Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Sept. 7, 2022 - Jim Fetzer

01:55:50

The Raw Deal (7 September 2022) with Mike Sledge

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	I was younger, so much younger than today.
	I never needed anybody's help in any way.
	But now these days are gone, I'm not so self-assured.
	But now I find, I've changed my mind, I'll open up the doors.
	Help me if you can, I'm feeling down.
	And I do appreciate you being round.
	Help me get my feet back on the ground.
	Won't you please, please help me? - Well, this is Jim Fetzer, your guest, where I'm seeking to get my guest, your host, where I'm seeking to get my guest on the line with you.
	Mitchell, we failed in our Zoom connection, so Mitchell is going to give it a try, and hopefully that's going to work out.
	Meanwhile, we have 56% viewing Joe Biden's extremist speech as unacceptable.
	That's pretty stunning.
	56% of the general election voters view Biden's speech where he casts Republicans as threats to the foundations of our republic as unacceptable.
	A Tuesday Trafalgar Group pal found The poll asked, what is your opinion of President Biden's recent prime time address to the nation?
	Which, by the way, ABC, CBS and NBC declined to carry.
	In which he accused his political opponents of representing an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic.
	56, say the speech, represents a dangerous Increasement in rhetoric and is designed to incite conflict among Americans.
	Only 35% claimed it was acceptable campaign messaging to be expected in an election year, and you can count on that to be Biden supporters, which are down to around 35%.
	There are 20% of Democrats viewed the speech negatively.
	62% of independents, and that's a very important number, independents, agreed it represents a dangerous increase in rhetoric and designed to incite conflict.
	90, 89%, nearly 90% of Republicans oppose the speech.
	Now that's pretty damning.
	The polling came after the Biden admin claimed that the official White House speech Was not a political speech heading into the midterm.
	Democracy is not a partisan or political issue.
	The White House Press Secretary Assistant Deputy Press Secretary Chris Marr tweeted, no doubt because to put out the regular press secretary denied it was a political speech would have been too monstrous.
	Just lying in the face of the reporters.
	Chris Maher tweeting, democracy is not a partisan or political issue, after Brianna Kalar had tweeted, whatever you think of this speech, the military is supposed to be apolitical, positioning Marines in uniform behind President Biden for a political speech.
	Why is it a face of that?
	It's wrong when Democrats do it.
	It's wrong when Republicans do it.
	The day after, Biden tried to walk back his dark speech and portrayed the Republicans as extremists who threaten the United States.
	I don't consider a Trump supporter to be a threat to the country, he replied when asked by reporters.
	But people voted for Trump and supported him.
	They weren't voting for attacking the Capitol.
	They weren't voting for overruling an election he backtracked.
	They were voting for a philosophy that he put forward.
	Let me just add.
	I have conjectured that, in fact, the figure we saw there during this very bizarre speech was not actually Joe Biden, but a hologram.
	Now, that may sound bizarre, but if you go online, you'll find holographic technology has become extremely sophisticated.
	We have one where an IT official comes out.
	He gives a whole speech about advances in IT.
	15 minutes or so, totally convincing, meaning appearing to be 100% genuine and turns out to have been a hologram.
	I mean, so they just have him disappear right there.
	I think that Biden's stuttering, losing words and all that means that they didn't want to take the risk, and therefore they created a holographic version.
	And what that means, of course, is he didn't actually deliver the speech.
	So when he's asked the next day about it, he reacts in a normal way.
	This guy may not have even seen the speech itself.
	Biden's backtracking, they're talking about now, not, you know, entertaining the hypothesis I just advanced.
	Came after images from his speech went viral.
	The images show an angry president flanked by Marines with red lighting in front of Independence Hall in Philadelphia.
	Here's a post-millennial tweeting.
	Biden's dark and divisive speech has been widely criticized for targeting a segment of the American population and labeling it a threat to the republic.
	What are your thoughts?
	And of course, this wasn't just a segment of the population.
	We're talking about Easily, easily in excess of 70 million voters.
	Indeed, as I've shown before and discussed, when Sidney Powell initially reported the outcome of the election, he put up an electoral map—and this was prior to the tabulated vote being manipulated—showing the country red from coast to coast, that even California and Minnesota had gone for Trump.
	410 electoral votes, precisely as I had been predicting that both of those would occur.
	Biden and Trump.
	I mean, California and Minnesota.
	Meanwhile, Breitbart reports a heckler appeared to have effed Joe Biden during his big speech.
	And moreover, interestingly enough, Biden calls—this is a Breitbart again—Biden calls mega-Republican violent, extreme, dangerous while ignoring leftist violence.
	Remember the summer of love of 2020 following the purported death of George Floyd?
	We had riots, Antifa and BLM in major cities across the United States.
	Burning down buildings, massive looting, all kinds of violence.
	People were killed, but you didn't hear a peep of protest from any of the Democrats there.
	I say this whole thing is going to backfire massively, and indeed, If anyone wanted to have an encouragement for conservatives or Republicans or even independents that turn out in the November election, this speech has motivated them beyond belief.
	Have no doubt about it.
	Meanwhile, another poll reports Most Americans say civility and tone in politics have gotten worse.
	There's not really a lot of room for debate about this.
	Most Americans believe civility and tone have worsened over the past few years.
	A recent CBS News YouGov survey found a vast majority, 80%, believe civility and politics has worsened in recent years compared to the 12% who say it stayed the same, and 7% who believe it's improved.
	Where have that 7% been living?
	I mean, how incredible.
	What is more?
	Nearly 7 in 10 Americans, 67%, are pessimistic about the ability of Americans to come together and work out their differences.
	Does one-third maintain an optimistic outlook?
	Further, 80% believe the U.S.
	is more divided today compared to their parents' generation.
	Only 14% believe it's about the same.
	I guarantee you it's overwhelmingly worse.
	Only 6% believe the U.S.
	is more united, which is absurd.
	The survey was taken August 29-31 with 2,085 adults, plus or minus 2.8 margin of error.
	That's a very reliable poll.
	Shortly after the survey's completion, notice this is before the Biden speech.
	Joe Biden delivered an angry and divisive speech in which he repeatedly demonized mega-Republicans.
	Deeming him a great threat to the country.
	The entire speech showed in contrast to Biden's original pitch for unity, something he had emphasized during his inaugural speech.
	Too much of what's happening in our country today is not normal.
	Donald Trump and the mega Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundation of our republic.
	And here, in my view, is what is true.
	Baker Republicans do not respect the Constitution, asserting they do not believe in the rule of law, which is frankly absurd.
	Frankly absurd.
	I mean, you have the lawlessness of the Democrats defunding the police, supporting all the riots, not prosecuting crime.
	Turning criminals back on the street before they're even booked.
	I mean, it's absurd.
	And then they go on to cause more crime and more crime and more crime.
	They do not recognize the will of the people, Biden claimed.
	They refuse to accept the results of a free election.
	And they're working right now as I speak in state after state to give power to decide elections to America, to partisans and cronies, empowering election deniers to undermine democracy itself.
	This is just completely absurd.
	Meanwhile, I'm very pleased to say I've been joined My guest today, Mike Fletch.
	Mike, join the conversation.
	Give me your thoughts about Biden's speech and these poll results.
	Yours.
	Well, I think it was the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard since probably the Bolshevik Revolution in 1970.
	It did have those aspects, did it not?
	Yes, more.
	Tell me more.
	Dude, the red color in the background was done on purpose by his, uh, you know, handlers.
	And, uh, of course, red.
	We lost you there, Mike.
	Come back.
	Yeah.
	About the red, the blood red.
	Yes.
	Of course, red represents, uh, you know, the symbol of the Rothschild banking cartel.
	Yeah, I think that's absolutely correct.
	I think that's absolutely correct.
	So it was with the military behind him, this was a direct threat to the American people.
	Yeah, I think that's absolutely correct.
	I think that's absolutely correct.
	I mean, among his other absurdities, they do not recognize the will of the people.
	They refuse to accept the results of a free election.
	And they're working right now, as I speak in state after state, give power to decide election to partisans and cronies, empowering election deniers to undermine democracy itself, when From the beginning of 2016, Hillary was complaining Donald Trump was not a legitimate president.
	Madonna was threatening to blow up the White House.
	We had this Kathy Perry walking around with a severed head at Donald Trump.
	Talk about election deniers.
	That was a modified victory for Donald Trump after it had been rigged for Hillary.
	I mean, this gets as absurd as it gets.
	A classic case of projection.
	Where you accuse your opponents of precisely the activities in which you yourself are engaged.
	Ultimately, Biden claimed mega forces are determined to take the country backward to an America where there's no right to choose, no right to privacy, no right to contraception, no right to marry whom you love.
	That's all silly.
	It's called a straw man.
	You created an exaggerated version of a position.
	And to make it easier to attack.
	While the Supreme Court ruled that Roe v. Wade had been improperly decided on the constitutional grounds that it was a matter to be determined by each of the states individually, that did not imply no right to choose, no right to privacy, much less no right to contraception or to marry whoever you love, meaning gay marriage.
	Some of us may think it's odd, but do not therefore oppose it.
	I'm a different strokes for different folks kind of guy.
	But when it goes to teaching kids they can pick their own gender or having sex change operation surgery to mutilate the genitalia of a little boy to turn him into a girl or the other way around, it's gone without even consulting parents, which is something that Democrats have been promoting that is so far Over, across the bounds, over the edge.
	It's completely outrageous.
	He continued, they promote authoritarian leaders and they flame the flames of political violence, fan the flames of political violence.
	They're a threat to our personal rights, to the pursuit of justice, the rule of law, the very soul of this country.
	He continued, Which was well received by Democrats, such as Speaker Pelosi, who called it inspiring and optimistic.
	I mean, what is this FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago where they've even fabricated evidence?
	It's lawless.
	What about the suppression of the content of the Hunter Biden laptop?
	That's lawless.
	What about The suppression of the content of the Anthony Weiner laptop.
	This idea of this guy getting up and talking about justice and law and order is embarrassing, shameless, hypocritical.
	Biden later tried to walk back some of his statements, containing he doesn't actually consider a Trump supporter to be a threat to the country, despite his painting Trump supporters as radical extremists, as I say.
	I don't believe Biden gave the speech.
	I believe it was done by a hologram.
	I don't believe he's even aware of what the speech said.
	I don't believe they let him see it.
	What do you think, Mike, about all of the above?
	I think the FBI has become the reelection committee for Donald Trump.
	I think that they're trying to prop up the two-party system.
	And I think it's all fake.
	I think it's all staged.
	I don't trust either side in this thing.
	I think that both sides are controlled by the same entity.
	I think Donald Trump is a crisis actor.
	Well, Mike, if that were the case, why don't they just play along?
	I mean, Trump had a lot of popularity.
	He actually won the election if he were on the same side.
	Why in the world would there be this opposition?
	Why would they have to go out of their way to steal the election?
	And we know it was stolen.
	We have the evidence.
	Yeah, I think it's to bring people back into the two-party circus that they want, you know.
	They want the party circus.
	They have to have the illusion of choice.
	They have to have the illusion of an election.
	It's been rigged.
	Probably since the Kennedy assassination.
	It's all been fake anyway.
	Well, let me see if I can get a third opinion here from Mitchell.
	Mitchell, I'd be glad for you to weigh in on all this.
	I mean, it seems to me the strongest argument for Trump being the real deal is the extent to which they're going out of their way to deny him the right to run again.
	It seems to me that would be absurd.
	If it were the case that these are really two wings of the same bird, and Mike, of course, is hardly the only one who's offered that suggestion here.
	There are any number who believe it, but I'm not among them.
	Mitchell, I think you're more inclined to agree with Mike than you are with me.
	Yeah, it's a selection process.
	You know, Donald Trump was the accidental president.
	He was supposed to lose.
	You know, we have patsies and we have winners in every election.
	There really is no contest in all honesty.
	It's a selective process run by.
	Multinational.
	Nonprofit corporations.
	That makes sense.
	Absolutely.
	I mean, why even bother with the Mar-a-Lago raid?
	Why impeach Trump twice?
	Why orchestrate January 6th in an attempt to... Joe Biden, when you got to Afghanistan and you heard Joe Biden essentially on a call with the Afghani president saying, look, it's all about perception.
	That's all they have.
	They have grift and perception, and Donald Trump, Has to be or designated the outsider in the, you know, the organized chaos that they create.
	I'll let you guys talk now.
	No, no, I want more from you, Mitchell.
	I'm glad to have you here.
	I want this today to be a three-way conversation.
	Let me add another story here.
	Biden takes heat for spending 40% of his days in office on vacation.
	President Biden is taking heat for spending 40% of his days in office on vacation after he was away from the White House for two-thirds of August.
	Biden's weekend Johnson vacation spanned 234 days, with seven and ten spent at his homes in Washington and Rohoboth Beach in Delaware, out of 589 days in office.
	RMC Chairwoman Rhoda McDaniels reported Republicans believe it's a winning campaign issue alongside concerns over the effects of Biden-era spending, including the $1.9 trillion stimulus package and the additional $437 billion environmental and health care bill.
	I think the campaign message might be we're better off when Biden is on vacation.
	Voters want Republicans who actually show up to work to dig America out of Biden's recession, secure the southern border, and put an end to reckless spending of taxpayer dollars, she added.
	Soon, Democrats will be able to join Biden on his weekly vacations when Americans vote him out in less than 70 days, referring to the forthcoming congressional elections.
	Mike, your thoughts?
	Mike, your thoughts?
	I don't know why, but evidently he dropped off the call.
	I'll call him back here in a second.
	Give him time if he had to do something.
	Okay, go ahead.
	I'll continue.
	The 19-month tally of Biden trips was assembled by RNC and is consistent with Independent Journal's count.
	It includes days Biden spent at his Delaware residence, as well as days at the presidential retreat at Camp David, Maryland, and trips to Nantucket and Kauai Island in South Carolina.
	White House spokesman Andrew Bates pushed back on the criticism, saying the presidency is a nonstop job that chief executives can do from anywhere in the world.
	Regardless of location, he's taken fewer vacation days than the modern norm, he asserted.
	Being somewhere other than the White House is not the same as being on vacation.
	And President Biden is constantly focused on the numbers.
	The tech now subscriber you are trying to reach is not available.
	Please leave your message after the tone.
	High prescription drugs and energy, reducing the deficit to fight inflation, creating the most jobs of any year in American history, and bringing manufacturing jobs back from overseas, growing the membership of NATO and passing the most significant country for law in almost 30 years.
	Well, I'm telling you, with the soaring gun crime that's going on around the country and the lawlessness that is being supported by these Democratic district attorneys, I don't think any of that is going to be found persuasive.
	And everyone who goes to the grocery store can see the absurdity of any claims that Joe Biden is fighting inflation.
	Despite, by the step, disputing the characterization he's not working during these trips, he's generally out of the public eye for most of his days away from D.C., relaxing with family member and friends.
	I think that's the very best thing they can do with this guy.
	He's clearly Don Cobus Mantis.
	He's incapable of handling the job.
	He's just become an absurdity.
	Transparency advocates say it's alarming Biden refuses to release visitor logs for locations other than the White House, saying it makes a mockery of his administration's self-praise for releasing partial West Wing visitor logs.
	First son, Hunter, who's under federal investigation for possible tax fraud, money laundering, and lobbying violations in connection with his foreign business dealings on behalf of a big guy whose dad, Joe, often travels with his father after repeatedly introducing his dad to associates during his vice presidency.
	Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch.
	This is a real good guy.
	Observed, one would hope that Biden is working when he's on vacation in Delaware, but the unwillingness of the White House to disclose his official visitors at Delaware suggests there's something to hide, including that Biden is completely checked out from his job and away from the White House at the same time.
	The secrecy makes it easier for Hunter and the family to continue their grift.
	I couldn't agree more.
	Pay attention to Tom Fitton if it comes from Judicial Watch.
	It's almost certain to be true.
	Meanwhile, Biden's habit of spending weekends away from the White House continued former President Trump's practice of routinely jetting away from weekends, usually to his home in Palm Beach or in Bedminster, New Jersey.
	Before that, Obama generally mained in DC for weekends.
	Data on presidential vacations has been meticulously tabulated and we'll be right back.
	And maybe Mike will be with us.
	Music
	This is Revolution Radio at freedomslips.com.
	We'll be right back after this message.
	Management would like to take a moment to thank the listeners and hosts for all their support.
	This has made Revolution Radio one of the biggest platforms for free speech in an ever-growing dark world of censorship.
	Unfortunately, this platform for free speech has never been free.
	We need the support of the people.
	It is the people like you, yes, you, that keeps the station in the front lines of the battle against tyranny and oppression.
	Please help support Revolution Radio so free speech will not be silenced in a world that seems to be going deaf to the real truth.
	With your support, we will be able to become an even bigger pillar of light in a dark world.
	Revolution Radio, freedomsubstance.com, the number one listener-supported radio station on the planet.
	Revolution.
	Radio, radio, radio, radio. Radio, radio, radio, radio.
	If you have questions about your past lives or future plans, need answers from the cosmos about your love life or career, or just want to keep your finger on the pulse of the planet, check out my show, The Cosmic Oracle, here on Revolution Radio at freedomslips.com.
	Amazon banned my book so you wouldn't learn what really happened at Sandy Hook.
	It was a FEMA drill presented as mass murder to promote gun control.
	Then they sued to shut me up, and the Wisconsin courts played along.
	I have the proof and the law on my side.
	What I don't have is the money.
	They want to do to us what they've already done to Canada—take guns and pose tyranny.
	It's on the way with Remington's help.
	First insurance, then registration, then confiscation.
	I'm asking SCOTUS to stop it.
	GiveSendGo.com funding Fetzer.
	Check it out.
	This is for all the marbles.
	Was it a conspiracy?
	Did you know that the police in Boston were broadcasting, this is a drill, this is a drill, on bullhordes during the marathon?
	That the Boston Globe was tweeting that a demonstration bomb would be set off during the marathon for the benefit of bomb squad activities.
	And that one would be set off in one minute in front of the library, which happened as the Globe had announced.
	Peering through the smoke, you could see bodies with missing arms and legs.
	But there was no blood.
	The blood only showed up later and came out of a tube.
	They used amputee actors and a studio-quality smoke machine.
	Don't let yourself be played.
	Check out And Nobody Died in Boston, either.
	Available at moonrockbooks.com.
	That's moonrockbooks.com.
	Oh, oh, oh, oh. oh.
	Join Revolution Radio every Wednesday, 8 p.m.
	Eastern.
	Eastern Time on Studio B for Momentary Zen with host Zen Garcia at FreedomSix.com, the people's station.
	The opinions expressed on this radio station, its programs, and its website by the hosts, guests, and call-in listeners or chatters are solely the opinions of the original source who expressed them.
	They do not necessarily represent the opinions of Revolution Radio and freedomslips.com, its staff, or affiliates.
	You're listening to Revolution Radio, freedomslips.com, 100% listener-supported radio, and now we return you to your host.
	Well, I'm happy to say we've got Mike back online because we're going to be a little bit more.
	Before I bring him back in, I want to review Newt Gingrich's assessment of the situation.
	Newt's a really very astute political observer.
	To wit, reality is about to crush Democrats' midterm dreams.
	Here we have We are once again in the silly season.
	The elite propaganda media and its Democrat allies are convincing themselves that a dramatic turn is coming.
	If you read the current breathless analysis and coverage, The Republicans have nominated weak and inadequate candidates for the Senate.
	Recently passed laws give Joe Biden and the Democrats real momentum, and the massive Democrat Party advantage in fundraising will give their candidates huge advantages in defining the election.
	In August of 1980, Reagan, who was reportedly underperforming, went on to win the biggest electoral college victory against an incumbent president in American history.
	In August 1994, no one thought the House Republicans could win a majority.
	In fact, even the weekend before the election, professional analysts and political expert Newcasters opined that a Republican majority was a fantasy.
	The following January, we convened the first Republican House majority in 40 years.
	In August of 2016, the elites were certain a Donald Trump victory was impossible.
	And that Hillary was inevitably going to be the next president of the United States.
	If you doubt how deeply the elite media believe in a Clinton victory, go to YouTube and watch Election Night 2016 coverage.
	Heartbroken commentator after heartbroken commentator realized, with tragic looks on their faces, that Trump had won.
	Finally, in 2020, House Republicans were supposed to lose 25 seats, according to the experts.
	Instead, they gained 15.
	This 40-seat swing put Kevin McCarthy in reach of the speakership.
	As you hear the Democrats surge, cheerleading.
	Consider that the Joan of Arc Trump haters got only 29% of the vote in Wyoming this week.
	Instead of wondering why Wyoming voters didn't believe the made-for-TV January 6th committee hearings, the media is wondering why the voters failed to do the right thing.
	Almost no pundits have looked inward and internalized that a 29% vote for an incumbent is not simply a loss, it is a repudiation.
	So now we have a series of slanted polls which indicate the Democrats are gaining ground.
	This is nothing new.
	In 1990, the liberal Detroit paper republished a poll the Saturday before the election showing Republican John Engler would lose by 19 percent.
	Three days later, he defeated the Democrat in combat.
	In my own case, I've never forgotten a newspaper headline in late October 1994, which read Democrats gaining ground.
	Being acutely interested at the time, I read the article carefully.
	The truth was the Democrats were gaining ground among those least likely to vote, and the Republicans were widening their lead among likely voters.
	Guess which one mattered more?
	Finally, we're told the Republicans made a mistake in nominating outsiders who never ran for office before.
	I lived through that in 1980, when we had a lot of newcomers running for the Senate.
	The paper said we'd lose big, but the American people said they wanted new blood in Washington candidates who wanted to work with Ronald Reagan.
	Republicans made a 12-seat gain and created the first Republican Senate majority since 1954.
	Republican candidates today just need to focus on big issues and not let their opponents or the news media drag them into irrelevant arguments.
	Remember, Liz Cheney failed because she didn't represent the people of Wyoming.
	There's a lot more about it, which I think is very telling.
	And I am predicting that, assuming we have the midterm elections, which I'm convinced Democrats are going to do their best to sabotage, the Republicans could pick up 100 seats in the House and three or four in the Senate.
	Mike, I'm glad to have you back.
	What's your assessment about the forthcoming midterms?
	And do you think we'll even get there?
	By the way, Dr. Foster, this is Alex Jones.
	I should have a clear connection now.
	Thanks for having me on.
	Anyway, I should be clear now.
	That was a great imitation, Mike.
	My God, that was fantastic.
	Jim, I used to do a show on Oracle Broadcasting about 12 years ago, and I would do Alex Jones every day just to drive him crazy, you know?
	And big fan of yours.
	I should be coming through crystal clear now.
	I apologize to your listeners and you for the, uh, for some reason, my other phone was just screwing up and, uh, I had to change phones and I think we're going to be okay now.
	Um, by the way, Newt Gingrich, who you just, uh, Newt, who you just quoted, he was my professor at college back in the early nineties.
	Uh, I actually took one of his classes.
	Very smart guy.
	Uh, but let me tell you, I disagree with the, I don't think there will be a red wave, you know, in the fall.
	And here's why, you know, I have a political science degree, that's kind of my forte.
	I think that the Democrats, whether we like it or not, have done an outstanding job in
	Uh, riling up their voters that will show up, and that is suburban white cat ladies that drink box wine in the suburbs of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, parts of Ohio, through the Rust Belt, who the Roe v. Wade issue, in my opinion, will energize and has energized the Democratic base and
	They're going to get black females automatically.
	They're going to get the gay vote.
	They're going to get, uh, you know, all the illegal immigrants, but they're going to get, but, but the number one thing is the swing vote.
	If you will, politically speaking, I used to do polling.
	Uh, I know how it works.
	Suburban white women in strategic parts of the country.
	And what we used to call swing States.
	Are the key to winning elections and the Roe v. Wade decision that conservatives jumped up and down and celebrated, uh, will in fact, uh, energize them to come out combined with the, you know, what Pat Buchanan used to call the Halloween coalition.
	Um, I think that, and this is, I'm saying this based on a fair election.
	Okay.
	I think it's going to be rigged as well.
	We already see that they're going to have mail-in ballots and all this, so it's not going to be fair.
	But on top of that, in that speech that Biden gave, politically speaking, I thought it was the Bolshevik speech, the red Rothschild background.
	You know, it was like a Lenin speech from 1917.
	But I got to tell you, For his base, and that's all he cares about, and that's all the Democratic Party cares about, this was a brilliant manipulation because, as you just quoted in the article, likely voters, you know, are not reliable.
	You know, they're just not.
	And I think that Alex Jones is actually undermining the Republican Party And this election as well by, you know, getting Trump to apologize for the vaccine and all that.
	I'm anti-vax myself, but I got to tell you, you know, all that does, you know, is, uh, get a quarter of the MAGA voters to stay at home.
	And I think that Alex Jonestein made a deal in that, in that trial and that defamation trial he was in to, uh, you know, I can't pay the 48 million, but I'll rig it the other way, potentially.
	You know, I think there's a lot of dirty pool going on behind the scenes here.
	But I think when you add it all up, I think it amounts to the Republicans in a fair election, in my opinion, based on polling that I used to be involved in, they might pick up four to five seats in the House, maybe two or three in the Senate.
	But as far as the title wave, and that's in a fair election, I think if rigged, it will negate all of those Minute gains.
	I also think the demographic change that we've had in this country over the last 20 plus years is a big deal.
	In white America, not trying to get racial here, but it's just a fact, can't come to grips with the fact that their vote no longer has the power it used to have.
	It has been overwhelmed by third world populations and All that taken into account, I think the Republican Party, like I said, in a fair election, maybe four to five in the House, maybe two to three in the Senate.
	In a rigged election, I think it's a wash.
	If that makes sense.
	That's very, very interesting, Mike.
	I would say offsetting the Roe v. Wade, which even polls long since the decision, the reversal by the Supreme Court,
	Have shown not to be even among the top 10 issues among likely voters, not even in the top 10 issues, are way overwhelmed by what this calamitous blunder of this speech, which was Hitler as total propaganda, going to energize Republican voters and conservatives and Trump supporters like mad.
	It's even disaffected independents.
	20% of the Democrats who are condemning it.
	Mike, I think that it's going to work the other way around.
	And I'm fascinated by your comments, especially about Alex Jones, because something was very wrong there.
	You may know I've been involved in a Sandy Hook trial myself.
	I was sued for an alleged defamation.
	Mine was lost because of a faulty summary judgment methodology in Wisconsin, about which I'm appealing to the U.S.
	Supreme Court, where the judge has a right to exercise his own subjective opinion about facts presented by one side or the other.
	And if he finds them to be unreasonable in his own personal opinion, he can set them aside as though they did not even exist.
	Which denied me my right to a trial, because if there were disputed facts and I laid out a lot of evidence, it had to go to a jury trial where I have every reason to believe I would have prevailed.
	So I've appealed that to the U.S.
	Supreme Court now.
	Not only was that case not decided properly, but Alex Jones' case was decided by default for allegedly failing to produce discovery when, as Robert Barnes observed, he produced Tens of thousands, maybe more, pages of Discovery.
	They had all his videos.
	No one can figure out what it was he failed to produce during Discovery and where the previous cases involving Sandy Hook were decided either on the basis of stipulation or assumption.
	In other words, there's been no judicial determination whether anybody died at Sandy Hook.
	I sought to intervene, Mike.
	In all three of the Alex Jones cases, to point out that there had been no determination whether anybody died at Sandy Hook, and I was not only opposed by the plaintiffs, the so-called Sandy Hook parents, which was unsurprising, but by the defendants.
	Even in the Remington case, the defendants opposed, and Alex Jones as well showed not the least interest in having me as an expert witness on his side.
	Your thoughts?
	Alex Jonestein is a total fraud.
	And let me say this, Dr. Fetzer, I've read your books.
	I've followed you since Scholars for Truth after 9-11.
	I'm a very big fan of your work and your research.
	I think it's spot on.
	And I think the Alex Jones case was, you know, I've read Nobody Died at Sandy Hook.
	The Boston bombing was garbage.
	I know all that to be the case.
	You are absolutely spot on on those issues.
	But here's the deal.
	I think what the Alex Jones case, and I said it as a guest on a Richard Carey show, who's an amazing guy, has a great show over at RBN.
	I said that what they're doing is, I believe that Alex Jones is the crisis actor, is the biggest crisis actor that's ever existed.
	Because what he's doing from a legal perspective, and although my knowledge is in political science, I studied law.
	Before I got into Poli Sci, and I know the law pretty well, what he allowed, and that lawyer, you know, he's got all this money, and that lawyer he had was a joke.
	He was a stooge.
	He would have had a better shot with a public defender than this guy, who I think they threw it on purpose.
	I think by him apologizing and saying that Sandy Hook actually happened, I think what that does, what they were trying to do, was potentially undermine your Supreme Court case with this trial because they set precedent, which is, even if it's fake, they still set a precedent.
	You can refer to the Jones court case and say, well, you know, these guys were talking about Sandy Hook and they, Admitted it was real and apologized and it was a big deal.
	So that basically undermines you and undermines your case.
	I think that Sandy Hook was the biggest psy-op, one of the biggest psy-ops this country's ever faced.
	I agree with your research.
	I think you're spot on.
	But what I'm trying to say is, is I think that was a show trial where Alex Jones participated in as an entertainer, as an actor, I think the case was thrown on purpose.
	I don't think any money will change hands.
	And I think as a result, he's helping the other side by doing this whole Trump needs to apologize for the warp speed.
	Look, I disagree with Trump on that issue as well.
	But what he's doing, if he really does care about Republican turnout in the fall, He has a lot of influence, unfortunately.
	He would not be trying to throw a quarter of the Republican base, or maybe more than that, into making them disillusioned to stay at home.
	And I think they will.
	And I think it's a tactic.
	And I think there's a lot of other shenanigans going on in other networks as well that seem to be doing the same thing.
	A lot of undermining of people on the Sandy Hook issue, if you know what I mean.
	Oh, that's extremely interesting, Mike.
	I really like all of that.
	It was pretty obvious he was throwing it.
	Now, strictly speaking, my case is about the methodology in Wisconsin, the flawed summary judgment methodology, which has affected tens of thousands of Wisconsin citizens by being denied
	They're right to a trial by jury under the 7th Amendment, so that it's a question of whether all the states ought to be a blind summary judgment methodology that protects their right under the 7th in accordance with the 14th, which recalls for equal justice under the law.
	We are dual citizens in the following sense.
	We're not only citizens of our states, but we're citizens of the United States.
	And under the Constitution, we're entitled to all the rights and privileges of citizens of the United States.
	But in Wisconsin, the Seventh Amendment is not being followed because of this flawed summary judgment methodology.
	Now, the court Is not being asked to address a question of what did or did not happen at Sandy Hook.
	Nevertheless, I suspect you may be 100% correct that throwing this case was intended to influence the court.
	My opinion is they could look at it the opposite way around and say, by reaffirming the right of every American to a trial by jury, even if they are controversial, Such as the defendant in this case, Dr. Fetzer, that we assert he has the same right to a trial by jury as every other citizen and therefore be emphatic about it.
	It's a very odd situation historically, Mike, that although the other nine of the first 10 amendments have been certified by the Supreme Court as applicable in all of the individual states, that's not the case for the seventh.
	Which means that there's a perfect opportunity, I'm teed up, for the Supreme Court to take the action that they no doubt have wanted to take when an appropriate case should come before them, which my case does precisely to affirm the applicability of the 7th to every one of the 50 states.
	Your thoughts?
	Oh, I think you're absolutely right.
	I think the whole purpose of the Jones case and the Jones trial coming ahead of your Supreme Court case Which is coming up, I think is very important, because as I said before, I don't have a law degree, but I know a lot about the law, and I'm telling you that that was a rigged case.
	There's no doubt in my mind, I think Alex Jones is the biggest crisis actor that's ever existed.
	He's bigger, he's a bigger, he's a more popular crisis actor than Posner from the Sandy Hook You know, he really is.
	I'm serious.
	And you know, but what they've done is so dangerous because we live now.
	And I actually wrote an article when I was in college.
	Oh God, this goes back to 91, 92, where I said that court TV and these channels are destroying our legal system because You know, the advent of TV and the, you know, Zionist manipulation of the television led to trial by democracy instead of trial by jury.
	And I don't believe in democracy.
	I believe in a constitutional republic, which is what this country was set up as.
	And so what they've done is they've for, for, you know, 20, 30 years, They've done these trials, going back to the O.J.
	trial.
	They've made a Hollywood cast.
	They've turned juries in courtrooms into Hollywood sets.
	Let me remind the listening audience that the Hollywood producers and camera crew that were invited in the Alex Jonestein case that we just witnessed, the biggest crisis actor since Posner, Let me remind the listener that that was the same Hollywood crew that filmed the Michael Jackson documentary.
	Okay?
	It was the same Hollywood crew.
	So, I mean, this would be a new book you could write, Dr. Fetzer, because, you know, in my opinion, that trial, in my opinion, that trial was a show trial and staged and fake.
	And the reason I say that is, That judge, even two years ago, four years ago, would never be allowed to rule from the bench and tell a defendant on the stand and call them a liar in front of the jury and say that their lawyer, you know, when you know, because there's a process here when you're dealing with law, you give over what they asked for, what pertains
	What the prosecution wants if you're on the defense side and vice versa.
	But what they did here was she basically said, well, I don't care what you've given over to the other side.
	You know what they asked for it.
	I don't care if you complied.
	I think you're a liar, OK?
	And you know, and he played right along right along with it.
	What Alex Jones said?
	In that court case was and then he did a show where he said I met one of the victims uh you know connected to the Bosner family and I apologized she gave me a bottle of water and we had a come to Jesus moment and I realized at that point That, you know, look, this is bigger than you or me.
	This is about the future of America and I am the tip of the spear and I'm going to fight.
	And I said, if you want to come on my show, I will be more than happy to admit that Sandy Hook was real.
	There were no crisis factors.
	People died.
	I pray every day to Jesus for your kids.
	I pray every day that we will.
	I mean, this is what he did.
	You know?
	So, basically, the end result of his trial is Sandy Hook was real, and I wouldn't be surprised if this fat, you know, penis pill-selling bastard doesn't say that 9-11 really happened, the official story, in a couple years, at the rate he's going.
	Because he threw all of you guys under the bus back when you were doing Scholars for Truth and all that.
	Which was important, and I think that Alex Jones has sold out a long time ago, if not from the very start, and he's a total fraud, and he is.
	You know, you should write a book on this.
	Alex Jones is the biggest crisis actor that's ever existed, if that even is his real name.
	Anyway, sorry, Dr. Fetcher, for bloviating.
	No, no, no, no.
	Mike, I'm finding all this fascinating.
	I mean, it's just wonderful.
	I'm so glad you got back on the air.
	This is terrific.
	I think Alex Jones threw it.
	It was improper.
	Robert Barnes himself, who'd been in the courtroom, said it was not a normal trial, that they had cameras everywhere, some of which were right on the jury.
	He thinks it's a made-for-TV movie.
	We'll be right back with Michael Sledge.
	I'm just delighted to have you here, and I love your Alex Jones improv.
	It's wonderful stuff.
	I'll be right back after this break.
	Thank you.
	I'll be right back after this break.
	We'll be right back after this message.
	Was it a conspiracy?
	Did you know that the police in Boston were broadcasting This is a Drill, This is a Drill on Bullhorns during the Marathon?
	That the Boston Globe was tweeting that a demonstration bomb would be set off during the marathon for the benefit of bomb squad activities.
	And that one would be set off in one minute in front of the library, which happened as the Globe had announced.
	Peering through the smoke, you could see bodies with missing arms and legs.
	But there was no blood.
	The blood only showed up later and came out of a tube.
	They used amputee actors and a studio-quality smoke machine.
	Don't let yourself be played.
	Check out And Nobody Died in Boston, either.
	Available at moonrockbooks.com.
	That's moonrockbooks.com.
	If you think for one second that the Capitol will ever treat us fairly, you are lying to yourself.
	Oh!
	Because we know who they are and what they do.
	This is what they do!
	And we must fight back!
	You can torture us and bomb us.
	Fire is catching.
	And if we burn, you burn with us!
	Good evening.
	Are you awake yet?
	I hope.
	We've tried and we've tried for years and years to use passive resistance and loud voices to make a change.
	But time is over.
	Your governments around the world have no other goal than to decimate your entire existence at the hands of the bankers and the elites.
	The war is coming and it's your choice to decide if you want to be a warrior or a victim.
	Denial is not a choice anymore.
	Revolution Radio, freedomslips.com, the number one listener-supported radio station on the planet.
	Not giving up.
	Revolution Radio. Revolution Radio. Revolution Radio. Revolution Radio. Revolution Radio. Revolution Radio. Revolution Radio.
	Amazon banned my book so you wouldn't learn what really happened at Sandy Hook.
	It was a FEMA drill presented as mass murder to promote gun control.
	Then they sued to shut me up, and the Wisconsin courts played along.
	I have the proof and the law on my side.
	What I don't have is the money.
	They want to do to us what they've already done to Canada.
	Take guns, impose tyranny.
	It's on the way with Remington's help.
	First insurance, then registration, then confiscation.
	I'm asking SCOTUS to stop it.
	Give Cengo.com funding Fetzer.
	Check it out.
	This is for all the marbles.
	The opinions expressed on this radio station, its programs, and its website by the hosts, guests, and call-in listeners, or chatters, are solely the opinions of the original source who expressed them.
	They do not necessarily represent the opinions of Revolution Radio and freedomslips.com, its staff, or affiliates.
	You're listening to Revolution Radio, freedomslips.com, 100% listener-supported radio, and now we return you to your host.
	Mike, let me fill you in on a recent development.
	I'd love to get your take.
	It turns out that once I filed my petition to the Supreme Court, that the Posner people decided to go after my blog and the book, Nobody Died at Sandy Hook, to satisfy the financial judgment against me for the original trial for $450,000.
	I protested against this because in Wisconsin, a monetary judgment can only be satisfied by a monetary award, that this is intellectual property, it's not money, that in order to assign it a monetary value, you have to assign a receiver, or the receiver then takes a property and seeks to, for example, auction it off.
	But where if it were to be the case that it would be used to make money, then once it had satisfied the judgment, any proceeds thereafter and the property itself would be returned to me.
	This was an unlawful taking because the judge directly gave it to the plaintiff in violation of the law.
	Now, it's fascinating that they actually took the blog on the 28th of July, because as you may be aware, that was a day when, during the Alex Jones trial, they began to trash all of the Sandy Hook skeptics of any prominent—Sylvia Small, Storm Wolfgang, Hal Big, James Tracy, and me.
	And in order to ensure that the public couldn't find what this guy they were describing as batshit crazy Jim Fetzer had to say, they took my blog on the 28th and redirected it to documents in the Posner v. Fetzer trial in Dane County.
	They're not going to make any money out of it.
	In fact, as I explained in my various briefs, Staple prevents Posner from taking it because it's a reversal of his previous position.
	He's gone out of his way to take down everything on the Internet related to Sandy Hook, some 1,500 videos, including many of mine.
	He's gone after books and publishers and everything else.
	He's made it his career to take down Sandy Hook material.
	So it's obvious.
	He was doing this for an improper purpose.
	He was trying to suppress access to the public, and the action he took in diverting from the blog to these documents confirms it.
	Nevertheless, the judge allowed it to go forward, even when I protested.
	And now we have this oddity Because I'm already at the Supreme Court, I could appeal to a justice, a justice who has responsibility for the district of which Wisconsin is a part, which was Amy Coney Barrett.
	Now I have a new docket entry.
	I mean, this happened just last week.
	A new docket entry, application 22A200 denied by Justice Barrett has been added for James Fetzer petitioner versus Leonard Posner.
	Please help me.
	This is, I've written to a group concerned with judicial corruption.
	Please help me to understand why she would deny this appeal of an unlawful order to take.
	I am baffled.
	In Wisconsin, only money can be used to satisfy a monetary judgment, not intellectual property.
	Intellectual property must be placed in the hands of a receiver to determine its value and put up for auction or other disposition to convert into money.
	That was not done.
	Instead, It was given directly to the plaintiff, who has no intention of using it to make money, but only to remove it from access to the public.
	This was openly admitted by the judge.
	I asked that Justice Barrett simply stay the order until such time as a full court can rule on my petition for a writ.
	She declined.
	Please, if anyone can, tell me what's going on here, because I am utterly baffled.
	Mike, your thoughts?
	Well, first of all, legally, and I'm not giving out legal advice, I'm not a lawyer, although I know the law pretty good, I will say this.
	In what you just mentioned, there has to be a legitimate receiver of the funds if you lose, okay?
	You know, to transfer to.
	Where I would go, I think as a crafty lawyer, where I would go is questioning the real identity Of some of these Sandy Hook people.
	I mean, I would question Posner's identity and say, is this really your name?
	When did you have it changed?
	Because here's the deal.
	If you can prove that the receiver is not valid, then it negates the whole contract.
	Because everything we do is under contract law.
	Unfortunately, I think it's horrible.
	I disagree with most of it, but that would be very interesting.
	You know, is this, you know, who is this real person?
	I mean, if this person is going to receive funds, receive money from another person based upon legal defamation or whatever, that person has to be bona fide as a real individual and not an invisible entity like a corporation.
	By the way, And if you look at past law, you'll find out that corporate personhood has been used to protect crisis actors in a lot of these situations.
	And I think this is a huge connection, legally, that should be looked at, you know.
	So, you know, how do you transfer funds to someone that doesn't really exist?
	How do you transfer funds to a Hollywood character?
	How do you transfer funds to an actor?
	Using a fake name.
	Now, this would be interesting.
	If they change their name, you know, then that's on the record.
	You have to do that legally, you know, for any funds to be received or transferred, if you understand what I'm getting at here.
	Oh, of course I do.
	Of course I do.
	Of course I do, because I've made this an issue from my original answer, as you know.
	Yep.
	After you receive a complaint, maybe a potential lawsuit, you have the opportunity to move for dismissal or to submit an answer.
	And the very first sentence of my answer might read as follows.
	Assuming the plaintiff is a real person.
	And by the time we got to the end, I was saying, I do not believe the person who has filed this lawsuit, calling himself Leonard Posner, is other than a legal fiction, that his real name is Reuben Fabner.
	And I repeated this throughout the entire lawsuit, Mike, and the judge showed not the least interest.
	I mean, it was just shocking to me.
	He blocked me at every single avenue, but overall he was doing it on the basis of this.
	Let me call it corrupt.
	Summary judgment methodology in Wisconsin.
	For example, I have this been in Texas and for the sake of my petition, I use Texas as a contrast case because one of the criteria for having issues heard before the Supreme Court is conflicts between the highest courts of different states in order to ensure that uniformity of the application of the law by due process to all 50 states.
	Well, it would have been either thrown out or sent to a jury for trial because the opposition in our position could not have been more dramatic.
	In summary, judgments are only applicable if there are no disputed facts.
	Well, get this.
	On the one hand, the plaintiff was asserting that I'd committed a defamation by challenging, and frankly, I'm under a permanent injunction.
	I can't reaffirm what I said over the sentences over which I was sued.
	Let's just say I was challenging the authenticity of a death certificate he'd made available to a research colleague, which he was insisting was authentic.
	And where he believes, therefore, that, you know, 20 children and six adults died at Sandy Hook, I was asserting it was a FEMA drill presented as mass murder to promote gun control, that nobody had died, and that I even had the FEMA manual.
	I had FBI consolidate crime report for 2012 showing that in the category of murderers, And non-negligent manslaughter for Newtown, of which Sandy Hook is a part, zero, that the official report by Dansbury State Attorney Stephen Sedinsky Failed to establish a causal connection between the alleged shooter, Adam Lanza, and his victims and the weapons he's supposed to have used.
	For example, the rifle with which he's supposed to have shot his mother did not have his fingerprints.
	And in a footnote 53, it observes that of the 150 slugs recovered at the scene, none of them could be matched to the AR-15 with which he's alleged to have shoot him.
	That meant it was a forensic failure.
	And yet the judge just moved forward, went ahead, made every ruling in favor of Petitioner, wouldn't even grant my status as an investigative journalist.
	I mean, I even had two forensic document expert reports, Mike, that supported my position and the judge merely set them aside as unhelpful.
	Yeah, yeah.
	And now Amy Comey Barrett.
	I followed your case, Dr. Fetzer, and I totally agree with you.
	I think you were totally in the right.
	I think everything you did was correct.
	And, you know, I think what we're dealing with at this point is total tyranny.
	There is no justice in the courtroom.
	And the main reason there will not be justice in the courtroom is because you're dealing with the bar, the British Accredited Registry, and they're going to cover up because they were the original inventors and the War of 1812 was so important because That basically moved America away from being tried by your peers and all this, and local justice and constitutional law.
	It changed it and moved it toward corporate law and corporate personhood, which Abraham Lincoln was the king at.
	The whole reason they put him in office was to bring about corporate personhood, which I've done
	Tons of research on, and I think the reason that we're losing these lawsuits and cases, in my opinion, not giving legal advice, I'm not a lawyer, but in my opinion from just doing research, I would say that corporate personhood is a big problem because when you umbrella yourself under the banner of a corporation, and that would include crisis actors in false drills, okay, they can claim that they are under some sort of
	LLC or whatever being brought to trial and that gives them carte blanche immunity, you know, because what it does is, you know, and you can't sue a corporation.
	So what is Hollywood?
	What is, you know, going back to the Patriot Act, which had a stipulation in there that they have the right, the government does, to hold fake events constitutionally, legally.
	That was passed by the Congress.
	Whether we like it or not, it was.
	And so what these people are doing are hiding behind the umbrella of corporate protection.
	You know, and so even if you go after their identities or whatever, they're going to claim, well, you know, I'm working in conjunction with this law firm who represents the corporation that I work for.
	This is complicated stuff for people listening, but I think you know what I'm talking about here.
	It gets into murky, murky stuff, but I think the reason that we're losing is because we're going up against ghosts.
	We're literally going up against fake persons.
	Corporate personhood was the biggest scam ever perpetrated on the American people.
	And I think this is what they're hiding behind in these cases, including yours, Dr. Fesser.
	And I think this is how we're losing this whole thing, in my opinion, from my research, you know, so be interested in your take.
	But I think that's what's going on here because you can say that you're a product, you know, and you can use a different name if you're a product and you're being hired by a corporation to do some kind of commercial or advertising.
	Okay.
	And so I think this is what they're hiding behind.
	And I think if we can expose this, we can truly win because I do believe that's the umbrella they're hiding under.
	If any of this, what I'm saying makes sense.
	I hope I'm hope hoping I'm making sense here.
	You know?
	Oh, I think you're I think you're making absolute sense, Mike.
	That's not I don't think there's any question about it.
	But I mean, I've been disputing the authenticity of this party from the beginning.
	But you make a interesting suggestion that I could challenge his identity even now, even though the judge swept it under the rug.
	It was a part of my counterclaims where the judge bifurcated the case and would not allow me discovery on my counterclaims, which included abuse of process.
	This was a slap suit, a strategic lawsuit against public participation intended to punish someone who has exposed secrets the government prefers that the public not learn.
	By hauling them into, you know, running up their bills, win or lose, they win because they, you know, and basically this was intended to take the book out of circulation and action, which it has succeeded in doing, at least for the time being.
	Second, fraud and theft by deception because of Sandy Hook parents, including this, the so-called Leonard Bosner, were receiving donations from sympathetic but gullible Americans by my best calculation between 27 and $130 million, which divided were receiving donations from sympathetic but gullible Americans by my best calculation between 27 and $130 million, which divided by 26 purportedly grieving families meant they were getting between one and five mil And third,
	brought upon the court because a party who presented himself as Leonard Bosner and even did a video deposition under that name is in fact not Leonard Bosner, but Ruben Vabner.
	And I made this protest again and again, and the judges set it aside, bifurcated the case, and we'll get to that after the main case.
	The charge against me is resolved.
	But it really, I think, was calculated to prevent me from discovery.
	Normally, the practice is you proceed on both tracks together, because who knows what discovery might reveal that would be important to the other case.
	And in this instance, I think there's No question about it.
	This is not a real person.
	This is a legal fiction.
	So I think your basic point, Mike, is spot on.
	Yeah, and I think that's what they hide behind.
	And remember, when you give donations, legally, I'm not a lawyer, but this is through my research.
	I'm saying that because I don't want to get sued.
	But you can sue me.
	I ain't got no money anyway.
	But what I'm saying is, Is through a legal fiction, through a corporate personhood or a corporation, if you receive donations and you use a fake name or whatever, you can, you know, in the terms of agreement that you, I do believe you have to sign when you give a donation on any of these sites.
	It's an umbrella, it has an umbrella effect, so it protects and gives You know, it hides the crisis actor from being revealed because they can always say, well, I'm just a product.
	You know, it's got nothing to do with the trial.
	I'm just a product under a corporate umbrella that people are giving money to.
	It's like buying a Pepsi or a Coke at a store, you know?
	And this is the key to the whole thing, in my opinion.
	This is my opinion.
	But you're not going to get anywhere with it in this court system.
	Because the fact is the British, the bar, the British accredited registry, this country's legal system was taken over at the war of 1812.
	And it has not, they've had to give some of our rights to us, uh, until they consolidated total power.
	And that would be the Rothschild banking cartel and the other people behind, um, uh, the bar going back to Cromwell.
	and that takeover of the British.
	And I believe that we lost our sovereignty in 1812.
	You know, one of the first things they did was burn down the whole records and all the legal documents in that battle.
	And I think that what we've seen with the lawyers, with the gills, with the judges, and the tyranny from the bench is the way their most important weapon they've used to take us over.
	And I think that your case is so important because it really goes back to the beginning of this.
	You know, you had the 1812 war where the bar really came in and titles of nobility were allowed back into American government.
	That would be Esquire and these kind of things, which should not be allowed to be to be in to be representing the people of this country.
	Then this country became a corporation, the United States of America.
	You know, when you go to a court, It's like, you know, dealing with the IRS.
	You're not dealing with the legal government of this country.
	You're dealing with a corporation.
	Okay?
	So, if you're dealing with a corporation, because remember, the bar, the British Accredited Registry, the esquires that are lawyers that deal within the system, are working for a corporate entity called the United States of America.
	So therefore, under that banner, these people can use and hide under that umbrella as crisis factors and in propagandist and win the case.
	You know, and even if you bring it up, the fact is that most of the public is too stupid to understand the nuance in the intelligence that you have, Dr. Vesser, and you know, unfortunately, that's the case.
	I mean, And here's the problem.
	Lawyers have become a fraternity, so it's hard to find good legal representation without them working behind your back for the fraternity.
	It's almost like, you know, your lawyers have become the Freemasons of the court system.
	And I'm not trying to get into all that, but I'm just saying this is what I see through my research, and I think we're in a very precarious situation
	And I think we lost a long time ago, but now they're really flexing and they're using you as an example of this flex to really scare off other people from doing the research that you've done and to put up the information that you've done because they want this to end.
	And I think that Alex Jones was working with the system to undermine your case.
	I think that's why his case happened before yours.
	I think that, you know, to not mention you in a Sandy Hook court proceeding is preposterous.
	I mean, you are on the forefront of Sandy Hook.
	You always have been.
	Your research is immaculate.
	And I think that that was a preemptive strike to your battle that you're facing now.
	And I think they'll go back and say, well, you know, this is precedent, you know.
	You know, and that's very important in a legal sense, if you know what I mean.
	And I hope I'm not bloviating.
	I'm sorry, Dr. No, no, no, no, Mike, you're doing great.
	You're doing great.
	This is absolutely fascinating to stop.
	I think you followed this all very, very closely.
	I'm very impressed.
	Really?
	I followed you.
	I followed your life.
	I'm really interested.
	I've read your books.
	I think your research is impeccable.
	And I think that this is the key to the whole thing is that corporate personhood.
	Going back to Lincoln, who was the first president that got rid of habeas corpus, by the way, which is really where your rights come from.
	And that was done the second time with the Patriot Act, you know.
	But Abraham Lincoln was a lawyer for the railroads that was basically a paid operative.
	If his name was Lincoln, through my research, I think his actual name was Abraham Springsteen.
	Evidence to suggest that.
	But regardless, he was from Illinois.
	Interesting, Obama was from Illinois as well, and the University of Chicago is very important in the neocon communist Bolshevik agenda.
	But the reason Abraham Lincoln was so important was because not only did he bring in corporate personhood as president, he destroyed the South.
	and destroyed what I call the Second American Revolution for constitutional rights.
	And as a southerner, you know, it's the war of northern aggression.
	But anyway, I got family on both sides.
	But sure, but I think I think this was important.
	And, you know, the Rockefellers main thing before oil was railroad money, you know, in corporate personhood was so important to create the artificial person The invisible entity that doesn't exist, you know, and that was done a long time ago and that was done on purpose because they knew there might be a revolt or rebellion against their power.
	And when you take it to the courts, you know, they can say, well, you know, this guy's trying to sue something that doesn't exist.
	But that same thing that doesn't exist has equal rights that a regular human being would have.
	And this is what happened during his administration.
	And then, of course, as I've been into the War of 1812, that was the consolidation of the bar of the British Accredited Registry, which was really England coming back that was totally the Rothschild Bank at that point.
	Captured America after the revolution, and then they lost it again.
	They had to have the Civil War.
	There was another rebellion, but our whole history as Americans has been fighting against the central bank, you know, for those of us in the know, and corporate fiction, legal fiction, as you call it.
	And I know this is a bloviated, long-winded kind of conversation, but It all relates to your case, because at the end of the day, all of this was done to protect these liars, these criminals, from committing genocide on our people and being able to get away with it by claiming that they're legal fiction.
	And this is how they've won!
	Anyway, and by the way, the reason the Alex Jones case was so important was because Alex Jones, what did he say the first time he was deposed?
	He said, and I hear the music, but he said that I'm an entertainer, I'm not a real person.
	Okay, anyway, I heard the music.
	Mike, we'll be right back, and we'll be taking your calls after this break.
	Listen to Revolution Radio at freedomslips.com.
	We'll be right back.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	Unfortunately, this platform for free speech has never been free.
	We need the support of the people.
	It is the people like you, yes, you, that keeps the station in the front lines of the battle against tyranny and oppression.
	Please help support Revolution Radio so free speech will not be silenced in a world that seems to be going deaf to the real truth.
	With your support, we will be able to become an even bigger pillar of light in a dark world.
	Revolution Radio, please.
	I'm on the number one list of supported radio stations on the planet.
	Revolution Radio.
	I just put my wife on top.
	It's gonna start looking fucking really fucking very good.
	I just put my wife on top.
	Man, this fuckin' sucks.
	Join Revolutionary World.
	- Come on, man, I can't even think so. - On the 10th Street. - I'm gonna take this out.
	Your host, Zeng Garcia.
	At freedomstudy.com, the people station. - Even the government admits 9/11 was a conspiracy.
	But did you know that it was an inside job?
	That Osama had nothing to do with it?
	That the Twin Towers were blown apart by a sophisticated arrangement of mini or micro nukes?
	That Building 7 collapsed 7 hours later because of explosives planted in the building?
	Barry Jennings was there.
	He heard them go off and felt himself stepping over dead people.
	The U.S.
	Geological Survey conducted studies of dust gathered from 35 locations in Lower Manhattan and found elements that would not have been there had this not been a nuclear event.
	Ironically, that means the government's own evidence contradicts the government's official position.
	9-11 was brought to us compliments of the CIA, the neocons of the Department of Defense, and the Mossad.
	Don't let yourself be played.
	Read American Nuke on 9-11.
	Available at moonrockbooks.com.
	That's moonrockbooks.com.
	The opinions expressed on this radio station, its programs, and its website by the hosts, guests, and call-in listeners, or chatters, are solely the opinions of the original source who expressed them.
	They do not necessarily represent the opinions of Revolution Radio and freedomslips.com, its staff, or affiliates.
	You're listening to Revolution Radio, freedomslips.com, 100% listener-supported radio, and now we return you to your host.
	Well, Mike, I found all this extremely interesting.
	It was interesting.
	With your concurrence, I'm going to open the line to callers.
	The number is 540-352-4452.
	We're getting a fair amount of background noise from your end, Mike.
	542-352-4452.
	Mike, meanwhile, please proceed.
	3-5-2-4-4-5-2.
	Mike, meanwhile, please proceed. - Jim, we got three colors on. - Oh, I don't see it.
	I don't see it.
	Hang on.
	Okay, very good.
	Hang on.
	Let me find him.
	Yeah, I think that background noise was one of the callers.
	I've been on mute.
	Yeah, John, I think.
	Yeah, hang on.
	Hang on.
	Okay, we got John first.
	John, go ahead.
	Join the conversation.
	Let me eliminate that background noise.
	I apologize.
	I have to work, unfortunately.
	I just wanted to say about your guest you just had on that you're I don't know his name but he's brilliant and he sees everything crystal clear because this is a game between the two parties and I've been trying to say it and until we break that we're never gonna ever get anywhere we're gonna keep on being in the same rut over and over like we have for 50 years or more what an amazing caller I must say just hey
	And also, I wanted to point out, this was the most thing I called about.
	The Alex Jones case was a total setup, just like it was for the Sandy Hook when they sued Remington.
	It's going to allow the victims to go after the gun manufacturers, while Alex Jones just opened up the floodgates for the victims to go after deniers on the interweb.
	If you say it didn't happen, they're going to go after them.
	And that's what Alex Jones did.
	He's a gatekeeper.
	That show trial was a joke.
	Go listen to it, how it was so staged and they were like playing their roles and their parts.
	I've never heard a court hearing ever in my life sound like that.
	What a pathetic joke.
	And dude, you're spot on, Mike, about Alex Jones and Trump.
	I mean, we've been tricked.
	I mean, it's not the first time we've been tricked.
	I mean, let's face it, it happens, you know.
	But until we shatter the left and right paradigm, which Alex Jones tried to do for 20 years, but when Trump came along, he sold out.
	Or he just showed his true cards, one or the other.
	But until we stop that nonsense, we're finished.
	Mike, go ahead, respond to John, who's quite a fan.
	Since there's other callers, I'll go ahead and take the answer off the air.
	No, no, no.
	John, stay here, stay here, stay here, stay here.
	Go ahead, Mike.
	Thanks for the call.
	Yeah.
	Thanks for the call.
	And I appreciate your kind words.
	And, uh, you know, I'm just a regular guy that does research and all this kind of thing.
	And I've been researching this for years, but I'll tell you, uh, going back to your point and I'll get to the Alex Jones thing in a second, but the two party system, uh, look, here's the thing, younger people, and I have a 16 year old son, so I know how they think, uh, younger, the young generation,
	is very aware of the conspiracy, is very much aware of what's being perpetrated now.
	So the political hierarchy knows this through their polling data, which I used to be involved in.
	They know how to ask questions of people.
	And through Facebook alone, you know, you get everybody's opinion and this kind of thing.
	So they're very aware that there is discontent, particularly in the white race.
	I'm not trying to be racial, but I'm just stating a fact that the majority of white people no longer trust this system at all, okay?
	And so what they're doing here is they have to create a fake outsider That represents the sign of the times for the new political scene that's taking place.
	And they're very savvy.
	I mean, after all, they're Hollywood, you know, these people, you know, so Donald Trump, you know, you could say that Ronald Reagan was the first actor that really became president, and he was a total disaster.
	But you could say that Donald Trump really Was the perfect president for the internet age, because he was on The Apprentice.
	He was very media savvy, the way he used Twitter or his handlers used it.
	But here's the key.
	Wilbur Roth was his, you know, connection to the Rothschild Inc, okay, in America.
	When his Taj Mahal went tits up in Atlantic City in the late 80s, It was Wilbur Ross that got the Rothschild Bank to bail him out from total bankruptcy and disaster.
	He would have been done.
	He would have been a bum on the street if it wasn't for the Rothschild Bank.
	And I believe at that point, he became an agent for that banking cartel.
	And let me tell you something else.
	Everybody's complaining about the red behind Joe Biden in that speech.
	Well, guess what?
	Donald Trump always wears the red tie and does the black power fist, which is the communist fist for freedom.
	He never does the Roman salute.
	I'm not recommending that, but I'm saying he always does the communist fist with the red tie, the power tie, as he calls it.
	And this is all garbage.
	Both parties are controlled by the Rothschild banking cartel.
	Why do you think that the Republican Party states are called red states?
	Why do you think they say there will be a red wave?
	All of this is because it doesn't matter which side you vote for, you lose.
	And yeah, 2020 was rigged.
	Yeah, it was rigged.
	It was a landslide.
	I believe Donald Trump won.
	But they've been rigging elections I believe, you know, a whole cloth after Kennedy got his head blown off, you know, for questioning the Levon Affair and not allowing Israel to have nukes, you know?
	That's my opinion on that, but, you know, they're both controlled opposition, so by attacking Donald Trump, you know, by the media attacking him, they give him more press, they give him more, you know, you know, I'm more of a pedestal.
	It helps him.
	He's the outsider.
	He's the, you know, the crazy white guy fighting against the Rothschild banking cartel.
	It's all garbage.
	It's all crisis acting.
	It's all staged.
	And, you know, it'll never change until we bring this system down.
	And the only way to bring it down is to quit consuming And believing its lies, you know, voting at this point does not matter.
	Because, you know, if you go vote, I mean, you know, I mean, go vote.
	I don't care.
	But who are you going to vote for?
	Let me give you an example.
	Hagerman that defeated Liz Cheney or Liz Cheney in Wyoming.
	OK, Dick Cheney's daughter.
	You know, she ran this populist campaign.
	Against Liz Cheney.
	But guess what?
	She was on the committee.
	She was one of the chief advisors to Liz Cheney on her run for Congress in the beginning.
	Her dad was an old political hack for what I call, people called the GOP, I called the GOP, but whatever.
	She comes from a long money history.
	In Wyoming.
	And so basically what happened, Liz Cheney lost to a competitor that was on her staff.
	This is a joke.
	There you go.
	Paul, just keep your mouth shut until I call on you, Paul, or I'm going to give you the boot.
	This is a problem I've had with you forever.
	Brian, give us your thoughts.
	Well, I agree with everything that Mike has said, but I wanted to point out to him this whole corporate thing, this whole
	The system that we have, it goes back to that Rabbi Shabbat and Zevi in 1666, when they heralded his coming, we got the London Fire, we got something called Cestuqv, C-U-S-T-U-Q-U-E-V-U-E, and if you look it up, you'll find the basis of our legal system, which is basically the consciousness of the Antichrist.
	So that's what I had to say.
	Well, thank you, Brian.
	John, did you want to respond to Mike's?
	And I don't agree with all of that, of course, but I'm glad to have your and Mike's opinions about it.
	John, did you want to add more?
	John, are you still with us?
	Paul, go ahead.
	Well, I would first point out that what part of the two word phrase show trial do people not understand?
	OK, show is the only word that needs to be emphasized.
	It's not a trial.
	It wasn't a real trial, just like Kyle Rittenhouse.
	For God's sake, there was a green screen, but they want us to pretend that we never saw that.
	They want us to pretend, oh, don't worry about this glitch in the TV coverage that you're watching.
	Don't pay any attention to that.
	As I've said from the very beginning, almost of my calls to this this show, which, you know, seems to have not made much progress, you know, back and forth with Republicans and Democrats in politics.
	There is no law.
	When we get that through our heads, we can start to win.
	OK, there's only real power.
	The only way this ends is when one group takes power from another throughout history.
	That's all that has ever mattered.
	Civilizations have risen and fallen because of that and no other reason.
	There's no voting.
	Once an establishment like the one that we have now gets a hold of power, it will never let it go.
	Jim, I can't, well, look, you know, you've given evidence that all these things are fake, but somehow you want to believe that the elections are real or that the presidency is real.
	You know, it's not.
	The president is not real.
	The presidency is not real either.
	Nothing could be more obvious.
	Now, just quickly, I just want to read a little bit of this from this great article right now on Renegade Tribune called The Real Truth Behind the Signing of the Magna Carta.
	And there's excerpts from a book.
	The title of the book is A History of Central Banking and the Enslavement of Mankind.
	Not sure when the book is written, but here you go.
	In the year 1207, an enormous sum was levied in taxes on the Christian population of England.
	The Jews also paid a tax, but at a lower rate, and usually on grossly understated income and wealth.
	113 nobles had borrowed money from Jewish moneylenders and the king, and agents had to have their mortgages registered on the treasury rolls.
	As soon as any noble got into financial difficulty, The king would buy the debt from the money lender and then seize the land for himself.
	King John was utterly reckless in this pursuit and depraved and dishonest policy and was moreover, profligate, incompetent and utterly beholden to the Jews.
	This will be the last of the most important paragraph.
	So in 1215, the nobles got together and revolted and forced King John to sign the Magna Carta.
	The document consists of 61 clauses related to the establishment of various legal and constitutional rights, and its principal purpose was to cancel the bonds of the Jewish moneylenders and to abolish usury and the privileged position of the Jews.
	Wow.
	So what do you know?
	1207.
	That goes on.
	Well, anyway, you could fast forward.
	What happened is in 1290, essentially, the righteous King Edward compelled the entire Jewish population of 16,000 plus to leave England forever.
	God, what a great edict that was.
	Said that there was, and of course, this is just one of many expulsions throughout history.
	And essentially he also further ordered, are you ready for this?
	That by November 1st, any Jew that remained after November 1st, 1290, which just happens to be All Saints Day, any Jew that remained was liable to be executed.
	Hmm.
	A little extreme, but Barry Goldwater once said, extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.
	So I don't know.
	That's from where I sit.
	But out here in California, we've got Scott Weiner introducing a bill to decriminalize adult male sex with boys as low as 14.
	So, hey, what a great country, huh, Mike?
	Mike, go ahead.
	Oh, dude.
	This is the, uh, the armpit of the world at this point.
	I mean, this country is the worst place to be in, in my opinion.
	And I think that we are the most, uh, Zionist controlled, Jew controlled.
	That's just what I believe.
	And, uh, and I think this is the most tyrannical country, uh, right now on the face of the earth.
	I think that we are the evil.
	If you want to know the truth, there are good people here, but you know, We're brainwashed.
	You know, the controlled media has done a great job of brainwashing and wiping the brains of most of the people in this country, and even if you had free and fair elections, it wouldn't make any difference because the people are so stupid.
	It wouldn't matter.
	And here's a quick little one, and then I'll cede the floor to other callers or whatever, Yeah.
	There's a little hate hoax controversy in Germany right now, because, of course, Germany has probably got it way worse than we do, seeing as how they lost so badly, quote unquote, lost.
	So there's a Sri Lankan immigrant who's running for some political office and they got a picture of him.
	Of course, he looks black.
	OK, he's a Negro.
	I can't say the N word.
	It would be bad.
	And just the joke of the fact that we got some black guy from the Indian subcontinent or those areas running for political office.
	Well, he faked a hate crime against himself.
	He kept a legend that swastikas and SS signs and other such things were appearing on his door, on his car.
	You know, he bashed his own window.
	The prosecutors investigated and found out that he faked a hate crime against himself.
	So this kind of crap is going on everywhere.
	Mike, I think you'll agree, because I know we're on the same team.
	No non-whites in office, no women in office, no Jews in this country.
	That's my position.
	But of course, I could be an extremist.
	Paul, I want you to stay on.
	The question I have for you and Mike, since you both think that the system is corrupt, the parties make no difference, you talk about somehow defeating them.
	What is supposed to take the place?
	Are you talking about rejecting the Constitution, the idea of the Yeah, I believe the Constitution was a fraudulent document that negated the Articles of Confederation.
	And remember, the only rights you have are all based on amendments that they added on in filthy Delphia when they came up with that document.
	This country was built on white slavery.
	This country was built on indentured servants and it was a, in my opinion, a British Yiddish trick to keep the aristocracy in control and expand territory while they convinced most people that it was a revolution that occurred here.
	I think they've always been in control from the very beginning and I think Anyway, I'm sorry.
	I don't mean to... No, you go ahead.
	Go ahead.
	Go ahead.
	And, you know, and I think that, you know, the Constitution itself does not guarantee you anything.
	I mean, by this time after we left filthy Delphia and, you know, created the new government we have now, it became a corporation.
	Okay?
	It's not a country.
	It's a corporation.
	You are a Right.
	And Mike, I think it's important for you to point out, because you said you know the law, so I'm sure you're familiar with there was at least, there's more than one case, but the one case where they ruled that the Constitution doesn't apply to you.
	Okay.
	It could be more important.
	It only applies to the aristocracy.
	Okay.
	It wasn't written for you and me.
	It was written for the aristocracy.
	It was written for the brotherhood.
	And this country was a total lie from the very beginning.
	And I know this is controversial, but it's the truth, you know?
	No, Jim's had Mike Gaddion, and I always, I would recommend to have him on again every month or two.
	Have Mike Gaddion, Jim, because he goes into this, he goes to source documents, letters between these principles, right?
	And what really went on at the time.
	And when you look at it, and again, I mentioned this many, many times, You know, it's just it's hard to accept.
	That's the problem.
	And I get it, Jim.
	It's you know, nobody wants to cross the bridge of full acceptance of the fraud of everything.
	But I promise you, Jim, the Constitution doesn't apply to you as a U.S.
	citizen.
	The only thing if you were to become an American national and or a state citizen, then you could invoke the common law.
	But, Jim, I'm telling you right now, you don't need the Constitution.
	You don't want the Constitution.
	And it doesn't even apply to you.
	It's an illusion.
	They try to make us believe it.
	I'm sorry, but that's just the way it is.
	I'm trying to get to the idea of what you guys would use to replace.
	Do you, Mike, for example, agree with the content of the first 10 amendments?
	Let me ask, like the first, the second, the fourth, the seventh.
	I mean, listen, I would use the Articles of Confederation, and I would have left it at that, okay?
	And you would have needed no amendments.
	The fact that they scrapped that was the reason why they added the amendments.
	And the only reason that they added the amendments was because, you know, the roofs were getting restless, you know, on the countryside, you know.
	You know, and they had to do something.
	But I would have kept the Articles of Confederation, I think it's a fine piece of work.
	I have no problem with that.
	But I think the Constitution, the fact that all of your rights are through amendment, which literally means, well, we have to amend this document to please you because we don't want you to come here with pitchforks and kill us all, you know, in some storming of the American Bastille.
	I mean, this was the reason for.
	Yeah.
	I was going to say, which is all they really fear.
	That's that's the thing.
	OK, that's all they fear.
	They don't fear elections.
	They don't really fear Us waking up, and they're completely correct when they're talking about certain speech leading to violence or hate speech.
	A lot of people in this movement, the right movement, the alternative right, the white nationalists, whatever you want to call it, they're always talking about the fact that, well, you know, this is kind of what you would call a false allegation, if you will, that speech leads to violence.
	And all I can say is, well, this sort of knowledge and this sort of speech, that's inevitable.
	It should, it better, okay?
	It better or we're doomed.
	All right.
	It's the truth.
	It's the truth of the matter.
	Suppose there were this national uprising.
	Suppose we overthrew the government.
	What do we replace it with?
	How do we go about that?
	Just tell me.
	I want to know.
	Bear us both.
	I would replace it with the Articles of Confederation.
	I think that was a good enough document for me.
	I have no problem with it.
	And I mean, but I could ask the same question to the people that are asking me that question and say, well, you know, it's become so tyrannical now, you know, if you believe in the Democrat is the tyrannical system, uh, you know, if you did take over now, let's just say that you believe, and I'm not saying you do Dr. Fester, I think you do great work, but I'm saying the people that believe that Donald Trump is the real deal.
	Well, if he got reelected, Literally, as Larry McDonald said, former head of the John Birch Society, who was assassinated in the early 80s, he said, the only way to take this country back would be to root out the bureaucracies, which means you would have to root out thousands and thousands of people.
	Now, how would you do that?
	So, the question is always asked of me.
	Well, Mike, how would you do this?
	I have the same question for the people that support this fraudulent system.
	How would you do?
	Can I can I can I just we're almost we're almost done.
	Go ahead.
	Yeah.
	OK, thanks.
	So I'm going to offer what I consider to be the proper perspective.
	It's less important that we work out ahead of time what we might replace it with and how that might go down that there are plenty of educated, intelligent men Who can work these things out?
	But I think it's important to keep in context, you know, the historical backdrop.
	So here's roughly a quote from Ezra Pound.
	I'm sure both of you know Ezra Pound.
	And he said, you will never understand American history or the history of the Occident.
	And I guess he means Occidental as or Western civilization.
	You will never understand American history or the history of the Occident during the last 2000 years.
	Unless you look at one or two problems, namely Jews and usury.
	One or both.
	I should say both.
	So that's supposedly a direct quote from Ezra Pound.
	As long as these people have a direct tap at the source, at the spigot, at the wellspring of our commercial activity, which is the issuance of money at debt, okay, through interest-bearing bonds owed to them, right?
	The government gives them interest-bearing bonds.
	Remember when I told you about 1215 the Magna Carta to cancel the bonds of the Jews?
	As long as that is being used against us and held over us to rule us, then the form of government doesn't really matter.
	We've come to the end.
	I thank you both, Mike and Paul.
	Fascinating conversation.
	I think Trump does have a plan.
	Check out Schedule F. Thanks to all the callers.
	John, Brian, Paul, excellent conversation.
	Mike, you were sensational.
	I can't thank you enough for being here.
	Meanwhile, spend as much time as you can with your friends and family, because literally we do not know how much time we have left.
	Just delighted to have everyone here.
	Paul, you were a model citizen today.
	Thank you for that.
	Mitchell, we're good to go.
	Mike, a final thought.
	Apparently I was ahead of the clock.
	Go ahead, Mike.
	Yeah, I have a final thought and that is That we're not going to answer your question, Jim.
	And thank you so much for having me on.
	It was an honor.
	I'm a big, you know, I love your work, your research, your books.
	It was an honor to be on the show with you.
	You're one of my heroes.
	But let me say this.
	The system is collapsing.
	We don't have to do anything.
	It's going to collapse.
	And all we have to do is survive the collapse and be a part of the recovery.

▲