All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 5, 2022 - Jim Fetzer
01:22:22
Need to Know News (4 August 2022) with Mike Cunningham and Principled Organic Vegan
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This is Jim Fetzer, Mass in Wisconsin, delighted to be joined today by Mike Cunningham in Austin, Texas, and Principled Organic Vegan in Los Angeles.
We're here to give you all the news you need to know.
We begin with cold showers and no lights.
Europe is in deep trouble as Russian gas wanes.
Fanny night lap like urban gorillas through Paris' darkened streets.
The anti-waste activists shimmy up walls, drain pipes, reaching for switches to turn off the light.
One by one, the outdoor light stores have left honor being extinguished, a small but symbolic step in a giant leap of energy.
Europe is trying to make it.
It tries to wean itself off of natural gas and oil from Russia so factories aren't forced to close and homes stay heated and powered.
This is, of course, an effect of all the sanctions which have massively backfired.
The stakes are high.
If Russia severs their supplies of gas, it's already drastically reduced.
Authorities fear Europe is going to become a colder, darker, less productive place this winter.
Without any doubt, it's coming.
It's imperative to economize now so it can be squirreled away to burn later in homes, factories, and power plants.
Europe needs to be ready, said European Commissioner President Ursula von der Leyen, to make it through the winter.
Assuming there is a full disruption of Russian gas, we need to fill our gas storage now.
And to do so, we have to reduce our gas consumption I know this is a lot to ask for the whole of the European Union, but it's necessary to protect us.
While Europe is scrambling to get energy from elsewhere, this winter could be far worse if Russian supplies are completely stabbard and remain off through 2023.
Indeed, France's minister overseeing energy stated, if gas deliveries are cut by the end of the year, it will mean we'll have a full year without Russian gas, so a fine winter could be even harder.
Hence the mounting appeal.
Germany had been getting about a third of its gas from Russia, making it the EU's biggest economy and most populous state, conspicuously vulnerable.
The glass dome of the Reichstag, the Parliament building of Berlin is going dark as it closes to visitors, and a host of others are being darkened.
Opera houses, even the Holocaust Museum.
Saunas are closing.
The sum of all the contributions will help get us through the winter and be prepared for the next, said Germany's Vice Chancellor and Economic Minister.
It'll be a demanding, stony road, but we can manage it.
The campaign is titled Flip the Switch, where the Netherlands government is urging showers of no more than five minutes, using sunshades and fans instead of air conditioning and air drying laundry, going back to times from the distant past.
Really quite remarkable what's taking place here.
Under a law passed Monday in Spain, which is often sweltering, offices, stores, and hospitality venues will no longer be allowed to set their thermostats below 81 degrees Fahrenheit, nor raise them above 19 degrees Celsius in the winter.
Meanwhile, the Italian government is also recommending limits on heating and cooling in public buildings in France, targeting a 10% reduction in energy use by 2024.
The 8,000 residents in southwestern France have been adjusting to nights without streetlights since July 11.
Meanwhile, next I'll be convincing townspeople to agree to less heated classrooms when schools reopen.
They really have no choice.
Mike, your thoughts?
Yeah, I think it goes to market manipulation as well.
If you remember back in 2020 when the United States became one of the leading producers of oil in the world, and we were energy efficient here, but we were exporting oil.
And then in the last two years, by our diminishing of oil and basically raising the price of oil to over $170 a barrel, doubling the price of oil, the effect ends up being that When the Russian cutoff, Europe doesn't have any other choice but to get from Russia.
It's you can't really convert to other things, but this idea of this green energy France for many years has been the leading nuclear power, but they were dependent upon a coal and stuff like this.
So when they try to shut down coal, they're hurting themselves.
They don't have any other option and they're stuck with Russia and then they end up.
This is the result.
I think people need to be aware when they go to elections.
And elections, say, have consequences.
And this is the consequence of voting in a way that these effectively do not work.
--standing by for Dallas-Fort Worth. I'm probably now checked in. Oh, I'm going to be-- You may want to mute-- yeah, Mike, when-- Vigan, your thoughts? It sounds exciting over there, Mike.
You know, the Green New Deal and going green, it sounds all great until we try to implement it into reality.
I am a fan of solar, once it gets on your roof, that is, and as long as no one is messing with it.
But for those European countries that they don't get enough sun, They can't depend on that.
And I remember that Germany was heavily stocked up in that.
I had a friend of mine who talked about it.
He was a professor.
But now that Russia is giving them problems, well, now they are having hard times.
Uh, over here in the United States, you know, more people have gotten solar, but again, not completely dependable and not great on the environment either.
When you look at what they have to do to mine it.
So, um, we're gonna have to see what happens as far as nuclear energy is concerned.
There's a big danger to that as long as you're up keeping it fine.
But we all know what's happened in Japan and Russia.
So, um, hoping for the best.
I'm not into I'm not in the industry.
So that's all I could say.
Thanks.
Well, the whole business of provoking Russia in relation to Ukraine appears to have been to cut off the Nord Stream 2 pipeline that was going to give all of Europe cheap gas, bring closer relationship between Germany and Russia, and leave NATO as an antiquated, obsolete entity.
So the military-industrial complex has been very big on the provocation, on the sanctions that have had the effect of disrupting What would have been cordial relations with a lot of cheap energy that would have brought Russia and Germany and all of Europe together.
Meanwhile, Wikipedia, surprise, surprise, changes its own editing rules as users fight over the definition of a recession.
Wiki has implemented restrictions for new and unregistered users who want to edit its page about recession.
They'll be able to make changes, but their edits will be subject to review.
Mind you, all their edits are subject to review.
When I attempt to set the record straight, I'm invariably rebuffed, and they revert to the earlier.
The definition has been under intense debate since the Commerce Department revealed that the U.S.
Gross Domestic Product, GDP, fell by an annualized rate of 9.7% during the second quarter following a 1.6% contraction in the first.
Traditionally, two consecutive quarters of decreasing GDP is considered a recession.
However, the Democrats are desperate to avoid the word, the R-word, and Treasury Secretary Yellen is denied the U.S.
is in a recession, even though it meets the standard definition.
In a recent appearance on Meet the Press, she declared, this is not an economy that's in recession.
We're in a period of transition where growth is slowing, and that's necessary and appropriate.
Really embarrassingly bad.
Biden has similarly claimed that we're in a situation where it doesn't sound like a recession, but nothing would sound like a reception to them.
Despite the common understanding, there is, in fact, no universally accepted definition.
The National Bureau of Economic Research is tasked with making the declaration, defining it as a significant decline in economic activity, a threat across the economy lasting more than a few months.
If that indeed is the definition, then there's no doubt we're in one.
As UnHerd reports, Wiki included its definition of recession, two negative consecutive quarters of growth, which would be satisfied, but now it's been removed, and instead they have been editing the page 180 times last week alone.
Critics have accused Wiki of trying to erase a popular definition to align itself with a Biden administration.
The foundation that operates Wiki, which is a disinformation site when it comes to any issue that's controversial and is undoubtedly Zionist-operated, has defended the measures taken to restrict editing.
It's not uncommon for topics in the news to receive a sudden interest on Wikipedia.
Volunteer editors know this and have created tools to respond to an influx of edits.
Mike, your thoughts?
Yeah, it's kind of scary when you start changing words.
I think I said the other day words have meaning and if you keep on changing the Wikipedia It's kind of like the idea of the constitution being a living constitution.
If it's a living constitution, there is no constitution.
So if you just feel like there's a recession, and then you can say, well, disregard the facts and just go out there.
And that's pretty much been the label of what they've been doing for the last 20, 30 years, whether it would be the DeSouza's talking about the great flip, you know, when they come back and deny what their heritage is.
Or if it comes back to other things, whether it be vaccines, you know, vaccines, when we were young, we actually stopped something.
Vaccines today may help you.
Recession is how you feel.
Well, if you go by feelings and somebody really thought about it, you know, when gasoline doubles, when milk price goes up 40%, when meat doubles and sometimes import triples, that has to be a recession, no matter how you define it.
You can't just change the names and change the situation.
They're in very, very bad shape.
And name-changing or name-calling won't help any bit.
Right.
These are desperate measures.
Democrats have forced all the obvious and inevitable vegan.
Yes, I have three thoughts.
Number one, Mike, to your account where you're saying You can't just make up things.
I don't want to go on a tangent, but I do need to make mention.
I was thinking about gender identity.
Look, I don't want to discriminate against anyone.
If you feel more like a man or you feel more like a woman inside and you're an adult and if you want to change yourself, fine.
But the fact that it's going into the schools and some people might think, oh, well, children, you know, they'll be better.
They'll be better mental health if they are who they want to be.
All right, you can think of it that way.
But how many things do we have in our lives where we want to change something?
But it doesn't mean we're going to get a whole lesson on it.
What if I want to change my skin color?
What if I think that I'm the color yellow or green?
Does that mean that I'm going to have a whole lesson on that?
And then all of a sudden I'm going to have to go to the doctors and I'm going to have to turn green?
They're going to put the green dye in me?
What about if I think that I'm 300 pounds and I'm a weight builder or whatnot, but clearly I'm not right now.
What do I do?
I mean, do we continue to allow people to call themselves something that they obviously aren't?
It's not discrimination.
It's just reality.
So are we gonna keep doing this?
Because if you're gonna call me a female, and white, and privileged, right?
Then maybe I'll just call myself a man, and black, and not privileged, but I'm not!
So where do we stop?
Now, I'm fine about changing things for the better of things, but at this point, I feel that we're just putting controversy out there for the sake of putting controversy.
And a lot of people are getting very angry at one another, okay?
That's come to haunt me, principled organic vegan.
I put that name out there because I want people to think, hey, she's a vegan for principled manners.
Not because she's a liberal, which is like the horrible word on this show.
And I'm not a liberal.
I just think about, how's it going to help society?
How's it going to help the individual?
In my case, how's it going to help the animals?
Well, they're not going to be harmed.
That's it.
Also, affirmation.
It also helps your body, because there's a lot of research now that states you're not going to get sick, or get as sick, if you take good care of yourself and you don't put those animal products in you.
Is that bad to say?
Is that liberal?
Alright, now let's go back to Wikipedia.
Yeah, interestingly enough, I feel that they're experiencing their own recession.
Every time I go on there to check something out, I'm sorry I do, I check it out.
They need money!
They need money!
Okay, that's all I wanted to say about that.
Lastly, the conservative movement, or just the non-lying movement, the people who aren't liars, we need to get more in the ball and make more of the internet.
our own because you know i mean look we're relying on wikipedia even if we don't like wikipedia because let's face it there are some true facts amongst the parts that aren't so we need to get more on the ball we need to learn how to get you know the uh the codes
i'm not saying i'm going to become a web programmer but it is very concerning that we still are depending on these sites which are kicking people off which are rewriting history which never happened i'm I was told I was rewriting history by calling out the George Floyd story.
No, I'm not rewriting history.
I'm just stating the history that happened.
I won't get into it.
But anyway, you're right, Mike, we can't just like have things live and grow.
And if it's not true, if it's not going to be a benefit, our Constitution is fine the way it is.
If we want an amendment, we can make an amendment.
That's it.
Let me just observe that much of philosophy is devoted to clarifying language, to making words more easily understood by enhancing or refining their meaning.
What's going on here is politically driven, anti-philosophical, but it's trying to promote fuzzy thinking, unclarity.
And actually dumbing down discourse for the sake of some political benefit.
Biden is in desperate shape.
An accurate accounting of what he's doing does him great political harm, which is all earned and deserved.
But they're doing their best to obfuscate and mislead the public by playing games with language.
Meanwhile, the House has passed an assault weapon ban, the first of its kind in decades.
The bill passed 217 to 213 in a largely party-line vote, where two Republicans voted to pass while five Democrats voted against it.
Simply entitled the Assault Weapons Ban, it would rule out the sale, transfer, manufacturing, and importing of 205 military-style assault weapons, including the AR-15 semi-automatics that gun reform activists claim are the guns of choice for mass shooters.
But the cases they're citing are staged phony events where nobody actually died.
Not only that, but calling them assault weapons is misleading and wrong because they're only semi-automatic, not fully automatic.
They are not weapons of war.
But they are without any doubt the weapon that would be most useful to a public if it wants to defend its freedom and liberty against a tyrannical government, which is why they want to take our guns.
Biden has urged the Senate to pass so he can sign it.
He claims the majority agree with this common sense action, but it's not common sense at all.
The overwhelming majority of murders, by the way, by guns or with handguns, that would be like 95 percent.
Even more murders occur by bare hands, beating or strangling to death, for example.
Moreover, most of the violence, gun violence, is in Democrat-controlled areas.
It's mostly blacks killing blacks gang members, for example.
Where Americans use guns to protect themselves defensibly millions of times every year, saving an estimated 200,000 lives per annum.
We know, said then Senator Biden in passing an earlier assault weapon ban, which was signed by Bill Clinton, we know assault weapons in large capacity magazine will save lives.
It's not at all clear that that is the case, however.
Democrats and progressives celebrated the passage of the bill in the House.
In a hearing last week, AOC confronted gun industry figures about the use of white supremacist imagery in their ads, pointing out the deep ties between the far right and the gun industry.
This is simply silly.
Individuals who want to use guns for sporting or whatever events are entitled to their own orientation, but the vast majority have nothing to do with white supremacy.
This is more propaganda coming from the Democrats, who want us to believe, as Vegan was observing, that you can change your sex willy-nilly, and that Williams, millions of migrants pouring across the border is a good thing for the United States, and who want to defund the police.
That's where they're falling flat.
Defunding the police is not going to work.
When you also want to take their guns, no one's going to let it happen.
Meanwhile, here's a statistic freaking out the anti-Second Amendment activists.
Imagine what's happening in one of the most politically left and therefore anti-gun states in the Union, namely Washington.
The number of active concealed licenses in Washington State soared by more than 11,200 in June.
A possible reaction to a continuing spike in violent crime, the second largest number of concealed carry permits issued in a single month since April of 2013, when the number soared by 13,932.
when the number soared by 13,932.
Last month, there were 644,417 active licenses.
Now, if you are irrationally terrified of firearms, convinced they can go off by themselves, are more of a danger to children than pedophiles, for example, how would you respond?
You'd be freaking out.
Look at this additional information from Workman.
Overall, the 655,709 currently active licenses set a new record, eclipsing the 650,403 set on April 1st of 2020, just as the coronavirus pandemic caused law enforcement agencies to suspend accepting new applications, even though there's no provision calling for that in state statute.
Yes, Almost two-thirds of a million concealed pistol license holders are now in the state of Washington.
It makes you wonder what other political tides are changing as more and more people take their own self-protection into their own hands, knowing that Democrats are taking the police away from them.
What an absurd situation, Mike.
Yeah, this is a good example, and I think it's a concerted effort.
Just changing the name Assault rifle itself.
Assault rifles are just basically weapons of defense against unconstitutional government.
But they got people believing that something's different.
They got people believing to go get a jab for vaccine because that's going to save their life against the COVID.
Then they'll say that we're not really in a recession.
Then they say that we can't really tell the difference between a woman and a man.
Then they say that the Constitution It's a living document that we can change at any time.
Disregard Article 5 of the Constitution says how you properly amend it.
We think we can just do it by through Article 3, but Article 3 says nothing of judicial supremacy.
And then then they ended implementing judicial review where we have nine people who are unelected.
Basically tell people what the law is.
All these have commonality and they all have to do with the big government.
We should be very scared of.
Yes, yes, yes.
Absolutely.
And while some argue the Founding Fathers didn't have military-style weapons in mind when they passed the Second Amendment, the fact is they had not just military-style, they had military weapons in mind because they wanted a population of citizen-soldiers who could come to the defense of the nation without whom We could never have defeated the British and won our own independence.
The arguments from the left are historically scurrilous and logically absurd.
Yes, well, it seems like the people from the left, they're just out to have playtime, but they don't think reality.
There are a lot of wealthy people, and they have a lot of hatred in them.
I do believe people on the right also have some hatred in them.
But it's a different kind.
I don't believe that they play games the way the Democrats are.
I do believe that everyone should have the right to have a weapon on themselves for their own protection.
Not to use, but for their own protection.
I do believe that anybody who's going to have a gun should go through some sort of a test.
And you might think, oh, well, what if they Give the test and they don't like you, then they don't pass you.
I'm not gonna go there because I don't have all the answers.
But I do feel that something has to be in place because we don't want people who have a mental illness, who have shown violence, and I've been around those people.
We don't want those people to have access to that for themselves or for the other people.
And lastly, with all these false flags, to me it seems like it should be waking people up that these are not white supremacists.
These are not really happening, all of them.
Maybe some of them are.
And there's too many of them.
Too many.
Although, you might think, well, maybe it's because there's no religion or there's no family structure in these people's lives.
True, but why is it that they're always talking about gun control instead of trying to restructure, trying to get love back, family?
They don't talk enough about mental health.
They've shut things down, right?
Sometimes we hear about mental health rehabilitation, but not so much.
So those are my comments.
The police in LA, They're at your door in an hour and a half, two hours.
We can't even rely on them, let alone take money away from them.
So they should have more training and they should be in place to be at your door when you need them.
Thank you.
Absolutely right.
Even an emergency call to the police, it takes them five or ten minutes to get there, and most of the mayhem occurs in the first few minutes.
So while you're waiting for the cops to arrive, your daughter may have been raped, your wife may have been murdered, you may have been mugged.
If you can't defend yourself, you're going to be helpless.
And with a growing food shortage, we're going to see starving people reaching out from the urban centers to the suburbs.
And if you are not able to defend yourself, they're going to take everything you have and they're going to leave you in a state of despair.
Meanwhile, there have been so many questions about what happened in Paradise, California.
An absolutely abnormal event, alleged to be some kind of wildfire, but the evergreen, the trees were not burned, while the homes were completely decided, destroyed to the ground, even including ceramic materials.
Hard evidence show Camp Fire was man-made genocide and mass destruction of Paradise, which was carefully planned.
The state of the nation has won a super job here of publishing all of this, fanned by microwaves, disseminated by three GWEN stations,
Where MPT has done a superb job of capturing incriminating satellite imagery, proving conclusively what took place in Northern California to start the devastating Camp Fire, strong enough to issue a citizen's indictment against a whole host of characters deeply involved in the genocide at Paradise.
His extraordinary efforts are a great example of what a courageous citizen journalist and smart forensic investigator can do.
Note, there it is, some of the images of what was taking place, provided by Nexrad Radar, AutoCAD Civil 3D, Modus 6, and VIRS.
Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite satellite hotspot data that microwave produced from three GWEN stations were utilized to bring about the devastating fire.
Here we have screenshots of what was taking place that are quite remarkable.
Now, here they have even a real-time video of what's taking place, where blips on the screen are surreptitiously emanating from one of the GWEN stations.
Serious stuff.
Here's satellite imagery capturing a microwave blast.
GWEN stations actually have many applications, as the following explains.
They control the weather, mind control, behavior, mood control, sending synthetic telepathy as infrasound to victims with U.S.
government mind control implants.
In other words, these are centers of managing human behavior in ways you may not have The evidence is quite massive, quite extensive.
They even feature screenshots from Wikipedia.
We're on very basic issues.
Wikipedia is highly reliable.
It's when it comes to anything politically controversial, this may become, and they may wind up editing it too, They are completely unreliable.
Here's the last one for everyone.
No need to search any further.
In my post yesterday, I only found one beam hitting the camp, but there were actually two.
Notice straight line from the upper left to the lower right of the first image below.
Other frequency signatures that stand out from an obvious energy attack.
This is stunning stuff.
Timestamp comparisons between the developing Camp Fire from satellite imagery and Gwen Station transmissions that fueled the engineered fires.
Very serious, very thorough, very well documented.
Conclusion.
While the foregoing is only a preliminary report, the conclusive proof provided represents a complex and convoluted crime spree committed against the American people.
The degree of power and influence necessary to carry out such a deadly and destructive crime waste without being reported or detected by the deep state, by the government, federal, state, or local, shows this was a government-controlled operation The hidden hierarchy that exerts total command and control over the notorious Deep State.
Therefore, the proper prosecution of these crimes against humanity during November of 2018 in California holds the prospect of taking down the entire world's shadow government and its ubiquitous global control matrix.
In light of this urgent and weighty task, State of the Nation respectfully requests every reader circulate this radioactive report as quickly and widely as possible.
We got him this time.
Mike, your thoughts?
Yeah, Jim, I think it's really serious and brings up the question, what kind of government do you have when the government attacks its own people?
And if you can't really trust the information coming from that, You're in deep trouble.
As we go over, as you said, by Wikipedia changing stuff, people have been denying.
I think MKUltra has been going on for a long time and they've denied mind control.
Sirhan Sirhan has been in jail for many years and he may be a subject of MKUltra.
There's some talk even back in the Kennedy assassination before that about Potentially MKL, some of the people involved, maybe Jack Ruby or somebody else.
But when it comes to scientific stuff, a lot of times I think it goes over people's heads, so they just don't really think about it.
But I think everybody really needs to wake up and look at your blog and look at the information, because that is very valuable to see and how all the threads all fit together.
I'm glad you mentioned the entire story.
It's on my blog at jameshfetzer.org.
Be sure to check it out.
And yes, Sir Hen was undoubtedly mind-controlled.
In fact, after the shooting, after Bobby was killed, A CIA-connected psychiatrist boasted of having hypnotized Sirhan.
It appears the girl in the polka dot dress was a trigger.
Sirhan was a distraction.
He was firing in front of Bobby, hit other people, but not RFK, who was killed, apparently, by the security guard who shot him behind the right temple, right here, from a distance of an inch and a half.
He continued firing as Bobby fell, hitting him twice more in the body and a fourth shot that passed through his jacket with a same type of weapon that Sir Hen was firing, where Bobby grabbed his tie and his tie clasp can be seen on the pantry floor as he's dying.
Vegan.
Well, just the fact that all that history was archived for so long tells me that they just don't want you to know something.
Just like Pfizer, it was going to take, what, 75 years to bring out everything that was in the ingredients and their protocol and whatnot.
We know that when they want everybody to be deceased or on the brink of going into an old age home, that they don't want us to know things regarding this fire.
I remember very well, I was in California, people were talking about it and wildfires were going all around me.
And, on YouTube, there was a video of what was going on up there, up north.
There was an airplane, and it was shooting out fireballs, if you would.
I'll never forget.
It was going, There was this horrible screech and some people said, oh no, that's just like, that's just computer generated.
I don't think so.
And if I recall correctly, YouTube took that down.
I have a friend of mine, her name is Dr. Armighty May.
She's a vegan veterinarian.
And she and I both believe very much in this weaponized weather control and weaponized energy methods, just as you showed.
But this was an actual airplane and it was throwing down balls of fire.
It's just so sad that we are the citizens that this government is planning.
If we do have a government.
I mean, there's foreign interests that obviously have come into play and are pulling the strings.
So, who knows who's completely behind this?
We're in a very scary time, and I would ask everyone to pray and keep as optimistic as possible, but also keep real.
And I do have something to say about the prayer.
You know, there's so much controversy with that.
With football, oh, you can't pray, you can't kneel!
But you can take a knee when you don't want to respect this country.
What is this about?
I'll tell you what it's about.
It's about control!
People don't want you to pray because they want you to be controlled.
The government.
The schools.
The corporations.
It's none of your business if I want to take a knee for a moment and say a prayer.
It's none of your business.
It is my constitutional right.
And it's what got me out of the awful injection by having a sincerely held religious belief, and many people out there as well.
So let them be.
Because they do have a faith.
And that's what gets us through this life.
All right, that's it.
Thank you.
Nice.
Nice points, Vegan.
Well said.
Meanwhile, we'll be right back.
Pelosi's House passes a so-called assault weapons ban.
There you see the votes.
Just before jetting off on a month-long vacation, Nancy Pelosi and the House Democrats wanted to capitalize on the opportunity to trample on law-abiding American gun owners By a vote of 217 to 213, Pelosi's House advanced H.R.
1808, a ban on common semi-autos, to the U.S.
Senate.
And by the way, the popularity of the E.R.
15 is one of the reasons, one of the criteria, this Supreme Court uses.
To recognize Americans' right to keep and bear arms.
The fact that these weapons are very popular is going to work against the Democrats' efforts here.
Even if they pass such a ban, it would be rendered unconstitutional by this Supreme Court.
I am very confident.
Multiple people approach a vehicle in a possible carjacking attempt in the middle of the night, but the victim has a gun, and one alleges so, and pays with his life.
I'm very pleased to say we're getting more and more reports of the defensive use of guns, which have been massively underreported in the past, to the detriment of the American people's right to keep and bear arms.
The alleged robbery attempt in Indianapolis ended with a victim shooting one of the alleged assailants dead.
Two were in a car in front of their home when multiple individuals approached the vehicle.
At least one had a gun.
A male attempted to rob those in the car.
But with that, one of the homeowners shot and killed the male.
The officers believe the homeowner acted in self-defense.
The Metropolitan Police, who responded around 4.20 a.m., found a male with gunshot wounds outside the residence who was pronounced dead at the scene.
Detective Officers and Forensic, we're collecting evidence for several hours.
The case will be presented to the Marion County Prosecutor's Office for formal review and charging determination, but it's bright obvious this was in self-defense.
Irene Davis has lived there for 13 years.
Usually takes her morning walk on Tap Drive after watching her kids get on their school bus.
I'm shocked, she said.
I'm shocked!
There's never been a shooting in the neighborhood before, which is very kid-friendly.
Similarly, Joyce Kefauver has been living there for 20 years.
Adding to the best of her knowledge, there have never been a homicide in the neighborhood before.
It's quiet.
We wave.
It's kind of baffling how this would happen.
Meanwhile, the Crimestoppers are asking for more information, but I'm very glad that more of these reports are getting out into the public domain.
Mike?
Yeah, one thing I want to mention is that guns don't shoot people, people shoot guns.
And a lot of times, for some reason, they think it's backwards.
So if you're going to make a law against a gun, you're actually making a law for people.
And it's very difficult to make, to change behaviors.
If somebody wants to illegally obtain something, they're not going to follow the law anyway.
So all you're going to do is going to try to inhibit people who are law abiding.
And in that case, you're doing it for a ruse or whatever.
Down here in, I'm in Minneapolis now, but down in Texas, We have constitutional carry.
They passed that earlier this year.
And you can carry a gun.
And we're having a difficult time in some places because you'll see people carrying guns on security teams and in churches.
You know, we've had shoot-ups in churches before and stuff like that.
And in the Dallas-Metroplex area, I think earlier this year, maybe the tail part of last year, Somebody came in with a gun and one of the prisoners is on their security team, takes out a gun and shoots the person.
When you see that happening, I think that will end up doing away with a considerable amount of assaults.
And you need to actually show that because in many cases, if they do go through judicial system, a judicial system is not necessarily justice.
Depending on a good lawyer can get a person off for whatever reasons.
All you can remember is John Hickley, John Hickley, in an attempt on President Reagan that, you know, that fiasco.
And he served time in the institution, mental institution, not any time in jail for attempted murder.
So you're going to see that.
I don't think laws are going to really help.
I think that carrying guns is a necessary thing.
We have plenty of laws on the book, and needless to say, the criminals are criminals because they don't follow the law.
They're not going to give up their guns.
Taking guns away from law-abiding citizens does not make society safer.
On the contrary, it creates free fire zones where the perps know they can shoot anyone they want and with impunity, especially when the Democrats are defunding the police.
Who the hell is going to protect the public if we can't defend ourselves?
Jim, one more thing, if I don't mind jumping in.
The problem is it's based on feelings, and if you base things on feelings, you don't really base it on the law.
Nor on logic, reason, and evidence.
You're absolutely right, and that's all these touchy-feely Democrats turn out to be morons, intellectual morons, guided by ideology, not by logic, reason, and fact.
Vegan.
Well, that's what the Bible says.
You can't just follow your heart.
Um, you know, it has to come into play somewhat, but, uh, feelings.
Yes.
So again, I'm going to state that everyone has the right to protect themselves.
I think that more women are wanting to get a weapon if they haven't gotten them already.
By weapon, I mean a gun.
I have a few friends that are learning at Target Practices or whatever you call them.
Yeah, they're learning to get their permit and I feel that it's necessary for females because females are more independent than they ever were.
They're living their whole life without being married.
There's some very angry people out there.
That want to take things away from females because they think that they're owed something.
So, yeah, I do believe that more women should be speaking out about this.
And as far as any problems with guns, yeah, there's going to be problems.
But again, that's why you have to take a test and we need more Training, if you would, more health checks and whatnot.
I know my dad, he never wanted to have one because he was afraid he'd get too angry that he would use it in the heat of the moment.
And there's something to be said to that.
I was an actor in a show called Lone Star Justice, and it was a reenactment of a real crime.
And the boy, he was jealous of his sister and he had a gun and he shot her to death.
So There's something to say for that.
You can't just say, sure, have a gun.
Doesn't work like that.
You know, just like we say, we can't just give a car, you know, or, or a baby a knife, right?
We have to train.
We have, we have to teach.
That's all I want to say.
Well, many perps target women because they think they're easier targets than men.
And the more women who are able to defend themselves, the better.
The more perps assaulting women who are shot in self-defense.
The example is set and inspires the rest of the nation to stand up for itself.
And Hollywood loves to have a pretty woman with a gun.
We see these all the time.
But then when you talk to the actor, they don't want to have guns.
You know, because they're into the politics.
The politics of things.
And that's very sad.
I'm sure some of them feel the way they feel out of genuine concern, but mostly it's politics.
And going back to the California fires, What better place to target people than California with all the Hollywood people, and all the people that go out there for a dream, and all the people that have been impoverished and whatnot.
What better way than to mind control those people?
I know!
It's embarrassing that the policies that are being promoted by the Democrats are deleterious to human beings and other living things.
Meanwhile, several developments in the Alex Jones trial.
He observes the jurors don't know what planet they're on.
An attorney for the parents of a child supposed to have been killed at Sandy Hook showed a video where the conspiracy theorist, yes, let's smear him when he's actually trying to figure out what's going on, tells him the jury pool is full of people who don't know what planet they're on.
Founder of the Infowars Show, he's on trial for damages for having allegedly defamed or spread falsehoods about Sandy Hook.
But the problem for him is he's been on both sides of the issue.
I guarantee 100% nobody died at Sandy Hook.
But while Alex Jones early on made those assertions, he subsequently contradicted himself and asserted the opposite.
We have the parent of alleged—for Jesse Lewis, Neil Haslund, who claimed he held his son in his arm when he died.
Jones' attorneys haven't even pointed out that contradiction observation of Wayne Carver, the medical examiner, who explained the parents were not allowed to even see the children who are identified on the basis of photographs.
That was appropriate because most of them only existed in the form of photographs.
And in fact, Alexis Presley has done research suggesting some of these parents cynically use photographs of themselves.
So, Neil Haslund appears to have been lying about it.
Either he's lying or Wayne Carver's lying, or in fact, they're both lying.
The fact is, not even this elementary evidence is being introduced on behalf of Alex Jones, where they're seeking to take him down with as much as $150 million in damages.
Jones, Wednesday, Well, it wasn't crazy at all.
He's saying now it was 100% real.
He's not going to save his ass.
falsehoods, but actually were truths that the shooting was a hoax, saying it was crazy of him to repeatedly make the claim.
Well, it wasn't crazy at all.
His saying now it was 100% real is not going to save his ass.
He's in deep trouble for reasons we're going to go forward to explain further.
But if only he had called experts on Sandy Hook, or I volunteered to be one, I could have laid out the evidence that proves, in my opinion, conclusively that it was a hoax.
Meanwhile, Alex has learned on the witness stand his lawyers sent his text messages to the rival attorneys for two years worth of his cell phone text messages.
This is a stunning development.
Mike Langston, an attorney for the plaintiffs, these alleged Sandy Hook parents, all of whom are frauds, I assert without any doubt, presented a text message about Sandy Hook that came from Jones' cell phone.
Do you know where I got this?
He asked him.
No, Alex replied.
Twelve days ago, your attorney messed up, sent me an entire digital copy of your cell phone with every text message you sent for the past two years, and when informed, did not take any steps to identify the privilege or protect it.
That means Alex was sold out by his own attorney.
In a pretrial deposition, he testified he'd searched his phone for text messages about Sandy Hook and had found none.
That is how I know you lied to me when you said you didn't have any text messages about Sandy Hook.
Did you know this?
Alex admitted he did not, and he'd given his phone to his attorney.
I guess this is your Perry Mason moment, the attorney added.
You know what perjury is, right?
Yes, I do.
I mean, I'm not a tech guy where the dramatic exchange came during the second day of his testimony.
So you did get my text messages.
And instead you didn't.
Nice trick.
Yes, Mr. Johnson.
Indeed.
You didn't give this text message to me.
You don't know where this came from.
Do you know where I got this?
No.
Mr. Jones.
Did you know that twelve days ago, twelve days ago, your attorneys messed up and sent me an entire digital copy of your entire cell phone with every text message you've sent for the past two years, and when informed, did not take any steps to identify it as privileged or protect it in any way.
And as of two days ago, it fell free and clear into my possession.
And that is how I know you lied to me when you said you didn't have text messages about Samuel.
Did you know that?
See, I told you the truth.
This is your Perry Mason moment.
I gave them my phone.
Mr. Jones, you need to answer the question.
Did you know this happened?
No, I didn't know this happened.
But, I mean, I told you I gave him the phone over.
In my opinion, you can stick a fork in Alex Jones's.
He's done.
He has in the past sought to portray himself as a victim who had been typecast for claiming the shooting was staged.
The only witness called by his defense team was Jones began complaining how media refused to report he now believes that Sandy Hook was real.
100% real.
The concession came a day after Neal Heslin and Scarlett Lewis, who pretend to be the parents of Jesse Lewis.
I have reason to believe Neal Heslin and Scarlett Lewis aren't even married, that most of the families here were synthetic, that they're not married with only two exceptions.
Are any of these parties actually married?
Claims, false claims, the attack did not occur.
It made his life a living hell.
This is really rather ridiculous beyond belief.
They've benefited massively from the fraud.
Sympathetic but gullible Americans have contributed between $27 and $130 million, which divided by the 26 families, is between $1 and $5 million for pretending to have lost a child at Sandy Hook.
Under cross-examination, Langston, the plaintiff's attorney, pampered Jones with questions about statements made on Infowars during the trial, even suggesting that the judge was rigging the proceedings with an actual script.
Langston asked Jones if such statements were evidence he's taking the trial seriously.
I think this is as serious as cancer, Alex replied.
He also asked Jones about other mass tragedies he's claimed were false flags, including Las Vegas, Parkland, Sutherland Springs, and the Boston Marathon.
I have done research on these.
I've published a book about Parkland.
I've published a book about the Boston Marathon, where I bring together experts to sort out what happened.
I've reported on Sutherland Springs.
I've reported extensively on Las Vegas.
Those were all scripted events.
Scripted events completely, 100%.
As was the case during his testimony Tuesday, the judge repeatedly reminded him to answer only the questions he was asked.
This is not your show, the judge said.
Mike, welcome.
Comments, thoughts, students who were there, tell us later on.
I'm going to introduce you in just a second to Julio.
He's going to talk a little bit about the trial.
He was there last Thursday and he'll show you his little shirt from the Alliance meeting that internship to use attending.
But going back to the justice system itself, it's very, very strange defense.
And it's almost like when they gave up the cell phone that they turned over the evidence to that.
And that was the only actionable thing that they did.
We need to remember in society, you're innocent until proven guilty.
So you can't just assume that these things happen to be true without any kind of proof.
So the burden of proof should be a good defense attorney should figure out the burden of proof should be on them to at least be able to prove that this did happen.
And if that was a level of proof and then all of a sudden it would be attacking so much on the people who are attacking them.
They have to have some standard of proof and I don't see any in that.
You know, they just assume that this happens and it doesn't.
I don't understand the pushback.
I do know a little bit of the deal.
He is.
under bankruptcy or he's trying to get his info awards under bankruptcy to try to alleviate some kind of a money issue but like you said he is totally uh if it be a tennis analogy he is not playing the net he's not playing the back line he's in the middle of court and they're slamming the ball right at him this is the julio viraga uh julio uh introduce yourself and tell me hello i'm julio julio viraga okay and explain what you said um
so so so we went to the uh to the court to the courtroom and we we We didn't really I saw him in person as we were walking out of the courtroom.
What did you actually get to see when you were in the courtroom?
So we were one of the attorneys.
I don't know if it was the defense attorney or the defense attorney cross examining one of the witnesses from the producers.
It was the producer.
The producer was being questioned.
And how impressed were you with what you saw?
I mean, I was really impressed at first.
I was really impressed overall because it is my first time going into an actual courtroom and actually seeing a court case in person.
Overall, there wasn't really that much going on.
Julio, Julio, I have a report that there are multiple cameras there.
There's a camera on the jury.
There are at least three camera crews in there.
Is that correct?
Yes.
Yes, sir.
Robert Barnes, who's quite a brilliant attorney, has Savage trial as a show trial that this is all phony and fake.
And it's a made for TV movie that's being produced here.
Is that consistent with your observations?
Yes.
Yes, sir.
I mean, sorry.
In fact, the other girl that was going to be here, she had said something which is very fascinating.
According to that, she said that the speech level was so slow, it was trying to be easy to follow.
It's almost like they're doing it as a script or doing it towards not necessarily an active courtroom.
So they're not asking questions like the speed we're talking now.
They're asking questions very, very, very slow.
And what were your observations when you looked at the jury?
I mean, they were.
Were they interested, disinterested, or what did you see?
I really can't describe it.
Unfortunately, I can't.
The Alex Jones attorney who apparently gave all these emails My research was appointed by Eric Holder.
Eric Holder was a key player in Sandy Hook.
Eric Holder would not want the facts about Sandy Hook to emerge.
There has been no trial that has resolved the question of whether anybody died at Sandy Hook.
I sought to intervene in all of these trials.
I was opposed by both The prosecution and the defense, both the plaintiffs and the defense, did not want me to intervene to raise the question, did anybody die at Sandy Hook?
It's quite clear they do not want the facts of the matter to emerge and that this is really an elaborate charade with a political objective.
Mike, further thoughts of yours?
I mean, go ahead.
No, no, no, no, no, no.
OK, try to help out just a little bit here.
You're exactly right on that case.
You would see that they're playing to something other than either the audience or the audience that's going to do a TV show, but they're not necessarily appealing to the people in the courtroom at all.
And just the just the idea that you can have a trial like this and go on so far and convict somebody or have them to pay without even proving that they have any kind of a loss.
It's really strange.
I mean, one needs to start wondering about our justice system, if this can this can happen, because, you know, there's a lot of talk, especially in Austin, because it's a very big thing.
But, you know, whether you carry a gun or not carry a gun or whether it is a catastrophe or whatever it is, you need to at least show that you had a loss.
And at that point, we just assume you had a loss, and then what have you done with the judicial system?
What have you done with the Seventh Amendment?
What do you really have to do with any kind of a trial at all?
You don't really have a trial, you're already convicted.
Yes, yes.
They made the question, it's taken for granted that this purported shooting was real, when I have massive evidence that it was in fact a FEMA drill presented as mass murder to promote gun control, even including the FEMA manual.
If Alex had invited me as an expert witness, I could have introduced all of this to mitigate his damages, because he had good reason to believe it.
And yet, during a video deposition in Connecticut, he asserted he'd never even read Nobody Died at Sandy Hook, where I brought together 13 experts, including six PhDs, which is a form of research competence certification.
And we established a school, been closed by 2008, that there were no students there and that it was a FEMA drill as advertised, even providing the manual for events on the ground corresponded to what you'd expect from a FEMA exercise.
It's just outrageous.
Julio, any final thoughts you'd like to add about the trials?
I mean, overall, overall, I didn't really have that much information or a lot of knowledge on this particular case.
I was hearing the name Alex Jones in the internet, in the news lately.
And then as I came into the courtroom, that's where I started to recognize, oh, this is what I've been seeing.
Not very, not very detailed, but it makes sense that if he's already been convicted or as he- Convicted in the court of public opinion.
Well, no, the judge actually found him by default to be guilty of defamation of these Sandy Hook parents.
But in none of these trials, including with Alex Jones, even including with me, where my case came the closest to dealing directly with the issue, has there been any determination whether anyone died at Sandy Hook?
It's just really a stunning story.
And that really goes, I think, with the problem, Jim, with all these different cases is you cannot convict somebody by summary judgment.
You cannot convict somebody by just stopping the trial.
You can assume they need to have some point of effect where they actually prove that there is a loss.
And as far as this goes, they were there for maybe four hours and they can only tell you maybe less than ten, five, ten minutes.
Four hours is actually really active stuff.
So this has the appearance of more of a staged deal than anything else you could think of, because there wasn't any kind of really action.
It's kind of like going down to watch the legislature and, you know, they vote, but then they're just sitting around, you know, watching, doing whatever they're going to be doing.
And you don't really see any kind of action.
That's not really what you would think at a trial.
And that's what It's very disconcerting.
Billy, you're going to say one more thing about that?
Um, I know that that is the result of having a court for more than a hundred years, claiming itself more power and then changing the laws, changing the constitution when clearly that is, there's nothing more unconstitutional than a court usurping powers and overriding the constitution.
And if, Yeah, it's a very problematic... Robert Barnes, who's a completely brilliant attorney, just does a vivid section of the trial.
You can find it on my BitChute channel.
Jim Fetzer is posted there.
He just takes it apart and describes this as an absolute show trial, and others have said this is the most rigged trial they've ever seen.
They've ever witnessed competent attorneys.
Vegan, your thoughts?
Well, wow.
I mean, when Alex was apologizing yesterday, which I have right here.
He's apologizing to parents there, yes, and seeking to make amends, but it's too little, too late.
It's not going to have an effect.
I do not know if Mike is still with us and can continue because I know he has conflicting obligations.
Beacon, what's your take on this whole business?
What's going on in Texas as you see it?
That's not the way this goes.
Well, the attorney for the other party just walks away and barks at Alex.
I mean, I thought that he sincerely was apologetic.
So you put me back in my place, Dr. Fetzer.
I mean, I thought that he sincerely was apologetic.
So you put me back in my place, Dr. Fetzer.
I thought that that was sincere.
He should have taken your advice.
Alex Jones is basically an entertainer who does political reporting, actually, yeah.
I congratulate him because in so many cases he's brought attention to controversial events where things don't add up, and he's been right again and again and again.
But he doesn't have the ability to follow through.
That's where the work I've done in collaboration with other experts has made all the difference in the world, because we follow through to ascertain what's a better supported hypothesis, that Sandy Hook was real, for example, or that Sandy Hook was fake.
When you have the FEMA manual, when you have an FBI consolidated crime report showing zero for the number of murders or non-negligent manslaughter in Newtown, of which Sandy Hook is a part for 2012, when you have a final report on Sandy Hook that does not connect the shooter with the alleged victims and the weapons he's supposed to have used, you know something is terribly wrong.
Not to mention all the photographic evidence we have of the photograph that was sent around the world that appears to be a string of students being led to safety because Shannon Hicks, the Newtown Bee photojournalist who took that photograph, took another a few minutes earlier.
And you see the kids are in a different arrangement.
There are parents there with their arms folded, their hands in the pocket, casually looking on, leading me to describe that photograph as lounging at the massacre.
They're rearranging the kids to get a better shot.
It's utterly inconsistent with the reality of this as having been a bona fide emergency.
And where the Newtown, the Connecticut State Police have a whole photographic record of the entire event because they appear to have been running the operation behind the scene in their photographic archive.
And they've removed the metadata.
So you cannot tell exactly when it was taken and by whom out of consciousness of guilt to make them not admissible in courts of law is.
It's outrageous!
All of this could be presented on behalf of Alex Jones, whether it was a concerted effort to cut it off, not bring in experts who could contribute to his effort, as I volunteered to do, in order to take him down.
And in the process, they're smearing every one of us who's been seeking to call out the government, whether it's over JFK or 9-11 or Wellstone or Sandy Hook or the Boston bombing.
I publish books on all of these because they don't want to allow citizen journalists to expose inconvenient truths.
We are demonized as conspiracy theorists because conspiracy theorists are seeking to solve crimes that lead back, more often than not, to the government itself.
That's what this whole trial is all about.
Do in independent journalists who are doing research that the government itself has failed to carry out intentionally because the government itself was involved.
Vegan.
More than likely, Mr. Jones was afraid of you.
You're too dangerous.
You have too much intellect, Dr. Fetzer.
I'm not telling you to vegan butter you up.
I mean, if he's an entertainer, well then, he's not going to want to bring the truth out like most entertainers.
He's probably a liberal, too.
I have no idea, but he probably is.
I shouldn't be using the word probably.
I know that the Health Ranger, he has a disclaimer on his show that this is for entertainment purposes only, although he seems to give a lot of facts.
I've never looked on Alex Jones' site.
If he says this is for entertainment purposes only, have you seen that at all, Dr. Fetzer?
Does he show that?
I've been told Info Wars is recorded as entertainment, but I'm open to that.
I'm always willing to see more evidence, and unfortunately, Alex, when he declared he'd never even read Nobody Died at Sandy Hook, how can a prominent figure taking stands on controversial issues not read the one objective scientific work with 13 experts that resolves the case and explain what was happening?
That was utterly irresponsible.
It may in and of itself have determined his fate here.
Mike, final thoughts from you.
Yeah, I'm the Alex Jones deal.
Remember Alex Jones got his start with the deal in Waco and he was quite popular locally and then he's trying to explode on the national scene and I think he covered that the Waco and Janet Reno and and all that very well.
I'm not so sure if he does that same level at all these other ones, so maybe he is trying to franchise or get the information in from other places.
And if that's the case, You know, some things have gone terribly wrong.
A couple of bloggers are mentioned, you know, he's gone into selling vitamins and pushing all kinds of other things.
So maybe he has to take a more of a capitalistic approach or more of a mainstream approach now, instead of actually trying to tell the truth, because what he is not necessarily pushing content, he's using the content to sell whatever his products are.
So in either case, that could be bad.
But originally I think it was very golden, especially with the assault on Waco many years ago, and that's where he got his start.
As far as everything else goes, that doesn't seem to be at the same level.
Now, Waco was an outrageous slaughter of the Branch Davidians.
It had no warrant.
David Koresh was walking back and forth the town.
They could have arrested him any time they wanted to without conducting the assault.
They began the fire that burned up and killed over 80 innocent women and children and men.
Outrageous!
Vegan, a final thought about this issue?
Yes, I wanted to state that there are people that call him controlled opposition.
Now, I didn't know what to think about that.
There's some people who call you controlled opposition, Dr. Fetzer, but you have credentials behind you when it comes to the research and you having taught.
I know he is selling vitamins, which is actually a good thing.
It's better than selling Coca-Cola, I believe.
Imagine everybody who's behind him and he's feeding people so He has that pressure Look at all the people in the in the media that got injected because they were told to get injected I don't know if he did I hope not hope not I don't think he did but my point is that you get to a certain level and That's when you back off when whatever your your morals are your truths not everybody
But too many people they sell out, and maybe he is one of them.
And again, I'm telling you, the entertainment business, for the most part, not completely, is liberal.
And if you don't show that, then you're going to be blackballed.
That's it.
Good, good, good, good.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, We want to hear from you.
Send fan mail, pro or con, to liveneedtoknowatgmail.com.
Liveneedtoknowatgmail.com.
Here's about Robert Barnes.
Sadly, it appears that Terry Robert Barnes believes the official Sandy Hook story.
I was astonished when he's given a critique of the trial.
He admits he thinks it was real.
I'm surprised and disheartened given how smart Barnes is as a person and as a lawyer.
I don't see how Barnes cannot smell a rat with Sandy Hook.
If the official story were true, the powers that be would not be so hell-bent on destroying Alex Jones and Jim Fetzer.
Alex had been questioning the official narrative on lots of topics for years.
Why now are they breaking every legal rule in the courtroom to bust him?
Why bother bringing attention to two conspiracy nuts if everything about Sandy Hook is just as the officials say it is?
Obviously, Jones and Fetzer are onto something and the powers that be fear the public might figure this out if Jones and Fetzer are allowed to voice opinions and present evidence that contradicts the official narrative.
Martin says Wolfgang Halbig's questioning of Sandy Hook's story is due to the government denying Halbig's FOIA request.
Why can't Martin see that by denying Halbig's FOIA request, the government is hiding something which makes it plausible that there is funny business going on with Sandy Hook?
Barnes alludes to the government not wanting the public to know how lax school security was at Sandy Hook.
I doubt this revelation would be so damning that the government would have to hide it.
If there was an actual lawsuit brought citing lax security, the plaintiff lawyer would demand and receive that information from the school.
Barnes is a good lawyer, but it's maddening to listen to him parrot the official lie-er-line about false flags like Sandy Hook and Parkland.
He probably believes the government story about 9-11 too.
Perhaps Barnes doesn't want to touch his hot potato issues to avoid the wrath of the powers that be in the courts and on social media.
Doctors like McCullough, Malone, Corey, McCullough are speaking out about COVID.
We need a few more lawyers who are not afraid to touch hot potato issues like Sandy Hook.
Meanwhile, my case before the United States Supreme Court is progressing.
It's been distributed for the conference on the 28th of September of 2022, which is very far along in the whole process, and I have very high prospects that the court is going to review it and render a decision, reversing my conviction based on the absurd summary judgment protocols that are being applied in Wisconsin as opposed to other states such as Texas, and have provided an opportunity to have made them uniform across all 50 states. and have provided an opportunity to have made them uniform
Final thoughts.
Mike, yours.
Yeah, I'd really like to add a little bit about your case.
That's a very, very important case.
People don't really realize, but summary judgments have stopped the progress of so many people's trials.
And this assumption of guilt can get out of people without actually proving it.
So basically, what has happened is that Dr. Fenster here has been denied his right to trial.
And if they allow summary judgments to continue, There'll be many more millions of people who are blocked from actually having their Seventh Amendment rights.
Some people actually think the Constitution is a living document that can be changed.
If you go back and look at the third article of the Constitution, when it talks about the Supreme Court and its powers, the Supreme Court does not have the powers to do that.
So a conservative court like we have now might can actually go back and take away some of the issues that we had And go back to the original intent and I think that would be the absolute best thing to do that we should go back to a constitution which is like a contract that doesn't change and the only way you can change is through the fifth article that actually specifies how you can amend the amendment.
You cannot amend by taking away people's rights and a judge cannot take away your constitutional rights without a fair trial.
And by not having a fair trial, they've taken away your rights.
So this is a really bad.
Catch-22, Moranic type of things that's happening.
If it's applied to all 50 states, it'll be criminal.
Well said, Mike.
Vegan, final thoughts?
You have a family member, or not you, what happened in that courtroom has a family member convinced that he was arrested and he's a conspiracy theorist and now what has happened has harmed my household because unfortunately the general population is going to believe what happened on TV and in the news.
And that makes it very difficult for us.
When is your court case, Dr. Fetzer?
I'd like to support you.
You need support, okay?
Because if I bring any of this up, whoo, do I hear about it, you know?
I find that this is kind of a, what can I say?
It's like a sanctuary for my brain.
I gotta admit, my brain isn't like a sharpshooting computer analysis like yours is for all these things, because I didn't really pay attention to all of this, except when this plandemic happened.
Then I started looking more into it.
You know, and I have other duties and whatnot, you know, and this is this is volunteer and whatnot and I enjoy but I just want to tell people where I'm coming from.
I've been in education for a long time and they try to suppress you, you know, and it's it's it's very sad because I do have three degrees.
I did need to use that brain a lot.
I was on the radio, although I was on dance music radio, but I always try to make it an intelligent but I'm just saying where I came from and It's horrible to feel squashed.
And when this pandemic first happened in 2020, I was one of the first people to make a new show on YouTube because I wanted to get the message out.
I was watching David Icke, Dr. Buttar, who else was talking at that time?
Whatever you think of them, Thomas Cowan, Andrew Kaufman.
And I wanted to get the word that, hey, there's documentation that This is this was planned, you know, and and I've been continuing to give my comments But when you're around people that don't understand this it makes it extremely difficult Especially those that you work with or live with so I think we should all support you in that courtroom Maybe you're gonna do it on zoom.
I don't know or maybe you can have both but I would like to be there and Because this is very destructive how the society is seeing this, believing that it's real, and then anybody who wants to speak out, oh!
Just shut up.
Those are my thoughts.
Be well, God bless.
Well, Mike Cunningham and Organic Vegan, you've done a wonderful job today.
And special thanks to Julio for making a cameo appearance here.
And in response to Vegan's observation, you can find the history of my entire case at GiveSendGo.com funding fat syrup.
I originally believed my case was a 1st and 2nd Amendment case, but it turned out because of the bizarre summary judgment procedures used in Wisconsin, it's actually a 7th and a 14th Amendment case.
I'm seeking to have the Supreme Court rule That summary judgment methods must be uniform through all 50 states.
They must not be prejudice against defendants as is the case in Wisconsin.
It must be set right.
I am very heartened by the observation of a retired professor of law that he likes My suggestion of, as it were, incorporating the 7th Amendment within the 14th Amendment.
It turns out all the other nine of the first ten amendments have been affirmed by the Supreme Court as applying in every single tate, and that the 7th, while generally assumed so, has not been backed up by a Supreme Court opinion to that effect.
My case affords that opportunity.
If the Supreme Court hears my case, you can count on Everybody's going to know.
It'll be a month and a half or more.
We'll know that they're going to issue a writ, in which case they will obtain all the legal files from Wisconsin.
They're going to be dumbfounded and astonished by how this whole matter has been handled in this state.
I have been stupefied to discover that the law is very far removed from what I've always assumed it to be.
There are many lessons here and many benefits because the same retired professor of law explained to me that the major judicial problem in the United States is the abuse of summary judgment.
So if you think this is a worthy cause, Visit GiveSendGo.com funding, Fetzer.
If you could make a contribution, I've had to try to defend myself from an improper taking on multiple grounds.
You can learn more about it.
Check it out.
If you're willing to lend a hand, I will be most grateful because I have the law on my side.
I have the evidence on my side.
What I don't have is the money for the legal fees.
I'm before the Supreme Court.
As a pro se representing myself.
And this may be one of those few cases in history such as the Gideon decision that preceded me in which a pro se applicant has made a difference to the legal history of the United States.
That's what this is all about.
Thank you for joining us.
Spend as much time as you can with your friends, your family, your loved ones.
We literally do not know how much time we have left.
Again, special thanks to Vegan and Mike for being here.
And all of you, back tomorrow with more of the news you need to know.
▲
Export Selection