm sure they aren't getting excited about him, right?
Now, Rebecca, we know you're not excited about Donald Trump.
Nevertheless, what was your take on the debate?
How did you call it?
Yeah, no, I think Trump did very well in calling out the socialist leftist leanings of Joe
Biden and the Democratic Party, and how Joe Biden does waffle on that point.
But you know, that's right, I'm not enthusiastic about Donald Trump.
I think he was chosen back in 2016.
Because he is such a lightning, he's such a galvanizing rod for the Democrats, right, and the liberals.
They just hate Trump.
And I think he was chosen back in 2016 to run for president because they
knew it would create a lot of division and hatred and finger pointing between the parties.
But you're right, Jim.
I have to say, one thing that concerned me during the debates
that Trump did is he referenced his mask.
He said, I have my mask in my pocket.
I think everyone should wear it when it's needed.
But I am entirely against these radical policy mandates coming
down with this COVID stuff and for Trump to support it even a little bit.
And then I have to say, he said that he's going to roll out the military to help deliver vaccines
to the American public.
And I think a guest of yours, Jim, Jack Mullen, has pointed this out as well.
That is very concerning to use the military force to roll out these vaccines that he
says are going to be your choice, but I really highly doubt it.
So that's very concerning.
That's right.
Yeah, well, he's had his new scientific medical advisor, Scott Atlas, declare several times it's going to be non-mandatory.
And it would be crazy.
Trump doesn't support mandatory.
I'm certain of it.
I even believe that his son, Barron, has been affected adversely by vaccinations and is mildly autistic as a consequence.
I think that he's going along with a lot of the public opinion, but will not, in fact, move in that direction.
Meanwhile, we'll be right back.
If you want more about Hillary and body doubles, you can find it from Orlando to Dallas and beyond at Moonrock Books.
There also was a fake state shooting in Dallas not long after Orlando, where, by the way, just to give you a clue, The permit for the Pulse Club had expired three years earlier.
That's when it was from white to black.
So they used an abandoned club for the fake shooting in Orlando, just as they used an abandoned school for the fake shooting in Newtown at Sandy Hook.
We now return.
CNN has asked a Democratic senator to explain how the nomination of Amy Coney Bryant is illegal or illegitimate, and he can't.
This is your senator, Richard Blumenthal, or Rebecca, One of the loudest voices has been Blumenthal, who declares, I will oppose the confirmation of Judge Amy Coney Barrett as I would any nominee proposed as part of this illegitimate sham process.
Barely one month before an election, as Americans are already casting their votes, Americans deserve a voice in this hugely consequential decision.
During his CNN interview, he repeatedly returned to his claim that the nomination is illegitimate and a sham.
Now, I was very impressed that Wolf Blitzer, who has ties to the CIA as Anderson Cooper, repeatedly asked him to explain how the nomination is illegal or illegitimate, but he had no answer.
What are the Republicans doing that is illegal or illegitimate, Blitzer asked.
Noting the Constitution delineates exactly how nominations to the court are supposed to occur.
The Constitution says the President has to nominate, the Senate has to advise, consent, and confirm.
So what's illegal about it?
You say it's illegitimate.
Blitzer wasn't satisfied that the Senator said it was so close to the election and pressed again.
Where does it say it's illegitimate in the Constitution or in the law?
Where does it say what they're doing is illegal?
Blumenthal was forced to admit nothing they were doing was illegal or illegitimate.
He claimed they were violating unwritten rules.
In the end, he said, it may not violate the letter of the Constitution, but violates the spirit.
Pretty weak.
I thought Trump was excellent on this when he pointed out he was elected for four years, not just for three.
Giuseppe, your thoughts?
Well, the great globalist democratic strategy is to appoint these judges who are activist judges who illegally mandate law when they shouldn't.
The proper role of a judge is to just decide cases fairly and let the legislative
and the executive branches make the laws.
And all of Clinton and Obama's judges are so radical in supporting the globalist agenda of the Agenda 2030,
the Green New Deal, and now the Great Reset.
It's just ridiculous.
Some of these activist judges have blocked so many of Trump's initiatives.
It's ridiculous that some pissant appointed by Obama is blocking what Trump's want to do.
It's such an overreach.
I can't believe this is allowed to happen as frequently as it does.
He also commented on how many judges he'd appointed.
Now, I had one correspondent say she wished he'd talked more about economic and the benefits for the black community, which have been very substantial and why I think a very large segment of the black community is going to support Trump, that they care less about the number of judges, but it's a very dear issue to his base.
Rebecca, your thoughts?
Right, well, Senator Richard Blumenthal is, yes, from my state of Connecticut.
He's repeatedly rolled out and enlisted by the Democrats to kind of be an attack dog in certain ways.
And I think what we saw with Will Flitzer, where Blumenthal couldn't really answer
to why it was an illegitimate and illegal selection process, is probably he was just unprepared.
I mean, his role is to be an attack dog.
They enlist him all the time to do this stuff, and he probably didn't even.
He had some sound bites that he knew he had to say, and that's probably all he had in his arsenal
to go after Coney Barrett.
But I have to say, on Coney Barrett, I have a lot of reservations about her
because she supported, I think it was in Illinois, these draconian COVID mandates, and she upheld them.
So that's a big concern.
I think everyone should keep that in mind during this nomination process.
Yeah, we have more on his nominee.
Here's a thoughtful piece by David Harsanyi about the nomination.
It must have been quite disappointing for those expecting Coney Bryant to appear in a red habit and fail to take the oath of subservience to the patriarchy, but Donald Trump and the nominee, along with her beautiful family, both gave fine speeches.
Was the Trump presidency worth it for conservatives?
History will tell.
Considering the accelerated radicalism of the modern left, evident in the feverish reaction of Barrett's nomination, the court is clearly going to be more important than it has been in years.
Will it help Trump win in 2020?
I'm no prognosticator, but politics has to be about more than always situating the party for the next win.
Occasionally, you're going to have to fulfill promises.
These justices fulfill the wishes of the vast majority of the right, sans a handful of Trump-obsessed former conservatives.
Nor should it be forgotten that if Barrett is confirmed, Mitch McConnell will become one of the most effective and consequential conservative politicians, nay politicians, period, in American history.
Call him a hypocrite if you like, but the risk of denying Obama another constitution corroding justice in 2016, widely seen as politically self-destructive by Washington commentators at the time, was worth it.
His constitutionally kosher position turned into three justices who, one hopes, will abide by their stated originalist and Scalia-like dispositions.
Those rulings will long outlast any fleeting partisan squabble.
Meanwhile, Lindsey Graham says Amy Comey Bryant could be confirmed by the end of October.
I expect it's going to happen.
We're reporting out her nomination on October 22nd.
Then he'll schedule the debate, holding confirmation hearings before the 3rd.
I have no doubt about it that Amy Coney Barrett will be confirmed before the election on November 3rd.
Giuseppe, your thoughts?
Well, I mean, as far as just the gravitas and bona fides, Amy Coney Barrett has Everything a Supreme Court Justice should and I have no doubt she will be confirmed.
I share Rebecca's concerns about her use of the Jacobson, the obscure Jacobson 1905 ruling as once again legitimizing draconian measures.
I hope that was just out of concern at the moment that the scamdemic was real and any thinking person now understands that It wasn't, so I hope that she would have a more reasoned decision-making approach on the Supreme Court.
Yes, yes.
Rebecca, your thoughts?
Yeah, well, I think Coney Barrett will absolutely be approved as a Scoutess very soon and quickly.
And you know what?
It's just going to create a firestorm on the left, and I think that's just going to be a warm-up To the firestorm we're going to see after the election when it's going to be contested and we're going to have counting and it's going to drag out.
So I think it's just a prelude to that kind of chaos.
Yeah.
And the point you make reinforces the importance of having her on the court before the election because without her there are only eight justices who could be stalemated four to four to unable to resolve crucial issues.
So I think that's another totally appropriate constitutional reason for having the court complete to its nine full Agenda in advance of this, what is going to be, as you observe, a highly disputed election.
Meanwhile, this is pretty interesting.
Democratic unity may not survive Harris attacks on Barrett.
This is Joe Sheffi, who I'm discovering is a real Schaefer, who is a very smart guy.
As Democratic presidential candidates, Scranton Joe Biden continues to distance himself from the more extremist elements of his party.
His running mate, Senator Kamala Harris, is primed to bring back to the fore during the upcoming Supreme Court battle.
She's released a combative statement on September 26, declaring her intention to strongly oppose Judge Amy Comey Bryant's nomination.
Sighting in her fiery miss of abortion and the sacred memory of deceased progressive icon Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
The pugnacious tone hits at further headaches for Biden, as his sidekick appears to be chomping at the bit to resume her role as a tough gal prosecutor she performed a dismal effect at the Brett Kavanaugh hearings in 2018.
Strains of her desire can be detected in her statement.
Just yesterday I paid my respects to the legendary Ruth Bader Ginsburg who devoted her life to fighting for equal justice under law in a more fair and just world.
Her passing is devastating and it would be a travesty to replace her with a justice who's being selected to undo her legacy and erase everything she did for our country.
With the next Supreme Court just set to determine the fate of protections for those with pre-existing health conditions, reproductive health options, I will continue to fight on behalf of the people and strongly oppose the President's nomination.
It's an expected pose for her to strike, given her confrontational political nature.
Some have criticized it as being harsh, yet in the eyes of Democrats, This is her welcome contribution to the Biden team, whereas Kamala questions have arisen about her silence.
What more should we expect?
So Harris is preparing to become exactly the attack dog many have thought she would perform, but is this what the campaign wants and needs?
So shortly before the election.
The worry may be bullying a Supreme Court nominee who will not pledge to uphold all the progressive shibboleths enunciated throughout the primary will not be a good law.
Interesting to see Democrats struggle with a pickle they have run themselves into.
They fully realize their progressive base demands.
They unleash hurricane lunacy at Barrett, yet they don't want to see their presidential tickets soiled by the storm.
It's gonna happen.
The idea that this woman, this judge, is going to be confirmed to the Supreme Court ought to be a lightning rod to motivate women to come out to vote to preserve the right of their choice.
But I don't think that Senator Harris ought to get in the middle.
to the Washington Examiner dutifully striking feminist progressive courts.
But I don't think that Senator Harris ought to get in the middle.
There are plenty of other Democrats who can make the case.
Glenser admitted the Mets must indeed be unrolled, an allusion to the Godfather, so the circus can go on.
Yet he desperately hopes the most prominent Democrat member in the Senate Judiciary Committee will proceed meekly.
Good luck with that.
We all remember how bad she was to Judge Kavanaugh.
She pampered her inquiry with ominous phrases like, be sure about your answer, sir.
And I'm asking you a very direct question, yes or no?
But in the end, she appeared to be a paper tiger with no substance behind the roar.
So now that Biden is lunging for the mainstream, the rest of the Democrats seem to be preparing two crucial lines of attack against Amy, her Catholic faith, and abortion rights.
No doubt Harris is girding herself.
A potential nightmare now threatens to befall Scranton Joe.
Perhaps he should have given much more consideration before tabbing as his VP pick, a political provocateur with a love of the spotlight.
Very, very thoughtful, Giuseppe, your observations.
Well, Kamala Harris is indeed an empty pantsuit, a paper tiger.
People tend to forget that when she was the exciting candidate for the globalist parasites in the early crowded Democratic debate, Tulsi Gabbard tore her apart and essentially ruined her chances for the presidential nomination.
She's weak and ineffective.
And I think that we should honor the real Kamala Harris, the WWE wrestler.
He has more legitimacy than she does.
Rebecca, your thoughts?
Yeah, well, I think saying Kamala Harris is a paper tiger is not accurate.
I disagree.
I don't think we should underestimate her skills, her intellect, and her acting as a past prosecutor, I believe, in California.
She's whip-smart.
She's a vicious cross-examiner and interrogator, and we saw that with the Kavanaugh hearings, the way she went after him.
She really put on display how she can be use her intellect and skills with the law and cross-examination
interrogation there.
She, I think as much as I dislike Kamala Harris, I think she does have those great skills.
Maybe she's just jealous of Pony Baird, one wishes she could be on the Supreme Court.
She's been chosen to run for VP by the powers that be or whatever.
But I just think, yeah, I think one more comment on Pony Baird that I wanted to
notice that I think she is going to challenge the use of,
she's going to challenge abortions, the federal funding of abortions.
And Kamala Harris, that's one of the reasons she's going after her so hard.
She wants to, Kamala Harris wants to prop up and support big business like Planned Parenthood.
And I think everyone should remember that in every inoculation and vaccine, there's aborted fetal tissue.
So when they roll out your flu vaccines and when they roll out these COVID vaccines, let's remember that.
Let's remember the sacredness and divinity of life here.
So, yeah.
And we also believe there is Bill Gates' DNA in every one of those vaccines.
And I'll tell you, you make nice points, Rebecca, here.
Kamala, I think, is going to harm the Democrats more than she helps.
Meanwhile, we've had a fairly stunning development, if you understand what actually happened in Las Vegas.
A judge had approved an $800 million payout to more than 4,400 relatives and victims.
These are all phonies and frauds.
It's very much like Sandy Hook.
No one actually died there.
We did have a body, but the circumstances of his death are very, very bizarre.
We got MGM Resorts.
International and its insurers paying out an 800 million settlement.
The gunman, Stephen Paddock, I should say the purported gunman, allegedly killed 58 and wounded 850.
The number goes up and up and up, opening fire from the 32 floor of the Mandalay Bay.
Moments before police could arrest, he killed himself.
This is all the official narrative.
Here you see the wing.
This is where they're supposed to have shot, but we have other videos showing light flashing from the center of the Mandalay Bay on the seventh floor.
The sheriff has declared he knows of no evidence of shots fired from anywhere else than this location, but that's, of course, blatant misrepresentation.
Crowds on Demand was recruiting for six weeks before the event.
We believe the crowd was stacked with as many as 500 crisis actors.
They played a pre-recorded soundtrack over the The PA system, and then have these special visual effects coordinated to make it look as though real machine guns were being fired, but no such thing was taking place.
Here you have the gunman, allegedly Steven Paddock.
More about him momentarily.
A line-by-line list of victims identified by their initials only runs for more than 170 pages of the 225-page complaint.
That's a kind of an appeal to emotion with a staggering list, where a minimum of five thou would go to each person who filed a claim for unseen injuries and didn't seek medical attention or therapy.
This is a kind of a payoff.
Here you've got the alleged decedent.
Scott Bennett, who's a former Army Intel and PSYOPS officer, noticed here in the small number of shell casings, given the vast number he's alleged to have fired, you find rounds for blanks and for CO2 cartridges, for gas-propelled pellet guns.
In other words, the prop master didn't really realize the nature of the shell cartridges had to be more than a striking appearance.
Mona Alexis Presley has tracked down all of the persons whose obituaries are listed and find they all, when they aren't merely photoshopped variations of one another, died in different states or on different dates or from different causes of death.
It was an entire complete scam.
She even tracked down the crime map for the surrounding area of the theater
where the event took place for 8 p.m. before to 8 p.m. after, and you had robbery,
other disturbance, recovered motor vehicle, malicious destruction, burglary, stolen motor vehicle,
assault and battery, not a single violent gunshot wound, No injury, no shooting there because it didn't happen.
I had a Facebook friend who actually contacted the Krakow Hospitals to the Ambulance Theater to ask how many gunshot victims had been admitted On the occasion, and all three reported none, and the third helpfully added, I think you're calling about that drill, but no one was shot.
You need to contact the local authorities.
Giuseppe, your thoughts?
Yeah, the whole so-called Las Vegas massacre has so many gaping holes, and he could drive a 40-foot semi-tractor trailer through it.
And Mona, Alexis Presley did a wonderful job in proving those corpses were certified dead in other cities and states.
And Scott Bennett, that's damning insight about the stage death scene.
in the hotel room with the purported shooter when in reality those the you know the the level of brass and things that would be there is is so missing and those are blanks and co2 cartridges it's it's such a scam there was uh obama and uh james holter were so obsessed with trying to deliver uh the uh communist uh wet dream of us taking the guns From Americans and they staged so many of those during that presidency and it's how ironic now they never happen anymore.
Yeah, you're absolutely right.
And I mean, look, the effect of all the rioting and looting and the move to defund or dismantle the police has made everyone know you've got to defend yourself.
Millions, millions of Americans have obtained firearms that would ordinarily never have done so, but for this aggressive move by the Democrats, which is massively backfiring.
Rebecca, your thoughts?
Right, well this news story says that restitution is going to be paid to the victims of Las Vegas, but we can easily translate that to an extra paycheck for the crisis actors.
That's all it is.
Because, you know, after digging under the surface of these false flags, as I have just come to realize within the year, and doing research in my own hometown, there's a lot to the narrative, well most of the narrative, if not all of the narrative, Is a mix of truth and lies, but yeah, the official narrative delivered to us is not the truth.
And they use crisis actors, that's right, they recycle them or, you know, they'll mix it up and they use past, you know, deceased people and so on and so forth.
But we all need to recognize that that's all that this probably is, is a payoff to the crisis actors and it's just sold to the mass media readers as restitution for the so-called victims, right?
Yeah.
As you say, it's an extra paycheck for being a crisis actor.
Embarrassingly bad.
And yet the mainstream pays no attention.
Meanwhile, we want to hear from you.
You can write us, pro or con, live.
Need to know at gmail.com, live.
Need to know at gmail.com and you're glad, you're welcome to take exception to any of our positions.
Notice we ourselves have differences in points of view.
If you want to see more about the sampler of orchestrated events, check out how to spot a false flag on the conspiracy guy at jimtheconspiracyguy.com You need to get a handle for this because, as you can tell, it's getting more and more common.
Embarrassingly bad.
Meanwhile, there will be a wonderful conference, Question Everything 2020, in the Hilton Garden Inn in Austin, Texas, on the 7th and 8th of November.
We're going to have significant experts on Sandy Hook, significant experts on 9-11, significant experts on JFK, and a mix of others, including our very own Rebecca Karnes.
This is one you don't want to miss.
And let me say, you don't actually have to be there.
There are only 200 seats available, but you can also participate from the comfort of your home via pay-per-view television.
Check it out at mixandstream.com.
You'll see the whole program, which we're tweaking and refining as we proceed.
Meanwhile, anyone so disposed, my Legal Defense Fund, you could write to James H. Fetzer, Legal Defense Fund, 800 Violet Lane, Oregon, Wisconsin, 53575, or Using Zelle, make an electronic transfer to jfetzer at d.umn.edu.
I repeat, jfetzer at d.umn.edu.
And now for our final thoughts, Giuseppe, yours.
Well, Jim, I think the whole Amy Coney Barrett nomination process is going to capture the spotlight for the next two to three weeks in the run down to the November 3rd election.
And I think that, I'll be curious to see how Joe Biden does.
So far his followup since the debate, appearances have been very unimpressive.
And I don't think that really there's much he can do anymore other than he's got,
there's 40% of the voters that, I saw a video recently where Joe was in a sports car
with his aviator glasses and a grouper Joe Biden could run over a 98 year old granny.
And he would still be get the vote of these loyalists.
So I think it's just, you know, it's all entrenched now.
I don't I would be curious to see if something really a major gap is made by Biden somehow, because other than that, I think it's just we're just gonna watch it all unfold.
Rebecca, your final thoughts.
Yeah, I just want to say, in terms of the debates and the future moderators, I vote for Ron Paul to be a moderator.
Because, you know, I look at these debates and what's going on in politics right now, and I really feel like Democrat and Republican, both aisles of politics, are supporting this COVID charade.
And that's really alarming and should be eye-opening for us all.
And I think someone like Ron Paul as moderator could really—or you, Jim!
I vote for Jim!
He'd be a great moderator!
I'd like to interject that the most unbiased of the moderators was supposed to be Chris Wallace, and he was so pro-Biden.
It's going to be really nasty with these liberals coming up.
Yes, yes, I quite agree.
He really, truly did discredit himself.
There's a whole blog about it by the same author I cited here about Kamala being aggressive with Amy Coney Bryant on my blog at jamesfetzer.org.
It's one you don't want to miss.
Check it out.
I'm just thrilled to be doing these programs with Giuseppe Giafangulo from the District of Criminals and with Rebecca Carnes from Newtown, Connecticut.
It's just sensational to have them here and we greatly value Everyone's integrity with respect to their own point of view.
We're not here to agree.
We're here to share our sincere, authentic views and to bring you what you need to know.
These issues, many of them inherently controversial.
We're helping you to sort them out and get to the bottom of the matter to understand the truth.
We'll be back tomorrow with more from the front.
Thank you all for watching.
▲
Export Selection