Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 8, 2021 - Jim Fetzer

01:31:31

Need to Know: The Fetzer Report Episode 145 - 05 March 2021

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	This is Jim Fetzer in Madison, Wisconsin, where I'm very pleased today to be joined by Michael Ivey from Nashville, North Carolina, and Chris Weinhart from Detroit, Michigan, who are very serious guys and eager to join me in bringing you all the news you need to know.
	We begin with the House passing H.R.
	1, the election reform bill.
	It's going to be devastating for democracy.
	It's typically mislabeled for the People Act when it's for the party.
	A party-line vote of 220 to 210 where all Republicans voted against it and were joined by Representative Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, the only Democrat, To vote against it.
	They would need 60 votes to overcome a filibuster in the Senate.
	And frankly, I don't believe they're going to get it.
	But Biden has declared that he would sign it were it to reach his death.
	They're giving a great deal of misrepresentation about the bill.
	But it would impose requirements on voting procedures that would give the Democrats the ability to extend the modes of theft they employed here in 2020.
	It would require additional disclosure of campaign donors and disclaimers on political advertising, which is good.
	But a candidate would receive six times the amount of a given small dollar contribution in a Freedom from Influence Fund that would be federally financed, coming from a 4.75% surcharge on fines and settlements corporations pay the federal government, Restructures the FEC as a partisan majority rule campaign regulatory agency.
	New restrictions on freedom of speech during campaign.
	Overturning Citizens United which would dissolve certain limits on corporate and union political spending.
	Actually, that I could support.
	Prohibit coordination between super PACs and political candidates.
	It would force states to implement a minimum of 15 days of early voting, however.
	Offer mail-in ballots.
	Facilitate online voter registration.
	Allow no excuse absentee balloting.
	All of which are methods that would greatly enhance a Democrat's ability to steal elections
	in the future, just make it a regular matter.
	Felons would also be able to vote after they've completed their sentences.
	I don't have a problem with that.
	It creates an independent commission for a congressional redistricting of academicians,
	public officials and private citizens, which is probably a good idea, though why they aren't
	simply adopting the Iowa model is unclear to me, where Iowa uses panels of retired judges
	to draw districts in a nonpartisan way.
	Michael, your thoughts?
	Well, I noticed that it passed with absolutely zero Republican votes, and they're calling it bipartisan.
	That's a good example of the bastardization and weaponization of language that we see at every turn these days.
	Like you, there's a couple of good things in there.
	I don't mind the allowing convicted felons to vote after they've served their sentences either, and the Citizens United needs to be overturned, and that's fine, but There's, I think this is correct.
	It allows for mail-in voting to be received up to 10 days after the election.
	Yeah, that's pretty, that's pretty crazy.
	And it mandates that everyone has to register to vote.
	And it prevents state officials from removing ineligible voters.
	So, It's pretty crazy stuff in there.
	Oh, another one in there that flipped me out was it's forcing, well, I say forcing, they use tax money however they want, to be used, forcing tax money to be used for campaigns at the rate of like an eight to one multiplier.
	If somebody raises $100 in donations, they're eligible for 800.
	In federally backed campaign funds.
	That means you and I get to back AOC.
	Isn't that great?
	Yeah, yeah.
	Love it.
	Love it.
	Right.
	Chris, your thoughts?
	Yeah, it doesn't surprise me.
	I would bet there's a lot of stuff in the details.
	The devil's always in the details.
	And as you can see, they usually use inversions or things that sound very placatable or Sounds like it's par for the course.
	an inversion or something that's there to just drive them further into servitude or to take
	their rights or things of that nature. So yeah, I would really be buyer beware and I haven't read
	the bill or you know entirely but yeah from what it sounds like it sounds like it's par for the
	course. Sounds like it's par for the course. I think for the Democrats that's exactly right.
	Meanwhile, we have an unreleased federal report that concludes there's no evidence that
	free speech online causes hate crimes.
	Remember, this is a justification for the massive censorship by Facebook and Twitter and YouTube.
	That free speech is supposed to be promoting face crimes, hate crimes.
	The report was prepared by the Department of Commerce National Telecommunications and Information Administration, responsible for advising the President on matters related to telecommunication and the Internet.
	It was drafted to revise the findings of a previous report In 1993, entitled The Role of Telecommunications in Hate Crimes, although it was prepared under the Trump administration, the request to revise the report came from the 116th Congress, which had a 35-seat Democrat majority in the House, only a slim Republican majority in the Senate.
	The 1993 report is still publicly available, but the latest revision to its findings is not.
	Sources who are close to drafting and approving believe bureaucrats and establishment politicians with vested interest in hate crimes and the fear associated with it and the use of censorship are trying to suppress it because its conclusions challenge popular narratives.
	Reports like this are typically made public.
	I don't know why this isn't up on a government website.
	It's already been submitted to Congress.
	It's not private anymore.
	According to the source, the updated report was bitterly opposed by the Civil Rights Division, which is part of the DOJ responsible for prosecuting hate crimes.
	The Civil Rights Division is also at the forefront of efforts to drum up hysteria over white nationalist extremism in the U.S.
	The report was approved by the Office of Management and Budget, but it doesn't approve on any website.
	From the report, The evidence does not show that during the last decade, a time of expansive growth in electronic communication, especially on the Internet and cell phones, there's been a rise in hate crime incidents.
	It also warns efforts to clamp down on online communication over unfounded concerns over hate crimes undermines the First Amendment.
	We caution that efforts to control or monitor speech online, even for the worthy goal of reducing crime, present serious First Amendment concerns and runs counter to our nation's dedication of free expression.
	To quote Barack Obama, the strongest weapon against hateful speech is not repression, it is more speech.
	Rather surprising, because I rather would expect today that Obama would take the opposite point of view.
	This research, and much like it, fails to demonstrate any causal relationship between increased social media use and increased violence.
	It does not present even comprehensive descriptive data correlating increased hate speech on social media with increased hate crimes.
	Moreover, this kind of censorship poses real dangers to our political system.
	Under the hate speech prohibitions and other censorship rules, the platforms have removed content that many consider seriously engaged with pressing political and social concerns.
	Why am I not surprised?
	Michael, your thoughts?
	It's a brainwashing.
	Well, the whole thing about Hate speech, which is something that's just come about in the last 30 years, is the first I heard the term.
	And hate crimes, everything has to be related to racism.
	And racism is like the worst evil that anybody could be accused of.
	It's even worse than murdering somebody these days.
	And of course, the only people who exercise Racism or white people.
	It's a way to attack the white foundation, the ideology of Christian-based European culture that they've been trying to destroy for centuries, and they're using this to do it.
	It's very reminiscent of Some of the principles that Orwell wrote about in 1984, especially the use of language, hate speech and hate crimes.
	So I guess that's all I have to say about that.
	Well, in hate speech and hate crimes, it's all totally subjective.
	I mean, freedom of speech is not to protect you from having your feelings hurt because somebody has an opinion with which you disagree.
	It's to allow everyone to express their view as long as they're not causing any physical harm.
	This is using psychological harm to be a new bastion and totally subjective.
	Just outrageous where the Democratic Party has become a bastion of anti-white racism.
	The Democratic Party today is the racist party in the United States.
	The American public just hasn't put it together yet.
	Chris, your thoughts?
	Yeah, I agree.
	This is definitely a gaslighting tactic they've utilized for a long time.
	In addition to pandering or inverting things, or selectively presenting information or half-truths, it's absolutely an effective tactic that they've utilized for a very long time.
	At least a century to my knowledge, maybe even longer with the Democratic Party in particular.
	Yeah, I'm not shocked by it.
	You know, in fact, I think it's going to get much worse if it's allowed to continue.
	And I think that's really why Trump gained so much popularity was that he kind of confronted this publicly and the pure insanity of some of the inversions that are going on.
	And I think that there's a certain group of people at the top that use both parties to kind of play this theater back and forth in this emotional racquetball back and forth, you know?
	Yeah.
	One more thing.
	Yeah, sure.
	On this topic, I had a career in the enforcement of civil rights laws, anti-discrimination laws, and during that career, started about 1977, I had several minority and black bosses, and one of them, this was in the mid-80s, started saying that it was not possible for blacks to be racist.
	The thinking that led to that was that one has to wield power over another in order to qualify as racist.
	So, therefore, since whites held all the power in society, they were the only ones that was capable of racism.
	So, I thought it was crazy at the time, and I think it's crazy today.
	And I told her so at the time.
	I said, look, I know too many blacks who are absolutely racist for me to believe what you're saying there.
	So I just thought I'd toss that in.
	Yeah, I think the Jews, they play both sides of the fence.
	You know, they use that hammer and shield.
	Well, there's a distinction, philosophical, between freedom and effective freedom.
	Freedom, in a certain nebulous sense, means you're not constrained from doing something by any laws that would prohibit you, for example, where you see it could be said that the poor are just as free to travel around the world and buy yachts as are the rich.
	But effective freedom means you have the resources to exercise those freedoms.
	So you could draw a distinction between racism and effective racism as it were.
	Racism clearly is a matter of discounting individuals and their worth on the basis of the racial characteristics.
	But effective racism would be then being in a position to implement it on a certain scale, for example, and that would be why I think the political structure could make a difference, you know, to a racist society.
	If you're going to round up all the whites.
	Do you have these sorts of things in South Africa and maybe here in the United States?
	South Africans, when the blacks came to power, they adopted the racist attitude of rounding up the whites and killing them.
	And I'm afraid that we might have something parallel going on here.
	Your thoughts, Michael?
	I got one more observation, and that is something that I just saw.
	Jeff Berwick, who goes by the name The Dollar Vigilante, he lives in Mexico, and he's a great truth teller.
	He started out one of his videos by saying that if you put a bunch of red ants and black ants in a jar, And they're just going to crawl around and then crawl out of the jar.
	But if you close the jar and shake it violently, and then dump the ants out on the ground, they'll all kill each other.
	They're natural enemies.
	And the point is that it's a metaphor to make you think, who is it that's shaking the jar in this situation?
	Between the races, between the sexes, who's shaking the jar?
	I think that's good because racial tensions, really, I mean, especially when you have the domination of professional sports by black athletes who clearly have, you know, greater success in athletic activities.
	I mean, why should we not acknowledge that different races have different abilities that are preponderant when you have open competition?
	Whites are better intellectually.
	Blacks are better physically.
	There are various subgroups and discriminations.
	I did a whole book about the evolution of intelligence, which really is rooted in a theory about the nature of mind, whether it's animal mind or human mind versus computers, and whether they're capable of possessing minds, where I give reasons to believe they are not, but they nevertheless can simulate Mental operations to a very high degree and behavioral as well in terms of robotics.
	But I have long believed, especially in entertainment, music, acting, that America is not a racist society.
	And after we elected a black American president twice, not once but twice, I really felt racism was a dead issue here in the United States.
	So it's been George Soros and those who are behind Antifa and Black Lives Matter who have wanted to exacerbate racial tensions, and that's had to do with taking down statues that were put up as monuments of mutual respect for both sides, the North and the South, of the Civil War to reach, you know, a reconciliation.
	Chris, anything you'd like to add is welcome here.
	Oh yeah, I'm itching to get in there.
	I think that it's part of the plan and the selective tokenism and even playing to these, these optics of historic persecution.
	This is really part of building a narrative of ostracism a self elected departmental ization within the rabble.
	And I don't think it's an accident.
	I think they've used this tactic for a long, long time and have mixed cultures in this way while purifying the people at the top, you know, the people you truly can't criticize, the people you can't really call racist or, like I said, playing both sides of the fence.
	This is the point of it, really, because when they throw this down to the caste system, we'll squabble with each other over the selective tokenism or over the The traditional conflicts that have been created for us, in most cases, by people funding both sides of the conflict.
	So yeah, this is really, I think, the intention of this.
	And all the while, we're here, you know, fighting with each other over these absurdities, whether it's under the guise of science or under the guise of political dialogue.
	In most cases, these conversations are controlled opposition dialogues in the first place, where they control the bargaining tactic, we'll say.
	Where they put an absurdity out there, something that is not logical or doesn't even really make sense or that is historically inaccurate for this very purpose to draw a strong opinion on one side and a strong counter opinion on the other.
	And really they use these things as catalysts and levers and fulcrums to just turn this
	against each other.
	So I think it's all part of it really, because you're really not talking about the people
	that are taking all the assets, running people out of their homes,
	that are coming up with these BS hoaxes and plandemic things,
	these financial frauds that are all tied together.
	And instead we're really focused on this bullshit.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Racism is such a wonderful diversion from classism and the exploitation of the poor and the politically weak by the rich and powerful.
	You're absolutely right, Chris.
	Michael?
	Katherine Austin Fitz boils it down, the general tactics being used to take us down into two principles, one of which is the invisible enemy and the other is divide and conquer.
	And it reminds me of that famous statement by Israel Cohen from the 1920s in which he said, we must realize that our party's greatest tool is racial tension.
	So that goes back to who's shaking the jar.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Who's talking about from the Zionist point of view that their greatest tool in destroying America is racism.
	Yeah.
	Look who's been on the side of like Jim Crow on the journalism side and then on the other side in terms of legal defense or the optic of that as well.
	Whether it's the ADL, the JDL, the SPLC, the NAACP.
	You always got white Jewish men in charge of black human rights.
	Very good.
	It's just like these laws they put out with the Democrats.
	They're just bullshit.
	They're like pandering to the demographic, but certainly not serving them, in fact, betraying them.
	Yeah, good point, good point.
	Very good.
	Meanwhile, the White House Press Secretary, Jen Psaki, repeatedly dodged questions
	during Tuesday's conference about why Kamala Harris, the Vice President, has spoken out
	about sexual misconduct allegations against New York Democratic Governor Cuomo
	after she spoke out so forcefully against.
	Brett Kavanaugh.
	The allegation to get Kavanaugh all turned out to be fabricated, phony.
	They were fake.
	They were absolutely unbelievable.
	Here you have Vice President Harris, one of the most vocal critics of Justice Kavanaugh, of Senator Al Franken, when they face similar allegations.
	Who repeatedly said, believe them, believe the women, but has said nothing about the three women accusing Governor Cuomo, Fox reporter Kristen Fisher observed.
	Now, the third accuser, Anna Arush, she actually worked for the Biden-Harris campaign.
	So at one point, does the first female vice president say something about this?
	Well, Psaki tried to, you know, work her way around it.
	I know that's how the Vice President continues to feel in the benefit of doing a briefing every day.
	I can certainly speak on behalf of the President and Vice President.
	Certainly, they both believe every woman should be heard, treated with dignity, and treated with respect.
	As you all know, the New York Attorney General will oversee an independent investigation.
	Well, the New York Attorney General happens to be a black woman, and I'm impressed that it appears she is going to move forward.
	But the White House Press Secretary is really being truly evasive.
	Here's part of the exchange.
	Fisher, this is the reporter.
	Well, you know, it's one thing to hear it from you, and it's appreciated, but it's another thing to hear it from the Vice President or the President himself.
	Can we expect to hear from either of them in this topic anytime soon?
	And Saki?
	Well, again, I'm speaking on their behalf.
	That's how they feel.
	They personally both view this as a situation where both all the women coming forward should be treated with dignity and respect and have their voices heard.
	And that's the representation of their points.
	In other words, no.
	Meanwhile, a former soccer star removed from the U.S.
	Soccer Council for speaking against kneeling during the anthem.
	How bad is this?
	Former soccer star Seth John was removed from the U.S.
	Soccer Federation's Athletic Council after giving a heartfelt speech For calling on keeping the prohibition on kneeling during the national anthem in place.
	The ultra-liberal council, however, not only removed the prohibition but took him out of the council.
	This is really embarrassing and insulting in my opinion.
	Jan obviously knew the type of close-minded liberals he was dealing with, judging by his opening statement.
	I'm sure I'm going to ruffle some feathers with what I'm about to say, given the athletic council I'm on, but given the evolution of our quote-unquote progressive culture, where everything offends everybody, those willing to take a knee for a mantle don't care about defending half our country, and when they do so, then I don't have much concern in exercising My First Amendment Rights.
	He went on to note many players opposed kneeling but were scared to say so.
	He noted American deserves credit for going to war to end slavery, that police killing on our black land was a rare event, contradicting the official narrative that would have it believed to be commonplace, and that he should not be politicizing sports.
	Not only did 71% of the Liberal Soccer Council vote to allow players to disrespect the flag, they bounced him off the council for telling the truth.
	Meanwhile, a motorcyclist who identifies as a bicyclist is setting cycling world records.
	I think we want to appreciate that.
	That's a good one.
	Michael, your thoughts?
	Well, the story about Jen Psaki not wanting to talk about that obvious hypocrisy.
	Jen Psaki is such a radical downgrade from Trump's press secretary, McElwain.
	As you know, she's been nicknamed Circleback Sackie because she simply says that so often because she doesn't know how to answer the questions half the time.
	What's her nickname?
	Circle back, Saki.
	Circle back.
	Okay.
	Because she's always saying, you know what?
	We'll have to circle back.
	I'll have to circle back to you on that.
	So it reminded me while you were reading there of something I heard Chris say a couple of shows ago, and that is, you know, they just double down on the bullshit.
	The story about Seth John, the soccer star, that's a great statement that he made and a great stand that he took.
	He probably knew stuff was going to come down on his head.
	And as a sports fan myself over the years, it's been really ridiculous how ever since ever since this, well, a year ago when the First, they laid the pandemic on us, and then they laid that phony cop killing in Minnesota on us.
	And ever since then, the politicization of sports has just gone nuts.
	I don't even like watching it anymore.
	Even when there's really good athletes playing, all you get is They pulled back on a little bit of the brainwashing from putting these statements on the backs of players' backs, but they still are brainwashing people constantly about the mask wearing and the pandemic, because there's nobody in the stadiums, there's nobody who's not wearing masks, except guys that are actually out on the basketball court or whatever it is you're watching.
	Yeah, it's unbelievable.
	Absolutely unbelievable.
	Chris, your thoughts?
	Yeah, I think a big part of that whole programming operation is to dissociate the cultural connection to sports and really to dissociate the common fanatic away from this connection.
	And in the course of doing so, reprogram this fanatic under the course of the COVID dialogue.
	So the media has been pretty effective in, you know, dehumanizing and dissociating everybody from their traditional comfort zones and pushing them into this new area of uncharted waters where every Karen in the world that has access to CNN is now a COVID expert and roughly going to enforce this communist UN agenda on everyone that's not in compliance with their level of idiocy and fear.
	Yeah, that's absolutely stunning.
	It's amazing to me the degree to which they've been successful at getting people to identify one position or the other.
	One position is you believe in the whole pandemic narrative, and those people are liberal, progressive, woke people.
	And the opposite is the case.
	The people who know that it's bullshit, oh, those must be Trump supporters.
	It's amazing to me how they've gotten people to identify those false positions.
	I almost think it's part of the theater to like put people into these two camps where if you're not on one side, if you're abhorred to it, then you're on the other.
	And that's like even some way that you're going to self-electively fall into these two sides that are, I think, control opposition dialogues being provided by Israel.
	But, you know, we'll see.
	We'll see how this turns out.
	It's going to be interesting.
	I can't tell you how many conversations I've had about The pandemic stuff that somebody says something political like, like, yeah, you would say that.
	And I have to say, like, this has absolutely nothing to do with right-left politics.
	I'm talking logic here.
	Yeah.
	You're talking science and they're talking pseudo.
	They bring these absurdities in too.
	Professional sports are just ludicrous.
	Yeah.
	Who gives a shit about the political views of LeBron James?
	Let him play the ball, for God's sake.
	The viewership has dropped dramatically.
	They're losing vast sums of money.
	The public likes sports because it's not political.
	Every other aspect of our life is political, for God's sake.
	Let us have a break.
	Let us relax and enjoy.
	Don't shovel your Political shit on us.
	I'm just shocked that they'd be that stupid.
	I'm mad, too.
	Like, I mean, like, this is something that most parents like to do with their kids.
	You know, you take your kid to the ballgame to get away from this bullshit, and this is like they're trying to muzzleload it down the... It's just crazy.
	Yeah.
	It's part of it.
	It's really a military operation they're trying to put on us.
	I agree completely, and it's because they want to control every aspect of our lives.
	That's sick.
	Supreme Court took up a one voter fraud case that has Democrats shaking with panic.
	They heard oral arguments in a case involving two provisions of Arizona law to prevent voter fraud.
	They date back to 2016.
	Where Democrats sued claiming two provisions of Arizona law, one that bans ballot harvesting and another that discards ballots if a vote is cast in the wrong precinct, violated the Voting Rights Act.
	They came, the laws were racist, and now the case is before the Supreme Court.
	Well, the Supreme Court rejected hearing the challenge of Pennsylvania's vote by mail law.
	Justice Thomas argued the court should have taken up the case to set clear guidelines to stop judges and state officials from changing election laws without the approval of the legislature.
	This case may finally give the court an opportunity to weigh in on election integrity.
	Meanwhile, and I'm so distraught to have to report, Lin Wood has leaked a whistleblower transcript exposing Vice President Pence, Joe Biden, Chief Justice Roberts as scoundrels.
	Absolute scoundrels.
	Here's a comment from a colleague who's read it.
	Linwood's deposition transcript is stunning to say the least, implicating Rod Rosenstein, Pence, and Roberts.
	The military may be cleaning things up.
	I certainly hope so, but I'm beginning to doubt it.
	Rod Rosenstein.
	Let me just hear you a bit about this from this whistleblower who actually underwent physical torture.
	He's been seriously punished.
	There was a timeline about replacing judges after Hillary became president.
	She was not supposed to lose.
	So this was all planned up, and it was more than just that.
	It was twofold.
	They wanted to pack the court and take out as many as they could.
	Meaning they wanted to assassinate members of the Supreme Court and of the federal courts generally.
	Roberts was actually helping them because he didn't want to be one of them.
	He wanted some choice and would be on the bench after that.
	He wanted to maintain some form of control, so he did provide information.
	And just to be clear, we're talking about Chief Justice John Roberts.
	But this was to be done within the first year of Hillary Clinton's campaign, so they could ban firearms as well and impact the court, so they'd have plenty of time to do that.
	Those were their two main goals.
	Do you believe that the death of Antonin Scalia was a part of the same plot, or do you know if that was a separate interview?
	It was the same people.
	He was a backup plan.
	He was their biggest threat, being the most conservative justice.
	Justice Scalia, actually, I believe he found out about this, the plans, and went to the White House.
	Unfortunately, I add, he didn't know Obama was in on it.
	So telling Obama really was letting Obama know that Scalia knew too much.
	Like a week before his death, I believe he found out what they were trying to do when they moved away from the overall attack on where these people lived.
	Or, you know, they would attack around the holidays when more than one justice would be in their home.
	Things like this.
	And again, Roberts was providing this.
	But they had to take him out.
	He was seen as their biggest obstacle.
	So the same basic group that was involved were given access to the ranch where he was found.
	They talked about how they did it.
	They had a couple different options.
	But it was discussed prior to his death what they intended to do, where they could possibly do it, how they could do it, who they would need.
	The records are there at the Cibolo Ranch.
	One person was brought in.
	There were three men.
	One was brought in as a temporary worker.
	The other two, the same team, were brought in as servants for a group that was there hunting.
	And they discussed how it was done that they used dipso, dimethyl sulfoxide, which is a fairly inert chemical.
	It just goes through your skin, but if you mix it with a poison or a drug or something like that, it'll go directly into your system and overload you.
	I believe that's why he was found with a pillow over his face.
	He was struggling to breathe.
	He couldn't breathe.
	He was choking.
	And this particular chemical, you can tailor it to the person.
	If they have a drug problem, you could put phenytol in it and overdose them.
	If they have a heart condition, it would take very little to go directly in.
	It would be like a direct injection into the heart.
	And they talk about how they did it.
	And Roberts is on the phone with these people discussing the successor.
	And he wants to say it because now it was only going to be one person.
	He wanted to pick that person.
	He wanted to say who was going to take it.
	And of course, there was a lot of people who were talking about Eric Holder taking it.
	All kinds of people.
	But he wanted to say who was going to take over Justice Scalia's spot.
	And I don't think he got it.
	I mean, obviously it didn't happen because President Trump was here, but he did want it.
	And this was all prior, the discussion and him complaining that he wasn't getting any prior say to the death, his son death.
	So it was well known.
	So, aside from the Roberts being involved in this, did Rosenstein or anyone else outside the Hathouse been made aware?
	This is stunning stuff.
	This is a very comprehensive 191-page transcript.
	It's a series of interviews with a whistleblower who has suffered Wow.
	physical harm they smashed his testicle for example, in getting these reports out and
	I admire him beyond words and when would for revealing this to the public you can find
	it online.
	Every American has to read this to understand the depths of corruption of our own government,
	including the Supreme Court, Michael.
	Wow, that's some heavy stuff in that deposition.
	Are there any clues as to who this person is?
	Not a name, but I mean, characterization, like how he came to know these things?
	Oh, yeah, sure.
	Yeah, you just read the transcript.
	He lays it all out.
	He had all kinds of background, degrees, and so forth.
	He was very deeply involved.
	You can learn it all there, Michael.
	Believe me, it's a very comprehensive interview.
	All right.
	I just didn't know the connection between the amazing stuff that he's talking about there.
	I mean, he's talking about John Roberts and Pence being involved in the assassination of Justice Scalia.
	He's talking about John Roberts and Rod Rosenstein, actually, who turns out to be a really nefarious character.
	When Biden fired all the U.S.
	attorneys, they kept Rod Rosenstein in place.
	Earlier in the section that you read, it did mention Pence as well.
	There's much more about Pence in here.
	Also, it has the statement in it, they wanted to pack the court and take out as many as they could.
	So, and then, then it mentions banning firearms.
	So presumably putting two and two together there, were they talking about creating a, an event where more than one justice got mowed down by some actor?
	No, no, no, no, no.
	They're talking about assessing the judges so Hillary, who is supposed to be the president, could nominate their successor and their program to ban firearms as a separate matter, but so they'd have a court that would support it, which is now going forward with a present Congress, you know?
	I mean, the House has introduced this Barbara Jordan Lee from Texas, this absolutely unbelievable A firearm thing where you're gonna have to have a national registry, you're gonna have to pay all kinds of taxes, you have to get a mental health examination on firearms.
	They're moving with the agenda.
	They were simply going to set up the court.
	No, they were not going to take him out with a staged false flag using guns, Michael.
	No, they were gonna Assassinate them and replace them so they'd be amenable to approving major overhauls, really the decimation of the Second Amendment.
	And Scalia, therefore, was, because he was such a strong proponent of both the First and the Second Amendment, was a major problem.
	But what he's emphasizing is, based on his own knowledge, it was a matter of murder.
	Scalia was murdered.
	Right.
	And Justice Roberts was providing information, and Hillary and Obama Both appear to have been involved.
	Okay, thanks.
	Chris, your thoughts?
	Well, I kind of maybe took an outside-the-box perspective of what's going on and I think that most of the stuff you're hearing about in the financial world or in the criminal world and Hollywood and DC, the pedophile thing, the whole enchilada with the intelligence networks and resource extraction and turning out human labor and replacing us with technocracy and AI, I think it all ties together and I think that it's a systematic effort every say 10 years to come up with a new scam and as soon as the scams discovered they maybe hang on a few departmentalized hangouts and then move on to the next scam and really the American people think that justice is served and really nothing could be further from the truth.
	I think that the deep state is trying to regulate self regulate the deep state in many instances like they did in the 70s or the 80s.
	You remember the Pike Church and Rockefeller hearings in the 70s, or also in the 80s with the kiddies alone the boys town Franklin cover up Keating five.
	could go on and on Drexel Burnham, the junk bonds, Milken.
	This is when Rothschild actually comes out with the LBMA too
	and starts a new scam with the bullion market.
	But that's a different conversation altogether.
	I've been looking into that and just kind of blowing my mind
	at how all this stuff seems to have these meetings in the aisles, like say in this case,
	the Iran Contra and John Poindexter.
	It was his ranch, I think where Scalia was killed at, wasn't it?
	Oh, I don't know.
	Was it John Poindexter's ranch in Texas, I thought was where Scalia was killed at.
	It was a peculiar setup there, this particular ranch, yeah, where a lot of... He was all over Iran-Contra, you know, and there's a lot of guys that keep re-popping up all over the place that are tied to these type of things, so I think it's bigger than just...
	You know what, what they were doing with Israel and covering up for them as they always seem to do this is tied into like the the bond market, the the drug smuggling the prostitution rings that I mean you name it, every black market on earth is now being pretty much drawn Digital white-collar world where these guys are going to run these new offerings that control us like cryptocurrencies or some of these other things.
	It's amazing to see the amount of control they're trying to put in not only with taking our constitutional rights away with this technocracy and asymmetrical surveillance, but also with these things that they're offering like as antithesis to the supposed Central Banking Intelligence Agency deep state control, which are in many cases just driving us further into further control.
	So, I really got my eyes open on this, and maybe I'm seeing things, or maybe I'm a little too suspicious of these guys, but I don't think it's unwarranted.
	I don't think it's on the line of paranoia, because paranoia would be unwarranted suspicion, and these guys got a long track record of pulling this bullshit and using this theater to do so.
	I'm not sure it's possible to have too much suspicion of these guys.
	Disagree with anything you said.
	What we have here is a document.
	We have a sworn affidavit from a witness who's got up close and personal and is nailing these things down.
	I've read 69 pages now of the 191-page document.
	A colleague Who put me on to it, who has read the whole thing, has explained to me, wait till I get to the rest of the matter.
	Because it turns out that Joe Biden has a history of pedophilia.
	All of his aides are aides because they make their children available to Joe Biden.
	And that his wife, Jill, whom we're supposed to admire, actually is a facilitator of Joe Biden's pedophilia.
	I mean, it's enough to make you vomit.
	Everyone needs to read this thing.
	You can find it, it's now all over the internet.
	For Lin Woods, you know, the transcript he's released, 191 pages.
	Every American has to read this thing to get an understanding of how gross is the situation we're in, even involving the Chief Justice of the United States, Michael.
	What you just said reminded me of a thought I had earlier, and that is, I wonder if it's going to be possible to actually do anything with this information.
	From what we've seen from the court system lately, it's at best a toss-up, and then if you have something this hot, it'll sort of be a test case, you might say, on a larger scale.
	That we can see when we have some really hot information about really high profile people, indeed, the President of the United States at this point, whether their power extends through the media, through the courts, and it just doesn't matter anymore.
	I think they're definitely exhausting their credibility in terms of the Justice Department and its supposed intention or creation to supposedly serve justice.
	I think they're more or less there to hang out the scapegoats and to hang out the limited hangouts and to really, when the word on the street gets too prominent in terms of calling for persecution or prosecution, then they put on the illusion of justice and diligence, but certainly not the deliverance of justice.
	That is the whole point of the Department of Justice and the FBI is the division of that.
	You can arguably say that with COINTELPRO and weaponizing civil rights and many political operations and racial ones and even the war on terror, there's a long track record there as well of these people not only interfering in these type of things but working in conjunction with the private sector like the ADL, the JDL and these other groups too.
	It's kind of murky waters there and most people that don't really study this or take the diligence to research this, I have no idea what I'm talking about, but those that do know damn well what I'm saying and can see right through this.
	Chris, you're, you're 100% right.
	Meanwhile, we'll be right back.
	Here we have a fellow talking about what's really going on.
	Check it out.
	Two states, Texas and Mississippi, have now officially ended their mask mandates.
	It is a big step for heat and lockdowns across the country.
	Now, predictably, the White House is furious.
	People like Dr. Anthony Fauci claiming that by ending mask mandates, it will cause a resurgence in the COVID virus across the country.
	But is that true?
	If only there was someplace we could turn to to get data to show whether or not mask mandates work.
	Well, turns out there is.
	I'll show it to you.
	I'm Ben Swan and this is Truth in Media.
	Welcome to the show.
	We are talking today about the removal of mask mandates in the states of Texas and Mississippi, what other states may follow.
	We're also going to look at data from the state of Florida that demonstrates just how well mask mandates have worked in terms of preventing the spread of The coronavirus.
	We're going to get to all that today, but before we do, a shout out to our sponsor for this episode, ISE.media.
	Guys, so excited to tell you that we are only a couple weeks away from launching our full site.
	We're so excited about what we're building with your help.
	ISE.media.
	Okay, so let's talk about the story of these mask mandates in Texas and Mississippi that have now been lifted by their respective governors.
	The governors of Texas and Mississippi both announced on Tuesday that they would be lifting their state's mask mandates and rolling back many of their COVID-19 health mandates Just one day after the CDC warned against complacency in the face of the emerging coronavirus variants.
	Quote, it is now time to open Texas 100%.
	Texas Governor Greg Abbott Tuesday afternoon at Montelongo's Mexican restaurant in Lubbock said, COVID has not suddenly disappeared, he said, but state mandates are no longer needed.
	Shortly after Abbott's announcement, Governor Tate Reeves announced that he would end Mississippi's statewide mask mandate effective Wednesday of this week.
	Now, of course, those decisions have been met with hand-wringing by not only the White House, but also their chief medical advisor.
	Who else?
	Dr. Anthony Fauci.
	Fauci, who is President Biden's chief medical advisor, said it was too early to lift restrictions.
	I don't know why they're doing it, but from a public health standpoint, it's certainly ill-advised.
	Just pulling back on all the public health guidelines that we know work, And if you take a look at the curve, we know it works.
	It's just inexplicable.
	Why would you want to pull back?
	Now, the truth is, despite what Fauci said there, there is plenty of data that proves that those mask mandates don't actually work.
	We'll get to that in a second.
	But let's talk about why Fauci and other White House advisers are freaking out at this point.
	And the answer to that is pretty simple.
	There are seven states, six of them led by GOP governors, that actually have mask mandates that are set to expire this month.
	And by the way, that includes the state of Alabama.
	Quote, Alabama Governor Kay Ivey could lift the state's mask mandate later this week with a spokesperson telling Politico that Alabama is headed in the right direction and that Ivey has made clear that she prefers personal responsibility to government mandates.
	Now, of course, the media and the White House were wringing their hands about this, as if Texas and Mississippi are the first states to actually lift mask mandates.
	They are not.
	In fact, the state of Florida hasn't had mask mandates for months.
	Some cities and counties have had mask mandates and others have not, and there's a lot of data that can be pulled from that.
	Justin Hart and the team at Rational Ground released a comprehensive data analysis of masked versus non-masked counties in the state.
	A total of 22 of 67 counties in the state of Florida have implemented a mask order at some point during the period of May 1st through December 15th of 2020.
	It may not sound like many, but these include almost all of Florida's largest metro areas.
	To be more than fair, if an area added a mask order at some point during the outbreak, the study's authors gave a 14-day period to allow time for cases to begin subsiding.
	Quote, cases were summed for both mandate and non-mandate jurisdictions and adjusted for 100,000 people for days the mandates were or were not in effect.
	If masked did even close to as advertised, one would expect to see the counties that admit maskless to be absolute dumpster fires next to the counties that implement a mandate, right?
	At the very least, the numbers should favor the masked areas by more than a percentage point or two.
	So how did it go?
	Well, yep, it was the masked folks' worst nightmare.
	quote, when counties did have a mandate in effect, there were 667,239 cases over 3,137 days with an
	average of 23 cases per 100,000 per day. When counties did not have a county-wide order,
	there were 438,687 cases over 12,139 days with an average of 22 cases per 100,000 per day.
	In other words, counties with mask mandates in place actually did worse than those that refused to implement them.
	The authors even accounted for population density in their analysis, suggesting that it didn't have an impact on the numbers because four of the 12 most populous counties in Florida never had a countywide order.
	When the 8 did have an order in effect, there were 64 cases per 1,000.
	In periods 11 and 12 did not have one, there were 40, they wrote.
	Rational Ground went on to look at national numbers, pitting the states that resisted the urge to impose a statewide mask mandate against those that masked up.
	And how did those compare?
	When states did have a mandate in effect, there were 9,605,256 cases over 5,907 total days,
	and averaged 27 cases per 100,000 per day. When states did not have a statewide order,
	there were 5,781,000.
	So the data here is without question.
	in cases over 5,772 total days, averaging 17 cases per 100,000 people per day.
	So the data here is without question.
	The bottom line is, and I've been telling you this for months
	that at the end of the day, mask mandates do not slow or prevent the spread of a virus,
	whether that virus is the flu or it's COVID-19.
	The reality is there were many studies that proved this before COVID came along.
	There are studies and data that now prove it, now that COVID has come along, and the bottom line is there will be studies that prove it in the future as well.
	When someone like Dr. Anthony Fauci tells you to put on a mask and then put on another one and put on a third one in order to prevent the virus, And every legitimate doctor across the country looks at that and says, that is nonsense.
	Why would we believe him when he begins to wring his hands that the science has proven that masks prevent the spread of the virus and therefore states must keep mandates in place?
	They don't need to keep mandates in place because masks don't prevent the spread.
	That's what the data shows.
	It showed it before COVID, it showed it during COVID, and it will continue to show it into the future.
	I gotta say, that was just a wonderful expose by Ben Swan.
	I'm very impressed.
	Anthony Fauci is a fraud.
	That's how we ought to think of him, is Fauci the fraud.
	Meanwhile, a Los Angeles school superintendent violated the Nuremberg Code and federal law by ordering teachers to receive an experimental COVID-19 vaccine.
	This is one of a host of brilliant articles by Edward Hendry.
	On February 27th, the superintendent of the LA Unified School District, Austin Buechner, sent out an email with the following order.
	Schedule an appointment to receive a COVID-19 vaccine.
	A direct order to his LA Unified School District employees to receive.
	It's clear that the superintendent intends the vaccine is required for teachers and staff.
	Multiple reports about it.
	The superintendent states, vaccinating school staff is a critical part of reopening school campuses in the safest possible way.
	The order in the email is the first sentence that placed in bold typeface, but It violates the Nuremberg Code and federal laws.
	Many may not know, but the Nuremberg Code is an international standard for medical practice that you cannot use human beings for experimental medical procedures without their informed consent.
	Here he is directing that they take the procedure when in fact the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine is not FDA approved It's an experimental vaccine.
	You cannot force anyone to take it.
	The significant note of potential risks and benefits and the extent to which the risks and benefits occur are unknown.
	Information about available vaccines and the risks and benefits of those alternatives would need to be presented.
	The COVID-19 vaccines are being administered to the public on what's known as an emergency use authorization, which the gravamen of the standard is that known and potential benefits of the vaccine outweigh their known and potential risks, but that is false.
	While they've been authorized for emergency use, they remain experimental.
	As experimental, they cannot be required by an employer or the government.
	Indeed, any person who offers a vaccine under the emergency ordinance must obtain informed consent before administering.
	To require someone to take part in any medical experiment is a violation of the Nuremberg Code.
	Here are some specific elements of the code that are codified in American law.
	No investigator may involve a human being as a subject in research covered by these regulations unless the investigator has obtained the legally effective informed consent of the subject.
	The FDA has taken the position that compliance is sufficient to dispense with a need for informed consent from a vaccine recipient.
	The FDA alleges, although informed consent is generally required, it's not required to use an emergency, which is simply wrong.
	Where did the FDA come up with this?
	Appropriate conditions need to Sure that individuals are informed that the known and potential benefits and notes are shared that you have the option to accept or refuse a product and no alternatives to the product there and available.
	This is a very significant matter, and I think that he is doing and Henry is doing a brilliant job where LA Unified School.
	District employees are being hoodwinked into believing the COVID-19 vaccine with which they're being injected is an FDA-approved vaccine to which they must submit.
	In fact, the COVID-19 vaccine being pushed on the LA Unified School District employees is an experimental vaccine not approved by the FDA.
	What that means is this is a gross violation of the Nuremberg Code and of their rights as human beings.
	Shocking stuff in my opinion.
	Michael, your thoughts?
	That is a fabulous article by Ed Hendry.
	I'm so glad that you wrote that.
	You've got it posted at your site.
	I've sent it out to quite a few friends and relatives already.
	It has a lot of good legal arguments in it and it's my understanding that if It's an experiment, then people get to say no.
	And even the military, I think that's why they're tolerating extremely high levels of refusal of this vaccine by the military and not ordering them to take it.
	But I've heard that the level of Refusal in the military is 40% or higher.
	Another good thing about that article is that it contains links to the actual descriptions of what's in these injections or descriptions of the injections methodology of working anyway.
	Which for the Moderna company, they say straight up front that it's putting an operating system into the human body.
	My daughter-in-law works in a hospital in Texas, and she's very concerned about this, and I'm hoping information in this article will help her fight it.
	It's F-ing unbelievable, Michael, what they're doing here with us!
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	They're just treating us like the cattle that they think we are.
	I wanted to say something about that Ben Swan video about mask mandates.
	That was a great thing, too.
	Now, the first thing was that it's another expression when these certain states started coming out.
	First, Texas, then Mississippi, now Alabama.
	I was in a conversation with someone just yesterday talking about that, and they were taking it like, No wonder in those states.
	So there again, they're taking it as a political thing.
	Those ignorant red states would do something like that, when actually it's just the opposite.
	They're not ignorant at all.
	They're seeing through the bullshit.
	Now, there are, in those studies that Ben Swan was talking about, there are a lot of variables there that he doesn't go over, and the highest one, highest variable, is the fact that the PCR tests are bullshit in the first place.
	And yet, I bet all the testing that has gone on in relation to what he's talking about was done with PCR tests, or most of it anyway.
	But that brings up another good thing that the governor of Florida, DeSantis, did about two months ago, I think, even before the WHO gave the order to dial back the cycles used in PCR tests.
	And that was, he required All the people who were administering PCR tests to also state the number of cycles used in reading the tests, because everybody knows that you go over 30 or so and they're completely meaningless.
	Oh, one other thing is in relation to this Texas, Mississippi, and Alabama opening up story.
	Joe Biden had a wonderful quote mumbling through his face mask.
	That we didn't need any more Neanderthal thinking.
	I'm sure you saw something about that.
	And I saw a great comment about that, which was Neanderthals probably had twice the working brain cells that Joe Biden has.
	Yeah, 100%.
	Chris, I think you showed us that Canadian coin because in Canada, they are forcing everyone to take the vaccine.
	Tell us more.
	Yeah, that and I'm really trying to turn people on to the concept of going with tangible goods instead of crypto and things like that.
	I think the silver and gold thing, the SLV and GLD markets are being manipulated.
	And I think if the people, the citizens really want to face, make the bankers face justice, the four big trading houses, call them on the spot for this demand delivery, you know, and really, you know, call these guys out.
	BlackRock's running this fund, and they are just doing some really nasty stuff with perception management as well.
	Yeah, I think that's a big part of this whole operation, whether it's the mask thing or the vaccine is the endgame with the nanotech and the operating system like Michael talked about.
	This is something that's been in the works for 30 years or more in the quote-unquote conspiracy theory community.
	However, some of this stuff, most of this stuff, has proven to be lockstep accurate and in fact, in many cases, prophecies.
	I don't think that really we're too far off in suggesting malice aforethought in this whole endeavor and really this dehumanization tactic from the left and from the right is a systematic operation I think and the left is really how they're going to deliver in these genocides like they always have.
	It's a liberal thing and they really know how to gaslight the elderly and the youth really because the youth know that there's something wrong but they can't quite put their finger on it and these guys are there to help them point in the wrong direction so I really think that there's a strong effort from the intelligence agencies to steer people through these media outlets down into these collision courses and really to put the dialogue to where it is.
	We're discussing absurdity A versus absurdity B and certainly not even considering common sense or rational thought.
	Science is kind of like the new god in this case and the people that are delivering this science is obviously it's very flawed.
	Obviously there's a lot of breakdowns in terms of logic or rational explanations.
	The concept of wearing more than one mask and one mask doesn't work in itself is absurd.
	The fact that they haven't even isolated the virus is another.
	The fact that they're putting out information to one side and the other in terms of You know, this being an event 201 with Bill Gates and having a patent on it and then the other side they say they can't isolate it.
	You know, this is part of the chaos and the confusion.
	They want to steer the herd into the range of the shepherds and the sheepdogs, man.
	So, I think that this is part of it and I think that those that know better are finally starting to gain critical mass and they're trying to make that into a mass hysteria.
	Excellent, excellent, excellent.
	What Chris said just then about shepherds and sheep reminded me of the speech that Christy Noem made at the CPAC conference.
	Did you guys get a chance to listen to that?
	I didn't hear her, but I know it went over well.
	Yeah, it was real good.
	I'm a big fan of Christy Noem, and one of her punchlines was, they want to be the shepherds, but that makes us the sheep, and we will not be sheep.
	Well, if they want to lead us to the slaughter, there's no doubt.
	That's 100% spot on.
	Meanwhile, the teachers union calls school reopening structural racism.
	This is bizarre!
	School reopenings do not significantly increase the spread of COVID-19, yet teachers unions are continuing to fight to keep schools closed.
	Even as kids suffered losing an entire year in the classroom.
	In fact, the teachers union in the second largest school district in America actually played the race card, more accurately the Marxist critical race card, race theory card, to condemn a toothless reopening plan as in league with structural racism.
	On Monday, Governor Newsom of California Revealed their compromised school reopening proposal.
	They've been working strong for months.
	The reopening plan doesn't force schools in more dangerous zones to reopen, but incentivizes reopening using state grants.
	Yet the United Teachers of Los Angeles condemned the plan, calling it a recipe for promulgating structural racism.
	We are being unfairly targeted by people who are not experiencing this disease in the same way as students and families in our community, said UTLA President Cicely Marriott Cruz in a press conference.
	If this was a rich person's disease, we'd see a very different response.
	We would not have the high rates of infections and deaths.
	Now educators are asked and said to sacrifice ourselves, the safety of our students and the safety of our schools, even though it's known that transmission among students is virtually non-existent.
	Newsom's toothless plan doesn't even require schools to reopen, but offers $2 billion in financial incentives for schools that do open before April 1st, which of course is April Fool's Day.
	They offer grants to schools that open transitional kindergarten through second grade by the end of March, and those who open classes for at-risk students in all grades.
	The plan does not apply pressure on reopening schools for older grades until counties hit the red tier at that point.
	Schools must open all elementary grades to qualify for grant funding.
	Newsom has pushed to get teachers vaccinated and case rates across the state are decreasing.
	More and more districts are moving up their timelines to reopen schools.
	But this head of the union said, accused white wealthy parents of increasing the political pressure and driving the push behind a rushed return.
	According to the Center for Disease Control, Black non-Hispanic Americans have 1.1 as many COVID cases as whites, 2.9 as many hospitalizations, 1.9 as many deaths.
	Hispanic or Latino Americans have 1.3 as many cases, 3.2 as many hospitalizations, 2.3 as many deaths.
	White people, however, still make up the vast majority of COVID deaths, 61.3% to 18.2%.
	Hispanic or Latino in 14.7% Black, non-Hispanic.
	This is just bizarre.
	While COVID-19 has disproportionately affected Black and Hispanic Americans, it hasn't spared Whites or Asians.
	There's no evidence to support the conspiracy theory That parents want to open schools to target racial minorities.
	In fact, school closures have taken a serious toll on the emotional state of America's children, whatever their race.
	Studies have found depression symptoms have increased substantially.
	The share of mental health-related hospital emergency visits were up 24 percent for kids 5 to 11, 31 for ages between 12 and 17, Reopening schools is about helping children, not exposing communities to infection.
	Their opposition to reopening has far more to do with power.
	It has virtually nothing to do with help.
	And this whole idea of structural racism is really a matter of brainwashing.
	I find this actually quite insulting.
	Michael, your thoughts?
	Yeah, sometimes when I contemplate these stories that we go through during the week, I think that I need these little signs to hold up, maybe 10 or 12 of them, that categorize whatever the principle is behind that particular story.
	And one of those signs would be hypocrisy.
	Another sign would be what I'd hold up for this one, and that would be a gaslighting with racism.
	I liked the phrase that the writer of that article used when he mentioned the race card.
	He said, well, it would be more accurate to say Marxist critical race theory card, because that's what we're Looking at with this.
	And it harkens back to something I noticed about that Arizona voter registration case going before the Supreme Court.
	It seems to me like the standard Democrat principle in challenging whatever thing they want to do under the voter eligibility is that All forms of procedural measures to reduce voter fraud are racist.
	That's the principle.
	The corollary to that is that all forms of voter fraud are good for us, speaking from the Democratic point of view.
	That's right.
	It's absurd.
	It's just effing absurd.
	Chris, your thoughts?
	Oh shit, I'm on mute.
	Sorry, I was muted.
	Yeah, my bad.
	Yeah, I have many thoughts on this.
	I think that it's all part of the cultural weaponization that they're trying to put on.
	Race is a very important thing that they can do.
	I've even heard the concept or the thing being thrown around that math is supposedly considered racism too.
	You know, that's the most racist thing you could ever really say.
	The point that you're even ascribing race to these type of non-racial entities is probably the racist thing to do in the first place.
	So I guess maybe you gotta gaslight the gaslighters back so that they finally check their head.
	Gaslight the gaslighters back.
	I like that.
	Nice.
	One further comment about that article we just went through is all of the statistics that it laid out there regarding which demographic groups have X amount or X percentage of COVID.
	All of that is totally pulled out of somebody's ass because the PCR tests do not They're not reliable.
	They don't measure any certain thing that somebody is sick of, so you might as well say that those percentages of people got the flu or something.
	So, all of that statistical stuff is meaningless.
	Now, this statistical stuff on the effects of the lockdowns on our children, I take those seriously.
	Yes, yes.
	I agree completely.
	Very, very nice point, Michael.
	Meanwhile... I think that's a big part of it, Fetz, is conditioning the next generation.
	Like, you know, on 9-11, they really did that, and the schools went after the metal detectors and all these things, and the inner-city schools, and transitioned the police state into these kids' psychologies.
	This is the next generation of technocratic control, I think, and they're really trying to indoctrinate the next generations, in my opinion.
	Nice point.
	Think of those who make the money, the big bucks.
	The pharmaceutical companies, in that case, those who made metal detectors, the Michael Chertoff Company.
	After Las Vegas, they wanted metal detectors in every hospital and every resort and casino in Las Vegas, and they hoped it would generate all over the country, and they'd make hundreds of millions of dollars over what was essentially a fabricated imaginary risk.
	Because the shooting wasn't real.
	They were recruiting members through Crowds On Demand to see the crowd there at the concert.
	They had a pre-recorded soundtrack of the sound of machine gun firing.
	Then they had flashing lights in the middle of the Mandalay Bay to simulate a machine gun.
	It was all total bullshit.
	Complete bullshit.
	Nobody died with the exception of the guy they had a body in the, in the suite, the Stephen Paddock, but it didn't correspond to the dimensions on his fishing and wildlife card.
	So we don't, we're not even quite sure who that body was.
	Yeah, Chris.
	Yeah, it's important to put that element of fear out there as well, because most people don't think about these factors when they're in the limbic state.
	And as you say, most common people would not even consider this a possibility.
	No decent human would ever imagine these type of things, but these are not decent humans we're talking about.
	And in many cases, you gotta stop giving them the same benefit of doubt that we give each other.
	And as common citizens, we almost gotta like unite in the same way we gotta be as adhesive
	as they are with themselves.
	We need to be that way with each other and really take our word as gold and their word as shit,
	because that's truly what it seems to more or less be is they extort you by this protection racket
	from a Gollum enterprise that they arguably create in the first place, and then use your pensions
	or your retirement funds through Wall Street to fund these absurdities, your own chains basically.
	Whether it's the Vax, the 5G, the nanotech, the virus, the masks, you name it, man.
	The markets, manipulations, it's crazy.
	It's crazy.
	Excellent, excellent, excellent.
	Both of you, just wonderful points.
	Meanwhile, Amazon's double-spandered on book bans.
	They canceled Ryan Anderson's book on transgenderism, but they're fine with selling works that normalize pedophilia.
	When Amazon removed Ryan Anderson's best-selling book When Harry Became Sally, responding to the transgender moment from its site last week, the bookseller gave no reason.
	But given the ascendancy of the transgender movement on the left and in the Biden administration, it's likely Amazon has decided a conservative book by a scholar, inviting debate on the issue of transgender identity, could no longer be tolerated.
	Hardly a polemic against the transgender movement.
	The book, The Newly Appointed President of the Ethics and Public Policy, takes a scholarly look at the growing movement of gender theory and transgender ideology.
	He has no idea why his book was banned.
	A week after they removed my book, Amazon just refuses to say which aspect of their content policy the book violates after three years of not violating.
	That's very much what happened to me.
	I was never given reasons, even before Amazon banned the book.
	The company had facilitated the sale of books on taboo subjects surrounding sexuality.
	As a prime example, for decades it has sold male intergenerational intimacy, historical, socio-psychological, and legal perspectives which attempts to normalize pedophilia, the ultimate in childhood sexual abuse.
	One of the most often cited sources justifying the relaxation of sanctions against male adult child sex, what the authors call intergenerational intimacy.
	This collection of essays was published in 1991 and has been sold on Amazon since it first went into business.
	The current content guidelines state the site will not include content that promotes pedophilia or the abuse or sexual exploitation of children.
	We don't sell certain content, including content we determine is hate speech, promotes the abuse or sexual exploitation of children, contains pornography, glorifies rape or pedophilia, advocates terrorism, or other material we deem inappropriate or offensive.
	While readers may be forgiven for thinking Amazon is violating its own rules, the truth is, male intergenerational intimacy, a work of gay scholarly literature, is in a protected category and is thus allowed to be sold.
	For the authors, this is not pedophilia.
	The collection of essays by American, German, Dutch, and English scholars, many with university teaching positions, argues strongly for male adult child sex.
	The book, according to one of its blurbs, goes beyond the usual narrow views to shed critical light on the broad spectrum of man-boy love and its place in ancient and contemporary societies.
	Several essays are geared to assisting readers to gain an understanding of childhood sexualities.
	A chapter by Ken Plummer, for example, claims to draw upon the theoretical work of the new social historians, the social feminists, the Foucauldians, and the constructionist sociologists to build a new and more fruitful approach to sexuality and children.
	Rather than viewing sex as a unitary essence with a common meaning, this new definition searches for multi-layered complexity, historical diversity, and situational ambiguity of sex.
	Drawing on the language of postmodern theory, he maintains we should no longer assume childhood is a time of innocence.
	Simply because of chronological age, he writes, a child of seven may have built an elaborate set of sexual understanding codes that would baffle many adults.
	Within this perspective, there's no assumption of linear sexual development.
	There's also no real childhood, only a definition externally imposed, presumably by the dominant power arrangement.
	Like the transgender advocates who maintain gender is not a biological given, the male intergenerational intimacy contributors claim childhood is not a biological given, but rather social construction.
	From this perspective, if childhood is socially constructed, it can be deconstructed.
	Removing the essentialist barriers to childhood enables apologists like the contributors to
	this book, the guest, pedophilia as part of the politics of transgession.
	Pedophiles in their view are not deviants, but merely what Michael Foucault called border
	crossers.
	In their defense, Amazon might claim male intergenerational intimacy as a scholarly
	treatment of a subject open for debate.
	Yet Ryan Anderson's book, When Harry Became Sally, is also a scholarly treatment of a
	sensitive subject open for debate.
	The difference is Amazon allows an encouraged debate over the value of mayor intergenerational intimacy but is not open to debate over whether biological males who think there are girls Should be allowed to compete against high school girls in track and field, or whether biological males who think they're girls should be given access to high school girls' locker rooms, or whether doctors and nurses should be forced to provide gender transitioning treatment to 12-year-old children if the child or her parent requests it.
	For Amazon, some subjects are no longer open for debate.
	And I would just say, Amazon has also banned six of my books, On Sandy Hook, the Boston Marathon, bombing Orlando and Dallas, Charlottesville, Parkland, and even the moon landing, many of which are authored by professors, current or retired.
	It's scholarly work in each and every case, but nevertheless, those books were banned.
	Michael, your thoughts?
	Yeah, at the first of that, I was tempted to pull out the hypocrisy card, but as we read on, I think the principle involved here as to why Ryan Anderson's book was banned and not those others that it described is that the only books that actually promote pedophilia, transgenderism, and whatever Sexual orientation, LGBT, those are OK if it promotes it.
	But if it's a neutral scholarly discussion of the ideology or the medical ramifications of it, no, you can't have that.
	It reminds me of a statement There's a description by the guy Revelo Oliver who described what one of their methodologies was, and that is the rape of our culture and the imposition of an alien morality.
	I think that sounds... Chris, your thoughts?
	Yeah, Mike, you're spot on with that one, man.
	That's the whole thing.
	These guys really try to not only normalize this absurdity by presenting their long track record of perversion and go and try to promote this type of delinquency or this type of predatory behavior against children.
	Well, banning people like yourself and others that have really tried to protect children in terms of providing some sort of suitable or reasonable investigation against these supposed absurdities that are known as the official narrative, whether it's the Sandy Hook thing, pick a winner.
	Many people in the online community have been fighting for the truth and standing up for justice or standing up against the official narrative, which seems to keep repeating over and over again.
	There's nothing to see here while they're getting away with murder and even worse.
	So I really have to really think that you should remember who's who and what's what in this situation.
	Remember who Amazon is supporting and who they're turning away.
	And maybe play the inversion to the good side.
	You know, maybe something good can come from this because evil is definitely showing their cards here.
	One question about that story.
	This guy, the author named Ryan Anderson, It says that he is the newly appointed president of Ethics and Public Policy.
	What's the organization there?
	I think it's right at the end there, Michael.
	Take a look.
	I think it's And Henderson, is it?
	Well, maybe not.
	I'm not sure what, which, but I mean, the guy's a serious sack of dimension.
	I think there's no doubt about that.
	So yeah, yeah, I don't think it mentions what, what the, uh, what his employer is, but go ahead.
	Yeah, there's a lot of organized money that seems to be hyping these type of umbrella operations to protect these perverts.
	And then there's a big organized money going after people telling the truth.
	So I think that these are important factors to point out and to be aware of and to remember.
	Yeah, I think you got it exactly right.
	Meanwhile, we want to hear from you.
	Send fan mail, pro or con, to liveneedtoknowatgmail.com.
	Liveneedtoknowatgmail.com.
	It's more than disheartening to know that Trump pushed this vaccine.
	Considering what Trump accomplished, I just can't seem to fit this into his policy of making America great again.
	Could he have been this misinformed?
	And if so, to whom was he listening?
	If he has any intentions of running and winning in 2024, it's going to be quite difficult if H.R.1 passes the Senate, since a steal will be on again.
	He had best clear this up, as I, for one, will not vote for him again, or anyone for that matter.
	Meanwhile, this is a known Antifa member who has paid $70,000 for his video of the January 6, 2021 Capitol riot.
	The FBI, in the meanwhile, said they have no proof of Antifa members dressing as Trump supporters and causing the January 6, 2021 Capitol riot.
	I think this is very telling that Christopher Wray is a complete fraud.
	Meanwhile, Minneapolis, having gone full throttle forward in defunding the police, is now adding $6.4 million in funding to the police department.
	After residents complained of the delay in response and increased crime rates, they unanimously voted to add the money.
	According to the New York Post, many police retired or went on leave after the death of George Floyd in May 2020, which I have demonstrated was a completely fabricated death.
	They used a A windpipe training dummy, African-American training torso from Sigma-7, a company that was in Minneapolis before they departed when the riots broke out.
	And George Floyd was, you know, handcuffed behind his back and put in the back of the police car.
	And we have video for all that, taking him out the other side.
	We do not, because it wasn't George Floyd.
	It was a training dummy.
	It had no hair, and when it was lifted to be put on a stretcher, it had no legs.
	Just a monster fraud.
	Meanwhile, I booted off Twitter, but I am on Telegram at t.me, Jim Fetzer News.
	Meanwhile, remember, False Flags and Conspiracies 2020.
	The archives are available at falseflagconspiracies2020.com.
	The secret of freedom lies in educating people.
	The secret of tyranny in keeping them ignorant.
	For our final thoughts, Michael.
	You know, who on the Minneapolis City Council could have possibly thought that crime would go up when they stopped funding the police?
	I don't know.
	I don't know how that works.
	For a final thought, I'd like to read A selection from RFK Jr.
	It says, I believe we are at an inflection point in human history, possibly the most important inflection point that humanity has ever encountered.
	For many years, authoritarian, totalitarian states have used the power of fear to engineer compliance in populations.
	All the rulers have to do is tell the people that there's something they have to fear, keep reminding them of that fear, and you can make human beings do anything you want them to do.
	You can make them go to a slaughter like sheep.
	You can make them obey.
	Governments love pandemics in the same way that they love wars.
	It gives them power.
	It gives them control.
	And it gives them the capacity to impose obedience on human beings.
	Today, we have an inflection of new technologies that give governments the capacity to impose levels of control on human populations that have never been imagined before by any tyrant in human history.
	That's the end of the quote by R.F.K.
	Jr.
	Excellent, excellent, Michael.
	Chris, your final thoughts?
	Yeah, I think this technocracy and the environment that's been ushered in, this unconstitutional behavior by third parties and even our government, you know, under the guise of national security after 9-11 and even before that, I think that all these things are part of the lockstep control system and if the American people don't realize this for what it was or for what it is and stand up against this, the next 10 years, the next generation, I don't see them having really any reasonable chance at standing up for anything that resembles humanity after this point.
	They talk about once everybody gets the vaccine, I think Henry Kissinger said this, once the people get the vaccine, they're done.
	So really, I think in terms of resistance, it's now or never.
	This is Jim Fetzer in Madison, Wisconsin, thanking Michael Ivey in Asheville, North Carolina, and Chris Weinert in Detroit, Michigan.
	Excellent commentary, very thoughtful, very provocative.
	I am told General McInerney insists the military are in charge.
	Well, if they are in charge, they better act now because the situation is getting worse and worse.
	And I would say if anyone wants to appreciate the profundity of the swamp that must be drained, check out What Lin Wood has now made available, this transcript by an insider who's telling it like it is, is horrifying.
	It's ghastly.
	It's devastating to any confidence you may have had that our government was clean, was honest and represented by honest and decent human beings, right up to the Chief Justice of the United States.
	Check it out.
	We have to know what we're up against to realize the enormity of the task we confront.
	Thank you for joining us today.

▲