All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 20, 2022 - Jim Fetzer
28:43
Truth Jihad Radio Aug 19, 2022, with Kevin Barrett and Jim Fetzer
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Listeners, he and Alex Jones have both been targeted by defamation lawsuits by Sandy Hook self-styled survivors, and in all cases it seems like there has never been much of a real defamation trial where Jim and or Alex could put forth a legal defense by claiming that they didn't lie and that whatever they said, right or wrong, never rose to the standard of reckless disregard for truth.
But those trials never really happened.
Judges just summarily rubber stamped the version of events of the plaintiffs.
And it's really quite a travesty of justice.
And now Jim is here to report on an even more bizarre sort of permutation of his case.
The judge awarded Lenny Posner, the Sandy Hook survivor that was given a big defamation award last year, Jim's book, Four Different Copyright Versions of it, plus four different website domains.
Thanks for featuring.
I enjoyed listening to you and Rolf.
no plans whatsoever to sell it or use it to raise any money to pay off the damages.
It seems like an irrational, arbitrary, punitive measure from this judge.
And I'm kind of shocked.
But I imagine that, Jim, you probably feel somewhat the same way.
So, hey, welcome.
How are you?
Oh, Kevin, great.
Yeah, thanks for featuring.
Enjoyed listening to you and Ralph.
I think that the timing had to be in coordination with the Alex Jones trial.
It was peculiar to me how after so long my case had been resolved that they would bring this motion to take just a couple of months ago.
But it turns out the timing was intended to coincide with the Alex Jones trial because they were going to use it to smear not only Alex, but Sophia Smallstorm, James Tracy, Wolfgang Helbig, and me.
And they knew that once they started talking about me, even if they were describing me as they did in a message that was supposed to be from Paul Joseph Watson to Alex Jones, we got to stay as far as possible as we can from that batshit crazy fencer, that people might want to know what that batshit crazy fencer had to say about Sandy Hook.
Well, my blog, JamesFetzer.org is a vast repository of information about Sandy Hook.
Even if you couldn't get a hold of the book, nobody died at Sandy Hook, which faded by the wayside long ago after David Gehry settled with Posner over the lawsuit.
Part of his agreement was to no longer sell the book.
And they were really coming after me because when Amazon banned it way back in 2015 after being on sale for nearly a month and sold nearly 500 copies and I released it for free as a PDF, They had to figure out a way to staunch the flow where a friend of mine who follows these believes it's been downloaded for free as a PDF as many as 10 million times.
Now, I can't vouch for that number, but I certainly like the idea because I released it for free because I've never cared about money.
I've cared about truth and getting the information out.
And for any of your audience who may be unaware, I brought together Thirteen experts on different aspects of Sandy Hook, including six PhDs.
We established the school had been closed by 2008.
It was closed with as best as another biohazard damage by hurricane.
There had even been floods.
It's in an area that's susceptible to floods.
There was even an additional in 2007 I was unaware of at the time I published a book.
That there were no students or teachers there, and that it was a two-day FEMA drill presented as mass murder to promote gun control.
One of the contributors, by the way, Paul Preston, did an interview with Sophia Smallstorm and explained how he as a school administrator had supervised active shooting drills, and he was so disturbed by what he saw being broadcast from Newtown that day that he reached out to his contacts in the Obama Department of Education.
All of whom confirmed to him it had been a drill, no children had been harmed, and it was done to promote gun control.
That's right in the book!
Can I briefly interrupt you here just to say that have you considered the possibility that the kind of evidence that makes it appear that the school had been closed for years with Tens of thousands of people in the community who would have known that that evidence that you've taken to accept that the school was closed could have been fabricated and it's vastly more likely that that's the case as opposed to tens of thousands of people all keeping their mouth shut about a school being closed that they all knew about.
No, Kevin, that's just wrong.
It was what Sophia said.
It was a capstone event.
It involved the whole community.
My conjecture is that Newtown got over $100 million to conduct this event.
It was about six years in the planning.
The families were all synthetic.
Most of them are not even married to one another.
The kids were fictions.
They're made up in various ways.
The one of which I was being sued Noah Posner was actually a fiction made out of photographs of the actual son of the man who came here and testified under the name of Leonard Posner, but his real name is Reuben Vabner.
His name is Michael Vabner, and they used photographs.
Michael Vabner was very telegenic as a child to be the Noah Posner who was the subject of the death certificate that I was sued over.
So, I mean, the answer is no, and I have done so much research on this, Kevin, and believe me, I know where I speak and the community key players in the community include the head of the Board of Education, the head of the police department.
The town attorney, the head of the bank, I mean, the head of the fire department, the town clerk, who happened to be married, by the way.
I mean, I'm just telling you, this whole thing was very much a community affair.
Even at that, when Alex Jones had won, I think it was actually Dan Bongino in his early days, since it was way back in 2012, was going to neighbors who said they thought it was odd there weren't any students there because the school had been closed for years.
So the answer to your question is emphatically no.
We established this school had been closed by 2008.
If you think six PhDs and seven others can't figure out whether school was open or closed, Kevin, I really... Well, I just happen to know that schools are very Much public knowledge that if you go to real estate listings online you can find everything you want to know about the schools.
It's the first thing everybody wants to know about when they're looking at places to move.
That thousands and thousands of people would have been looking and thinking about moving to and from Sandy Hook.
There's no way to hermetically seal off that community and so that at a minimum tens of thousands of people would have known what schools were open, what schools were closed.
There's no way you could possibly conduct this kind of a fraudulent event like you're saying at such a school that has been closed for four years.
It's utterly preposterous.
And I think you've been fooled by Cass Sunstein's friends who have hoodwinked you and Alex and other people into saying things that have destroyed your credibility and destroyed the credibility of the truth movement in general.
Well, Kevin, I'm sure glad to see you coming out honestly about this because I find this quite shocking.
I've always wondered why you seem to be sitting on the fence about Sandy Hook.
Makes me wonder if you even ever bothered to read the book, because there's no doubt about it, even part of it.
I read it.
It didn't convince me.
Kevin, you're wrong.
Even participants in the drill have read the book.
They like the book because it's honest and it's truthful, and they have no malice toward me because they recognize I've simply been trying to expose the truth here, unlike others like Alex Jones, or they don't have much enthusiasm for Sophia or James Tracy, and Wolfgang seems to have overplayed his hand.
But for me, They bear no malice, and I'm just telling you, Kevin, you are the one who's been allowed to play yourself.
I'm really kind of embarrassed by this.
When you look at all the evidence I'm asked, and we even have the FEMA manual for the drill, for God's sake.
We have the FBI report showing no deaths in Newtown.
For murder and non-negligent manslaughter for 2012.
That's the FBI.
We got the official account from the state.
Stephen Sedinsky, the third, the Danbury State's attorney that fails to call.
He took a year to do his research.
He fails to establish a causal nexus between the purported shooter, Adam Lanza, and the victims he's supposed to have shot.
With regard to his mother, no fingerprints on the .22 caliber rifle.
With regard to the 20 kids and 6 adults, they found 150 slugs, which they could not match to the weapon.
So it was another forensic failure.
If there's ever been one like this in history, it would be astonishing.
There are no class photos for any kids from Sandy Hook Elementary.
You can't find a bake sale.
You can't find a teacher of the year.
It's not there because it doesn't exist.
And the fact is, according to Sidansky, there were 489 students there.
Well, if you subtract 20, that meant they had to evacuate 469.
We don't even have a list of the enrollment.
Where are the names of the 469?
Kevin, you have just been suckered into this.
I'm really kind of shocked.
Slightly disappointed to hear you making these fantastic claims.
I go out of my way.
I'm very thorough going.
I don't make any claims I cannot prove and I can prove every damn thing I've just said here, which you, alas, cannot.
What I was disappointed was that you never got a chance.
You never got a chance to actually make these kinds of arguments or any arguments at all in court because there was the summary judgment prevented there from being an actual jury trial about the facts of the case.
So that's really where my sympathy for your position really comes in, is because the way the trial was run, and similarly with the Alex Jones trial, it was clear that there was never going to be an actual jury trial about the facts of the case.
Uh, you know, maybe that's partly the bad defense strategy that you chose, but I think it's obvious that the court didn't want there to be any such trial.
So on that point, I would agree with you that the stuff that you're saying, as much as I don't accept the evidence for it as being strong enough to prove that it's true or even close, that should have been aired in court.
And clearly the judges didn't want that to happen.
And so that does weigh on your side.
I'll come back to the trial, but this shows how out of touch you are with research.
I enlisted Brian Davidson, a PI.
I did an interview with him about research techniques online, and he said even photographs.
So I just threw him an anonymous photograph of a crime scene vehicle in the parking lot, asked him to track it down.
You know, I tracked it down to the magazine where it originally appeared, but he tracked it down to the Connecticut State Police files.
We found a veritable bonanza.
They've been taking photographs of every aspect of the case.
They were running the whole thing behind the scene, and they took photographs of all of it.
He has photographs down the hallway where there was supposed to be new bodies.
There's nobody there.
He has photographs inside classroom 10.
There's supposed to have been a stack of bodies there that were left overnight, which was absurd on his face.
There's no blood, no pockmarks, nothing there.
And the Connecticut State Police not only have hundreds of these photographs, But they've removed all the metadata, so they can't be introduced in court.
But this one photograph is so stunning, and if anyone goes to my blog, which now since they've taken jamesfetzer.org, you have to go to jameshfetzer.org, and look at my most recent pieces about the Alex Jones trial and the Sandy Hook parents, and you'll see the photograph I'm talking about.
It is in and of itself definitive that this was a fraud because you've got the crime scene vehicle there in the Sandy Hook parking lot.
You've got crime scene tape up already.
You've got Wayne Carver leaning against the wall with his arms full, but the windows at classroom 10 are not damaged.
They would, after the event, be shot out, which means this photograph was either taken before the event took place altogether or if it was taken after the event allegedly took place, they hadn't finished faking the proof.
Kevin, you just have not done your homework.
I just got to be emphatic about this.
Can I ask you a question about the police report?
That describes in great detail the police finding the bodies of the children and some wounded children who were then taken away in ambulances and so on and so forth.
That police report, just let me finish, the police report describes the police finding the body of Adam Lanza, the shooter, or the person that they will later identify as him, handcuffed
That is one of several bizarre anomalies in that very detailed police report of what the police found when they entered Sandy Hook School and found all the bodies of these children who had apparently been rushed into a bathroom and were then shot while they were squashed together in an extremely crowded fashion in this bathroom.
Anyway, I don't know if you've read that police report, but I'm wondering why would they produce a police report with such bizarre anomalies as Adam Lanza being found shot dead and in handcuffs and then claiming that he shot himself if indeed this whole thing was a complete fabrication?
Well, why wouldn't you just take that at face value and say something obviously is terribly wrong here?
The fact is you're believing words.
For a guy who writes a lot, you ought to realize you can write up any damn scenario you want.
They had a script for Sandy Hook.
They spent a lot of time working it out, but it was done in a sloppy way.
There were lots of glitches.
That's why they've had to resort to the courts to try to Slam dunk, you know, home by abusing the law.
None of these trials are legitimate.
None of them established that anybody had died at Sandy Hook.
I sought to interview in all three of Alex Jones trials, making the point that there'd never been a determination that anybody had died in any of these judicial proceedings.
They were all settled on procedural grounds.
That was also true for Alex Jones.
He was found guilty for failing to come forward with discovery.
Now, Robert Barnes is quite a brilliant guy, has given sensational critiques of that.
He's been in the courtroom.
He said it was unlike any courtroom he'd ever seen.
They had three different cameras there.
He got the sense it was a made-for-TV movie.
Well, I think he's got it exactly right.
Now, if you find a defendant guilty on procedural grounds, it's nevertheless obligatory upon the plaintiffs to come forward and present the evidence that they suffered the injustices over which they were suing.
That was finesse.
They just leaped right over it.
Indeed, with Neil Hesselin, it would have been absurd.
We had Wayne Carver, the medical examiner, declare during his press conference that parents were not allowed to come into contact with their children, but were identified on the basis of photographs, which I've submitted forever.
It was very appropriate since, for the most part, they only existed in the form of photographs, Noah Posner being an illustration, where Mona Lexis Presley has found further reason to believe some of the parents used photographs of themselves when they were children.
But Neil Hesselin claims he held his dying son in his arms.
Well, they can't both be true.
Either Wayne Carver is lying when he said the parents weren't allowed to come in contact with their children, or Neil Hesselin was lying when he said he held Jesse in his arms, that the fact of the matter is, while they can't both be true, they can't both be false.
Well, Carver may have made a mistake.
One would expect lots of erroneous information coming from both media and officials in this kind of situation, in the heat of the moment.
Christ Almighty!
Are you this ignorant, Kevin?
That's Wayne Carver giving his press conference that's all recorded on video saying the parents weren't allowed to come into contact.
That's Neil Heslin in a lawsuit prior to this one declaring that he held his son Jesse in his arms when he died.
I would tend to believe Neil and not Wayne.
I would tend to believe that Wayne gave a very bizarre press conference and he looked like he was on drugs or in a state of shock.
I wouldn't necessarily expect any accurate information or a whole lot of it from that press conference.
Wayne Carver, because he was a state of Connecticut medical examiner with a glue that had the whole thing together, I mean, it was just ridiculous.
He admitted in Las Vegas, according to one report, when people approached him that it had just been a drill, and it had just been a drill.
The fact that you'd have port-a-potty set up in advance, they'd have pizza and bottled water at the firehouse, there'd be a sign, everyone must check in.
It says right in the manual, everyone must check in with a controller so they can pay them off.
Yet everyone there wearing name tags on lanyards.
I've asked police about whether this resembled a crime scene and they found it was ludicrous.
You had parents bringing children to the scene.
No parent is going to bring a child to the scene of a child shooting massacre.
And then the day of the event, there was no surge of EMTs into the building.
There was no string of ambulances to rush little bodies off to hospitals.
They didn't even call a medevac chopper, which they do even for drills.
They put out a triage tarp, but there were no bodies dead or wounded put on the triage tarps.
How do you know all of this, Jim, when there are official police reports describing children being taken off in ambulances?
What makes you say that didn't happen?
Because I've followed this damn thing.
Victims and Drive, which was the only way in and out, Kevin, was so clogged you couldn't have got an emergency vehicle in there if you wanted to.
Not only that, but the police said the evacuation was taking place at specific locations and times.
We have dash cam footage for those locations and times, and there's no evacuation taking place.
The school had been abandoned.
It was in terrible shape.
We've had all kinds of confirmation since.
We put up videos where, oh, I don't know, 10 months or so, and school teachers were saying that's what they do with abandoned schools.
They use them for storage.
In Classroom 10, all the furniture was pushed up against the wall, against the windows.
It bore no semblance of functional school.
It wasn't decorated for Christmas.
This was 14 December.
There are no Christmas or Hanukkah decorations there.
And as I told you before, you go back over their history, there are no class photographs of students who graduated from Sandy Hook.
There are none.
And if you dig in, you'll find none of the teachers who allegedly taught there, with one exception, even had a teaching credential.
And you'll dig into it, you'll find like Scarlett Lewis and Jesse Haslam are not even married.
Kevin, you have just blown it here so bad.
Most of these families don't even know each other.
This was a totally fabricated event, and I guarantee you I know wherever I speak.
OK, well, we've talked about this many times, but what we haven't talked about is what happened in court this week.
And I think we both tend to agree that this bizarre judge's order taking your intellectual property supposedly to satisfy a monetary judgment when that intellectual property could not possibly be used to actually satisfy that monetary judgment, even in part, is just bizarre and extremely unjust and raises questions about the court.
Am I getting this right, that actually they seized your intellectual property and they're not trying to sell it, they're not trying to convert it into cash that could be used to reduce the judgment against you?
They're simply just taking it, giving it to Lenny Posner and that's not reducing your judgment by one penny?
How can they justify that?
Kevin, in my opinion, they can't.
The whole thing is a sham.
You're absolutely right.
Here you're on firm ground.
It's a statutory law.
You cannot take anything but money or something having financial value to satisfy a financial judgment.
I got 1.1 million in financial judgments against me.
But not only is it the case that he's not using it for that purpose, he's actually estoppel.
There's a judicial doctrine of estoppel, that having won a lawsuit, you cannot reverse your position in order to benefit from that lawsuit financially.
It's called estoppel.
That means he could not judicially take the book or he could not take the blogs.
I mean, look, he took four domain names.
I didn't even own any of these.
JamesFetzer.org, JamesFetzer.net.
Falseflags.org, falseflags.net.
I own none of them.
Dave Gehry at home, jamesfetzer.org.
But I own none of them.
In the book, I thought that Dave owned the book, but it turned out he'd never formally copyrighted it, so they argued that I had the common law copyright.
Now, think about it.
I was sued for three sentences in a 440 page book that were found by the court to be defamatory.
And the fact is the court excluded my evidence systematically from the beginning.
He would not allow me to introduce all the evidence I had in this massive compilation.
I wasn't allowed to introduce the FEMA manual, the FBI, all that.
The judge just set it aside as unreasonable.
It's got this peculiarity in Wisconsin, Kevin, that under summary judgment rules of Wisconsin, the judge is entitled to make decisions about proposed facts by a party and decide whether or not they're reasonable in his subjective opinion.
And if he declares they're unreasonable, he can just set them aside as though they did not exist.
You can only have a summary judgment if there are no disputed facts.
But in this case, my position and that of the legal fiction Leonard Posner could not have been more opposite.
I was asserting it was a FEMA drill.
Nobody died.
I had the manual.
I had the FBI report.
I had the problems with the official account, the whole bit, all the correspondence of events on the ground with what you expect if it were a FEMA event.
Uh, because it's standard for FEMA exercise.
They provide refreshments and restrooms.
It's standard.
They identify everyone on color-coded name tags on manuals.
And of course, parents would bring children to a FEMA drill because they treat it as a festive occasion when no parent would bring a child to a child shooting massacre.
Wait a minute.
Parents would bring a child to a FEMA drill purporting to be a famous child shooting?
When those children grow up, aren't they going to start scratching their heads over, wait a minute, my parents took me to a FEMA drill, and now everybody believes that it was a real massacre, but I know that it wasn't?
Wouldn't that put them in kind of a difficult position?
Well, they're kids.
It depends on the age.
Actually, there are any number of participants who'd like to have their lives back because they're having to continue to live the lie that this was a real shooting, when it was just a charade.
So how many of them have confessed or talked about this?
I mean, even CIA people like David Sanchez Morales have spouted off about their participation in the JFK assassination.
Yeah, but they signed 10-year nondisclosure agreements, which are about to expire, so we may have that happening.
I don't know what it would take to convince you.
I would have thought long since you'd realize it was a FEMA drill, since I've had so much evidence, I presented it so many times.
But let me return to the court case.
I was puzzled as to why they were making this sudden rush that they control my blog and the book when he couldn't do anything with it.
I mean, you're quite right.
I mean, he can't.
And he's even judicially estoppeled.
And I had all this in my briefs and my motion for reconsideration because a gross error of the law had been committed here in the motion to stay because I have a petition before the United States Supreme Court.
It's going to be heard in conference on the 28th.
I'll know by October 3rd whether or not they're actually going to issue a writ and get all the documents and records from Wisconsin.
I believe it's going to happen because I'm raising a question about the whole summary judgment methodology that allows the judges, based on their subjective opinion, to exclude evidence to determine facts or not facts because they don't agree with them.
I mean, it's absurd.
In the appellate court review of my appeal of this case, they said in consecutive paragraphs, it's reasonable to believe Adam Lanza shot his mother, then shot 20 kids and 6 adults, and bah, bah, bah.
And it even said right there in the summary that Neil Hesselin held his dying child in his arms.
They don't note that Wayne Carver said that the parents weren't allowed to come into contact with their children.
And then in the following paragraph they say it's not reasonable to believe it was a FEMA drill, you know, a two-day FEMA drill presented as mass murder to promote gun control.
Well, how could two positions be more opposite?
And yet they claim there were no disputed facts here because the judge is entitled to simply suppress those he doesn't like.
I mean, that's basically what it comes down to.
So when I got through all this and figured out what the hell had happened to me because it was so disparate from what I'd expected of a summary judgment or from everything I'd read, you're supposed to take all of the defendant's assertions as true and then ascertain whether or not the plaintiff who is suing agrees with all of those assertions by the defendant.
And if he does not agree, then it has to go to a jury trial to resolve the disputed facts.
But in this case, the judge was simply able to put all my facts to one side and declare there were no disputed facts and rule in favor of the plaintiff, even though I had, of all things, two forensic document experts who agreed with me on my position.
Which is a standard way in which courts of law, you decide on the authenticity of documents.
He got document experts.
Well, I didn't have just one.
I had two, which he simply set aside as unhelpful, even though the whole case was focused on the authenticity of this document.
So he just set aside the document.
I mean, it's absurd.
It's a legal absurdity from beginning to end.
It was only after I was turned down by the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
They wouldn't even review that.
I realized that there was something wrong with the methodology used in Wisconsin.
It came out not only in relation to the Court of Appeals decision, which was so blatant, But in the circuit court judge's opinion on the post-verdict motions, where he was just explaining again and again that what I was saying was unreasonable, unreasonable, unreasonable, I did not realize at the time that that entitled him to set all my evidence aside and just discount it because it was unreasonable.
Now, what I have done then is contrast what happens in Wisconsin with what happened in Texas, because Texas has a proper summary judgment in my case, It would have either been thrown out or sent to a jury trial.
I would have been dealt with appropriately.
But in Wisconsin, you can violate my 7th Amendment right to a trial by jury and my 14th Amendment right to equal justice under the law to due process.
which is supposed to be uniform across all the states.
It turns out that this summary judgment is a problem for the American judicial system.
I've teed it up for them to knock it out of the park.
I predict they're gonna take my case and they're gonna rule in my favor and reverse all this. - And so when do you find out about when the Supreme Court will decide or not to decide to take up the case? - October 3rd. - October 3rd, okay.
I wish you the best with that, Jim.
I share your outrage about being barred from providing your side of the story.
I think you actually would have had a good defense regardless of whether your version of Sandy Hook or Thanks so much, my friend.
▲
Export Selection