All Episodes
Previous Next
May 4, 2022 - Jim Fetzer
44:35
Geezy Truth News (3 May 2022)
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome, everybody, to Jeezy Truth News.
It is May 3rd, 2022.
We have the one and only Jim Fetzer here.
Please tell us what's going on.
What are all the updates?
You've got a lot of things going on, lots of crazy stuff going on.
You're writing a writ to the Supreme Court and all kinds of stuff.
Let us know.
I am, you're right, and the writ is due next Wednesday, and it's got to be there in a timely way or it gets Booted permanently, so I have no choice but to have it finished.
It turns out I'm going to be submitting pro se, meaning I'll be representing myself in the process.
But the Red is, I believe, quite powerful, and once it's been submitted, I will be glad to share it and discuss it in some detail.
In the meanwhile, we have another development with regard to the Supreme Court of enormous significance for the nation.
In fact, this is, in my judgment, a gut-wrenching development to wit.
A leaked document that appears to be a majority opinion draft repudiating Roe v. Wade, which of course was a landmark decision that nationalized a woman's right to abortion.
My opinion has long been that Roe v. Wade was among the wisest decisions ever made in the history of the Supreme Court.
I have not believed in a million years that it would be reversed, and yet that appears to be where we stand.
A 2,400-word article Published on Politico, timestamped 8.32pm on May 2nd, which of course was yesterday, describes the draft as a full-throated, unflinching repudiation of the 1973 decision, which guaranteed federal constitutional protection of abortion rights,
And a subsequent 1992 decision, Planned Parenthood versus Casey, that largely maintained the right where the opinion is some 67 pages long with a 31 page appendix.
Now, just to get the flavor of what may be here, one of the
Parties who testified before the court was an attorney general from a southern state who was Mississippi Solicitor General Scott Stewart, who described The situation does.
Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood versus Casey haunt our country.
They have no basis in the Constitution.
They have no home in our history or traditions.
They've damaged the democratic process.
They've poisoned the law.
They've choked off compromise.
For 50 years, they've kept this court at the center of a political battle that it can never resolve.
And 50 years on, they stand alone.
Nowhere else does this court recognize a right to end a human life.
Now, I want to make several comments about that argument.
For example, if there is no right to abortion, if women are essentially not allowed to have abortions, and what I'm hearing is that this decision is pretty strict,
Oh, I gather it's going to devolve responsibility onto the various states so that we're going to have a patchwork quilt, as we did in the past, of states that allow abortion and other states that do not.
When you consider the difference between the pro-choice and the pro-life position, pro-life requires a woman to carry the term an unwanted fetus.
Which is, of course, in my opinion, a form of reproductive slavery.
The question, the way in which the court had decided in Roe v. Wade was very subtle and nuanced, and it drew distinction between the three trimesters of a nine-month pregnancy, the first, second, and third, where abortion was unrestricted with no legal Restraints in the first trimester.
During the second, the state could impose.
Restrictions on the methods that were used to perform an abortion during the third trimester.
That an abortion could only be conducted if it were necessary to preserve the life or the health of the mother.
Now that meant.
During the third trimester.
An abortion for any other reason than to save the life or health of the mother would qualify as murder.
We do have some extremist zealots in Virginia.
It may have been Terry McAfee or another governor who is advocating essentially infanticide, that if a child, you know, if a fetus were born live, that it was permissible to kill it.
I think that's absolutely wrong and abhorrent.
But the real issue, and this is a subtle part about Roe v. Wade, is essentially It's not a question about whether or not this is a developing entity that would become a human being if or to come to term.
No one can argue about that.
That's a fact of biology.
The question instead is, when does this developing entity deserve the status of being a person under the law, where personhood entails certain moral, social, and legal entitlements?
Do not accrue to non-persons.
Dogs and cats, for example, are non-persons.
If you kill a dog or a cat, you're not committing murder.
Indeed, murder requires the killing of a human being that is both deliberate and wrongful.
In particular, illegal.
There are many situations in which Humans are allowed to kill other human beings that are not wrongful, not illegal.
Consider soldiers in combat.
Consider police and the performance of their duty.
Consider citizens in self-defense.
There are any number of sets and circumstances in which human beings are allowed to kill other human beings who have the status of persons.
What the court did in the Roe v. Wade was to determine that personhood occurs at the point of what is known as viability, which is determined by the ability of the fetus to survive independent of the interuterine environment, which is generally agreed upon to occur at the end of the second trimester or six months of development.
What the court therefore implied by its ruling is that personhood first occurs at viability when you acquire a primitive right to life that entails the right not to be terminated independent of the overriding right of the mother to save her life or to preserve her health.
Now there's always been a debate over whether the health exception was being used as a cover.
If someone, for example, were unhappy with the sex of the fetus, they wanted to have a boy, it was going to be a girl.
And I agree that if the issue or the reason is not to save the life or the health of the mother, then it's inexcusable to determine Preferred sex, for example, is not acceptable and therefore ought properly to qualify as murder.
But by the reasoning of the court in Roe v. Wade in 1973, as the entity develops from a zygote through an embryo to the early fetal stages, even as it acquires
A heartbeat and primitive brain function, it's still not sufficient to qualify as a person separate and apart from the mother until it attains a state of viability.
Prior to that, it's a very special kind of protected property.
For example, Persons who kill a pregnant woman and thereby bring about the death of their fetus, as I understand it, in many jurisdictions can be charged with a double homicide, the two murders.
And most certainly, the woman has every right to protect her fetus from harm.
But if her circumstances are such,
By virtue of having already so many members of her family, of being a single mom who's got to work, who can't afford to not work, to raise the kids, to stay at home, or for any number of reasons, and frankly, as a professor of philosophy, when we would debate the issue of abortion, I was fascinated by how many sets of circumstances
That students believed abortions would be appropriate and even more astonished by the range of methods of birth control with which they were familiar, which overwhelmingly exceeded those with which I was personally familiar.
But the key point comes down to this.
There are profound differences in opinion.
About whether abortion is moral or immoral, which drives the desire to make it illegal for anyone to have an abortion, except under perhaps the most extraordinary circumstances, where some zealots go so far as to insist that even if a woman is impregnated by a rapist, that she must nevertheless carry the fetus to term and
That the rapist might even be entitled to parental rights.
Now, I believe that is really, truly unacceptable.
But consider it this way.
When we have the argument, you know, from the solicitor general of this assembly, that it's undemocratic.
The pro-choice position is the democratic position.
The pro-choice position does not force any woman to have an abortion against her will.
And the pro-choice position does not force any woman to carry a fetus to term against her will.
So if you're looking for the democratic solution to the problem, it's not to ban abortion.
Which would have the effect of forcing women to carry determined unwanted fetus.
And we know, by the way, from the sociological epidemic demographic and other data, that unwanted offspring tend to become problem children, juvenile delinquents, criminals as adults.
I mean, the pattern is very clear.
Any sociologist or student of crime can confirm what I'm explaining here.
And think of the damage it can do to a woman's life if she already has a large enough family, but bringing another into the family would be too much.
It would overwhelm, or as I say, a working mother who can't Afford to not work in a host of other circumstances, including, of course, rape and incest, which I think are just so obvious.
And it's, to me, incredible that anyone would oppose a woman having an abortion when her pregnancy resulted from rape or incest.
I never believed Roe v. Wade would be overthrown, and the nominees that Trump appointed, all three implied that they believe that Roe was a precedent that's now around 50 years been in effect.
And I had no inkling whatsoever they'd be disposed to overthrow it.
Here's the draft.
This is an actual textual from the draft.
Abortion presents a profound moral issue on which Americans hold charmingly conflicting views.
Some believe fervently that a human person, notice they use the word person, comes into being at conception.
And that abortion ends an innocent life.
Others feel just as strongly that any regulation of abortion invades a woman's right to control her own body and prevents women from achieving full equality.
Still others in a third group think that abortion should be allowed under some but not all circumstances.
And those within the group hold a variety of views about the particular restrictions that should be imposed.
I believe in a woman's right to choose And it has.
It troubles me profoundly that this court would take this action at this point in time.
Let me add, by the way, this is such a political bombshell.
As we look ahead to the midterm elections, it was a foregone conclusion that the Democrats were going to be virtually wiped off the board.
I've been predicting The loss of 100 seats in the House and three or four seats in the Senate, that is going to completely reverse the political power distribution in Washington, D.C.
And, of course, for a host of good reasons.
Virtually every measure that the Biden administration has taken since it came into office, from canceling the XL pipeline and revoking permits to drill on federal lines, its first day in office, Hasn't been damaging and detrimental to the United States.
The open borders are the most obvious case.
They're allowing millions of illegals to flood into the United States and rolling out a red carpet.
Part of this appears to be not only to change the demographics because they believe the vast majority of these illegals are going to vote Democrat.
If they're allowed to vote, and in states like California, where Jerry Brown way back when introduced motor voter laws, so when you registered, obtained a driver's license at the same time you were registered to vote, which sounds fine, like a practical, efficient method, until you understand that in California,
Illegals are allowed to get driver's license and thereby under the motor voter law were entitled to vote.
It's having in fact an effect on all residents already here who migrated legally and went through the arduous process to become American citizens such that A recent poll of Latinos showed some 65% are opposed to the Biden administration and the flood of illegals into the country is a major reason for that.
Trump, remember, had really restored the economy.
It was so vigorous that the lowest wage earners were seeing their wages rise at the highest rate, in part because he had clamped down on the border.
What we have with a Biden administration, and this is truly bizarre for those who reflect upon it, greater concern for the borders of what may well be the most corrupt nation in the world, namely Ukraine, than for the United States.
The Biden administration has been doing a whole raft of things that are destructive of America, weaken the nation economically, morally, militarily.
In fact, it's been part and parcel with a VAX program that admittedly was introduced by Donald Trump, for which I would like him to take responsibility and apologize to the American people.
And in addition for the lockdown, where it appears he was played in order to bring about the lockdown by being given exaggerated numbers.
But where my vaccine, the military, those who understood the massive threat that the Vax representative got out of the military, those who have taken the Vax are going to be partially or seriously incapacitated, even if not killed as a consequence of taking the Vax.
And I have to tell you, I believe this is a deliberate agenda so that the American military is so grossly weakened that what they will do, and they're already doing it, is bring in these illegals, many of whom are young military age, into the American military, promising citizenship and creating new American military
Where the individual soldiers, unlike those of the past, would be willing to shoot American citizens.
Why?
Because they don't have any loyalty to America.
They don't care about American citizens.
They did not grow up in America.
So this is all horrendous.
Now, by dropping this bomb, this is a political earthquake, by rescinding Roe v. Wade, The vast majority of women in America are going to be outraged, and any man who cares profoundly about women's rights, as do I, is going to be offended by this insult to democracy, to a woman's right to control her own body.
I mean, the very idea of reducing women to reproductive slaves is so repulsive.
I simply cannot believe that the Supreme Court has taken what it appears they have taken here by its reversal.
So I have to say this is all really truly stunning stuff.
If you look at the stages of gestation, the development of the evolving entity, it bears no resemblance whatsoever to a human being in early stages.
Fairly early on it starts to look more like A shrimp or maybe a seahorse.
In fact, there's some biological theorists believe that gestation replicates evolution so that you see on a minor scale with individual entities developing in the womb what happened historically over
Hundreds of thousands, even millions of years among species evolving over vast periods of time.
You have a form of a mini-replication of what's taking place there.
All that is fascinating, but the political impact here is going to be simply enormous.
And if I spend most of today talking about it, it's because this is absolutely stunning development.
It's a political earthquake.
The consequences are going to be enormous.
We now have a six to three conservative majority.
It's not clear now where Justice Roberts is going to fall.
Apparently, when this was authored, it was like a five to four with Roberts not yet declared.
It's not impossible, by the way, as Alan Dershowitz has speculated, the theory, he says it's only a theory.
I think this was leaked by a liberal law clerk who is trying to change the outcome of the case, either by putting pressure on some of the justices to change their mind or by getting Congress to pack the court even before June, which is very unlikely.
It's not going to happen.
Or to get Congress to pass a national right to abortion law, which would apply to all the states.
Now, I believe, in fact, that's the solution.
Have Congress pass a law, a national right to abortion law, which would apply to all the states.
Now, I have long since lost any faith in the Democratic Party, even though I voted Democrat for virtually all of my life.
I voted for Bill Clinton twice.
I voted for Barack Obama twice.
When Donald Trump arrived on the scene, it was a fresh breeze.
He wasn't beholden to either party.
And I do believe if Trump had been allowed to do what he intended to do when he came into office, the country would be a whole lot better off.
But in order to inhibit that In order for Trump to prevent Trump from having any greater influence, because his popularity was growing enormously in this country, they had to steal the election of 2020.
And while the Democrats insist that that was the most clean and honest election in American history, precisely the opposite is the case.
The fact is that the election was stolen by manipulating the vote in virtually every one of the 50 states, and where we now just have released a brand new documentary from Dinesh D'Souza entitled 2000 Mules, where it's documenting one of the methods that was used to steal the election, namely stuffing the drop boxes where they had hired
Thousands to, you know, just dump ballot after ballot into these Dropboxes, but where, ironically, in order to be paid, they had to take selfies, they had to take photographs of themselves at the Dropboxes.
Well, all of that digital record is in the possession of those who produce a 2000 mules.
Turns out in Philadelphia, for example, there were 1100 Mules who are stuffing the draw boxes in Philadelphia alone, that single city alone.
And remember, when you steal an election, you got to go where the votes are.
You go to the big cities primarily.
It turns out in Georgia, Also, there were hundreds of these in one of the major cities, and yet in Georgia, in order to assist with drop boxes, you had to be registered, and not a single person was registered to perform that feat in Georgia.
We've seen a huge amount of effort before, you know, expose of how the election of 2020 was stolen.
The consequences have been staggering.
Because it brought in an administration that is actually dedicated to the destruction of America, which is without precedent in our history.
This is not even a real senator, Joe Biden from Delaware.
I've done a lot of research on this.
We're talking about a body double.
He has different colored eyes, different shape and size of skull.
His ears are different.
He's an actor.
It's odd, and a friend of mine believes there are more than one Biden body double, but some are displaying the same kind of cognitive incapacities for which Joe Biden himself was known, which I find ironic, but I guarantee 100% this is not the real Joe Biden.
So we have a fake administration in office with a fake president based upon a fake election And the consequences are immeasurable.
Trump should have been allowed to carry on.
I'm afraid we're seeing this kind of theft replicated elsewhere.
For example, in France, millions of ballots from Marine Le Pen were damaged by little tears in the corner.
Well, it turns out under French election laws, A defaced or torn ballot cannot be counted.
So there were millions of defaced or torn ballots in the French election, but every one of the torn or defaced ballots was one cast for Le Pen.
So, you know, the establishment has worked to maintain Emmanuel Macron in office.
There are many high ranking officials of the European Union who are breathing a sigh of relief.
NATO's happy with the outcome.
Le Pen, a strong independent woman, would be a great president for France.
But just as Donald Trump was denied the opportunity to continue to lead the United States, she has been denied the opportunity to lead France.
And of course, we have a A horror story in Canada where Justin Trudeau has become a petty tyrant of all petty tyrants and is imposing all sorts of forms of tyranny upon the Canadian people, where Canada confiscated guns before introducing all of this tyranny.
It's pretty obvious.
Now, the one great strength the American people have going for them is there are 130 million gun owners in the United States who would be capable of defending the nation.
But I am very troubled because if you convert the Army from an asset to protect America's national security into an instrument to destroy Democracy, and I guarantee you 100% that's exactly what's going on today.
The consequences and ramifications are going to be enormous.
JFK put it well when he observed that those who make peaceful reform impossible make violent revolution inevitable.
It's going on in Canada, it's going on in France, it's going on right here in the United States.
So while there are lots of other troubling serious events taking place, such as NATO and the United States seeming eager to enter a kinetic war with Russia, the outcome would be very, very bad for the West.
Russia has the best military equipment in the world.
They have the best anti-missile missiles.
They have the best anti-ship missiles.
They have the best anti-submarine torpedoes.
They have this new successor to the Satan, a multi-warhead intercontinental ballistic missile, a single one of which could take out all of France.
And if the US and NATO succeed in provoking Russia to war, Russia can take out all the NATO aircraft carriers and all the NATO airfields within, you know, I suggest 15 minutes max, less than an hour without any doubt.
And bear in mind, the Russians have subs off of our East Coast.
One of those subs could set off a dirty bomb that would contaminate the East Coast from Boston to Washington, D.C.
and render it uninhabitable.
Which would mean our financial district and our political capital would be dysfunctional and it could be contaminated for 250 years.
That's only one submarine of Russia launching one missile.
And there's also more speculation that Russia might also retaliate by initiating an electromagnetic pulse Over the United States, which would take out all of our computerized systems.
I can think about how much of our life is dominated by computerized systems, all our financial transactions, all our medical records, not to mention our email, other forms of correspondence, posts and activity and communication.
I mean, I'm telling you, This would transform America.
It would bring the nation to a standstill, virtually frozen in place.
And of course, among the sources of an EMP that could do that is nuclear devices, because they bring about a massive electromagnetic pulse that would have those debilitating effects.
So I say we're in a very precarious time.
And we're not even turning here to the Vax and the vast damage that it's continuing to do.
Or there's even a suggestion that the way in which the Democrats are going to steal the midterm election is by introducing a new variant and claiming it's so serious a nation has to be locked down so that they can require all voting by mail.
It's very odd that most Leaders of the Democratic Party are not actually displaying a panic that would be commensurate with all the signs that there's going to be a political bloodbath for the Democrats in November.
And I believe it's because they already know how they're going to handle it, which is a sad commentary on the state of the Union on the USA Today.
I wish I had better news to report, but I'm going to give it to you straight.
We have to understand, in a sober fashion, exactly the situation we're in, and none of it is good.
Yeah, that is for sure.
You know, all these distractions and all this crazy stuff going, and the Federal Reserve just keeps printing, and it's, that's, just like you said, it's a reflection of what's going, what The people inside it, and that's what's happening.
So we'll see what the state is.
Let's get over to the questions.
I've got some listener questions over here.
First one is, have you ever been on the Alex Jones Show?
If not, why not?
Both of you have the Sandy Hook lawsuits in common.
Well, we do indeed, but we've handled them in completely different ways, Alex, alas.
Has been on both sides of the issue, sometimes declaring it was fake, other times later conceding it was real, when in fact it was a total fabrication.
During a video deposition in Connecticut, he even declared that he'd never read Nobody Died at Sandy Hook.
Which, frankly, is grossly discrediting.
How can you take a stand on an issue of this political significance without reading the only serious scholarly book that dispatches what happened, where I brought together 13 experts, including six then current or retired PhD professors, and we established the school had been closed by 2008, that there were no students or teachers there.
And that it had been a FEMA drill presented as mass murder to promote gun control, when we even located the manual for a mass casualty exercise involving children, which I published as Appendix A in the book.
For Alex to say he's never read Nobody Died is embarrassing.
Not only that, but the fact that he's never invited me onto his InfoWars show, Is really quite stunning.
Alex and I did have a commonality way back in 2006 after I had founded Scholars for 9-11 Truth in December of 2005, and this society took off like a rocket with hundreds of members internationally from all different disciplines, pilots, engineers, mechanical, structural, aeronautical,
Physicists, hundreds of members joining from all around the world.
Well, in June, Alex organized the American Scholars Conference on 9-11, no doubt inspired by the name of the society I had founded, and invited me to be the keynote speaker.
In addition, During a panel discussion that was held on Sunday morning and was videotaped by C-SPAN, which they would subsequently broadcast seven or eight different times, all four of the panel members were from scholars.
They included Steve Jones, a physicist from BYU, whom I'd invited to be my co-chair, Bob Bowman, who had a PhD in nuclear engineering from Caltech and had been the scientific advisor on Star Wars,
To President Reagan and Ford, Webster Tarbly had published a brilliant book, 9-11 Synthetic Tear Made in the USA, and myself, as a founder of Scholars, where I talked about the top 10 reasons we know that the hijackers were fake.
It was a very successful event.
We had a cordial relation then.
Years later in New York City, After I spoke at the Great Hall of Cooper Union during the 9-11 conference, my wife and I and a friend went to a nearby theater where Alex Jones was sponsoring an event.
And when I came in, they gave me the red carpet treatment.
I was really surprised and appreciative.
They put me up on a platform with first responders.
I had earlier in the year done interviews on Hannity and Combs, and actually these were all in 2006, one with Ollie North, who was sitting in, another with Sean Hannity, and a third with Bill O'Reilly.
Bill O'Reilly was particularly nasty, and as I was sitting waiting to come on with a bright light in my face, he suddenly pops in my ear and says, I'm going to tell the world that you're a nut and that you hate your country.
Boom, I'm on the air.
And then he begins with two ad hominem attacks so I can never get back to the beginning.
Well, I thought that had been a very mixed bag, a bit of a calamity.
But when I sat down on the platform, which was for first responders, the fellow sitting next to me leaned over and said, it was seeing you on O'Reilly that convinced me 9-11 had been an inside job.
So that's my history with Alex.
I sought to come to his aid.
I've sought to intervene in any number of these lawsuits involving with Remington, involving the Jones bankruptcy, even involving the tax court.
To point out that all these lawsuits are based on the presumption that 20 kids and six adults died at Sandy Hook, but there has never been a judicial determination that that was the case, or mine had the most potential to do that, but was derailed by an abusive process, by a ridiculous
Summary judgment, some have described as the worst they've ever encountered, which is part and parcel of the reason why I'm now going to the Supreme Court with a writ of certiorari, asking them to review my case.
Which, as I may have mentioned, is due on Wednesday.
So you can imagine I'm quite preoccupied with winging this to completion, because if it's not there in a timely fashion on the 17th, which is actually a Tuesday, then it will be tossed.
They're very rigid on their time schedule.
Tuesday.
So I'm very preoccupied with that now.
You may have other questions you'd like to ask.
Gotcha.
Yeah, it's definitely, you know, everybody's got their agenda.
It's weird that he wouldn't have you on the show since you're one of the leading experts and blah, blah, blah, and all this, you know, just a lot of weirdness going on.
You know, you think people fighting to similar stuff would be on the, you know, getting up there and talking about it all.
So the next one is, There's a few of them that are kind of similar.
What is the fate of Joe Biden, Klaus Schwab, Economic Forum?
What do you think about all these guys?
Someone had a question about what you think about Contangi Brown, the new Supreme Court Justice.
You know, it's crazy.
Well, she appears to be a mediocrity, but then I have to say, given this apparent decision about Roe v. Wade, I'd say we have a whole court of dunces.
And when you when you promote people who are really not well qualified, the positions of power, the consequences can be devastating.
Klaus Schwab, the World Economic Forum are all behind not only the Vax, but wanting to provoke a war between the United States and Russia.
I've already described the outcome would not be one that will be happy for the West.
Well, we seem to be eager for a war that we're not prepared to fight, while the Russians are reluctant to wage a war that they're very prepared to fight.
Putin is the most savvy, intelligent, remarkable, only, in my opinion, the only true statesman astride the world stage.
So we're in the midst of a titanic struggle, and it truly can be described as one between good and evil.
That's not an exaggeration, given the set of circumstances we confront today.
Gotcha.
Well, I guess we'll wrap up today's show.
Thank you very much, Jim.
Is there anything else you want to share before we close?
Well, if anyone who might be interested in my Supreme Court suit, I do have a crowdsource funding site at GiveSenGo.com slash FundingFetzer.
GiveSenGo.com slash FundingFetzer.
If you go there, There's a fairly detailed description of the suit, of the past case, the history of my research here.
And if you think it's worth extending a contribution to my effort, which is on behalf of all of the people, it's not only got to do with the First Amendment and the Second, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, the right to keep and bear arms, but our entitlement under the Fifth Amendment to due process,
Well, none of us should be subjected to loss of life, liberty or property without due process of law, which was grossly violated in this case.
So if anyone likes what they see there and can throw a couple of bucks into the hopper, that would be most welcome and appreciated if a large number make modest contributions.
And in this day and age, I cannot expect more.
We're all very hard pressed and hit.
Financially, especially with inflation on the rise, that would be most welcome and greatly appreciated.
All right.
Well, thank you very much, Jim.
We'll wrap it up.
Thank you very much.
We'll continue, you know, hopefully things are getting better.
We'll get more information from you about all the court stuff and let's hope things turn around.
So, thank you for coming on the show.
To be continued.
The good guys are going to win.
We're going to keep it up.
We're going to keep going.
My great pleasure.
My great pleasure.
You got it.
Take care.
Bye.
▲
Export Selection