All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 25, 2021 - Jim Fetzer
01:51:25
The Raw Deal (24 February 2021) with Rolf Lindgren
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Here goes the metronome.
For if the bomb that drops on you, gets your friends and neighbors too.
There'll be nobody left behind to grieve.
And we will all go together when we go.
What a comforting fact that is to know.
Universal bereavement, an inspiring achievement.
Yes, we all will go together when we go.
We will all go together when we go.
This is Jim Fetzer, your host on The Raw Deal, where I'm very pleased to have as my featured
guest today, a return engagement from a dear friend.
He's an expert in politics and polling.
He was my introduction to Rush Limbaugh, and he's got a lot of things to say, not only about Rush, Tiger Woods, and a host of other issues.
Rolf Lindgren, welcome back to The Raw Deal.
Welcome to you and all of you out there in Radioland.
It's great to be here.
Well, Rolf, from our conversations, you were really on a roll talking about Rush and his significance.
You had a multiple-pronged approach to explaining why he was so significant, and I wanted to share it with my audience.
Okay, go ahead.
You want me to go over it, or you want to go over it?
Oh, yeah, yeah.
No, Rolf, I want you, because listen.
Okay.
I wanted to say, I wanted to open the program by saying a word of prayer for Both Rush Limbaugh and for Tiger Woods, who both, by the way, were recently given the Congressional Medal of Honor by President Trump.
It looks like Tiger's going to be okay, although we're praying that he'll be able to walk again someday without pain and maybe even play again.
There's still details on that coming out As far as Rush Limbaugh, we found out a little over a year ago that he had stage 4 lung cancer and probably wouldn't live all that long, so he did last for about 13 months from when we heard about it.
His program, of course, had the guest hosts constantly all the last year, which, you know, some of the guest hosts aren't quite as good as Rush, but it's still a pretty good program.
Rush Limbaugh is really one of the most influential people in the last hundred years, and I can name three significant things that Rush Limbaugh did that forever changed the United States and the world.
The first would be, he identified from the very beginning of his show who the root cause, the real enemy in society, and it's the liberal mass media.
He his program.
When it's from the time it started, instead of just covering the news.
He would also cover how the news media covered the news.
Probably half the time that was probably half of his show from the beginning.
Nowadays we have a lot of people are doing are are doing that and then.
But see what happens is when people grow up, they just think the news media is just some unbiased news source.
OK, because if you read the sports page, They're just reporting the news, right?
If you read the weather report, they're just reporting the news.
They're not trying to, you know, manipulate you with stuff in the weather report, except for with climate change stuff.
But as far as telling you what the temperature is going to be tomorrow, or if it's going to rain tomorrow, they're just reporting the news.
What do the weathermen think?
Same with entertainment news, you know, like the Beatles concert, you know, there's going to be a rock and roll concert with Mick Jagger.
You know, the new Beatles album is coming out.
They just report the news.
So what people do is they assume the news is just the news.
But then when you get to politics, all of a sudden the news isn't really the news.
The news is really a propaganda channel.
And not only does Rush Limbaugh point out who the real enemy is, the liberal mass media, he also tells you what their tricks are.
Like, one of the tricks is just not covering certain news.
There's several ways to use headlines.
There's all kinds of tricks that they've used, and Rush Limbaugh has exposed them all, and now they've been covered by others.
And that leads me to the second thing that Rush Limbaugh did.
He's really the foundation of conservative talk radio.
All the other famous hosts, whether they're local or other national hosts, like Sean Hannity.
Sean Hannity started out as a Rush Limbaugh.
Well, that's all started with Rush Limbaugh.
And then even Fox News was really put together based on the Rush Limbaugh show.
Somebody figured out, look, there's a big demand for a more conservative TV program Because the liberal mass media is so liberal that people who don't want to hear that, they want to see something else.
And that's how Fox News was created.
So that's the second thing that Rush Limbaugh did.
I should add, by the way, that the Fairness Doctrine was gotten rid of in 1987 by Reagan.
And that's when that opened things up for Rush Limbaugh.
So we can credit Ronald Reagan for Rush Limbaugh.
But we can also, and this is the third thing that Rush Limbaugh did, we can credit Rush Limbaugh for getting President Trump elected.
Rush Limbaugh, I listened to his program the day Trump announced back in 2015, he was all for Trump, you know, from the beginning.
Now supposedly he actually endorsed Ted Cruz, obviously Rush Limbaugh supported Ted Cruz too, but Ted Cruz was a traditional Republican.
So it's not surprising that Rush Limbaugh would support Ted Cruz, but Rush Limbaugh also supported Trump from the beginning.
And so does Sean Hannity.
But President Trump would never have been elected president if it wasn't for Rush Limbaugh.
We can also credit Rush Limbaugh, and slightly not as important as President Trump, but you can also credit Rush Limbaugh for the 1994 Republicans taking back the House With Newt Gingrich and the contract with America.
You know, at the time the contract with America came out, I wasn't all that impressed with it.
But you have to understand in 1994, you didn't even have the internet yet.
And all you had is these liberal mass media stations dominating the news, plus the newspapers, which are just as bad.
So it was amazing.
In retrospect, it was amazing that they actually were able to do that in 1994.
So we can credit Rush Limbaugh.
For 1994, and we can also credit Rush Limbaugh for being one of the main people behind the commercialized version of the Tea Party movement, which started in 2009.
There was a Tea Party movement before that, of course, with Ron Paul, but the commercialized version of the Tea Party started in 2009 with Rush Limbaugh.
And that leads me into one of the topics I wanted to talk about.
Is the 2020-2022 elections and 2024 elections, what do I think is going to happen?
What I want to do is let you think back to what happened in 2009.
At the beginning of 2009, we had a President Obama who was very, very popular.
Also a younger guy and a sharp political operator.
He had 79 seats.
Advantage in the House, and he also had about 60 senators, if I'm not mistaken, until Ted Kennedy died later in the year.
Okay, so if you think about it, the Democrats were in a much, much stronger position in 2009 than they are right now.
Today they have a 50-50 Senate with the tiebreaker.
They've got Only a nine, about a nine seat advantage in the house.
Something along those lines.
Uh, I know that three Democrat house members are being picked for the cabinet and there's two Republicans, three Republicans just died since the election, two of them in their four in their early forties.
So the exact margin is a little, I'm not sure what the exact margin is, but it was approximately nine seats total.
Also, Nancy Pelosi is basically, to be put it bluntly, she's over the hill, not effective anymore.
Back in 2009, she was still much younger and a very sharp political operator.
So people who have the doom and gloom attitude that we're never going to have another election again, the Democrats will win every time.
Okay.
I'm glad to tell you this, but things were a lot worse In 2009 than they are now.
Now, what happened in 2009?
Well, it wasn't... the first thing that Obama did was pass the Porkulous Bill, you know, to stimulate the economy after the Bush meltdown, and that was like $800 billion or something like that.
Of course, most of that money just went to special interest groups that traditionally are Democrats, supporting, like, unions, corporate projects, State bureaucracies, all these other groups, the trial lawyers, the Indian reservations, all kinds of stuff.
Okay.
Okay.
And the porculist bill wasn't really all that popular.
Um, Obama's poll numbers, he started 2009, very, very popular by the, his poll number started going down quickly.
And by the, even by the middle of the year, he was already at fairly mediocre poll numbers.
And, you know, he was never that popular the rest of his presidency.
He was good enough to be re-elected, but not a very popular president like we were thinking of JFK or someone who was really popular, Reagan, at times was very popular.
JFK, Eisenhower.
Obama was never like that, except for at the very beginning of his presidency.
And of course, there was talk Well, not that far into 2009 that the House could be retaken by the Republicans.
Well, guess what?
The Republicans did retake the House in 2009, in 2010.
They had to pick up 70, they had to take, they had to pick up at least 40 seats to do that.
So that's an amazing accomplishment.
They didn't retake the Senate, although they came close to taking the Senate.
They cut, I think they cut it down by about six seats in the Senate.
And it could have been even worse.
Some of the Republicans didn't win the general elections and narrow, narrow elections, like Sharon Angle in Nevada.
Some people think that if there had been a different candidate, the Republicans could have taken that seat.
I think the Republicans lost a narrow election in Colorado that year.
Ken Buck, who's now in the House, narrowly lost in that race.
So, things got bad quick for the Democrats in 2009.
Why did they get bad?
Because they didn't really do anything that the people wanted.
And as far as I'm concerned, things are much worse for the Democrats now than they were in 2009.
In 2009, the Republicans were still dominated by the Bush Republicans, who aren't that great.
They're, in many cases, worse than Democrats.
Some Bush Republicans.
Not all, but a lot of them.
And now, the Bush Republicans are a much smaller number of them.
And now we have the Trump Republicans, the Tea Party Republicans, and the Ron Paul and Rand Paul Republicans.
There's a lot of Republicans that are on the right side of the issues.
And the Democrats don't seem to be on the right side of any issue in two respects.
The Democrats side of the issue are not popular with voters, and they're not good for America.
It's a double whammy.
So I see the Republicans, as the year goes on, rising up, and the Democrats going down in the polls.
And this year and next year, until the 22nd, I think the Republicans can retake the House.
Remember, they only have to pick up four net seats.
Instead of 40, what they did in 2010.
They only need to pick up four to take the House, which isn't that hard to do.
And they have to just pick one Senate seat, one not Senate seat, to take the Senate back.
So I think they can take both of them back.
And that will set things up for Trump to run in 2024.
It's clear that Trump is planning on running in 2024.
If he doesn't run in 2024, there's only two reasons why he's not going to run.
One is if he doesn't think he's going to win.
And the second reason is if he has a health issue, because he is fairly old for a presidential candidate, but he seems to be in pretty good health.
So that's what I think is going to happen.
I think that Trump will actually win in 2024.
I think the Democrats already have a problem with who is their candidate going to be in 2024.
Well, it seems like there's only one likely candidate they're going to have.
That's Kamala Harris.
Because Joe Biden seems to be too old to run for a second term.
And some people don't think he'll even finish his first term.
If he doesn't finish his first term, that's actually better for Republicans, because then Kamala Harris will be the president.
That will guarantee that she's the nominee in 2024.
And she is not a good candidate in a general election.
She's not a good candidate at all.
She's weaker than Then Hillary Clinton.
She doesn't have any accomplishments at all.
She's a multiracial woman.
It's her only claim to fame.
And most people aren't going to vote for someone just because they're a multiracial woman.
They want to know some other reason to vote for them besides a demographic category.
If Joe does finish his first term, I predict that Joe will finish his first term.
And then not run again if it's an open election for the Democratic seat.
If Kamala is just simply the VP, usually the VP is going to get the nomination if the president doesn't run.
Usually.
Not always, but usually.
Kamala Harris, just to give you an example of how weak she is as a candidate, if you recall in the Democratic primaries during the 2019 year when the Democrats were maneuvering for position, Kamala Harris didn't even make it to the 2020 primaries.
She dropped out before they even got to the primaries.
Why did she drop out?
Well, first of all, her poll numbers were sitting around two to five percent at the time she dropped out.
When she got into the race, she had many advantages.
She was considered by many the frontrunner.
She had many advantages.
One was the media was behind her.
That's the biggest advantage.
Secondly, she was from California, which probably has like 18% of all Democrats in the country.
Well, she couldn't get their votes in the primaries.
Another group of people she couldn't get were the women's vote in the Democrats.
The Democrats have like 60% of their voters are women.
Well, the only other High profile woman running out of those 27 candidates was Elizabeth Warren, and then there was also Amy Klobuchar, who initially was not a top tier candidate, she was really a second tier candidate.
Well, Kamala Harris couldn't get women's votes from Democrats, and then the third group of people she couldn't get votes for were from blacks and minorities.
The only other black candidate running was Cory Booker.
Who didn't get very many votes either.
And then there was one Hispanic candidate, Julian Castro, who was a very weak candidate, rarely ever got over 1%.
She couldn't get the minority votes either.
Joe Biden was actually getting all the minority votes.
And that's why Joe Biden ended up winning the nomination.
So she was not a strong candidate.
Democratic voters, and if you think she'd be a good candidate in a general election, I don't see any reason why she would be a good candidate in a general election.
I think she would be a terrible, a good candidate that would be likely to lose.
I think a lot of people just don't want her to be president.
She's never done anything that I can think of.
If you remember when Chelsea Gabbard hammered her in one of the debates, you know, those criticisms were never really Refuted or anything.
See, they were simply just ignored by the media.
And then most people just forgot about it later on.
So she's not a good candidate.
So I think that the Trump, or if it isn't Trump, I think a Republican candidate who's roughly the same as Trump on the issues can easily win the nominee, can easily win the 2024 presidential nomination and the election in general.
That's that's my opinion of what's going to happen.
So any other?
Well, that's all fascinating, and I want to draw you out on the following question, given that Kamala Harris was so weak that she dropped out before Iowa, given that Joe Biden had run for president three times and before South Carolina had not won a single caucus or a single primary.
How could the Democrats have possibly won the election?
Because I know you and I have a difference in opinion about this matter.
I'd just like you to explain what you think happened during the election of 2020.
Well, I think that there was a lot of voter fraud, and I think that in those six states that were contested, I think that Trump would have won those states if the voting laws had been followed.
In Wisconsin, where I'm in, I went to the recount.
I saw all kinds of violations of how the elections were done.
They didn't have the initials on the ballots.
You have to wonder why they wouldn't put initials on the ballots.
The proper initials.
Why was that?
And they had mail-in ballots that didn't have addresses.
There were mail-in ballots where it was obvious that the poll workers or whoever filled in the addresses.
That's not what the law says.
Also the voting in the park, fraud in the park, we call it.
People were voting on September 26th and October 3rd.
Those votes are not even supposed to be counted because the early voting isn't supposed to start until October 20th in Wisconsin.
So there's all kinds of voter fraud.
I'm just saying that Trump didn't win because the Electoral College ultimately voted for Biden.
And that's what the Constitution says.
But obviously the voter fraud Was a huge reason why Trump didn't win.
There's a lot of other reasons why he didn't win.
Dirty tricks to the media, the media and all that.
The biggest being the plandemic.
You know, Trump would have been reelected if it wasn't for the plandemic.
That's another thing that would.
And also that you provide cover for all the mail-in ballots.
There's the paranoia over the plandemic.
So it was a very close election, even with the plandemic.
Trump lost by less than 1% in like four or five states that were pivotal, including Wisconsin.
So I think that the thing is that what Trump did when Trump challenged voter fraud after the election, what President Trump is doing is he's setting things up for the next election.
First of all, he's putting voter fraud on the table.
Voter fraud was the top issue in the country for two or three months.
So the next election, people are going to be looking for voter fraud, including the
courts, which Trump, by the way, got a lot of courts, a lot better judges put into the
courts.
So now that you can actually win federal cases sometimes, often.
But the people are looking for, in Wisconsin, the legislature just introduced a whole bunch
of bills to reform the elections.
I'm going to go ahead and close the video.
So, a whole bunch of bills.
And that's going on in every state.
Rolf, I want to solicit your opinion about the role of the Supreme Court in all these matters after we return from the break.
We'll be right back.
do do
do do
do Listen at Revolution Radio, freedomslips.com
We'll be right back after this message.
Was it a conspiracy?
Did you know that the police in Boston were broadcasting, This is a drill, this is a drill, on bullhordes during the
marathon?
you That the Boston Globe was tweeting that a demonstration bomb would be set off during the marathon for the benefit of bomb squad activities.
And that one would be set off in one minute 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 moonrockbooks.com.
What the heck is the truth, Jihad?
Hey, I'm Kevin Barrett, host of Truth Jihad Radio.
Federal prosecutors, Department of Homeland Security agents, and curious passers-by often ask me, just what is this Truth Jihad thing anyway?
Well, everybody knows what truth is, but jihad is a misunderstood term.
Jihad means effort or struggle.
The greater jihad is the struggle to be a better person, while the lesser jihad is the struggle to defend the community.
Prophet Muhammad, peace upon him, did say that the best jihad is a word of truth flung in the face of a tyrant.
And that's what we do here at Truth Jihad Radio!
Every Friday, 8 to 10 p.m.
Eastern, 5 to 7 Pacific, right here on Revolution Radio!
Find some comfort at Willow's World.
A variety of news, commentary and poetry at Willow's Poetry Corner, where there are comfy cushions and a tempting selection of delectable comestibles.
A show that's quirkily and quintessentially British, with a unique twist, featuring Willow Andresen, your host.
Join Willow, Mondays and Thursdays, 2 till 4 p.m.
Eastern Time, Studio A.
The opinions expressed on this radio station, its programs, and its website by the hosts, guests, and call-in listeners, or chatters, are solely the opinions of the original source who expressed them.
They do not necessarily represent the opinions of Revolution Radio and freedomslips.com, its staff, or affiliates.
You're listening to Revolution Radio, freedomslips.com, 100% listener supported radio, and now we
return you to your host.
Well, Rolf, I'm not alone in having been disillusioned by the failure of the Supreme Court to pick
up initially the Texas case.
And now to confirm what I regard as their dereliction of duty, these additional cases that were submitted, Well, they did.
could have easily docketed them, although the discussion wouldn't actually take place,
the appearance, the arguments before the court until October.
Many of us believe that the Supreme Court has sold out the American people and failed
to fulfill its obligations under the Constitution.
Your thoughts?
Well, they did sell us out, but courts are more passive than...I'm not really surprised
by what happened.
I'm actually surprised that some of the judges actually voted to take on these cases.
To me, that's even more surprising.
The problem that Trump had was the voter fraud he's talking about is the same voter fraud we've already had for decades.
It was worse this time because of the All the mail-in voting because of the pandemic.
But we've had this kind of order fraud going on in Wisconsin.
They've been filling in the addresses for decades, probably.
So the problem with the courts is there weren't very many precedents for changing, for affecting the elections based on past elections.
A lot of people are like, well, this is the way we've always done it.
Okay.
And that's kind of a cop-out, but the reality is that that is what happened.
So now instead of complaining about it ad nauseum, what you have to do is do something about it.
You know, Julius Caesar, if he lost a battle, which he didn't very often happen, he didn't complain about the other guy cheated.
He figured out how to win the next time.
And then he did win the next time.
Every time.
So that's what Trump has had to do.
Is he has to figure out how to win the next time.
Well, he's already setting himself up to win the next time.
Okay.
Voter fraud is now a big issue with millions of people.
And it wasn't before Trump came along.
It just wasn't.
This is the most publicity that we've ever had in the United States on voter fraud.
More than when Al Gore lost to Bush.
More than the Kerry versus Bush.
More than the Kennedy in 1960 with the dead people voting and more than, even than the Russians after.
This is, this is, this is a big deal.
The idea that they're going to be able to do the same thing next time is not likely when everybody's, it's not easy to commit fraud when everybody's watching.
Okay.
That's the first thing.
The other thing is Trump is reaching people who normally do not vote and are not engaged in politics.
By talking about voter fraud.
The reality is, the less people know about politics, the more they believe in voter fraud.
And people who don't know much about politics, 100% believe in voter fraud.
Okay?
Now, I'm going to ask you a question.
The Democrats are always trying to raise the turnout, right?
Why is that?
Because the Democrats know that the higher the turnout, The more likely the people who vote will vote Democrat.
So the people who are less engaged are going to typically, if they do vote, they're more likely to vote Democrat.
The Democrats know that, so they're always pushing for more people to vote.
And by the way, why are those people likely to vote Democrat?
because of the liberal mass media that's why. The people who
are being pushed to vote, the The lowest engaged people to vote are people who hate Republicans and don't like Democrats.
So that means if they do vote, they're more likely to vote for a Democrat.
Okay.
What Trump is doing is he's engaging with these people that, oh, Trump cares about voter fraud and the Democrats don't.
That's because the Democrats must be doing voter fraud.
You see?
So the next election, there's a whole new group of people Who are going to be voting, who didn't vote in the last election, who are going to vote for Trump, especially for Trump.
I had a, I talked to a guy from the Trump campaign, a guy who worked in the Trump headquarters.
He said, he said, if as many volunteers showed up at the recounts, it showed up to, to work for the campaign before the election, we would have, we would have won.
You know, I mean, how many people showed up at the recount?
There were hundreds and hundreds of people.
One of the days I went to the recount, I couldn't even go down to the recount.
There were too many election observers, so I just waited upstairs for a couple hours.
I went down one time and walked through the room and then came back because there was nowhere to sit.
So that's how many volunteers there were after the election.
Those people were not volunteering.
Most of these people were not even volunteering before the election.
So if they volunteer in the next election for Trump, Trump's going to win.
Because these are the kind of people who actually the Democrats think were going to vote for them.
These are typically people who don't like Democrats, they don't like Republicans, but they like Trump.
Those are the voters.
Those are voters that Trump reached.
He reached millions of people.
That's why the impeachment didn't work.
The impeachment didn't work because there wasn't enough popular support to do it.
That's ultimately the reason.
Not to mention there were no facts to back up the impeachment.
But that wasn't really the issue.
The issue is what does the actual voters think?
There's a poll that just came out.
73% of Republicans say Biden is not the legitimate president.
Only 17% of Republicans think that Joe Biden is a legitimate president.
10% aren't sure.
That's a massive amount of support for Trump's issue that there was massive voter fraud.
So I'm thinking about it, instead of complaining about the last election, I'm thinking about what are we going to do in the next election?
We have to beat these people in the next election.
Now, Some of the things that have been talked about in the by I want to talk about the Biden administration.
Again, the Biden administration is not going to get anything passed at all, except for maybe this COVID bill, maybe.
Okay, that's it.
They don't have enough of a margin that Democrats are already divided into into factions.
They're not going to get stuff passed.
One of the things that people talked about was packing the courts.
Okay, they're never going to get that through Congress.
It's never going to happen.
There's an amendment I've been notified about called Keep Nine.
And that's a good idea.
But they're never going to get the packing courts through.
It's just not going to happen.
They're not going to get anything through.
And that's one of the things that's going to turn voters against Biden.
He's not going to do anything.
He doesn't tweet.
He doesn't make very many public appearances.
Eventually, people are going to want the president to be doing something instead of disappearing wherever he does.
And if anything goes wrong in the country, then it's especially going to be if there's some sort of a crisis.
There's always going to be some crisis somewhere.
You know, the stock market could go bad.
Something's going to happen, and Biden's not going to look like a very strong leader.
And remember, Joe Biden's support is very soft.
You know, only about a third of the people that voted for Biden probably really actually like him.
I bet you two thirds are, they just didn't like Trump, maybe.
Or they heard that Trump was a racist or something.
Or they heard Trump was a corrupt person.
So they don't even really know.
Those are the kind of people who could easily change their mind by the next election and not want Biden back, or not even want a Democrat in general back.
And this is an effect that happens with polling.
When unpopular presidents are out of the public eye, they become more popular.
Like, take George Bush.
He was extremely unpopular in 2008.
But now he's a lot more popular, if you look at his poll numbers.
Okay?
Another example would be to compare Clinton with Obama.
In Obama's first term, we talked earlier in the program about how Obama's poll numbers started to go down in his first year in office.
If you look at polls going back to 2010, 11, 12, if you looked at a poll back then, you would find that Hillary Clinton was much more popular than Obama.
Why is that?
Because Clinton wasn't going to run for re-election in 2012.
All the negative attacks were focused on Obama.
Mostly before 2012.
So Obama had lower numbers and Clinton had higher numbers.
Well, after the election, people knew that then a Clinton was going to run, so gradually Clinton's numbers went down and Obama's numbers went up.
So by the time he got to 2016, Obama was much more popular than Clinton.
So what's going to happen with Trump is the Democrats are spending, they can't spend four years just complaining about Trump.
At some point, you have to do something yourself.
It's a lot easier to complain about someone else than to do anything positively.
Galileo was a big fan of Galileo, if you go back about 400 years.
Galileo was a critic of Aristotle's theories, scientific theories.
He said at the time, he said, it's easy to criticize Aristotle's theories of motion, but it's not easy to tell you what the actual truth is.
Galileo was able to figure out much of the truth of how motion works, whereas other people simply just criticized Aristotle.
It's the same thing as right now.
It's easy to criticize Trump, but it's not as easy to do something that people want done.
And so far, Biden isn't doing anything that people really want.
Do the people really want the Keystone Pipeline shutdown?
No, they don't.
Do people want us to go back into the Paris Climate Accords?
Not really.
Either they don't really care or they just they don't want it.
They know it's more regulations are coming.
I mean, can you do do people really want more illegal aliens coming into the country, especially during a pandemic?
No, but most people don't want more illegal aliens coming in.
President Trump had over 1 million legal citizens sworn in each of his first three years in office.
Over a million people.
That's a lot of people.
So why do we need an extra 500,000 illegal aliens on top of that?
You see?
And that's how the media tries to dupe us.
They would think that Trump's a racist because he doesn't want 500,000 illegal aliens to come in on top of the million legal citizens, because they never tell you about the legal citizens.
I have three questions for you.
You can take it any order you like.
Number one is, what's your view of the idea of a third party emerging around Trump, given he had about 74 million voters, the vast majority of whom are very dedicated to him?
Number two, you mentioned a minimum of three Republican members of the House who are relatively young in their 40s have died.
I find that highly suspicious from a statistical point of view, and it causes me to consider.
We heard Hillary had planned, had she become president, to assassinate members of the Supreme Court so she could make her own appointees.
Could something like that be taking place in the House to increase the Democrats' margin?
You mentioned both Rush and Tiger had received the Medal of Freedom from the President of the United States.
Could there be a hit list here for those who Trump recognized and honored, in any order you like?
I don't think there's a hit list.
I think it'd be a clever conspiracy, possibly cooked up by the CIA, to post on a Q platform.
It just sounds like a way to, you know, insult people who actually like Tiger Woods or Rush Limbaugh.
As far as the three congressmen who've died, two of them were in their early 40s and one of them was in his late 60s who died, which isn't really all that old either.
I think he was either 67 or 69 and then the others were like 41 and 42.
I think it's just a coincidence, but you never know.
You know, there could be somebody out there who's blowing COVID on people with a, you know, I suppose you could, you could do it.
You could be a silent assassin.
You could pick up, get a vial of COVID in a, in a tube and have some way to blow it on people.
It sounds like a good way to, although the thing is most people in their early forties aren't going to die from, from COVID.
In fact, even people in their late sixties, the odds are they're not going to die from it.
So there probably isn't, It's probably just a coincidence.
None of the three congressmen I had ever even heard of.
I'd have to see more cases before I'm going to think there's something behind it.
As far as the third party is concerned, there isn't going to be a third party with Trump, just so you know.
Trump is just using that as leverage to keep the GOP in his camp.
That's all he's doing.
Because the GOP knows that if Trump did start a third party, it would split the Republicans and then the Democrats would win all over the place.
Hell, they could win 400 House seats.
If you had two Republicans in every general election, one Trump Republican and one anti-Trump
Republican, you could, the Democrats could win 400 House seats and 70 or 80 Senate seats, you know.
So that's not, he's not going to start a third party just for leverage.
He's already been meeting with Kevin McCarthy, plotting how to retake the house.
So he wouldn't be doing that if he was going to have a third party.
Okay.
He's already, they're already vetting candidates because remember to retake the house, what you have to do is you have to find good candidates and then raise money for these candidates and help them help them if they're, if they're new to politics, help them with, Even if they're not new, if they're people like state legislators who are moving up to the next level, they may need help running a big-time campaign.
You can blow an election with one idiotic move, like Ted Cruz went to Cancun.
That's going to come back at him when he runs for re-election.
I don't really care if he goes to Cancun.
I don't personally care, but it's a political blunder.
You don't want candidates making political blunders and losing elections.
Also, the Democrats will use dirty tricks to make you lose.
Well, you have to be ready for the dirty tricks.
You can't just complain about the dirty tricks and lose.
You have to be proactive and make sure that the Democrats, their dirty tricks don't win.
That's what you've got to do.
Getting back to Julius Caesar, he never said, oh, the other guy cheated.
No, he had to win every time.
He had to prepare for the dirty tricks of the other guy.
That's how he won, literally every time.
That's what Trump has to do.
So, they're already vetting candidates.
They plan on winning the House back.
Trust me.
Okay, so, the third party, and also I used to be, many years, I was in the Libertarian, but I'm still personally a pro-liberty Libertarian, personally.
The Republican Party has really become what I would call a commercialized Libertarian Party, where it's their pro-liberty to the best extent they can be, given the media and given the voters.
The voters aren't Libertarians.
Most voters aren't from the Libertarian Party.
So the idea that a Libertarian Party is going to win an election doesn't happen very often, but that's because the voters aren't Libertarians, most of them.
But they do have a soft pro-liberty streak in them.
Most people do have a pro-liberty mindset to some extent.
So that's what the Republican Party is doing.
It's appealing to pro-liberty minded people, individualists, people like that.
The Democrats basically get their votes from these groups.
People on welfare, people who work for the government, billionaires, And minorities who think that Republicans are a bunch of racists.
That's basically where they get all their votes from.
And that's almost half the people in the country.
So that's what the Republicans have to do.
They have to chip away at these voting, voting blocs to win.
And like I said, these elections are pretty close.
You know, look at, look how close these, look at the Senate.
There was at least four Republican senators at very close races.
Okay.
The two in Georgia.
John James in Michigan and McSally in Arizona.
All those races were very, very close.
They couldn't make it.
That's the way it is.
Some people say football is a game of inches, right?
You get the first down by an inch or you don't get the first down.
Or you miss the field goal by an inch.
That's the way it is in politics.
You lose by one percent, you could have won.
You have to give it all you've got, and then if you give it all you've got, the odds are you're going to cross the line for victory.
So that's what I think about the third parties.
Well, I'm going to have an update of what we know about the events of the 6th of January, the intrusion into the Capitol, but what I want to ask you now is this.
How much damage did Mitch McConnell do to the Republican Party when he denounced Trump and held him personally and morally responsible for the intrusion?
All the evidence, of course, is against that.
But Mitch McConnell was so strong in his statement, it seemed to me he did enormous damage to the Republican Party.
Well, Mitch McConnell did enormous damage to himself, not to the Republican Party.
Mitch McConnell got a lot of judges confirmed.
He got like 300 judges confirmed, like over 50 appellate judges, three Supreme Court judges, and, you know, district judges.
He did all that, and now his poll numbers with Republicans are negative 15%, I heard, is his net poll numbers with Republicans.
Trump's are plus 75% with Republicans.
So Mitch McConnell just heard him.
Another thing is Mitch McConnell didn't vote to convict Trump.
Okay.
So all the people who actually don't like Trump don't like Mitch McConnell either, because they just look at Mitch McConnell as a hypocritical, two-faced idiot.
They're like, okay, this guy's an idiot.
He denounced Trump for doing all this, but then he didn't, then he voted him not guilty.
So they just think he's an idiot.
And of course the people, Republicans think he's an idiot because they're like, well, this guy's an idiot because he denounced Trump.
Okay.
So he made an unforced error is what he did.
Yeah, January 6th, which I considered largely peaceful protests.
I know people who were at the protests.
I talked to some people on the phone when they were there, and most of the people there, first of all, less than 1% of the people went into the Capitol.
I heard there were 40,000 people at the speech, and there were about 270 people who went into the Capitol.
Most of the people who went into the Capitol didn't do anything violent.
They just walked into the Capitol.
They took some selfies and then they walked out of the Capitol.
That's it.
A small number of people did some vandalization.
Someone broke the window.
Somebody stole Nancy's podium, which is, I consider to be more of a college prank, more than an actual crime.
That's the way I look at it.
You see, I've looked at the charges against some of these defendants and the defense lawyers We have very strong cases.
At least 29 of the defendants have said that the police led them into the building.
And that's according to a Yahoo News article.
It's probably going to be almost all the defendants.
I think there's about over 200 arrested.
Almost all of them are going to probably claim that they were led into the building or they just walked in with a crowd of people and there was nobody there.
They just walked in.
There was no trespassing sign up.
There was no fence up to keep them out.
You know, the doors were open, so they just walked in.
These cases are weak.
I saw one particular case where there's a former Navy officer, decorated, no criminal record.
He's been charged with going into the building, but according to his defense lawyer, there's no evidence that he was in the building.
There's no photograph of him in the building.
And then the prosecution at his bail hearing acknowledged, no, he's not He what we don't have any photos of him in the building.
So maybe they have a witness who says he was in the building.
But they don't have any.
You know, his defense says that he wasn't even in the building.
He was with his wife on the other side of the Capitol.
Also, they're calling him an oath keeper in the news.
But in his bail hearing, it turns out he's not a member of Oath Keepers.
He's simply he's simply someone who knows people from Oath Keepers.
Rolf, I hate to interrupt, but I want to let everyone know the number to call in if you'd like to speak to Rolf or me, the number 540-352-4452.
540-352-4452.
540-352-4452. 540-352-4452. And we have a lot of callers with a lot of opinions and
I expect they may want to contest some of your positions, Rolf, and support others.
I'm very disturbed by Mitch McConnell.
Of course, he didn't vote because he felt it was unconstitutional.
But his denunciation, I thought, was completely off the wall.
It was shocking to me.
And I believe the consequences are going to be enormous.
As you observe, he's already got a minus 15 among Republicans, where Trump has a plus 75.
We're going to take a break now, and then we'll be right back with my special guest, Rolf Ludengren.
Be sure to call.
It's a great video.
It's free.
It's free.
A visiting Syrian diplomat reported today that their population is evolving rapidly and advancing into a fifth dimensional consciousness.
They are seeking peace with all cosmic cultures, which may mean that the Earth will be asked to join the prestigious Galactic Federation of Light Alliances.
Please join Debbie West and Michael Hathaway on Lost Knowledge, Saturdays 3 p.m.
Eastern Standard Time in Studio A for the latest breaking news on the Star Visitor's peaceful contact and the ongoing project of cleansing the Earth.
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 blown 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.
The 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 in 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.
This is Thomas, aka...
A Mad Painter.
I'd like you to join me Monday nights, 10 p.m.
Eastern Standard Time for Open Canvas.
Don't forget to bring an open mind.
Yes, folks, that's right.
Bring an open mind to an open canvas.
Again, that is Monday nights, 10 p.m.
Eastern.
UFOs to government corruption.
This is Revolution Radio, freedomslips.com.
You don't need to expect us.
We're already here.
To be continued...
To be continued...
Collision Course is back, back, back.
Schedule B on Revolution Radio every Saturday night, 6 to 8 p.m.
You get outer space.
You get honest answers, real researchers, truthful answers, and a place to engage with questions.
Take part in the discussion.
Revolution Radio on FrigginSlips.com hosts Collision Course every Saturday from 6 to 8 p.m.
Eastern, 5 p.m., 7 p.m.
Central, 4 p.m.
to 6 p.m.
Mountain Time and 3 p.m.
to 5 p.m.
city.
They do not necessarily represent the opinions of Revolution Radio and freedomslips.com, its staff, or affiliates.
You're listening to Revolution Radio, freedomslips.com, 100% listener-supported radio, and now we
return you to your host.
I reiterate that anyone who'd like to call in to speak with Rawlforme about any of these
issues is welcome to call.
540-352-4452.
You're welcome to agree or disagree.
3 5 2 4 4 5 2 5 4 0 3 5 2 4 4 5 2. You're welcome to agree or disagree. Just give us
your reasons for thinking so. I don't want to put Rolf on a disadvantage, though he's
welcome to comment as he chooses. But Millennial Millie has just released a stunning documentary
It runs about an hour and a half.
I've watched the first 45 minutes.
I've had reports about the rest from two other sources who have watched the whole, where she goes into in-depth about how the SIOP at the Capitol was organized for the 6th of July.
The key role played by the two Sullivan brothers, James and John, who nominally are on opposite
sides of the political spectrum, but who actually appear to be acting in coordination, where
they're the sons of an army general who is an expert in PSYOPs, where the general's white
and the two boys he adopted are black, where Millie goes into detail about the planning
of the event on social media.
She even has a Zoom call in which they're talking in detail about how it's going to
be done.
It turns out John Sullivan has been very active in Antifa, including in Utah, where he's organized
numerous events.
He of course was videoed, caught at the Capitol in the event.
We have a separate video I've discussed here on the show before, where you can see Millie.
Managers and directors in the crowd telling individuals where to go and what to do.
John Sullivan organizes discussions, conference calls and the like about how to participate in a riot.
He actually sells riot gear.
He explains how you should dress.
You can go on his website.
You can buy the riot gear.
He was virtually immediately released after he'd been arrested.
Millie just does, in my opinion, a sensational job, including featuring an expert on these kinds of psyops, who has been at over 500 of these riots, false flags, and other demonstrations, who observes that seeing the difference between Antifa and Trump supporters is like the difference between alligators and turtles.
And I'm telling you, this whole thing was an immense scam, whereas I pointed out before, not only was it taking place before Trump had even finished speaking at 1-11 at the Ellipse, which was a mile and a half away, But the events taking place there were already well underway before 1-11, beginning as early as 12-40.
And it turns out that in terms of orchestrating the event, John Sullivan and others were having the group they were planning to use to surge into the Capitol meet at 11am.
I mean, it's just stunning what she's done here.
So I want to encourage everyone to check it out.
Millie seems to me to be doing the job that Woodward and Bernstein did, representing the best in investigative reporting.
I'm very impressed with Millie.
Meanwhile, we have a call from our area code, Rolf, so it may be a friend or a fan.
In any case, we'll take area code 608.
Please give us your first name and state, which we know to be Wisconsin, and join the conversation.
First name is Larry from Wisconsin, friend of Ralph's, live in Dane County.
Go for it, Larry!
Yeah, Ralph, this is maybe a little bit off topic, but it has to do with the information we're getting on the mainstream media and from all sources about what to do now with the COVID.
And what I'm referring to is information from Bill Gates, who I don't know where he got his medical degree from, but seems to be a medical expert.
And also, St.
Anthony Frouche, who's our patron saint of misinformation.
Now, lately, I've seen that, and I've got my two, my wife and I both have our two COVID shots already.
So his suggestion right now is, even if you've had grandparents have had two COVID shots, You can't go and hug your grandkids yet.
It's too early to do that.
Okay.
Um, you gotta wear masks probably until 2022.
Okay.
Um, you know, where are you getting this information from?
And do you care about what's happening with the, uh, even school closings?
They're not even following the science on, on, on opening up the schools.
so i it seems to be more of a much more of a political game that up
the scientific follow the science game and they could care less about people
who are out the increased suicide rates uh...
the increased uh...
uh... depression the increased drug and alcohol abuse espousal abuse
the uh...
the uh...
you know the the lives livelihood lost by small business owners
and employee employees who have lost their job and you know i'm getting so sick of this and uh...
and what do you do to try to open people's minds so they're just not
uh... clone to listen to what they're what they're being fed by the mainstream media
you.
Larry, let me just say those are wonderful, wonderful questions.
I've just published on my blog at jamesfetzer.org the anti-New York Times response to the claims made that there have been 500,000 COVID deaths.
Explain how they've manipulated the data, manufactured the whole event.
Really, we know that the virus, the so-called COVID-2, has never actually been purified and isolated, which means, of course, they can't possibly have developed an effective vaccine if they haven't even isolated the virus.
But those are my responses to what I regard as excellent questions.
Now I turn to Rolf.
Well, I agree.
I'm frustrated with the media coverage.
I mean, I would call it a mixture of science and politics, you know, maybe 50 50.
Okay, but what they do is they treat people like, like third graders, they just repeat it over and over and over.
They never mentioned things that might be beneficial, like, you know, using mouthwash.
Okay, I use mouthwash.
After every meal, when do people get sick?
They wake up with a sore throat, right?
So take some mouthwash before you go to sleep at night.
But all they do is lecture you about masks, whether they work or not.
They probably work a little bit, but, you know, people, if you work at the hospital, maybe wear them.
But I'm sick of it, too.
By the way, they're not vaccinations.
They're Fauci-ouchies.
Just remember that.
Fauci, ouchies.
You know, I'm just hoping that this will die down.
Eventually, we can go back to living a normal life.
I'm sick of it.
It just shows you the power of the liberal media.
See, one of the things about the so-called health announcements that they make, this is the mentality of the people who give these announcements.
You have to remember this.
Okay, let's pretend there's something like A study is done and it says if you drink one beer a day, then that's good for you.
Okay?
Or one beer a day will prevent heart attacks or something.
Okay?
Well, according to the public announcement people, if you put out in the news, drink one beer a day, that's good for you.
Well, then they think, okay, everybody's going to go out and buy a case of beer and drink a case of beer a day or drink hard liquor or something.
Because if one beer a day is good for you, then why not two beers, right?
That's twice as good, right?
So they assume that if they tell you something's good for you, obviously drinking a lot of beer too much is not good for you, but drinking one beer a day may be good for you.
At least for some people, okay?
So this is the same thing with these announcements with the virus stuff.
They don't want to tell you Something they're afraid to tell you something that's good or something that's not dangerous because as soon as you say something as soon as they say something's not dangerous, then everybody's just going to go and do something that's dangerous.
So that's why that but the problem with these announcements is that people like me and Larry and Jim, people who think logically, we think logically about what they say.
So if they say keep six feet apart, Okay.
Well, what's the science on that?
How do we know the science doesn't say four feet apart or 20 feet apart or 10 feet?
You know, we don't really know.
Is there really any science on the distance or not?
We don't, I don't know.
Is there, or is that just something they say?
It's like wearing your mask to go into a restaurant and you sit down at a table and you take your mask off.
Well, are you below the level that the virus is going to affect you or something?
I guess the point I'm making is little, It'll never really be safe.
When is safe, safe?
It'll never be safe.
I mean, we take a risk in everything we do.
I mean, you drive your car.
Well, you drive, yeah, but you don't, you drive responsibly.
You don't go a hundred miles an hour down the belt line without a seatbelt on.
You don't, you know, if you're 80 years old, you know, I'm 78.
I'm not going to parachute out of a plane or anything.
I mean, you take, you, you got to use some common sense, you know, and, uh, It just seems that people aren't doing this.
They're just like sheep and not using their minds to think, ìWhat's an acceptable risk?î
I've gotten to the point where I'm about ready not to even wear my mask when it's required
to go into one of these Madison stores and just see what their response is.
I don't know personally how to fight this thing.
Larry, you're making so many excellent points.
Both John Rapoport and Edward Hendry have explained how they are inflating the COVID
death certificates massively, not only by the CDC having changed the way in which deaths
are reported, flipping information that ought to be in Part 2 into Part 1 to make it look
as though if somebody died with COVID that they died from COVID.
And that's the key point that Rappaport and Hendry are making.
They're equivocating.
It's an elementary fallacy.
of the order I taught students for 35 years how to avoid, because the word case is ambiguous, and the statistics are getting on the cases.
The vast majority are false positives because they're making an inappropriate application of what is known as a PCR test, which its inventor, Carey Mullis, explained was never intended to be a diagnostic instrument, but only for research by multiplying A sample, so you'd have sufficient to study it, and where when they turn up the number of cycles on multiplication, you get virtually guaranteed false positives, so that you have a huge number of people that are allegedly infected, and even with the inflated statistics, the survival rate is on the order of 99.7, so your point about acceptable risk is exactly right on the mark.
After all, it's never been the case in the past that you dealt with an infectious disease by quarantining healthy people.
What you do is you quarantine the sick and give those who are vulnerable additional assistance, but shutting down the economy, it's been catastrophic.
And only now it seems that, you know, But political genii like Andrew Cuomo are realizing that if nobody's working, they're not getting any income.
If they're not getting income, they can't pay any taxes.
If they can't pay any taxes, then local and state governments don't have the resources to take the actions they want.
So how are some of these leaders responding?
By raising taxes, which is about as absurd an outcome as it could be.
Larry, continue.
Well, you've answered a lot of my questions and you've made some good points.
I'm to the point now that, well, you know, I'm banned on Facebook for 30 days for bullying Schmuckerberg, but I still get out there and I'm going to go do this since I hang up and go out there and do the best I can to bug some liberals and get under their skin and do some things on email and some messaging and things I still can Can get the word out, but I'm just I'm just I'm just I'm just sad to see the way the people are just like sheep and they're just they're just not using their I think fear fear must do a lot to to cloud your thinking.
Larry, you're so right.
I wrote to a lot of our members of our legislature and our Senate and the governor.
In local school principals, a set of a dozen studies showing that the wearing of face masks is seriously damaging.
You're recycling oxygen depleted air.
You're killing brain cells, which unlike other cells of the body, do not regenerate.
So that's irrevocable brain damage.
It's especially serious for young people, kids who are growing because they need that oxygen to develop their bodies.
It's also putting additional stress on our cardiovascular systems.
Some of the experts whose studies are on my blog, I again reiterate it, jamesfetzer.org.
Larry, I think you might especially like this latest from the NI New York Times because it's rather thorough going.
But for all the studies on masks, just do a search at jamesfetzer.org on face masks.
You'll find even the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons.
Which is the leading medical scientific organization of the United States does not recommend face masks, where Tony Fauci and others participated in a study of the Spanish flu, which of course killed millions in the early 20th century, and found that the vast majority did not die from the flu, but died from bacterial pneumonia Which all the studies I cite point out is promoted by the wearing of face masks.
So that when you have Fauci coming out now and telling us to wear multiple masks, that's because he wants to kill us faster.
Wearing face masks is guaranteed to kill you slowly.
The shots, and I'm concerned for your well-being for having taken the shots because I've got
reports of thousands of people who have died from taking the shots, are a way of killing
us faster than ultimately it appears the plan is.
And it's exemplified by Bill Gates buying farmland all over the United States to cut
down the food supply to subject us to starvation, where deagle.com has made the projection that
the US population is going to drop from 330 million in 2020 to less than 100 million in
That's a loss of 230 million of our fellow citizens right here in the USA, Larry.
It's profoundly disturbing, but that appears to be the game plan to bring in the great reset Or everyone's going to be so deprived of income, they're completely dependent upon the state.
And in agreement for a pittance from the state, you'll be able to rent a little cubicle, but you have to agree to give up all your property, all your assets, and submit to a regimen of vaccinations that's going to be ongoing and terminably And if you refuse, you're going to be put in a FEMA camp as a public health menace.
And if you continue to resist, your head will be separated from your body using guillotines.
Guess what?
Made in China.
That appears to be the big picture, Larry, and it's very scary.
What's the source of that?
Could you give me the source of that again so I can... it was in the New York Times or where was this that you're... No, it's the anti-New York Times.
Just go to JamesFetzer.org, Larry.
JamesFetzer.org.
How do you spell the last name?
Fetzer.
F-E-T-Z-E-R.
.org.
Okay, I'll check that out.
That's very interesting.
I'm very glad you called in, Larry, because you're making so many excellent points, and you've been putting things together quite well, it seems to me.
Rolf, would you like to?
Yeah, go ahead, Larry.
I just wanted to say, I'm going to have to hang up, because I'm going to, like I say, I've got some things to do, but I want to thank you guys for fighting the good fight and keeping up the battle, and I wish you nothing but good luck and success in your future endeavors, and I'll stay in tune.
Thanks Larry, that was a terrific call.
I can't thank you enough.
Rolf, go ahead, your further thoughts.
I agree with you.
There's a lot of things that, like I said, if you're a logical thinking person and you're trying to take in all the advice from Fauci and all that, it gets, like another example is this.
We can't call it the China flu because that's racist, right?
Right.
But we can call it the UK variant.
How come that's not racist?
Yeah, I don't know.
I don't know.
Because it's just a load of crap that they're feeding.
They didn't want to call it the China flu because they wanted to blame the virus on Trump during the presidential election.
That's what they wanted to do.
They wanted to blame it on Trump.
That's really what it comes down to.
All right, guys.
Thanks a lot.
Keep up the good work and we'll talk to you later, okay?
Terrific call.
Thanks for calling.
Bye.
So another thing that's coming up is this Andrew Cuomo situation.
I'm going to tell you something about Andrew Cuomo.
He was being heralded as the next presidential candidate, if you recall, last summer.
You know, he said he needed 40,000 ventilators, but it turned out he only needed like four more, not 40,000 more.
He had published a book on October 13th of last year, and I saw it in Walmart in mid-October in Whitewater.
I go to Whitewater once a week and I often go grocery shopping.
I usually go to Walmart like literally once a week in Whitewater.
And I remember there was a big stack of his books on the shelf.
Okay.
And I went back the next week and the same stack was there.
That same stack of books was there for four months.
They never sold a single book in the whole time I went in there.
I went there whenever.
Finally, I just went in there last weekend.
And the books were all missing.
So this is a guy who didn't sell a single book at Wellman.
What was his book called?
Leadership Skills in a Crisis.
Okay, well now he's now he's in serious trouble because even the Democrats in New York are calling for an investigation over his conduct of putting sick people into the nursing homes and then lying about the number of deaths.
AOC and Bill de Blasio have both called For an investigation.
A lot of Democrats want him impeached.
A lot of people, Democrats want him recalled.
We know that Republicans will agree.
So this is a big meltdown for Democrats in their second biggest state.
And I'd be happy if he was out of there.
You know, maybe they get a better candidate.
You know, it's not likely a very good candidate will win in New York, but probably maybe there's a Democrat that's not a corrupt You know, maybe there's an actual Democrat that has some principles.
They used to have principles like Dennis Kucinich had some principles.
So the Democrats are melting down in New York.
The Democrats are also melting down in California.
You know, that's their biggest, that's the biggest state in the country.
Well, that means between California and New York, that's probably 30% of all the Democrats in the country.
This is another reason why the Democrats are not going to do well in the next election.
They're not going to do well.
There's a lot of Republican seats in upstate New York.
There's a lot of Republican districts.
There's lots of Republicans are going to beat the Democrats, and these scandals may spill over because they're so big.
These are such big states, the media can't really ignore the scandal.
They do everything they can to downplay it, to downplay the scandal, and then talk about Ted Cruz, because he went to Cancun to drop his kids off, and obviously a pre-planned event.
But think about it, which is a bigger story.
And also, how many people pay attention to the news media anymore?
Well, obviously some people do, because Joe Biden got elected.
You know, there was a lot of voter fraud, but a lot of people voted for Joe Biden, unfortunately.
So some people are still watching the news media.
But how many people are watching?
Hopefully there's a lot less people watching than five years ago, and hopefully the number watching are less likely to believe it.
I do want to talk about one other issue before our time is up.
There's hearings into the There were hearings yesterday into the January 6th, they call them the riots, or I call them a largely peaceful protest.
And there was a, I caught a little bit of it, and there was something that was really interesting.
There was a Democratic senator who was questioning Sund, the former police chief, Capitol Police, who looks like the scapegoat, in my opinion, of it, because it looks like they withheld information from him.
It's sort of like Admiral Kimmel at Pearl Harbor.
What they did is they withheld information from him and then they blamed him for what happened.
Okay.
According to his testimony, which I specifically saw, he said that they had much more preparation and more officers present for the Trump speech on January 6th than they did for the Black Lives Matter The first Black Lives Matter protest, which was back in June, the first one at the Capitol.
I'm not talking about the ones in the other cities.
I'm talking about at the Capitol for the George Floyd case.
He said there was far more preparation and personnel ready to go for the January 6th than for the George Floyd in June.
OK, so keep that in mind.
The senator is trying to create this narrative with his questions that they were arresting Too many people at the Black Lives Matter and not enough at the Trump rally.
Apparently there's been about 250 arrests so far in the, or charges, maybe not arrested, but charges in the Trump case.
But apparently there were around 700 charges in the Black Lives Matter protest back in June.
I didn't realize there were 700 people charged, but that's what the Senator said.
Now, how many have been convicted?
I don't know.
Okay.
The Senator was trying, was trying to, what's that?
I was just going to say, we've got another caller saying, we'll take him after the break, which is coming up.
Okay.
Okay.
That's good.
I just wanted to say quickly that, that to me, that the number of arrests shows that the Black Lives Matter protest was much more violent and disruptive and chaotic than the Trump protest, because there were almost three times as many people arrested.
The Democrat, of course, was trying to make the narrative that They just arrested more people because, you know, because it was Black Lives Matter than Trump.
But I think that the police will charge anybody they can find.
I mean, you know the police are looking to charge anybody they can in the Trump protest.
The reality is most people at the Trump protest didn't do anything.
You're absolutely right.
They weren't even in the vicinity of the Capitol yet.
Alright, we got we got a caller so
so Listen to Revolution Radio at freedomslist.com.
We'll be right back after this message.
Were they conspiracies?
Have you ever wondered if we really did go to the moon?
If Paul McCartney died in 1966 and was replaced by an even better musician?
Did you know that Saddam Hussein died in a B-1 bomber strike on 7 April 2003 and was replaced by one of his doubles, who was put on trial and hanged in his place?
Or that Osama bin Laden died in Afghanistan on the 15th of December 2001 and was buried in an unmarked grave in accordance with Muslim traditions?
That the raid in Pakistan was faked?
There's more, including four chapters about the end of World War II which prove that events we've been taught were very different than we have been told.
Don't let yourself be played.
Read, and I suppose we didn't go to the moon either.
Available at moonrockbooks.com.
That's moonrockbooks.com.
Looking for a nightcap to fill your listening needs?
Come join us on Spaced Out Radio with me, Dave Scott, right here on Revolution Radio.
Monday through Friday for three hours a night, starting at 9 p.m.
Pacific, midnight Eastern, we will take you down the supernatural path.
From E.T.
Contact to the paranormal, and all of the spiritual, cryptid, and conspiracy stories in between.
You can find us right here on Revolution Radio, at spacedoutradio.com, on Twitter, at Spaced Out Radio, and on Facebook, at Spaced Out Radio Show.
Spaced Out Radio.
It's a night of talk and interaction.
Are you experienced?
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 blown 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.
The 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 in 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.
They do not necessarily represent the opinions of Revolution Radio and freedomslips.com, its staff, or affiliates.
You're listening to Revolution Radio, freedomslips.com, 100% listener-supported radio, and now we
return you to your host.
Oh, this is Jim Fetzer, where I'm very pleased to have Rolf Lindgren here as my guest.
And we had a wonderful call from Larry.
Meanwhile, we have a second call from the 262 Area Code.
Please give us just your first name and state and join the conversation.
262 area code This is Mike 5 3 0 2 9
Thank you for your time.
Go ahead, Mike.
Join us.
What state are you in?
Wisconsin.
Okay, perfect.
Go ahead, Mike.
Well, I've just tuned in a minute ago, and I'm just listening at this point.
I don't really have much to say.
Oh, I see.
Okay.
You'd be welcome to ask Rolf any questions if you have them.
Talking about the election, Trump, the future, political future, possibility of a third party, why he thinks Trump will win in 2024, why the Republicans will retake the House in 2022.
Anything you'd like to ask Rolf while you're here?
Well, I'd just like to know what he thinks about that Capitol situation with people breaking into the Capitol with very little security and I don't know.
I was talking with my daughter yesterday, and it just seems very, very suspicious.
That's really my point.
I agree with you.
I don't think that very many people are actually going to get convicted.
I've been trying to read some of the cases.
I mentioned earlier in the program, I guess you maybe hadn't been on at the time, but I read there was a Navy officer.
They said he was in Oath Keepers, and they said he went into the building and caused trouble.
According to the, at the bail hearing, it turns out they don't have any photos of him actually in the building.
He says he wasn't in the Capitol.
He says he was with his wife on the other side of the Capitol.
The government acknowledged that they don't have any proof he's in the Capitol, and the government also acknowledged that he's not actually a member of Oath Keepers.
He just knows some people from Oath Keepers.
So, the media reports all this stuff, and then when you get to court, the facts are very different.
So, the people who actually broke into the Capitol Committed vandalism so charge them with something not with terrorism like like they were going to do the next 9-11 not terrorism.
They whatever the normal charges for vandalism.
So if you broke a window.
You broke the window.
Okay, so I'd like to know how did they actually get into the Capitol?
I still haven't heard how they got into the Capitol when I first heard about it.
I was wondering why did they how did they get into the Capitol because there's a lot of there's a lot of security.
At the White House.
A lot of security.
And none of the protesters had guns.
Not one protester had a gun.
So all the talk about guns, none of them had guns.
They had things like crowbars or something.
Some of them did.
Some of the weapons that they had weren't really weapons.
Some guy had a baton.
Okay.
Great.
Some people may carry batons with them for personal security.
Especially if you're around a lot of people.
You know, why not carry a baton?
So the cases have been pretty weak.
The facts, the media doesn't really want to tell you the facts.
When the people actually go into court, the truth turns out to be a lot different.
So I guess we have to wait and see what happens.
We do know that the attack was planned, so it wasn't from Trump's speech.
Someone testified in the hearing yesterday that those pipe bombs We're put there for diversions.
In other words, to pull the police away from the Capitol with the pipe bombs so then they could get into the Capitol with less police defending it.
Okay, so I did hear catch that in the testimony.
That sounds like a sophisticated plan, but some of the people who have been arrested were one guy was from Black Lives Matters.
He was one of the guys in the front row who broke in.
Okay, I want to know why would someone from Black Lives Matter be hanging out with people from Oath Keepers?
So who's really from Oath Keepers and who's really from Black Lives Matters?
You know, we don't know until these people have their actual court appearances and then the truth is different.
Some of the defendants have gotten permission to go to Mexico and stuff on vacation.
So the court, the judge, didn't think it was a very serious charge if they can go to Mexico on vacation.
Another defendant I read about is a transgender woman who was let go from the military because of Trump's transgender policy.
Okay, she's supposedly from Oath Keepers.
Okay, well first of all, there's two different things that you might think about when you hear about this.
One is you might think that she's a plant, because why would a transgender woman kicked out of the military be a Trump supporter?
That's one possibility, I suppose.
Another possibility Is that, is that maybe, maybe transgenders don't all hate Trump.
Maybe transgenders care about a better country, a better economy, more freedom.
Maybe they wanted the same thing that other people want.
Maybe transgenders are just like other Americans and they don't just vote for Democrats.
So that's another possibility that the transgender woman, according to the evidence the police have is they have texts from her where she says, don't bring any, any, any weapons.
And then later she says, oh no, they said we can bring weapons.
Okay.
To me, that sounds like someone who's being manipulated by someone to get her to do something to make Trump look bad.
So she, then she did bring some sort of a weapon, some sort of a, you know, I don't know if it was a crowbar or whatever it was, something like that.
So now she's been charged, but she's getting these messages from someone else that, oh no, it's okay to bring, Weapons.
If they were planning to break into the Capitol from the beginning, then why would they say, don't bring any weapons?
Were they going to break in without weapons?
So then all of a sudden they say it's okay to bring weapons.
So the question I would have is, who is this person and what is she really doing?
Who are the people sending her the text messages?
Because if you're planning on breaking into the Capitol, why would you send out a message not to bring weapons?
What I think happens is that these groups like Oath Keepers are good people for the most part and then an agitator joins the group and then starts agitating to do something either violent or something that would look stupid and a good way to smear the right-wing groups.
That's probably what really happened.
So there's a lot of cases.
I haven't read all the cases.
There's a lot of it out there.
The media.
Hasn't hasn't covered hasn't really covered it that much either.
They just cover that people are arrested and that's it.
And then they give some sensationalized version of the charge whenever they don't tell you what the defense attorneys are saying.
It also the Black Lives Matter riots that were earlier in last June at the at the US Capitol.
I heard a senator state that there were 700 people arrested.
I haven't heard how many of those people have been convicted.
How many of them had the charges dropped?
I haven't heard that.
I heard that Bruce Springsteen just had his drunk driving ticket thrown out by the judge today.
Did you hear that?
No.
A lot of times when people are in the news for getting arrested, then later on the charge gets thrown out or they never get convicted because it's a bogus case.
We don't, we haven't heard.
We haven't really heard.
And unless you spend all your time digging on the internet, which I don't have time to do, you may not hear about it.
So that's my opinion.
I agree with almost everything you said.
The whole thing was very, very suspicious.
And ever since it's taken place, the Democrats have used this as a rallying cry to try and destroy Trump and destroy conservatives.
Yeah, I'm going to say one thing.
If Trump runs for president again, I guarantee you it's going to be one trouble spot for Trump.
Whenever he has a rally, if there's a fight at the rally, they're going to blame Trump for it.
Someone will show up with a Confederate flag, possibly an agitator, and then they'll try to use that against Trump.
This is one of the things.
It puts a curveball in Trump's next campaign.
Go ahead.
I just wanted to add that Millennial Millie, who's just doing a brilliant job of investigating and reporting, has on her blog now, her website... Is that Millie Weaver?
Millie Weaver.
Millie Weaver is the one.
Right, Millie Weaver, who uses the name Millennial Willie, has a brilliant expose, an hour and a half.
I've watched the first hour.
I have reports from two others who've watched the whole, exposing how it was an Antifa operation, how John Sullivan, who is a son of an army general who is an expert in PSYOPs, adopted son, and his brother, they're both black, We're key orchestrating the event where they were even announcing it or arranging on social media where they had everyone meet together at 11 a.m.
in anticipation of going into the Capitol where John even sells riot gear, all black Antifa type gear he sells and he markets it over his own show and where she featured an expert On these kinds of psyops who's been covered some 500 and who explained it's as easy for him to distinguish between Trump supporters and Antifa members as it is between alligators and turtles, and that this was an Antifa op, and the fact that the Congress is mamby-pambing around reflects that the Democrats actually don't want the truth to emerge because it's going to backfire massively in their faces.
So I'm just putting up actually an article right now about the testimony from the former chief of police that this was an arranged or orchestrated organized event, which of course blows to smithereens the very idea that Trump had committed any incitement.
And I observed that he didn't finish speaking at the Ellipse until 1.11 and yet these events at the Capitol began as early as 12.40 and well before any Trump supporters could have been there and already called for reinforcements and the whole matter was well underway.
I'm embedding there, by the way.
And it'll be up in about 30 minutes.
I'm embedding there, by the way, a video, 21-minute video where you can see managers and directors in the crowd telling people where to go and what to do.
And the staging, the staging of the shooting of the woman who was supposed to be a Trump supporter but
who appears to be a crisis actor.
The whole thing was phony, fake, unbelievable, awful.
So your points about the politics are exactly right and there's a mountain of evidence to
back you up.
That would be at jamesfetzer.org.
Should be up in about 20 minutes.
Yeah, well like I said, the media, it's good that people are doing this, but ultimately
the defendants, you know, they get to go to court and in the cases, I bet you a lot of
them are going to be thrown out.
A lot of people will, but what the government is trying to do is scare the bejesus out of people.
They're charging people with these terrorism type charges and they're trying to, they want some person to say, their lawyer will say, look, you're looking at 20 years if you get convicted, but if you plead guilty, You'll get a felony, but you'll only get a year of probation and a month in jail or something.
So, and then tell on everyone else.
And of course, if they tell on other people, who knows if they'll just make it up or, or actually tell the truth.
That's what they're, that's what the government is trying to do.
They're trying to get someone to, to, to plead guilty and then rat out the other people.
The reality though, is I've looked at these, the actual cases.
I've looked at some of the cases.
And the people who are charged, these people do not look like terrorists.
They'll say, oh, they're putting up pictures on their Facebook page.
By the way, they weren't using Parler, by the way.
They were using Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, and YouTube mostly, not Parler.
But they would put up stuff.
Well, first of all, that's because the people didn't have the intent.
These people were not terrorists, because if you really think you're a terrorist and you're doing a crime, you're not going to put up a picture of you smiling in the Capitol.
And Nancy Pelosi's desk or something.
You're not going to do that because they didn't have the intent.
The people who did these things were not committing any kind of crime outside of the people who did the actual vandalism.
They weren't doing anything.
They didn't have any criminal intent.
And I believe the government has to prove criminal intent in these cases.
And the fact that these people were putting up fun, fun Twitter posts and stuff It's actually evidence to me that they were not hiding what they did.
They put it right up on Twitter.
They're not hiding it because they didn't have criminal intent.
So we will have to keep waiting and see how the cases shake out.
We'll have to see what happens.
Very good.
Thank you for calling.
You're welcome to stick around.
I have another call here from Scaredy Cat.
Scaredy Cat, please join the conversation with Rolf and me.
Hi Jim, Rolf, Larry, and I didn't quite catch the other caller, but hello.
And so, Rolf, I love, love, love your analysis, political analysis.
I'm a fan of yours.
How you connect everything slowly and calmly, and you connect and you remember a wide-ranging
evidence.
And I think any group would be lucky to have you on their side.
However...
Thank you.
Here comes the but.
So that's the 99%, and here's my little 1% criticism.
So my point of view is that you are wrong about your lines of dissection.
I feel that Republican and Democratic, which I call the demolish, demolishocracy, the demolishocrats, so the Republicans and the demolishocrats, the lines, the lines of political analysis Those lines are extinct, and the present-day danger, we have to dissect the present days, what the dangers are coming towards us, and what's coming towards us, like the heavily loaded map truck, is the religions.
And I feel that if you just add a little bit of religion into dissecting or what is political analysis in the end?
It is the powerful groups, people coming together, gaining resources, power, money, influence
in order to effect rules over us, whichever group is ruling over us.
And I think the problem is that President Trump is a father's love for his daughter
is one of the most marvelous things in our human family, in the universe.
But I think the danger of President Trump in 2024 is that he might be selling America
to his Jewish daughter, Ivanka Trump, and her core religionists.
Scary eyes. Did you?
Could you clarify what Skerrity was asking?
I couldn't quite get it, Ralph.
Are you saying that you think Ivanka Trump might run for president?
Is that what you're saying?
No, not at all.
What do you mean?
She belongs to Jew culture, and the political analysis should be... In other words, we should name everybody's religion.
The Jew cultures of people, Uh, Christian cultures, people, uh, uh, Muslim cultures, people, Hindu cultures, people, Nikki Haley and so on.
Um, I think that would be a more truthful, uh, uh, political analysis.
For example, I totally, totally want President Trump to get the Nobel Peace Prize.
I would like to go, I don't know who it is, the Queen of Norway or Queen of Sweden to, um, and King of Sweden.
If I could just tell them, just hand it over to President Trump.
But the real reason, the true reason being that he's our really true, truly first peace president of our planet since President John Fitzgerald Kennedy, and that was almost 60 years ago.
I agree with that.
I agree with that, that Kennedy and Trump are peace presidents.
I agree with that.
What I don't agree with, though, is going after people's religious beliefs.
You know, Ivanka Trump married a Jewish guy, Jared Kushner, but Jared Kushner's done a lot of great things.
Jared Kushner's the guy who's been negotiating all the peace treaties in the Middle East.
That's Jared Kushner.
Is one of the main people doing that.
Jared Kushner also was the guy who was the lead person on the First Step Act.
Did you know that President Trump, for all the people who say he's a dictator, actually reduced the federal prison population by 40,000 prisoners?
It went from 190,000 to 150,000.
Did you know that?
90,000 to 150,000.
Did you know that?
That's to me, that's a pro, there's way too many people in the federal prisons.
Okay, and President Trump is the first person to do something about it.
Now, obviously, there's a lot of bad people in the federal prisons, but there's a lot of... I would say that, well, first of all, the war on drugs has way too many people getting arrested.
Obviously, fewer people were getting arrested, at least on federal cases, when President Trump was in office.
So, I credit Jared Kushner for two different things.
You may not know this, but Jared Kushner's father Was in federal prison on what many people consider to be trumped up fraud charges.
Think of the charges against people like Paul Manafort and then think, okay, well, there's a lot of people that get caught up in these technical fraud cases.
Like you put the, you exaggerate your income on a credit card application.
Okay.
That's a, they make it into a federal case.
Well, Jared Kushner's father got screwed.
And by the way, the prosecutor was Chris Christie.
In that case.
So I don't really care.
I don't really care about what people's religion is.
It's a free, freedom of religion country in the United States.
I do believe that I'm, I've raised a Lutheran and I just believe in the basic principles that I learned in Sunday school, you know, love thy neighbor and things like that.
And that's the way, not that I don't sit there and read the Bible and say, I'm going to go follow the Old Testament.
I don't, and that's not the way I look at it, but I do think there's good, good values are taught in, in the big, in the major religions.
That's what I think.
And I don't really care that much about it.
Well, if I don't have any doubt about your sincerity, but are you aware of the extent to which Zionists control our mainstream media or even our Congress through AIPAC?
I don't think that they, I don't think they do it anymore.
I think they used to, but not anymore.
First of all, a Zionist is someone who wants Israel to become a country.
Israel became a country in 1948, so unless you want to start a war to get rid of Israel, then you're a Zionist, right?
Do you think we should start a war to take out Israel?
Otherwise, you're a Zionist.
I mean, I thought these people were anti-war people.
I don't think it matters if you call someone a Zionist.
What does that even mean?
How does that affect me?
I don't care about whether they're Zionist or not.
What I care about is if the mass media is selling liberal lies and making stuff up It doesn't make any difference if they're a Zionist or an anti-Zionist or a pro-Zionist or a pseudo-Zionist.
It doesn't make any difference.
And I go back to Rush Limbaugh.
He doesn't care.
He just doesn't like the liberal news media because they lie by omission.
They twist the facts.
They create false narratives.
It doesn't make any difference if they're Zionists.
It doesn't make any difference, whatever the definition of that word is.
Because that's not the issue of whether they're Zionists or not.
That's not the issue.
The issue is, what are they doing?
They want gun control.
You don't have to be a Zionist to support gun control, do you?
What about socialism?
What does that have to do with it?
You could be a Zionist for socialism, you could be a Zionist against socialism, you could be an anti-Zionist for socialism or an anti-Zionist against socialism.
So it doesn't make any difference.
The question is, what are the main issues?
Illegal immigration.
The real group of people that are the former globalist billionaires who don't care about border security, they rig the trade agreements against the United States, that's what Trump came along to oppose this stuff.
Yeah, Rolf, wonderful, wonderful.
You've been terrific.
I appreciate the sincerity of all your comments.
And for the most part, I think you've been spot on.
I'm inclined to agree with Scaredy Cat here.
However, if you go to my blog, check out bought and paid for Biden's long history pandering to the Israeli lobby.
I believe there is a major problem here with Israel's control of our mainstream media and over our Congress.
I'm going to thank everyone who called in.
Larry was excellent, the second caller too.
Scaredy Cat, always glad to have you here.
Rolf, you did a great job.
I can't thank you enough.
Well, we look forward.
Thank you very much.
You got it, Rolf.
We'll be back on Friday.
▲
Export Selection