All Episodes
Previous Next
March 1, 2022 - Jim Fetzer
57:03
David Zublick's Dark OutPost: Defending the 1st & 2nd Amendments (26 February 2022)
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome back to the Dark Outpost.
I'm David Zublik.
Thank you for being with us today.
We really appreciate it.
Joining us now, as he does every week at this time, is Dr. James Fetzer.
We call him Jim the Conspiracy Guy.
Let's bring him on board.
Dr. Fetzer, how are you today?
David, David, very well.
I mean, this The Give Send Go account is taking off.
It's getting widespread publicity.
I believe that the Wisconsin Supreme Court will eventually come to regret that it acted in such a cavalier manner, which sets it in dismissing my petition for review, which had such obvious legal, moral merit.
But because it was a political hot potato, they refused to consider it.
They rejected my petition, which in my opinion, David, demonstrates that since this court is unique in having six women and one man as members, even women can exhibit as much judicial corruption as any man.
Absolutely.
And we're going to get into that in just a moment.
I just want to do a quick plug here for something and then we'll I want to get into this with you, but this is really interesting because you have been under a lot of pressure, and I think it's time that somebody started supporting you 100%.
So we'll get with that in a moment.
I want to ask you something, folks.
You know, this year is already whizzing by.
If you're getting closer to retirement, are you going to have the money to be able to retire?
If you're not, and you're worried you won't make it, I need you to get in touch with my good friends over at Noble Gold Investments about getting into precious metals, putting one into your IRA or 401k.
You're not going to get handsome.
They're just going to lay out the options for you.
And this month, they're getting ready to give you folks a great product.
I think you're going to like this thing.
I want to show this to you.
Dr. Fetzer, I think even you'll like this.
It's a beautiful, take a look at this.
Give us the absolute latest, Dr. Fetzer.
The Supreme Court turned your case down.
of an ounce solid gold American Eagle coin with any qualifying plan you start.
So call 877-646-5347 or go to noblegoldinvestments.com.
All right, so give us the absolute latest, Dr. Fetzer.
The Supreme Court turned your case down, is that it? - The Wisconsin Supreme Court has declined to accept my petition for review in spite of obvious merit I mean, this case just bristles with objectionable, needed-to-be-corrected grounds here, and it's just stunning that they should have done that.
So I'm carrying the case now to the United States Supreme Court.
David, I was hoping you could change the running head here.
I will add it in during the course of our discussion here because I put the gifts in.
Are you still accepting The donation is the other way as well?
I want to direct them to GiveCenGo.
That's the primary.
That's the primary now.
GiveCenGo.com.
Okay.
That's fine.
No problem.
We'll change that as we're going.
And verbally right now, before we get started, give us that GiveCenGo address and then I'll put it in for you.
Yeah, it's very simple.
GiveCenGo.com slash FundingFetzer.
Okay.
Now there's no additional slash.
I discovered if you added a slash at the end then it goes to a non-existent page.
So it's givesendgo.com slash Funding Fetzer.
This is to carry my case to the U.S.
Supreme Court.
Let me mention among the many reasons, and we're going to go through this in some detail today, for doing this is that Virtually every law school in the country reviews writs of certiorari, as they are known, that are submitted to the United States Supreme Court.
GiveSendGo.com funding pets are exactly right, David.
Okay, so we got that going.
Excellent.
Yes, yes, yes.
And there's been a strong response and it's going to continue and grow.
Other websites are picking up on the story.
Michael Raviro, for example, has published my blog about this case on his What Really Happened site and others.
It's getting out on Twitter and various, I believe, That the court, among other reasons, will regret its decision, not only because it was the wrong decision, but because the world is going to know that it made a wrong decision.
This is so grossly an error that Ron Avery, who wrote just a scathing critique of the appellate court's decision not to accept my appeal, has said that Given his familiarity with defamation cases and with summary judgment, this is the worst he has ever seen.
This is the worst abuse of a summary judgment he has ever witnessed.
So we're going to the Supreme Court.
Now here's another development of note.
Mary Maxwell Was both a PhD and an LLB, meaning she has a background in the law, has picked up on this case.
She's published a whole series of blogs on her rumor mill website about Sandy Hook, and she's published a book entitled Unreality.
Now we're going to go through her most recent about arrests should be made over the grotesque abuse of the lawsuits here, which I think everyone will find to be utterly fascinating.
And then, of course, I'm going to give you the lowdown about why the U.S.
Supreme Court ought to consider my submission to them, because it involves procedural issues that affect the entirety of the United States, David.
This isn't just Jim Fetzer.
This isn't just one Sandy Hook skeptic being steamrolled in the courts of Wisconsin.
Which they did very thoroughly, you know.
I mean, figuratively, they flattened me like a pancake.
The fact is that if this were allowed to stand, then any judge in any court in the country could use summary judgment to make up his own facts and arrive at a predetermined conclusion regardless of the merits of the case.
This is that grotesque a violation of summary judgment.
So let's take a look at the evidence here, David.
You can kick off with the very first, which is Sandy Hook families come to this unprecedented $73 million settlement with Remington.
Now, I sought to intervene in this case.
This was a Soto versus Remington case.
And my intervention was warranted because the appellate court in Wisconsin had cited The case from Connecticut here involving Soto as a precedent in relation to my case when it's never reached the question of whether anybody died at Sandy Hook.
So I was using that as a hook, but the point I was making is this.
When they're going about talking about this vast sum of money for a settlement, they never bothered to determine whether anyone, even one person, had died at Sandy Hook.
And that seems to me to be a gross abuse of the situation.
Why would Remington not?
And get this, as we'll see, not only did the plaintiffs oppose my intervention, but so did Remington.
And I believe, David, and this is a point to which I'm going to return, They're making these massive insurance settlements to convey to the American public in a breathtaking fashion that there are insurance issues related to the use of guns so that they are going to move to have legislation that requires every gun owner to obtain insurance for every weapon he owns.
Yeah.
Here, the insurance are going to have to register the weapon, David.
And once they register the weapon, the government knows where every gun is.
As Dave Hodges observed years and years ago, in the 20th century, there were 19 democides, which were the slaughter of entire societies by their own government, each of which was preceded by gun confiscation.
If you look to Canada, you can see how helpless the Canadian people are to resisting the tyranny being imposed by Justin Trudeau.
That's because they took their guns in Canada.
I don't think any of this nonsense would have been taking place Had that not occurred already.
So what we've got here is setting up with these massive settlements that have no merit whatsoever.
Put it this way, David, Remington should have required the exhumation of every body of every alleged decedent at Sandy Hook to verify this was the case.
Instead, they're falling all over themselves, giving vast sums of money that is completely inappropriate and unwarranted.
Can I just ask one question about that?
Why Remington?
Why do you think Remington did this?
It makes no sense to me.
I mean, I would have fought it tooth and nail.
If you lost, you lost.
But why did they settle?
They appear to be in on it, David, that they're taken over by a capital company, Cerberus Capital, has bought up a number of the gun owners, and Cerberus Capital apparently desires these settlements to take place.
It was done by the insurers, the four insurance companies.
But this is the big picture scam, using insurance as a new way to deprive us of our right to keep and bear arms.
So look here, you see, Sandy Hook attorney boasts, Remington settlement opens the path to going after other gun makers.
I mean, they're being blatant about it, David.
Here you see him talking.
The legal strategy here of making this under a fair trade practice Violation by promoting illegal behavior.
This was an incredible stretch.
The legal strategy was considered groundbreaking since it successfully circumvented a long-standing law known as the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act that protects firearm manufacturers from litigation.
After violent incidents involving their products.
So here it is.
Cerberus.
Driven by profit goals set by parent company Cerberus, Remington changed its previously sober approach to marketing firearms in favor of an aggressive multimedia campaign.
That pushed AR-15s through product placement in first-person shooter video games, and by touting the AR-15's efficacy as a killing machine.
Now, there's Cerberus setting up Remington for justice lawsuit.
David, I'm telling you, they have been planning this for decades, I'm convinced, to figure out a way to destroy the Second Amendment.
Well, I won't just be... Yeah, I will.
It won't just be that.
You're one of the car manufacturers for that idiot that drove through the crowd after the After the Kyle Woodman story.
Waka shot.
Yeah, you're absolutely right.
It's just as ludicrous.
Now, I've many times made the point that just an aerial photograph shows this whole thing as a scam.
For example, it was a 38 degree Fahrenheit ground temperature day.
Now, that's above freezing, but it's still very cold.
If you're going to conduct classes, you would have had to heat the building.
But there's no steam or heat rising from the building, no doubt because the boilers were dysfunctional, decrepit.
From not having been in use since 2008 when the school was closed.
Notice too, and this is very telling.
The absence of blue and white parking spaces, blue and white signage for Americans with disability.
This building had access and entrance routes that were not accessible by wheelchair.
What that means, David, is this building, this school, could not have legally operated as a public school in 2012.
I checked both Connecticut and federal law.
It could not have functioned as a school.
And look at the center row.
All those vehicles are parked facing the school.
Well, look at the driving instruction.
You come in off of Dickinson, you turn right, curl around, then you park facing away.
This is because, and indicates, they brought the vehicles in a single line and just parked them in two by two by two because it was easier.
Who is even going to notice, David?
It was just a prop.
Yep.
Next slide.
Okay.
I mean, so just from the parking lot, we know.
Here we have GOA, Gun Owners of America.
This is a threat to every law-abiding gun owner in the country.
Falsely claiming firearm manufacturers are responsible for violence instead of criminals is a slippery slope to ban guns and unconstitutional restrictions.
Let me point out, too, a feature of this.
Look at that sign.
Sandy Hook School.
It doesn't say, by the way, Sandy Hook Elementary School, which is curious, but notice it says it was put up in 1956.
Well, that sign looks brand new.
It does.
They refurbished the school, they replaced the sign, all this to serve as a stage for this manufactured event, David.
It would have said every school near where I live, it either says high school, middle school, grade school, not just school.
It's not a little red schoolhouse.
That's right.
So there's something wrong there, too.
Now, the next is just showing how many people realize this is fraudulent.
This is a relatively short video.
Go for it.
Yeah, this is the 18th of February, 2022.
This was published on the 16th of February, written by Christine Fernando of USA Today.
Titled Sandy Hook Families, Remington reached a historic settlement.
What's next for similar cases?
There's a little clip here, placed in 59 seconds.
Let's have a listen.
Gunmaker Remington Arms has agreed to pay $73 million in settlement.
It was never about damages in the sense of compensation.
It was about damages in the sense of compensation.
Forcing change.
It was about damages in the sense of realizing the goals of these families.
to do whatever they can to help prevent the next assembly.
And a lich pen of this settlement He's the attorney that represented these families.
Now, here's the question that I have.
Well, I actually have a few questions.
what that attorney said he's the attorney that represented these families.
Now here's the question that I have.
Well I actually have a few questions.
Adam Lanza reportedly used the Remington Bushmaster.
The Bushmaster by itself is an inanimate object.
It can't do anything by itself.
It just simply lays there or stays there.
Now, what's the difference if you go out or I go out and buy a new car?
Let's say you buy a, I don't know, a Lexus.
And you go run over some children at a crosswalk.
You drove the vehicle, which again is a Lexus.
The vehicle killed those people.
You didn't go out there and strangle them to death, the vehicle killed them.
What's the difference between Adam Lanza, if it was indeed Adam Lanza, using Birmington Bushmaster, or you using a Lexus?
The end result's the same.
This never would have settled the way it did if there wasn't this hysteria to take away second amendment rights.
That's just totally crazy.
Now, I've said this in other videos before.
What Remington should have done was demanded that the bodies of those children, all of those children, would have been exhumed.
Now, why do we say that?
Well, there's videos that show the children at various events after this event reportedly took place.
One of the little boys that was reportedly killed, Died twice.
He died in Afghanistan as well.
The exact same picture with the boy wearing a leather jacket with a fur collar.
What about the father?
And I've done videos on this that was going to be interviewed.
And he was cracking jokes.
Didn't realize he was on camera.
And as soon as he realized he was on camera, he choked on I lost my child!
But before that he was cracking jokes.
This whole thing is a complete farce and it was pushed by the Obama administration.
Obama sent Air Force One to pick up their families in Sandy Hook and fly them to Washington D.C.
to the White House.
The whole thing is a complete setup.
The children get hit by a Lexus at a crosswalk, or they get shot, supposedly get shot with a Remington Bushmaster.
Can you tell me what the difference is?
This lawyer is going to take what, 30% of $73 million?
The very first we heard about this event was broken by CNN.
And they showed the Sandy Hook Fire Station.
They said that was the Sandy Hook School.
I did countless videos of this event.
Sandy Hook School was closed due to asbestos contamination.
The whole thing is a complete joke.
The corridor that reportedly saw the bodies came out and he started cracking up laughing.
And he said that he hopes that the folks at Sandy Hook can live with this.
Live with what they've said and done.
The whole thing is absolute bullshit.
That's just sort of what I think.
And at a minimum, Remington should have demanded that those bodies be exhumed.
Before they paid a dime.
And that attorney?
He's laughing all the way to the bank.
Whatever the hell you like, the link will be attached.
That's true.
Dave, I think he's got it right.
I think every point he made was appropriate, and indeed that photograph that appeared, it wasn't in Afghanistan, but in Pakistan, was of Noah Bosner, who was the alleged decedent over whose death certificate I was sued.
you know, for having claimed it was fake.
And let me add, I'm under a court order that I can't reaffirm that it was fake.
I can only explain to you the circumstances of the trial and how it evolved to a decision that thereby...
Yeah, but I'm not under a court order and I'm saying it's fake.
Now that.
Well, get this, David.
Let me tell you how insulting it is.
The lead plaintiff in this case is named Donna Soto.
she's pictured on the upper right.
But look, it turns out she is the same crisis actor that played the role of Susan Brough in Charlottesville.
So Donna Soto, who's supposed to be the aggrieved mother of the Sandy Hook teacher Victoria Soto, shown in the lower left, also played the role of Susan Brough, the mother of Heather Heyer, who's supposed to have died in a car crash in Charlottesville.
David, This is called rubbing your nose in it.
This is telling you we can get away with any damn thing we want and you can't do a thing about it.
If you go to the very next, yes David, you'll find this is where, when I sought to intervene in this very case, notice this is the Soto versus Bush master, I was opposed by both the plaintiff and the defendant.
That the plaintiff should object was not surprising, but Remington too?
So there you have plaintiff's objection to participant's motion to intervene and below it Remington's objection to motion to intervene.
Stunning!
In the very next slide then we have Does that give you the least hint that the fix was in?
Considering my attempts to make the Court and Council aware have been repeatedly rebuffed, it appears that whether this was a staged event, actually a two-day FEMA mass casualty exercise involving children, for which we even found the manual and published as appendix A to Nobody Died at Sandy Hook, 2015, 2nd edition, 2016, Doesn't matter to the parties in this case.
Think about it.
I published before that this $33 million lawsuit was an insurance scam.
Now I'm told they settled for $73 million.
And the first-name plaintiff, Donna Soto, also played the role of Susan Brough in Charlottesville.
Stunning.
Now, if you want to learn something about the book, there was a wonderful review by Brian Wright.
You can find him on his Coffee Coaster website of Nobody Died at Sandy Hook.
The next slide, David, gives the key elements of his discovery.
The story first came my way by Mike Adams and his report that Amazon was getting into the book banning business with this particular title.
In fact, Mike Adams interviewed me, David, about it and published under the title, "The Most Dangerous Mind in America on False Flags and Extreme Censorship," for which I was immensely flattered.
But notice the second paragraph: "To an epistemological certainty, Sandy Hook was not real.
Nobody real died.
Sandy Hook was a FEMA drill with the purpose of generating support for an extreme gun control and federal power agenda." This review will simply catalog the main factual data that demonstrates a certainty.
Here are just two of the many points.
489 students minus 20 equals 469 plus 70 staff and teachers.
Nowhere to be found.
There was no evacuation of all those teachers.
The benefits to those who participated in the hoax have been substantial.
The donation sites created by families of the victims have hauled in over $27 million, or excess of $1 million per family.
Actually, I believe closer to $130 million.
And here's how we know it's faked, and we've reviewed this before.
This was a photograph sent around the world of a policewoman allegedly leading Sandy Hook kids to safety.
But as the next photograph shows, it was a second taken minutes earlier.
And you can see there are parents there!
And they got their arms folded, hands in their pockets, just standing around David.
Does this make any sense for a mass shooting taking place, which was still taking place when this photograph was taken, allegedly?
And notice now, as the next slide shows, they switched the kids around.
Notice at the bottom, the photograph taken earlier, it was led by a little girl in a pink sweater and a short skirt.
But they thought boy number one would be more photogenic.
They moved him to the front of the line with a long sweater and blue jeans.
Boy number one was moved to the head of the line.
So we're supposed to believe, David, that during an emergency evacuation, mass murder being committed, they stopped to rearrange the kids to get a better shot, that parents were present.
Any parent who'd been present would have grabbed their kid and got the hell out and dodged David.
And if you look between boy number one and boy number two at the bottom, the next slide shows a close-up.
Look at this.
You have parents just sitting there casually conversing.
They are casually looking on.
I call this lounging at the massacre.
Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus is a Latin phrase meaning false in one thing, false in everything.
It's common law.
It's a legal principle.
A witness who testifies falsely about one matter is not credible to testify about any.
Can anyone doubt that the photo sent around the world was staged?
And if it was staged, the rest of the event was also staged?
It's insulting that we are being played again and again.
The fraud is obvious on its face.
Now, David, I mentioned Mary Maxwell, who has this, this is her latest blog.
Mary Maxwell, The Real Sandy Hook Tragedy Begins Now, Arrest Called For.
Could you assist by reading what Mary Maxwell has written, David?
Yes.
The day of the Sandy Hook school massacre, December 14, 2012, is not a tragic day, as there were no deaths.
There was no shooter.
There weren't six staff members who tried valiantly to save the 20 children.
It was an ordinary Friday.
The massacre story is fiction.
There have been many false flag events in the U.S.
and elsewhere.
Some are pure fiction, such as the crash of Flight UA-93 in Shanksville, Pennsylvania on September 11, 2001.
No plane fell to the ground there, whether by an unskilled Arab hijacker making a boo-boo in the cockpit, or by patriotic passengers manning up to the call, let's roll.
A script writer did the whole thing, though it's likely some of the named passengers were killed elsewhere.
Other events are mainly fictional, but include visible deaths.
In regard to Australia's Lindt Chocolate Cafe hostage taking, In December 2013, I can vouch for the fact that Man Heron Monis, the hostage taker, was an insider playing a part.
The media drama went on all day, was faked.
But in the end, two people died.
Tori Johnson, the cafe's manager, and Katrina Dawson, a barrister.
See my book, Inquest, Siege in Sydney.
The gunman Monis was probably shot dead by police, although there's a small chance he was allowed to escape.
In regard to the 2012 Sandy Hook school shooting, I have recently written a book entitled On Reality.
I won't recap it here.
That is, I will not go over the evidence that the school parking lot on the day of the event was empty of any wounded or otherwise attacked children.
Citizen Investigator James Tracy, ex-State Trooper Wolfgang Halbig, and Emeritus Professor James Fetzer have proved to the satisfaction of any intelligent layperson that the shooting did not take place.
This should be cause for anger.
Merely the bold face lying by police, media, and politicians.
How dare such people make fools of the public?
But now I feel more than anger, I feel sorrow, as the courts have let us down and this means we have lost a beautiful, beautiful thing in our American civilization.
No, wait a minute.
Fear is starting to set in the predominant emotion.
You know, in Australia, my other home, authorities recently released footage of the new concentration camp for COVID non-compliers.
It's called Welcome camp or camp welcome or something.
Yep, surrounded by high fence with a barbed wire.
In sum, the news today on the Sandy Hook case from cases from two courts is causing various proportions of anger, sorrow, and anxiety.
So needlessly, can't people get their tongue around the word truth anymore?
The real Sandy Hook tragedy concerns decisions made this week in two separate courts.
The first is the Wisconsin Supreme Court's decision to go along with lower court rulings against James Fetzer for defamation.
The second is a decision by a Connecticut court to approve a settlement in which the gun manufacturer will pay $73 million to the bereaved families.
They are not bereaved, and the public apparently knows this according to many caustic comments on the internet.
James Fetzer, in his role as an internet journalist and book writer, author of several philosophy books, and editor of six conspiracy theory books, has the right of free speech.
We can agree on that, can we not?
Free speech is sometimes considered the basic right in America, since it allows us to be vigilant against bad government.
That is its proud purpose.
There are umpteen precedents in court cases to say, speak your mind, oh citizens.
Still, if a journalist or anyone defames a person, that person is entitled to sue for damages.
As every man and his cousin knows, the way a defamer may get off the hook in court is by using the truth defense.
He shows that his statement, however insulting or hurtful, was correct.
Maybe every cousin doesn't know that nowadays, doesn't know that nowadays, so I'm spelling it out here.
But the judges and all the judges' cousins are aware that truth is a defense against claim of defamation.
In this case, Leonard Posner Now hold on here for a minute.
dad stepped forward and said he was hurt when professor James Fetzer published a statement that the death certificate which he, the dad, had uploaded to the internet as proof of his son's death is fake.
The dad construes Fetzer's comments as defaming as it effectively labels the dad a liar.
Now hold on here for a minute.
Doesn't the supposed defamation really consist of Fetzer saying the child was not killed?
Yes, I think that's the crux of the matter.
But By the way, the same dad says he had to change residence several times as conspiracy-type folks were harassing him.
I find that pretty hard to imagine.
Fetzer earnestly refused the Sandy Hook narrative.
He, along with co-editor Mike Palachuk, produced a nice, thick volume with the defiant title, Nobody Died at Sandy Hook.
It was a FEMA drill to promote gun control.
You can't get much clearer than that regarding Fetzer's position on the deaths of 20 children.
In the book, dated 2015, he shows and criticizes one child's death certificate that was proffered by the aforementioned dad.
Fetcher points to three different fonts used, which he, in good faith, believed was highly unlikely in a state-issued death certificate.
What really matters is that James Fetzer, the defendant in the lawsuit, was kept out of court.
This is a huge no-no in this dear land of our forefathers.
Fetzer yelled that he did not defame the dad, as claimed, and that he has two expert witnesses available to criticize the death certificate, and he was not given a chance to deal.
The judge made a summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff.
Fetzer did not even get the standard privilege of discovery.
Why not?
The question of the authenticity of the death certificate should have been put to a jury, and it wasn't.
Well, okay.
Mistakes get made every day.
But we have modes of redress, such as appeals in courts.
Fine.
Offender goes to the state appeals court, but is likewise dismissed without the grant of argument.
He also took the appeals court decision to the Wisconsin Supreme Court by request for review, but was ignored.
Oh, I forgot to mention the money!
After the court judge made the summary judgment, he assembled a jury to decide on the amount payable.
The jury awarded $450,000 to the dad.
$650,000 to the dad.
In the same case, Fetzer was also hit with a $650,000 amount for breach of a confidentiality agreement.
So he now has liens against him for $1.1 million. - $100.
What did he do wrong?
Nothing.
He's absolutely allowed to say that he finds a death certificate or any other document to be fake.
He can say so in print.
I can say so in print.
You can say so in print.
You can print that Secretary of State Colin Powell was a liar when he told the U.N.
that the U.S.
had proof that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.
You can use the word liar.
Rest assured the law protects you.
We need people to catch liars.
Oops!
Are we talking past tense?
As I said, I'm feeling anxious.
Am I going to find myself behind barbed wire?
Does the U.S.
support the rule of law?
Did the Wisconsin Supreme Court throw in the towel today?
Can judges no longer be bothered to protect us?
Do they let someone put a 1.1 million dollar lien without considering the well-established truth defense?
Did the judge himself get threatened with barbed wire if he enforced the proper law?
Eeks!
Do I agree with gun control legislation?
Wouldn't I like there to be a way to prevent the Adam Lanzas of the world from killing 21st graders?
Excuse me, what Adam Lanza?
What 21st graders?
I'd warmly support a law against bullets that lodge inside a human body in such a way that they can't be removed.
No doubt that sort of thing is already listed in the Geneva Conventions as inhumane and unacceptable.
Indeed, I'm against landmines that you can't see them on the ground and they interfere with children's play.
Maybe I would agree with legislation if I had practical measures to prevent the marketing of guns to young people.
For that matter, I'd like there to be criminal penalties for advertisers who incite murder.
Undoubtedly, such penalties already exist.
Hmm.
So couldn't we accuse the media of incitement each time they tell a false story of murder and mayhem, causing young people to believe murder and mayhem are normal, thus encouraging violence?
Well, that's an aside.
I just wanted to denude this article of partisan politics.
My beef about the settlement is that all parties knew the thing was a fake, so let's address only that.
A few years ago, some of the families obtained a payout on their claim against the insurance company that held the homeowner's liability insurance at the home of Nancy Lanza, mom of the alleged gunman, Adam.
Nancy was the owner of the fictive offending weapon that got fired at children at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut on that famous day.
I have not read that insurance case.
It didn't go to court.
Nine families in 2014 sued the gun maker Remington Arms, producer of the Bushmaster rifle.
At first, these plaintiffs, Soto et al., were turned back because the law gives gun manufacturers some immunity.
On appeal, however, Remington was found to lack that kind of immunity in the circumstances that prevailed fictionally at Sandy Hook.
This sort of case has been pending for a long time.
The plaintiffs originally asked for $215 million in damages.
There are nine, not 26, families in this case.
Three are families of the six allegedly deceased teachers or staff members.
Namely, Rachel Devino, Mary Sherlock, and Victoria Soto.
Six are families of the 20 kids who allegedly died.
Dylan Hockley, Noah Posner, Lorne Rousseau, Daniel Barden, Benjamin Wheeler, and Jesse McCord Lewis.
There was a wounded, not killed teacher when the case was first filed, Natalie Hammond, but she dropped out.
Good on ya, Natalie.
One additional part of the Soto et al.
v. Remington case, which is also called the Soto et al.
v. Bushmaster case, concerns the husband of teacher Mary Sherlock.
He's entitled to file not only for murder on behalf of the state, of her state, but also to file for the loss of consortium he will endure for the years ahead.
I have not heard how the settlement fit in those amounts.
It is noteworthy, by the way, that not only did Remington mess up in this matter, its fellow members of the gun manufacturing industry did not seem to raise an eyebrow.
Worse yet, the various sports associations that we would expect to be, pardon me, up in arms have not been heard from.
One such association has its national office in Newtown, Connecticut.
Amazing.
I think true Second Amendment activists will have to stick up for the Constitution without waiting for support.
All Americans should be constitutional.
Sticker up for us.
You've got to pull out your weight.
You've got to pull your weight if you're going to want the benefits of a republic.
See my 2021 book, Keep the Republic, linked below.
People laugh at me because I believe in law.
I find it hard to imagine an alternative.
A lawless society would be unlivable.
As I said, Australia has already built a welcome camp.
Uh-oh.
James Fetzer can still get his case overturned if people support him.
I mean, he can take it to the not great nine on the basis of that court's own precedence regarding the truth defense.
Picture it.
SCOTUS rules that Fetzer does not have to pay damages for defamation because his allegation about a fake death certificate was correct.
All faint.
Nah, actually SCOTUS doesn't rule on a case that the complaint is that someone was deprived of trial.
It would just get remanded to the lower court for a trial by jury, which will more than suffice for Fetzer.
As for Soto versus Remington, the money will change hands this week.
Perhaps Soto's lawyers are stated to get a third, $24 million, give or take a mil.
Well, it was hard work, wasn't it?
My guess is that each of the nine plaintiffs won't get much.
I speculate, having watched movies like Godfather, that there are many silent partners waiting for their bit.
Based on the sincere belief that the entire massacre was fictional, various comings and goings at courthouses must have pressure put like mad.
That's why I call this the real Sandy Hook tragedy.
It is sad behind belief, We have lost our third branch of government, the sorter of disputes, the review of law, our world-envied judiciary.
Sad, sad, sad.
The title of this article includes the phrase arrests called for.
You can call 9-1-1.
There's no shortage of law against the obstruction of justice.
Start by googling for 18 U.S.C.
1501-1521.
There's even the crime of misprison at 18 U.S.C.
4.
It doesn't mean you'll miss out going to prison.
It means you can indeed go to prison for failing to report a felony.
I learned about it from the late, great Rodney Stitch some years ago at Rumor Mill News.
Put it this way, if someone had just broken into your home and stolen your grandmother's precious jewels, you'd be straight out of the phone calling 911, wouldn't you?
Thank you, David.
Someone has just broken into your home and stolen one of your grandmother's precious jewels.
Should you want to support my appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, go to giveculture.com forward slash fundingfetzer.
I'm doing this on your and my and our nation's behalf.
Thank you, David.
I think Mary did a masterful job in conveying the complexities of this situation in brief compass.
Here you see the cover of when Mike Adams reported about Amazon having banned the book.
The Most Dangerous Mind in America interviewed about false flags and extreme censorship, and he's showing there in that photograph David Wheeler.
Who played both the role of a SWAT team member and also a grieving husband with his wife, Francine, both of whom have acting credits, by the way.
And wherein the imagery, he's carrying a weapon upside down by the magazine.
His wife, Francine, was a personal assistant to Maureen White, who was a fundraiser for the Democratic National Committee.
You begin to see where all this goes.
When Barack Obama flew them down on Air Force One, he was violating the law because he knew these were lobbyists for gun control, and it's against the law for the president to use Air Force One for that purpose.
The next slide shows how the judge actually excluded the massive evidence I had that nobody died at Sandy Hook, which they've sought to walk back during the appeals process and claim they didn't preclude me from presenting my defense.
But here's the Circuit Court's clear and unambiguous statement in full.
Whether or not Sandy Hook ever happened or not is not relevant to this, the truthfulness or the accuracy of the death certificate.
Now, I understand the defendant's overall theory in believing that it never happened, and I'm not going to take the bait and let this case go down the rabbit hole.
The Circuit Court's limited view of the matter is further indicated by the Court's refusal to read your book because it would not be appropriate for me to start educating myself about the larger controversy.
How absurd!
Now, here's a death certificate over which I was sued.
Notice it has no file number.
It has no state certification, which would occur on the bottom.
Most importantly, it has no down certification, which would appear on the left side.
A couple of redactions don't render it, you know, therefore illegitimate or fake, but the fact is under Connecticut law, and I'm now repeating Connecticut law, not even parents are allowed to have an uncertified death certificate of which this was an example.
And indeed, as mentioned in passing, I had two forensic document examiners reports in evidence testifying that this and three other death certificates for the same decedent were all fake.
Notice in particular how absurd is the judge's ruling when it says here the decedent died at 12 Dickinson Drive on 14 December 2012 of multiple gunshot wounds at Sandy Hook School.
I mean, this is just ridiculous beyond belief.
In the next slide I mention how Ron Avery had done a masterful job here.
Well, this is Kevin Barrett.
He actually came to my trial for damaging and published a brilliant article entitled, The Legal Lynching of a Truth Seeker, Jim Fetzer's Stalinist-Style Show Trial.
You've got to read this on UNZ.com review.
This captures exactly what I was going through.
And as the next slide shows, Ron Avery did a critique of the appellate court's rejection where they simply took for granted that the official determination, the official narrative of Sandy Hook of mass murder was true.
In other words, they never even considered the possibility that I might be right.
But as Mary emphasizes, I was entitled to present my evidence, which the court, the trial court judge, refused to allow me to do.
Now in the next slide you see, this is the Supreme Court of Wisconsin.
Read the bottom lines.
A petition for review presented by Wisconsin Stat 908.10 hearing Having been filed on behalf of defendant appellate petitioner James Fetzer and considered by this court, it is ordered that the petition for review is denied with $50 in cost.
Now look at what they were denying summarized that they wouldn't review.
The complaint with different death certificates was set in the complaint not to be materially different because they attached to the complaint one with a file number, a state certification, and a town certification, all of which are materially different.
The scheduling conference, he declared he wasn't going down that rabbit hole as we reviewed.
He was excluding my right to present my evidence that nobody died.
My submission, seven pages, of my status as a journalist was never ruled upon.
If I were a journalist or additional burdens they had to overcome in order to convict me and mention.
How could my status as a journalist be in doubt when I was being sued over sentences in a book where I co-authored chapters and edited the book?
And in another blog that was in fact edited by Robert David Steele.
Obviously, I had the status of a journalist.
They set aside the reports of the two forensic document experts, as I've explained.
They ruled, this is a circuit court judge ruling, when the basic fact of authenticity remained in dispute.
You may not use summary judgment if the facts are in dispute, which was the case here.
He never reduced the reasoning for his decision to writing.
It turns out to be a requirement of the law that he have to state his decision in writing, which was never done.
Then the appellate court, as we've just observed, affirmed the official narrative and ruled against me, and the Wisconsin Supreme Court has now denied my petition for review.
The next slide reflects that Stephen Pidgeon, who's rather famous, observed that there may be an action here for deprivation of rights under color of law.
Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the constitutional laws of the United States.
And if you look down to the middle, just four lines from the bottom of the second paragraph, that includes law enforcement officials as well as judges.
Yeah.
David, the next is a letter I was sent by someone following the case.
I'd be very grateful if you could write what he had to say about the Wisconsin Supreme Court decision.
Sure.
Jim, like you and no doubt many of your other supporters, I'm profoundly disturbed by the denial of your petition for review of the Posner v. Fetzer case.
By the Wisconsin Supreme Court and the terse manner in which it was denied, if terse is even the correct adjective.
It is incomprehensible, on one level, how any court in the land could even begin to consider that this is a proper judicial denial, lacking, as it is, any reasoned legal analysis or justification for its decision.
On another level, it is completely understandable, given the state of utter corruption and encapture we're facing in all sectors of our government, Legislative, judicial, and executive and its agencies, plus the complicit corporate media, entertainment, and tech sectors.
I was certain that you and your co-defendants would prevail on this case when it first came up.
It seemed like a slam dunk.
But over the years, since you published your fine book on the subject, Nobody Died at Sandy Hook, and subsequently went through legal proceedings, it has become clear That the controllers involved will never tolerate a serious, credible threat to expose their frauds, deceptions, and criminal operations.
And it is increasingly clear that they have the power to delay, cheat, obfuscate, censor, blackmail, bribe, entrap, propagandize, memory hole, etc.
to prevent such exposure.
As with the events of other real false flags and conspiracies you have covered, such as JFK, Wellstone, 9-11, Boston, Orlando, Parkland, etc., it sadly seems that truth about Sandy Hook will remain obscured to a lot of general public for a long time, if not forever.
Yet, notwithstanding this, I admire and applaud your determination to continue your efforts to bring out the truth about these events as you know it, To bring your petition to the United States Supreme Court to continue to broadcast your shows, to continue to research, write and sell books, engage in debates, collaborate with other truth seekers, etc.
You are one of our few breathing national natural treasures, an honorable American public intellectual with the courage to speak truth in the face of corrupt adversity.
This in itself is a unique contribution and job well done.
I thank you for it.
Please keep up the good work, Eric, in Florida.
Now, David, you'll see next here, this is a one-minute pitch I'm making for the public to understand what's going on here.
Amazon banned my book so you wouldn't learn what really happened at Sandy Hook.
It was a FEMA drill to promote gun control.
Presented as mass murder.
Then they sued to shut me up.
I have the proof and the law on my side.
What I don't have is the money.
They want to do to us what they've already done to Canada.
Take guns, impose tyranny, and it's on the way with Remington's help.
First insurance, then registration, then confiscation.
I'm asking SCOTUS to stop it.
Give Sanco.com funding faster.
Check it out.
Noah Posner did not die at Sandy Hook.
In fact, David, as you can see there, Noah Posner was a fiction made up of photographs of his older stepbrother, allegedly Michael Vabner, who is alive and well.
This was all fabricated, fake.
They made up the kids in different ways.
Some parents actually even use photographs of themselves as children.
No, we're good, David.
This is the final slide right here.
Defending the First and the Second Amendments.
Yes.
If you go to GiveSinGo.com slash FundingFetz, I'll be most grateful for your support, because otherwise, if you're a gun owner, you're going to fine.
They're going to force you to buy insurance and register your weapon so the government can confiscate it.
That's what's going on here.
David.
Yeah.
I want to just I want to do one quick thing before I before I remove this I want to go back to slide 31 because this this is I think is the crux of your case where they say what the justice whether or not Sandy Hook ever happened is or not is not relevant to this that's bullshit because there would be no death certificate Had he not allegedly been killed.
And what you're trying to prove is that the death certificate cannot be real because it didn't happen.
Do you have a way of getting Noah Posner's body exhumed?
Well, I'm sure that would be opposed.
Connecticut is completely corrupt.
Everyone in Connecticut knows this is a fraud.
Every lawyer who's ever looked at this case knows it's outrageous.
Everyone who's studied summary judgments knows this is an insult.
This is a gross abuse.
I think the Wisconsin Supreme Court was simply afraid to acknowledge that this gross abuse of the law had been undertaken by a circuit court judge in Dane County and then upheld by the appellate court.
It was massively embarrassing, but I'll say this also.
I believe they decided they weren't going to review my petition way back when.
Initially, when it was first submitted, they dragged this out for eight, nearly nine months until they could have the Remington Settlement of $73 million as a cover, David.
They waited.
They had it on the shelf to publish it when the Remington Settlement came forth so they could, as it were, have cover for themselves.
But that failure, you know, to undercover of law, to deny me of my rights, I believe applies to the Wisconsin Supreme Court just as much as it does to the appellate court, just as much as it does to the circuit court.
So I think that the attorney who made that observation was spot on.
But in order to bring such, you have to exhaust your other appeals.
I am going to the Wisconsin, to the United States Supreme Court with your help.
And now I'm appealing to the public.
I have the law.
I have the facts.
What I don't have is the money I need.
We're targeting $100,000.
We've made over our first $1,000, but that's just the beginning.
I need your help.
If you care about the Second Amendment and the First Amendment, And all the other issues that are involved here, you want to support this because, by God, it's coming.
The lawyers for the plaintiffs have already announced they're going to go after other gun makers.
They're going to make insurance a requirement to own firearms.
You're not going to like it.
The small sum you could contribute to me could preclude the far larger sum you'd have to pay in insurance in the future.
Registering your weapons and putting the government in the position to confiscate them.
Remember, Dave Hodges observed that during the 20th century, there were 19 democides, the slaughters of entire societies by their own governments.
Those were carried out following gun confiscation.
We cannot let America become number 20.
No, we cannot.
So please give, send, go.com forward slash Dr. James Fetzer here on the Dark Outpost.
▲
Export Selection