Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Oct. 6, 2022 - Jim Fetzer

01:31:55

Need to Know News (5 October 2022) with David Scorpio and Carl Herman

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	This is Jim Fetzer in Mass in Wisconsin.
	I'm joined today by two colleagues in California, David Scorpio in the San Diego area and Carl Herman from San Ramon, California.
	We're here to bring you all the news you need to know.
	We begin with a Russian ambassador suggesting the U.S.
	destroyed Nord Stream.
	It's an established fact, in my opinion.
	Warning against provoking a nuclear war.
	These are statements he made last week, which in my judgment have been thoroughly verified.
	In the meanwhile, the United States was the only nation with a motive, the means, and the opportunity.
	The Russian ambassador Wednesday, Anatoly Antonov, published an article addressing comparisons between the current situation in Ukraine to the Cuban Missile Crisis of the 1960s.
	He observed this October will mark 60 years since the Cuban Missile Crisis, when the USSR and the United States were on the verge of a nuclear conflict.
	Look closer at the foreign policy lessons the two great powers have learned from that dramatic time, but which seem to be lost entirely on the Biden administration.
	Recently, he observed, American media outlets and politicians have been warning Russia may soon use nuclear weapons and comparing the situation to that.
	However, the experts are wrong about the comparison, ignorant of history and misinterpreting the current state of affairs.
	He explained how global treaties signed over decades have sunk into oblivion, how the United States has searched for opportunities to achieve global military dominance, how NATO forces have continuously encroached on the Eastern European bloc countries that became independent nations with the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, in spite of making the most solemn pledges not to do so.
	Regarding the decision to wage war on Ukraine, he observed, what did the United States do to ensure the implementation of the Minsk agreements?
	Why did Washington keep silent for eight years and not pull Kiev up when Ukrainians and Russians were killed in the Donbass?
	How could it ignore the terrible tragedy in Odessa when several dozen were burned alive?
	Where were the international humanitarian organizations?
	Why did the administration prioritize human rights, allow such crimes to take place?
	These are all fair questions that have yet to be answered.
	Indeed, the United States cannot answer them because the United States is complicit.
	Today, it's obvious the U.S.
	is directly involved in the military actions of the Kiev regime.
	Washington is openly building up the supply of lethal weapons to Ukraine, providing Ukraine with intelligence.
	They jointly plan military operations against the Russian armed forces.
	Ukrainians are being trained to use NATO military hardware in a fight.
	Russia feels it's being tested to see how long it will remain patient and refrain from responding to blatantly adversarial actions and attacks.
	These are very appropriate.
	Indeed, Vladimir Putin has given a marvelous statement about On the occasion of the four parts of Ukraine being absorbed into the Soviet Union.
	But he also points out, what Putin has explained, that the Russian Federation would only use nuclear weapons in a defensive manner, strictly adhering to its 2014 military doctrine and 2020 basic principles of state policy on nuclear deterrence.
	That would regard them is appropriate, only if the existence of the Russian Federation were at stake, or they will now regard any attacks on these new regions as an attack on Russia itself.
	He criticized American military planners who think a limited nuclear conflict is possible, warning they would rapidly escalate to a global scale.
	Indeed, studies have shown that limited wars are going to have catastrophic effects and bring about the extinction of around one-third of the world's population.
	Today, it's difficult to predict how far Washington is ready to go in exacerbating relations with Russia.
	Will the U.S.
	ruling circles be able to give up their plans aimed at wearing out our country with the prospect of its dismemberment?
	This is very serious.
	The embassy has suggested the United States is responsible, noting U.S.
	politicians have blamed Russia for the pipeline sabotage, which of course is completely moronic.
	Russia invested in the pipeline as its economic leverage with Europe.
	It stands to make vast profits, provide cheap gas.
	It was going to reduce tensions.
	And it can turn it off with a spigot.
	There would be no need to apply explosives to its own pipeline.
	Indeed, they expect to reactivate it once the situation with Ukraine has been resolved.
	Former CIA Director John Brennan, a despicable cat if ever there were one, was peddling this theory even on CNN.
	Perhaps they have a better view from the top of Capitol Hill, but if that's the case, they may also have seen U.S.
	warships activities at the very site of the Russian infrastructure disruption just the day before.
	Or notice drones and choppers flying over there.
	U.S.
	Navy exercises with underwater explosives that have been conducted in the same area some time ago.
	And the promise made by President Biden to bring an end to the Nord Stream 2 project.
	In February 22, he said, if Russia invades, then there will no longer be a Nord Stream 2.
	We will bring it to an end.
	A reporter asked, but how will you do that exactly?
	Since a project is in Germany's control.
	Biden, I promise you, we will be able to do that.
	And we had similar declaration from Victoria Nuland.
	So who benefits from the pipeline's rupture?
	The U.S.
	decided to squeeze out Russia as a competitor using non-market methods and sanctions.
	Decades-long energy trade between Moscow and Europe has been long turned into an eyesore of a Washington strategist unable to offer a decent alternative to reliable and, no less importantly, cheap supplies of gas.
	America's endgame, according to Russia, is to get its allies hooked on an expensive and environmentally unfriendly liquid natural gas needle.
	Chinese and Ukrainian companies that produce and trade LNG, by the way, are suspiciously enough the exact ventures Hunter Biden chose to dive into leading up to the war in Ukraine.
	Scorpio.
	I think he's got it right.
	Yours?
	Well, yeah, the idea that the Russians blew up their own pipeline is absurd when they could just turn it off.
	I mean.
	The amount of bullshit that Americans are supposed to believe is staggering.
	And of course, you know, only a handful of countries could have possibly sabotaged the pipeline.
	You have to have a submarine and highly trained underwater divers that are that are able to use the heliox special mix to go that deep.
	You can't go that deep breathing oxygen and or normal air, I should say.
	So, Obviously, Israel or America did this, you know, and unfortunately, this really represents a huge escalation in this war.
	And, you know, I'm kind of, honestly, I'm a little reticent to support either side in this conflict because there's so many anomalies going on since the beginning of this war.
	And I understand the narrative we're being fed.
	And certainly the West has done all it can to amplify this war and exacerbate it and escalate things.
	There's no question about that beginning in 2014.
	And Zelensky is running a puppet regime for NATO and the West and the international Jewish cabal.
	But Russia has had an odd strategy in this.
	It doesn't seem like they want to wipe things up quickly.
	They want this to drag out.
	You know, they could have, I mean, Russia had air support superiority since the very beginning of this war.
	Why didn't Russia go in there and destroy every major Ukrainian military base at the very beginning of the conflict?
	They certainly have the intelligence to do that.
	I mean, hiding a Russian spy in Ukraine wouldn't exactly be a difficult thing.
	I'm sure they're everywhere.
	So you have to wonder why wasn't that done?
	Why did the Russians amass all these tanks on the border for like three weeks before they actually did anything, giving the Ukrainian army and NATO and everyone else plenty of warning as to what was coming?
	It's just an odd strategy.
	And unfortunately, this whole thing fits into the green agenda.
	The destruction of this pipeline is going to make it so that gas is going to be a difficult thing to come by in Europe.
	They're going to have it, but it's going to be really expensive.
	I don't believe that people are going to be freezing to death and starving to death, but it's going to be very, very expensive, and you're going to hear more and more calls for, we have to do something!
	The whole system doesn't work!
	We need more green technology!
	Even though that can't possibly solve the problem.
	It's the green agenda is designed to fail.
	It only works if you have a greatly reduced population.
	And so there's just a lot of things kind of under the surface here that I'm wondering about.
	And we'll just have to see where this goes.
	But unfortunately, Jim, I think we're heading for a major escalation in this conflict.
	I think that's on the table.
	And just I was hearing this morning that this Zelensky character, the international Jew puppet, he pretty much signed a memorandum declaring that it's forbidden to have direct talks with Russia now.
	They don't want to even talk.
	So that's off the table.
	It's forbidden.
	What a bizarre thing to pass.
	And, uh, this man has tried to escalate things since the very beginning.
	Uh, they, he wanted, you know, air airplanes from NATO at the very beginning.
	I mean, he's, he wanted to join NATO the other day and this guy wants to kick off a world war.
	I don't think there's any question about that.
	Very interesting observation.
	Yes, he declared there could be no peace talks with President Putin.
	In other words, Putin's got to go, which seems consistent with the Jacob Rothschild declaration that Putin is an enemy of the New World Order and that the New World Order cannot move forward without Ukraine.
	So I think those pieces fit together.
	Your other observations, fascinating.
	Carl, yours.
	And Putin's response to that offer was, well, if they change their mind, we can talk.
	Otherwise, we'll just wait for a new president out of Kiev and we'll talk to him.
	There is a lot going on underneath the table and the phrase fog of war is accurate.
	And first, you know, Jim is absolutely right that the evidence is overwhelming that this was a U.S.
	military operation, or at least with the information available to the general public.
	That's the only conclusion.
	We had two European governments come out.
	And just say it.
	You have, let's see, so Antonoff is right.
	We have the radar demonstrating that the U.S.
	military was over that spot, hovering with military helicopters and flyovers 10 times in September.
	You have the seismic data of the two explosions.
	You have Biden's promise, even having no direct political authority, to put an end To Nord Stream, you have Secretary of State Blinken just giddy with the opportunity to sucker the Europeans into U.S.
	liquefied natural gas, and you have the motive to damage Russia and to force the Western European countries to try to win the war quickly if they are to remain in political power.
	The European people are not going to have any of this.
	So either the war wraps up with a victory, or those Western governments are not going to last.
	Let's see.
	So this is, and most importantly, this is all in the context of the U.S.
	being a lying, looting, illegal, rogue state empire.
	Carl B. Herman blogs about any of these shows.
	I document that completely.
	And by the way, the United States nuclear policy, in contrast, we authorize a first strike use if we fear another nation is even a threat.
	To Israel.
	That's where the US has threatened Iran for over a decade to terrorize those people.
	We have to mention also the vulnerability of the global public and all the Americans, all of our listeners, I assume, to be so vulnerable because we are tech specialists.
	Very few of us know how to do much with our hands sufficient to be able to produce a living.
	We're all operating through the use of money.
	So, this is heading towards either the Great Awakening, where we have truth, justice, and technological breakthroughs, or to the Great Reset, where we're just going to have more vicious lies from these psychopaths, and this rogue state empire, and austerity, and the culling of the sheeple.
	I think the American people are so dumbed down that young kids today can't even add or subtract without a calculator.
	It's just ridiculous.
	Meanwhile, Russia has deployed—I mean, what would be the response?—a doomsday nuclear ocean, the largest submarines, which has nuclear drones, as global economic meltdown looms.
	According to multiple media reports, Russia has now officially deployed the world's largest submarine, which can carry up to eight Apocalypse drone torpedoes.
	These superweapons are actually nuclear-armed underwater drones designed to hide off the coast of a targeted nation, detonate their warheads upon receiving satellite commands, and generate Highly destructive radioactive tsunamis that inundate coastal areas, rendering them uninhabitable for 250 or more years, believe it or not.
	The K329 Belgorod submarine is the only of its kind in the world.
	Reportedly, can travel at a speed of 125 miles an hour, underwater of course, using a secret highly advanced propulsion system.
	Officially, the Boseidon drones carry two megaton warheads, but we have data from other sources indicating they can actually make them up to 100 megatons, over 6,000 more powerful than the bomb used on Hiroshima.
	Upon detonation, such a warhead would unleash a truly massive tsunami that could potentially reach heights of 500 feet or more, moving at hundreds of miles an hour before crashing into intended coastal targets.
	The radioactive water would deposit isotopes into everything it touches, rendering the affected areas uninhabitable for at least three centuries.
	That's ten half-lives of cesium-137, for your information.
	Notably, America's most important power centers—governmental, finance, military, and trade—are all located near the coast.
	Just one Boyceton detonation on the East Coast could take out our government, finance, and military hubs with a single detonation.
	Or on out of California, America's largest trade ports and transport hubs.
	Notice some of the characteristics here.
	This submarine is 603 feet long, weighs 30,000 tons, has unlimited range.
	Here its speed is given at 32 knots, but it appears to be overwhelmingly greater.
	The torpedoes are listed at 79 feet with a 70 knot speed, a 2 megaton that we know now can be increased substantially.
	It was built using exotic technology that allows it to achieve almost unimaginable speeds while still operating covertly.
	The Sun reports, the revolutionary design based on the Oscar II-class cruise missile subs has been extensively modified for covert missions, made its giant length to carry devastating nuclear-tipped Poseidon torpedoes guarded by artificial intelligence.
	The nuke can be dropped into the seabed by a sub or ship and zoom past underwater defenses at speeds reported to be between 70 and 125 knots.
	Christopher Ford, a former Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation, told CNN, the torpedo is designed to inundate U.S.
	coastal cities with radioactive tsunamis.
	No country in the world has a defense against radioactive tsunamis, by the way.
	It's now abundantly obvious the U.S.
	played a significant role in destroying the Nord Stream pipelines, attacking civilian infrastructure targets in an effort to isolate Germany from Russia's supply and prolong the war.
	The United States, as Putin pointed out in his speech about the absorption of these new regions of Ukraine as parts of Russia,
	has a long history of using weapons of mass destruction to target civilian infrastructure and civilian populations, including the use of nukes in World War II on Japan and the deliberate destruction of civilian infrastructure in Iraq, which Christopher Busby, by the way, certified going there to investigate the abundance of
	Genetic abnormalities in Fallujah, which he believed initially were caused by depleted uranium in anti-tank missiles, but turned out to be from enriched uranium of a new class of nuclear weapons, the United States was covertly deploying in Iraq.
	The U.S.
	now is resorting to cutting off the energy supply for millions of Europeans.
	As much as half of Germany's industrial operations are facing shutdowns.
	Ammonia production already down 70%.
	Industrial metals smelting down 50%.
	And those are old numbers.
	Putin explained the U.S.
	as a precedent for nations that are faced with threat of destruction to use nuclear weapons in their own defense to strike even civilian targets if needed.
	Putin deems the West to be a satanic cabal of criminals.
	Fuzz Defense Head Medved describes the West as the Antichrist civilization that must be brought to its knees for humanity to survive.
	Thus it appears Putin is preparing—this is Mike Adams now—a large-scale nuclear first strike against the West, though that's contradicted by their official policy, as the ambassador to the United States observed.
	It also appears the destruction of the West is desired by the globalists, who want to see America annihilated so national sovereignty can be wiped from the slate, with the remaining survivors enslaved under globalist control.
	The U.S.
	is scheduled to be reduced to under 100 million survivors by 2030.
	This can be achieved through multiple re-vaccine famine, bio-weapon, power grid sabotage, most quickly achieved through the use of nuclear weapons that target infrastructure such as finance and transport.
	Another important point he makes, Democrats won a nuclear war before the November 8th midterm election, so they won't have to endure defeat at the ballot box.
	They need a nuclear emergency to delay the election and invoke a kind of martial law to push nationwide gun confiscation.
	This is the only way they can remain in power and continue their agenda of child mutilation, transgenderism, surgeries, criminalizing their political opponents through the DOJ and FBI, weaponization, censorship, vote rigging, and money laundering, such as the vast sums for Ukraine.
	We're American soldiers now being told to go on food stamps.
	We also need to understand the criminal cabal running the U.S.
	is at war with Europe, attempting to reduce its industrial base to rubble to make sure America has the last Western factory left standing.
	In addition to destroying the Nord Stream pipelines, which a lying corporate media claim was for some reason carried out by Russia, as absurd as it gets, the Federal Reserve is waging a currency war against the Euro and the Bank of England.
	Rising interest rates are causing a wave of capital to leave Europe and head to the United States.
	The Swiss bank is reportedly on the verge of insolvency.
	Cascading collapse of European banks is a mathematical certainty as U.S.
	banking interest rates continue to rise.
	Realize that if interest rates don't increase, inflation will spiral out of control in the USA.
	If interest rates continue to rise, however, Europe will suffer an economic meltdown.
	It's clear the Fed is using the latter, which is why many observers have concluded the U.S.
	is waging an economic war against Europe.
	At the very same time, it's waging a kinetic and economic war against Russia.
	Finally, In the latest example of insane levels of ignorance and lack of preparedness, a large number of German consumers are reportedly panicked by electric space heaters, following comments by energy minister who recently stated Germany might run out of gas.
	The panic buying reveals many Germans have no idea winter's coming or that the energy crisis had already impacted their country.
	It's as if they have no memory of last year's winter.
	Even worse, they seem to be oblivious about what powers electric space heaters.
	Not only will they be paying a thousand percent or higher increases on their electric bill, but that electricity is largely generated by the very same natural gas that Germany will not have, since the Nord Stream pipelines have been blown up and cannot be repaired this winter.
	Indeed, electric space heaters powered by electricity generated from natural gas is the least efficient use of energy for heat, It will end up taking far more gas to power the electric space heaters than if they just burned natural gas-powered home heating systems in the first place.
	Put another way, hydrocarbons for heat is efficient.
	Hydrocarbons for heat for steam turbines, for grid electricity, for space heater heat, inefficient.
	Meanwhile, nobody in Germany seems to be making this observation, acting as though Germany were some sort of green suicide cult.
	I've heard mentality mass obedience acolytes who can't wait to obliterate their own infrastructure and industry.
	Meanwhile, they seem to have zero knowledge about how heat, electricity, and hydrocarbons actually work.
	An ignorance shared by nearly all socialist greens in Europe and around the world, including, of course, right here in the USA.
	They seem to think electricity comes from nowhere, so using electricity to heat homes is somehow not going to require energy inputs or anything else.
	Scorpio, your thoughts?
	Muted.
	Sorry about that, Jim.
	Great points about the inefficiency of, you know, converting Natural gas to electricity and then using that electricity to heat a home.
	The same thing goes for electric cars.
	You know, the more you convert a power source into something else and then use it for a different purpose, each time you go down the line of that, you lose efficiency.
	So, you know, the idea you're going to plug an electric car into a power plant that's, you know, Powered by gas, it's a lot more less efficient than just simply using gasoline to burn in your car.
	But that's not the point.
	The point is, is they want centralized control of everything.
	They don't want people having their own, you know, individual freedom.
	And as far as the the nuclear aspect goes, I think, you know, a lot of those figures just don't ring true to me.
	Certainly, there are nuclear weapons.
	Exactly what they are and how they function, I don't think it's been entirely revealed to us.
	You know, if nuclear radiation was so deadly, how did they re-inhabit Hiroshima so quickly?
	I mean there was never a point where people didn't live there right even right after the the attack almost so and apparently the newer generation of nuclear weapons are much more efficient in terms of burning all the fuel off and having less radioactivity as a result so Personally, I don't think a real nuclear war is in the cards at all.
	I think it's a great way to scare the public, keep the Goyim cattle, you know, hiding under their bed in a fetal position, afraid.
	But I do think they could expand this war in Ukraine and even light off a few tactical nukes here and there and do some serious destruction.
	But I think the point is, is they're not going to do anything that truly leads to actual chaos.
	They might want to give the appearance of chaos, but it all has to be a controlled demolition.
	Same with the economy.
	They're going to make it look like things are imploding, but it's going to be carefully done.
	They don't want to lose control in this transitional period.
	And so the whole game is to create this big magic show where we believe it's all happening, but it's actually tightly controlled.
	And you know I don't even think a real world war is possible because we are actually dependent upon China and Russia for not only the raw materials to make weaponry but also for the components.
	A lot of the electronic components come from China.
	All kinds of stuff comes from that.
	So I think if there is a so-called world war, it's going to be staged, man.
	It's not, not in the, you know, the fighting won't be fake.
	It will be real, but I think it's going to be controlled at the top and as sort of the, a, a play for us to watch and believe as they transform the world and the country.
	Uh, and I think that's about it.
	Well, those are extremely interesting thoughts.
	I sure would like to think we're not going to have a worldwide nuclear war, Carl.
	Yeah, I like what Scorpio is saying is that what we see is just a very distorted and limited viewpoint of what's going on and I would assert that we have had a war going on and drama that has been going on on this entire And I do think too, going along with what Scorpio was talking about, is that they want total control in the background.
	So they just want the type of fear that'll herd the sheeple into a narrative, they'll create a false flag.
	I think in general they want us afraid because we can't process factual information very accurately at all.
	They want us pushed into that reptilian cortex of the brain.
	So that story of the Russian sub, if that's true, that is a... I appreciate Russian culture very much and their personality.
	That's a very Russian Thing to do, to say, all right, bitches, if you want to play, this is what we got for you.
	If you happen to try, what you're capable of, this is what we're capable of.
	Now, that said, going back into the 90s, it was my understanding as well, is that the US, the UK, NATO, and Israel too, and Russia, all had submarine technology at the time, with about a dozen nuclear missiles that would be launched from the submarines, each one of those missiles would merv multiple independently targeted reentry vehicles.
	And I believe each one of those missiles would merv into eight components.
	So you would have just one ordinary sub would have the capacity So it's multiple layers of destruction that we're facing.
	with nuclear explosive power greater than what the US dropped in World War II.
	So it's multiple layers of destruction that we're facing.
	This is really the possibility of an extinction level event.
	Let's see. - Okay.
	So, Mike Adams talked about the Russians saying the U.S.
	has a history of war crimes in Iraq, and we do.
	Carl B. Herman Blockspott, I wrote a 40-page white paper that Congressman Kucinich used to leverage in the impeachment attempts for Bush and Cheney, and that's part of my documentation, is the war crimes and the crimes against humanity that the U.S.
	engages in ordinary war.
	Such as, why don't you target a water treatment plant?
	Isn't that sweet?
	So Mike Adams is right that this is an endgame, and on the good news side of it is that we could have a breakthrough in any one of a number of areas.
	We could have an economic breakthrough that would Have the people around the world withdraw their consent from the government.
	We could have a breakthrough in the Hunter information, or Pedo Peter, his father, any of that information.
	So it's very exciting times, very dicey, very edge-of-your-seat times.
	And I'm having a hard time seeing how we avoid a nuclear war, so I like the thought that maybe we can't.
	Here is an alternative point of view from the editor of Health Impact News.
	Has World War III begun?
	What U.S.
	corporate media is not reporting about Russia's annexation of these regions of Ukraine?
	If one's only getting their news from the U.S.
	corporate media, they're getting a very slanted view where Russia's in trouble and losing the war.
	Those who don't take the time to read Russia's perspective, as well as others, may be totally unprepared for what's about to happen.
	The recent referendum votes and annexation of certain regions in Ukraine, in action almost the same move Russia took on previous Ukraine regions that began the war back in February, is a perfect example of how the media is reporting this move and how Russia and others are saying things that are very different.
	Obviously, it's prudent to look at both sides, since the non-U.S.
	corporate media are almost all saying Russia clearly has the upper hand over Ukraine and that they are about to start the next phase of this war that some are claiming is the beginning of World War III.
	Before we look at what's being reported, I strongly advise look at the opposing view, what the real purpose of the conflict is, in our previous coverage of a leaked document that came from the Rand Corporation.
	Check this out.
	Russian President Putin signed treaties Friday to annex occupied Ukrainian territory and move the West as blasted as an illegal land grab.
	Putin vowed to protect newly annexed regions of Ukraine by all available means, a renewed threat he made at a Kremlin signing ceremony, where he also railed furiously against the West, accusing the U.S.
	and its allies of seeking Russia's destruction.
	Global leaders, including those from the Group of Seven leading economies, responded with an avalanche of condemnation, and the U.S.
	and the U.K.
	announced more sanctions.
	That's according to U.S.
	news.
	Very typical.
	Let's start with these three facts and see how others reported them.
	First, this was an action the West has blasted as an illegal land grab.
	Which legal system in the West is the article referencing to call it illegal?
	It's not clear, but I think most Americans would agree the U.S.
	Constitution and legal system do not extend to Ukraine.
	Here's what RT, for example, reported.
	The treaties on the accession of the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republic and the Kursan and Zaporizhzhya regions are in full accordance with the Constitution, the country's top court rule.
	The Russian Constitutional Court separately examined the four treaties after they were signed by President Putin.
	The next step is to be ratified by both Houses of Parliament.
	The lower, Duma, plans to vote for ratification, which it has done.
	The DPR and LPR broke off from Ukraine after the 2014 coup in Kiev.
	Kyrsyn and Zaporozhye regions declared independence from Ukraine after they were seized by Russian troops during Roscoe's military operation in the neighboring country, launched in February.
	The four territories voted overwhelmingly in favor of joining Russian referenda held between September 23rd and 27th.
	Kiev, along with Western countries, consider the accession illegal and have vowed not to recognize it.
	So at least from Russia's perspective, the action was done in full accordance with their constitution, according to their highest court.
	Two, Putin railed furiously against the West, accusing the U.S.
	and its allies of seeking Russia's destruction.
	What exactly does this mean?
	It seems to imply Putin is afraid of the U.S.
	destroying Russia militarily, but take some time to actually read what Putin said about the West from Raj News, Russian President Putin in a major speech denounced Western societies as outright Satanism with various supposed genders.
	He said the West had turned away from traditional and religious values, asking the audience if they wanted their children to be offered check exchange operations, which he later said is common in the West.
	Let's answer some very simple questions for ourselves.
	I now want to return to what I said.
	I want to address all citizens of the country, not only those who are here in the hall, all citizens of Russia.
	Do we want to have here in our country in Russia parent number one, number two, number three, instead of mom and dad?
	Have they gone mad out there?
	Do we really want perversions that lead to degradation and extinction to be imposed on children in our schools from the primary grades up?
	To be drummed into them, their various opposed genders, beside women and men?
	To be offered sex change operations?
	Do we want this for our country and our children?
	For us?
	All of this is unacceptable.
	We have a different future.
	Our own future.
	Such a complete denial of man, the overthrow of faith and traditional values, the suppression of freedom, acquiring the features of a reverse religion, outright Satanism.
	In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus Christ announced the false prophets, saying, By their fruits you shall know them.
	And these poisonous fruits are already obvious to people, not only in our country, in all countries, including many in the West itself.
	He was speaking at a ceremony to recognize the annexation.
	It's hardly surprising most liberal U.S.
	corporate media didn't report this.
	They probably knew full well many Americans would actually agree with Putin on these points about cultural moral values.
	Third, global leaders, including those from the group of seven leading economies, responded with an avalanche of condemnation.
	This seems to imply almost every other nation condemns Russia's move, but the full story excludes the most populous countries in the world who did not do that.
	China, India, Brazil abstain from UN vote condemning Russian annexation.
	But the biggest discrepancies by far between what the U.S.
	media has been reporting and what others have been reporting is who has the upper hand in the actual military battles.
	Here's a recent report from RT that actually quotes the corporate media in the United States, suggesting Ukraine may soon run out of supplies from the U.S.
	Washington may not be able to support Ukraine in the conflict against Russia for as long as it takes due to a shortage of the industrial capacity needed to replace munitions and weapons it sends to Kiev, CNBC reported, citing military analysts.
	There is a point where the Ukrainians will need to be cautious about their rate of expenditure and where they prioritize these munitions because there isn't an infinite supply, said Jack Watling, an expert in the Royal United Services Institute in London.
	The problem reportedly stems from the structure of military production in Western nations, especially the United States, tailored for peacetime, which cannot sustain a protracted draw in stockpiles during a major armed conflict.
	For instance, The U.S.
	arms industry can produce about 30,000 rounds per year for 155 howitzers.
	The Ukrainian military consumes that amount in about two weeks.
	Another example is the Javelin shoulder-fired anti-tank missile.
	U.S.
	production stands at about 800 units per year.
	But Washington has already sent some 8,500 to Ukraine.
	Reserves of Himmler's multiple rocket launchers, Stinger anti-aircraft missiles, and M-77 howitzers are running low in the U.S.
	Defense officials and other Western nations arming Ukraine object to the drain of stockpiles intended for their own training and readiness.
	I'm greatly concerned.
	Unless we have new production, which takes months to ramp up, we're not going to have the ability to supply the Ukrainians, said Dave DeRoche, a senior military fellow at the U.S.
	National Defense University.
	Much less, by the way, protect ourselves.
	For example, U.S.
	defense contractor L3Harris Technologies brought back and cannibalized its old radios to get components for new products.
	The move was necessary to meet customer demand.
	CNBC suggests that Kyiv may turn to new suppliers of weapons such as South Korea or have to switch to less capable arms the U.S.
	and its allies would be willing to share.
	What about the reported threats of nuclear strikes frequently mentioned?
	Are these noonday scenarios used to create fear against Russia realistically possible?
	Maybe.
	In times of war, anything is possible.
	But here's what the former Russian President and current Russian Security Council Deputy Chairman Medvedev actually said.
	Russia.
	He said he doesn't believe the U.S.
	and NATO would intervene if Russia launched a nuclear strike in Ukraine over fears of a nuclear apocalypse, despite recent comments from U.S.
	officials.
	Medved, a former Russian president, also re-edited Moscow, believes it has the right to use nuclear weapons if Russia's existence is threatened.
	Let's imagine Russia is forced to use the most incredible weapons against the Ukrainian regime, which has committed large-scale acts of aggression, endangering the very existence of our state.
	I believe NATO will not directly interfere in the conflict, even in this scenario.
	The former Russian president said supplying weapons to Ukraine was just a business for the Western powers.
	Their security themselves is more important than the fate of a dying Ukraine.
	He said U.S.
	and European demagogues are not going to die in a nuclear apocalypse.
	That's why they will swallow the use of any weapon in the current conflict.
	Many in Europe now seem much more aware of opposing views on the Ukraine war and are beginning to ask the question, is saving Ukraine really worth destroying our own economy and livelihood?
	One has to wonder if Americans will ever wake up and start asking the same question.
	The Biden admin continues to send billions in military aid while not addressing the needs of its own citizens, such as telling its own military to apply for food stamps to fight inflation.
	InfoWars published a great article explaining why nobody wants to join the military.
	It's certainly not my intention from anything I've written to imply I'm taking a pro-Russia side to the war in Ukraine.
	I am not.
	I am anti-corporate, media, anti-big tech, and their criminal action depriving Americans of the truth, which has led to many being crippled and killed by the action of big pharma and globalists who run this country.
	If they are purposely hiding the truth and publishing false news about the war in Ukraine, then we need to ask why.
	I close by republishing a commentary, someone who uses the pen name Big Surge.
	First, I'll indulge a brief paragraph.
	I'm a Luddite by nature and never had any sort of social media presence.
	However, when the Russia-Ukraine war began in February, I was alarmed by the amateurish, even clownish levels of analysis that were being amplified by the typical establishment channels.
	Public figures that contravened the collective wisdom, like Colonel Douglas MacGregor or Scott Ritter, were largely ignored.
	It seemed to me the public was being memed into believing a story about cartoonish Russian incompetence, while what I saw was a lethal and locked-in Russian military waging an intelligent war.
	I would freely confess to having Russophilic tendencies like many American Orthodox Christians.
	However, I will also bluntly say, when you've had as much military history as I, you begin to think a certain way.
	I don't claim to be smarter than anyone else.
	I did spend the last 15 years extensively reading subjects to get me a strong base knowledge for the current moment, but it seems to me I simply got lucky picking a hobby that would one day be so relevant.
	In other words, he actually reads and researches rather than believing what we're being told and finds his analysis to be more credible than what we're hearing from the corporate media.
	He has answered the question I posed in the affirmative, yes.
	World War III has begun, is part of what he had to say.
	I've been attempting for several weeks to collect my thoughts, but my efforts were consistently frustrated by the war's stubborn refusal to sit still.
	After a slow attritional grind for much of the summer, events have begun to accelerate, calling to mind a famous quip from Vladimir Lenin, there are decades where nothing happens, and there are weeks where decades haven't.
	This has been one of those weeks.
	It began with a commencement of a referendum for a former Ukrainian airblast to determine whether or not to join the Federation, accompanied by Putin's announcement reservists would be called up.
	Further excitement bubbled in the Baltic with the mysterious destruction of the Nord Stream pipelines.
	Nuclear rumors circulate, all the while the war on the ground continues.
	In all, it's clear we're currently in the transitional period toward a new phase of the war, with higher Russian force deployment, expanded rules of engagement, and greater intensity looming.
	Season two of the special military operation looms, and with it, the winter of Yuri.
	Scorpio, your thoughts?
	Well, a lot to unpack there, Jim.
	This idea that, you know, we have this grand strategy to collapse Europe to save America, that is really insane thinking if that's actually what they're trying to do.
	You know, it's a parasitical way of trying to move forward in the world.
	Certainly not a good idea.
	And, you know, we'll see if Russia has all this high-tech military ability or not, because right now Russia is in retreat for whatever reason.
	I know the Ukrainians have taken high losses, but I'm a little confused as to why Russia is having such trouble at this stage in the war.
	It's a little odd.
	We have to wonder what's really going on here.
	And it's interesting, you know, a lot of people are questioning if this is worth it.
	I mean, why does the borders of Ukraine matter to America at all?
	I mean, Russia could take all of Ukraine back into Russia.
	I'd be okay with that, quite frankly.
	And it's not like if Russia did take Ukraine back, they would just abuse everybody and kill everybody.
	They'd have to manage the country somehow.
	So, you know, the idea that we're going to allow this to keep escalating, to me, it kind of reeks of the same way they got World War Two started.
	We can't let Hitler take any of Poland even though Russia invaded Poland from the east at the same time and and you know we can't allow this kicked off World War Two after the false flag at Pearl Harbor and What was the end result?
	We allowed the Russians to take all of Eastern Europe after the war was over.
	So what was the point?
	I think we're being fed a lot of false narratives about what's really going on here.
	What's really in play to me is the green agenda moving forward, the de-industrialization of Germany.
	and the the pivot of power to the east uh as has been talked about by numerous globalist organizations they want to export the Chinese system worldwide and if you recall right before the Chinese Olympics, Russia and China, Putin and Xi got on stage together and said, "Hey, we're together." They had their arms around each other practically.
	We're together and what's in China's interest is in our interest and vice versa.
	So they made the declaration very publicly that the two countries are closely aligned now.
	So if there is a world war, China's going to get involved in it.
	And the idea that America is just sort of, you know, giving up its stockpile of weapons to help Ukraine is certainly foolish.
	But there's a lot in play here, Jim, a lot of unanswered questions.
	So we'll just have to see how things play out further.
	Yeah, I think that's one of the most disturbing aspects.
	We're not only giving up our stockpile of weapons for self-defense, we've weakened our military with a vax, and we've drained the strategic petroleum reserve just to keep the price of gas down for political purposes.
	This is all utterly irresponsible.
	Carl, your thoughts?
	Well, these are great analyses and great stories.
	To take a step back, as we're seeing corporate media demonize Putin, and as usual, it's all just projection.
	The demons are the ones who are doing the demonizing.
	And let's remind ourselves of Putin's demands for peace.
	All he's doing is he's asking the West, the US, NATO, just to do what they've already agreed to do.
	No NATO for Ukraine.
	And they already agreed not one inch east.
	They've already reneged on that.
	But that's what they've already agreed to.
	And two, for the independence of those regions in eastern Ukraine, which is what those nations all say that they want.
	They want a democracy.
	And if they want to call that first vote was a sham, I'm sure that Putin would be delighted to do it right and to have the true transparent voices and the facts be known, because the people of the eastern Ukraine have been shelled by their neighbors.
	In the Ukrainian government for the last eight and a half years, the artillery has killed about 14,000 people.
	Part of what I enjoy with what we're seeing here is how exposed corporate media is.
	They can't recover from this if The good guys win.
	If we the people win, corporate media is doomed.
	Therefore, I would say, heads up, corporate media is going to be doing more censorship than ever before.
	They are that vulnerable.
	They know that they, the leaders of corporate media, will be tried and convicted.
	as criminals against humanity for the massive deaths associated with the lies that they sell.
	So we're either in the Great Awakening's last stage where the public has the Emperor's New Clothes breakthrough and they see for themselves that the leaders are just virtue signaling liars about everything and they're lying for this evil empire.
	And by evil, I mean evil.
	People are going to be shocked.
	Or corporate media is going to continue to push us into the Great Reset, and we'll be told is that we need these wars for peace.
	And the people will have to go through austerity temporarily forever.
	And to keep people safe, everyone needs to be vaccinated and to have a passport.
	And to protect you from the greatest threat, which is domestic terrorism, you need to have a social credit score to keep people in line so that the government can keep you safe.
	Oh, Carl, you got that exactly right.
	I have no doubt.
	You're right.
	Spot on.
	Meanwhile, Obama privately wrote reporters that Trump would destroy America in eight years in his last days in office.
	Bess Levin writes, as we previously noted around these parts, the biggest criticism of Barack Obama between the years of 2016 and 2020 related his decision not to voice the opinions you know he absolutely had about Donald Trump.
	But I remember so clearly, however, his opinions he had about Joe Biden.
	Never underestimate Joe's ability to fuck things up.
	That's what Obama said.
	That was accurate.
	If someone's going to destroy America, it's going to be Joe Biden, not Donald Trump.
	Meanwhile, Nancy Pelosi wants immigrants to stay in Florida.
	We need them there to pick the crops.
	The southern border is proving to be a sore spot for Democrats, indications that the party is losing its lead with Latino voters, that the slip is related to Biden's policies regarding immigration reform in the border.
	With illegal encounters reaching record highs, along with migrant deaths, you'd think the Democrats would be choosing their words wisely when speaking on the subject.
	However, You would be predictably incorrect.
	You can generally count on the President and Vice President to provide some forehead-slabbing quotes on any topic.
	But now we got a bonehead comment from none other than House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
	So what does she think migrants are for?
	Ronnie McDaniel tweets, Biden said Latinx Americans are worried they'll be vaccinated and deported.
	Jill Biden compared Hispanic Americans to tacos.
	Pelosi says immigrants should be picking crops.
	Democrats are showing Hispanic Americans who they truly are.
	Good only for crop picking?
	Since Kamala Harris told me the impressive border is secure, Democrats have been pelted with reports asking if they believe the same.
	Naturally, Pelosi was asked that question, too.
	Her response, diplomatic and measured at first, saying, we have a responsibility to secure our border.
	We also have a responsibility to recognize the importance of newcomers to our nation.
	But she didn't stop there.
	Saying the best course of action is to have a comprehensive immigration reform.
	The jaw-dropping part of her answer landed in the most blunt way possible, undoubtedly intended for her next remark to land a jab at Ron DeSantis.
	You see in Florida, she said, some of the farmers in Grosse say, why are you shipping these migrants up north?
	We need them to pick our crops down here.
	Pause a moment and ask yourself how the media would have reacted if former President Trump, or any Republican, said that.
	They'd be apoplectic.
	Every liberal pundit would be calling him a racist and demanding a full-on apology tour.
	Here's Pamela Hensley tweeting, Pelosi just talked about the importance of having immigrants pick crops.
	If a Republican had said this racist comment, they'd have been forced to resign on the spot.
	The reaction to the speaker's statement was epic.
	The Federation of American Immigration Reform broke down the reality behind the Democrat platform on immigration, stating, for Democrats, mass immigration checks two boxes.
	One, more future voters.
	Two, cheap foreign labor.
	Reality hits like cold water.
	Now Latinos across the country are coming to the realization Pelosi doesn't see them as anything more than free votes and cheap labor.
	It's not hard to imagine she has probably never even spoken to a working-class Latino who wasn't cleaning one of her mansions.
	The comment from Pelosi illustrates why there are shifting attitudes highlighted by a Republican consultant who stated it's not hard to believe immigrants who have become American citizens are starting to vote Republican when the leader of the Congressional Democratic Party views them only as fruit pickers.
	A recent NBC Telemundo poll shows the shift.
	54% of Latinos prefer Democrats to keep control of Congress versus 33% for Republicans.
	Well, that seems like a wide 21-point lead compared to previous years.
	It paints a pretty interesting picture.
	For example, in 2012, the Democrats enjoyed a 42-point lead.
	In 2018, a 34-point lead.
	lead compared to previous years, it paints a pretty interesting picture.
	For example, in 2012, the Democrats enjoyed a 42-point lead.
	In 2018, a 34-point lead.
	In 2020, a 26-point lead.
	While polls can be inaccurate and what lies in the hearts and minds of voters, some are crystal clear.
	The U.S., for example, surpassed 2 million encounters at our southern border, breaking the record with a 25% from last year.
	Over the last 18 months, 5 million have come across our border from 160 different countries.
	There have been about a million gotaways defined as individuals the Border Patrol could not apprehend.
	What they have been able to arrest are 113 convicted murderers, 770 convicted sexual offenders.
	That's a 2,000% increase in murders from the year prior.
	convicted sexual offenders.
	That's a 2,000% increase in murders from the year prior.
	260% increase in sexual predators from the year before.
	It's no wonder among Latino voters, only 51% have the proof of the job Biden's doing versus 45% who disapprove.
	Lauren Boebert tweets, so Kamala can travel to Seoul but still can't get to the southern border she's supposed to be in charge of?
	Former Bill Clinton had some thoughts on the current border crisis in an interview with Fareed Zakaria on CNN.
	While admitting there is a limit to how many immigrants our nation can absorb, he still managed to take a swipe at the Republican governor of Texas.
	What's happening in Venezuela?
	More than 2 million refugees pouring into first Colombia than nearby countries.
	Has created unprecedented new challenges and meanwhile provides opportunities for stunts like Governor Abbott sending his refugees to someplace he thinks is advocating for a broad-minded policy that it doesn't have to live with.
	I find it interesting he calls the refugees his, as if the issue at the southern border isn't a national issue, but rather a state.
	Perhaps what's most interesting is some of the former president's earlier remarks on illegal immigration.
	During his 1995 State of the Union, President Clinton said of illegal immigration, the jobs they hold might otherwise be held by citizens of legal immigrants.
	The public service they impose burdens on our taxpayers.
	Oh, how the views on illegal immigration have changed in the years since.
	Senator Marsha Blackburn tweets, Bill Clinton, There's a limit to how many migrants any society can take without severe disruption.
	He's right.
	It was over 8,000 crossing the border illegally every day in Biden's America.
	We're way past that limit.
	Scorpio.
	You're muted.
	My apologies, guys.
	You know, it's interesting.
	The issue of Venezuelan refugees is a pretty big deal in South America, too.
	You know, when I was living down there, Venezuelan refugees were not popular at all because they were known to bring violent crime, not just petty crime, but actual violent crime and form gangs and really cause a lot of problems within the neighboring countries.
	So this idea that all Hispanics, which again is not even a real concept, it's an American concept.
	The idea that Hispanics support illegal immigration, it's really not true at all.
	And especially if you look at how things actually work in South America, the Venezuelan immigrants are not welcome.
	They don't want them.
	Peru doesn't want them.
	Ecuador doesn't want them.
	Columbia doesn't want them.
	And so it's okay for us to say we don't want them either.
	Because, um, uh, these are truly desperate people that, uh, there's no end to the amounts that will come in if we let them.
	There's just no end to it.
	And it's amazing where Bill Clinton is becoming the voice of reason.
	That says something.
	Uh, you know, so that's the kind of level of insanity that we've gotten to in this country.
	And you know, gosh, Nancy Pelosi sounding awfully racist, and she's engaging in stereotyping of Hispanics.
	But you know, one of the dirty secrets about, you know, the produce industry in America is, you know, using these immigrants and not even paying the minimum wage.
	And because they're going to send the money back to Mexico or wherever, and that's a good deal for them.
	But It's really, you know, kind of this dirty little secret of underpaying people to do labor that's been going on for a very, very long time.
	And it's part of the reason why we have this problem of all these immigrants is they know they can find work.
	And that could all be stopped very easily if they wanted it, but you know, it's essentially this is coming down to a backdoor route for globalism, and it's also becoming sort of this race to the bottom for wages, because obviously the more people that enter the labor pool, the farther the wages are going to drop.
	It's not, you know, rocket science there.
	So, and then as far as this constant dumping of money into Ukraine, It really does appear that this federal government doesn't really care all that much about this country.
	They don't care about the southern border, but we're really concerned about Ukraine's border.
	I mean, that's insane.
	We're dumping like a billion dollars.
	It seems like every two or three weeks, there's another billion dollars going over there.
	Imagine what that would do for the American people.
	We're not even supposed to think about that.
	You know, there's a homeless crisis in the United States right now.
	The amount of homeless people is absolutely staggering, and there's ways that could be dealt with.
	You know, building like tiny homes and having solutions like that rather than just moving these people around in tents.
	It's disgraceful, quite frankly.
	America needs to focus on its own problems.
	This idea that our leaders are just running around the world worried about, you know, Korea and Ukraine and all these other things.
	It's really insane.
	It's a great way to start off a world war by, you know, poking the bear and Uh, getting China, uh, riled up too.
	I think about Taiwan.
	I think that's none of our business.
	Of course, America helped this situation.
	Uh, we helped the Chinese communists take over by arming them and simultaneously disarming Chiang Kai-shek.
	So, uh, America has a long history of actually aiding and promoting communist regimes, uh, beginning with the, uh, Bolshevik, Bolshevik Revolution.
	So this is nothing new, unfortunately.
	And, um, We need to focus on taking care of our own country.
	This is insane when we see our leaders just gallivanting around the world handing out cash.
	Of course, they're just printing it up, but we need to stick to our problems at home because they're numerous and I think the rest of the world can take care of itself quite well.
	Two comments.
	One, all economists agree you cannot combine a welfare state with open borders.
	It'll lead to economic collapse.
	But if you envision George Soros as the acting president, that's what he wants to bring about the destruction of America.
	Second, Because Trump locked down the borders and developed a robust economy.
	You saw the lowest earning wage earners seeing their wages rise at the highest rate, which is why Erasmus and Poll of 2019 showed 40% of black likely voters who are going to vote for Trump because he actually was doing something benefiting them, unlike the Democrats.
	Carl?
	This will be my last comment, then I got to go to a meeting.
	So that first story, I like that, that Obama propaganda that secretly he told reporters from the beginning.
	That's a nice touch for propaganda.
	For Pelosi's crop picker comment, remember about a month ago, she praised China's democracy.
	So where our opponents are going is that they're going for the open One People's Democratic Party, where they are going to say something like, well, of course, the One People's Party needs workers to plant and pick the crops.
	And because we're going to help you out, you're a migrant and you have no other option, you'll plant and pick for the state.
	But Patriot, the more you plant and pick, the more you get to keep to feed your own family!
	And they'll sell that through corporate media.
	The NBC poll, that's, you know, remember, that's corporate media slime, so you can't trust what they say.
	But what they're going to do is, in the midterm, they're going to say something.
	If they have control over the Dominion voting machines, they're going to warn people and say, election denial is a form of domestic terrorism.
	No, I was just going to add one thought before you have to go, Carl.
	Excellent throughout.
	An ABC poll, which is not sympathetic to Republicans, showed the GOP has a five-point lead nationwide heading into the midterm, and in the battleground states, a 21-point lead.
	So they're going to do everything they can to forestall what looks not just like a red wave, but a red tsunami.
	Your final thought?
	Yeah, they're going to need some sort of a false flag to scare people and blame MAGAs and therefore justify an election win that they'll manipulate the machines to do.
	And then when people complain about it, they'll call them domestic violent extremists.
	And they'll say the time has come.
	Our patience has run out.
	These people need to be prosecuted as terrorists.
	All right.
	Thanks, guys.
	You got it.
	Thanks so much.
	Excellent.
	Meanwhile, the New York Times cemented the myth of a stolen election on the day the Capitol was attacked.
	139 Republicans in the House voted to dispute the Electoral College count.
	By introducing both his overt and covert enemies into continuously defending the integrity of the great election steal, the Donald has masterfully maneuvered Salzburger Slimes, the Piranha Press, and the corrupt and cowardly politician within both parties into swimming into a trap from which they cannot extricate themselves.
	And what do trapped schools of fish instinctively do?
	They start to frantically wiggle and continue to wiggle ever more aggressively.
	Though the situation is hopeless, they will furiously and illogically wiggle until the bitter end, even when halted and dumped on the boat deck itself.
	With ever-increasing numbers of normies now open to the question of voter fraud, with solid Trump allies in position to win governor races in badly defrauded Arizona, badly defrauded Michigan, badly defrauded Pennsylvania,
	The wriggling has got worse than ever with this dramatic front, top, and center package attack on the election-denying Republicans who have since outmuscled the cowards and traitors who now dominate the new Republican Party, the Trump Party.
	The article describes the huge shift.
	Five days after the attack on the Capitol, the Republican members of the House braced for a backlash.
	Two-thirds, 139, had been voting on January 6 to dispute the electoral college count that would seal Donald J. Trump's defeat, just as rioters determined to keep the president in power stormed the chamber.
	One lawmaker after another warned during a conference call that unless Republicans demanded accountability, voters would punish them for inflaming the mob.
	More than 20 months later, the opposite has happened.
	The votes to reject the election results have become a badge of honor within the party.
	In some cases, even a requirement for advancement as doubts about the election have come to define what it means to be a Trump Republican.
	As both Q and Trump himself have posted many times, nothing can stop what is coming.
	And the rotten-headed fish at the slimes all know it.
	Here's Kerry Lake, who appears to be a lock in Arizona.
	Doug Mastriani, though said to be losing, may win Pennsylvania.
	Trapped in the J6 Galapagos net, the fake news has no choice but to keep defending the stolen election, the sting operation actually, of 2020 and the criminal J6 certification of 2021.
	Bloomberg, Trump and his allies are in control of the GOP.
	Democracy and constitutional law be damned.
	The former president and his psychofants are now the mainstream.
	Now about this, nothing can stop what is coming.
	Code language, which we explained after the big steal of 2020.
	It's worth revealing that the time, because the GOP has slowly but surely, since January 6, been transformed into a fighting party, seemingly determined to expose 2020 when the timing is perfect.
	Some excerpt from our press dated November 7, 2020, In November of 2018, Trump's DHS establishment, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Agency to Protect the Integrity of U.S.
	Elections, oversees another sub-agency to develop the products needed to assist DHS working with public safety partners involved in interoperable communications at all levels of government.
	In other words, If something like a blockchain communication embedded in a watermark was indeed added on the ballots, this particular subdivision of the CISA, a subgroup of DHS, would have been tasked with setting up the sting operation by working with private vendors and public safety partners.
	And the name of this subgroup is?
	Drumroll.
	The National Council of Statewide Interoperable Coordinators, official acronym being N-C-S-W-I-C initials, which perfectly match.
	Nothing can stop what is coming.
	Coincidence?
	We shall know sooner or later.
	Meanwhile, CSIS gets up for 2020 election security.
	Protect 2020 is a national call to initiate by CISA, the lead federal agency responsible for national election security, to enhance the integrity and resilience of the nation's election infrastructure and ensure the confidentiality, truthfulness, and accuracy of the free and fair elections necessary for our American way of life.
	My next piece is called Nothing Can Stop What Is Coming.
	Oh, I think you know very well what that catchphrase means, Mr. President.
	Not just a catchphrase, also an acronym.
	Melania's election day dress has been interpreted by some to symbolize a blockchain technology being used to track ballot transactions with expanding codes that cannot be altered, like Bitcoin.
	Obviously, especially in hindsight, the hidden meaning of NCSWIC in January 6th are closely linked, which is interesting because this imposter Joe Biden on several occasions also uttered code language before the 2020 election.
	Much to the confusion of the fake news, Biden on several occasions predicted an epiphany, a sudden manifestation of revelation among Republicans who had turned the putty against Trump.
	Of course, as Biden himself has since acknowledged, this epiphany has gone in the exact opposite direction.
	For those whose Christianity is a bit rusty, the epiphany, the revelation of Christ, is observed by most Christian denominations on, drum roll please, January 6th.
	Coincidence?
	The movie continues.
	Q Post about nothing can stop what's happening 2018-2020.
	One more from 2022.
	Trump just last week added the word believe.
	Biden says Republicans will have epiphany if he is elected.
	He sees crisis facing country as an opportunity to forge unity.
	Biden says Republicans won't have to fear Trump's retribution.
	Biden, the GOP epiphany I predicted didn't come.
	How Joe Biden went from predicting a Republican epiphany to declaring war on the mega party.
	The president's new message came three years after insisting the GOP would free itself from Trump and the far right after the 2020 race.
	Now he wants Democrats to fight that.
	Meanwhile, Trumpy Latino tweets.
	Why are you ignoring the biggest story in history?
	810,000 fraudulent ballots trafficked by over 54,000 mules.
	We know their names, addresses, cell phone numbers.
	We know who gave them ballots and who paid them.
	Why haven't they been arrested?
	Trump won.
	Scorpio, your thoughts?
	You're muted.
	You're muted.
	Oh, I'm sorry, Jim.
	There's a lot of noise here, and I keep muting.
	My apologies.
	You know, it's kind of a mixed bag for me, to be honest.
	I don't think there's going to be a big Republican red wave here, I think.
	First of all, I hope there is, because anything to shake up what's going on now is probably a good thing.
	But I think that the key races are going to be fixed, unfortunately.
	But we'll see, they can only cheat so much.
	They can only put their finger on the scale so hard.
	There is a limit to it, no question about that.
	But I'm just not convinced that even if the Republicans get into office, they're really going to do a whole lot.
	There's so many-- I think the problem is the idea of being conservative revolves around some things that I don't think are really all that important.
	I wish Republicans weren't so on this.
	Abortion thing.
	I mean, personally, I'm against abortion, but it's a loser of an issue for the Republicans.
	It's not going to play well.
	It does not play well.
	All it does is sort of activate the right, or I mean the left-wing base, thinking they're going to have their rights taken away doing abortion.
	Well, personally, I think it resides very well within the states just to have the states decide, because that way you're always going to have some states that allow abortion.
	And you may have to drive a couple hundred miles to get your abortion, but you'll get it.
	So this idea that we're going to... Republicans want to pass a ban on abortion, I think that is just...
	It's counterproductive and it just makes them look bad.
	You're going to throw people in jail for abortions?
	I don't think that looks good.
	Personally, I'm against giving the government any more power.
	There's so much power they have to put people in jail as it is.
	So we'll see.
	We'll see.
	You know, I hope there's some kind of a shift in the politics right now.
	But frankly, it seems to me that the agenda rolls forward no matter who's in office to some degree.
	No one's calling out the Jew.
	No one's saying, hey, 9-11 was fake.
	Nobody is saying COVID was manipulated and that vaccines are dangerous.
	Until we hear some politicians saying things like that, I think to some degree it's all just window dressing and kabuki theater.
	There needs to be more said out in the open.
	I largely agree with all of that, Scorpio.
	That piece actually seems rather dated at this point in time.
	I do believe the January 6th Committee is falling apart.
	I believe all the revelations are convincing more and more people that the election was stolen.
	I do think that basic theme is correct.
	You're 100% correct.
	The idea of having a national ban on abortion is lunacy.
	This is a Democrat's strongest issue, so why should you Incite them to turn out in greater numbers.
	It's a dumb idea.
	So I think you're basically correct, though.
	I hope there is going to be a transition and we're going to stop this nonsense and secure the borders and do a host of other things that the American people need, lest this country continue to turn into a shambles.
	It's a disgrace.
	We have one final story to cover.
	SCOTUS support bottoms out.
	Trust in our nation's highest court is at historic lows.
	According to a recent Gallup poll, faith in one of America's highest and most respected institutions is sitting at an all-time low.
	Only 47% support the judicial branch, down from 53.
	According to Gallup, 47% of U.S.
	adults say they have a great deal or a fair amount of trust in the judicial branch headed by the Supreme Court.
	This represents a 20 percentage point drop from two years ago, including seven points since last year.
	It is now the lowest in Gallup's trend by six points.
	The judicial branch's current tarnished image contrasts with trust levels exceeding two-thirds in most years in Gallup's trend that began in 1972.
	In addition to documenting record low trust in the federal judiciary, the new Gallup poll also found a record time low 70% of Americans saying they approve, a record high 58% saying they disapprove of the job the Supreme Court is doing.
	So, Gallup tweets, American trust in the judicial branch of the federal government has fallen further to a new low of 47%.
	Approval of the job the Supreme Court is doing is also at a record low of 40%.
	Count me also disillusioned with the Supreme Court.
	Here's my petition for a writ of certiorari for the Supreme Court to set right the summary judgment process in Wisconsin for the benefit of citizens of Wisconsin, and actually to implement the Seventh Amendment for all 50 states, which, ironically, the Supreme Court has never done.
	Here is a question my case presented to the court.
	May rules of summary judgment vary throughout the states, allowing the Wisconsin judiciary to conduct and affirm a non-jury trial under the pretense of a summary judgment proceeding, the process of which violates all of the rules of summary judgment in Texas,
	Depriving Wisconsin citizens of their equal rights to a trial by jury and due process under their 7th and 14th Amendment and further allowing a Wisconsin judge to determine the validity of major national events through unsound summary judgment methodology.
	A methodology, I would add, that allows a judge to determine the facts based upon his subjective opinion of what is reasonable and what is not.
	My case was distributed for the conference to be held on the 28th.
	That was last Friday.
	Meanwhile, I had gone through 10 of the 12 stages to reach this point.
	I felt very positive.
	This is a major issue.
	It far transcends my personal case, which simply illustrates Not how it can be abused, but where thousands of other Wisconsin residents have been subjected to the same abuse, and where a retired professor of law explained to me why he liked this idea of incorporating the 7th within the 14th Amendment because a major problem affecting the American judiciary is the abuse of summary judgment.
	Well, get this.
	I also followed it up with an application for a stay because I had been subjected to the taking of my blog, jamesfetzer.org, and the book, Nobody Died at Sandy Hook.
	It was a FEMA drill to prevent To promote gun control under a clearly unlawful process here in Wisconsin, where monetary judgments can only be satisfied by the monetary awards, this was intellectual property.
	It had to be given to a receiver, then take bids to convert it into monetary property.
	But the judge instead just directly gave it to the plaintiff, who doesn't have any interest in marketing it, but only wants us to ensure the public will never have access.
	I submitted originally to Justice Barrett because the United States is divided into circuits.
	She is a judge for the Seventh Circuit in which Wisconsin is found.
	But when she denied it, I had the opportunity to submit to another justice, to Gorsuch, who actually is distributed for a conference on the Seventh.
	So I'll learn that that's the day after tomorrow.
	I'll learn the following Monday what happens to the To the application for a stay, it's been referred to the court.
	But get this ironically, apparently the stay never caught up, that the motion, the petition for a writ of certiorari has now been denied as of Monday.
	And I have no idea what they're going to do about the stay.
	I'm very disillusioned because this was a major opportunity for the Supreme Court to affirm that the Seventh Amendment applies to all 50 of the states, which oddly enough, through peculiarities of history, it's never heretofore done.
	This was a major opportunity for the Supreme Court to set things right, and they finessed.
	I'm disillusioned.
	Scorpio, your thoughts?
	Well, I think the uphill battle you've been facing since the start is that Sandy Hook is kind of radioactive, it's kryptonite, because if any aspect of that case is ever exposed, a house of cards starts to collapse that will be difficult to stop.
	Once America is implicated in just one or the American government, I should say, is implicated in just one of these, you know, dodgy, questionable school shootings and other false flag events like 9/11, the whole thing starts to come apart and it becomes clear that we do have some kind of a captured government that is not working in any way, shape or form, the whole thing starts to come apart and it becomes clear that we do have some kind of a captured government
	So, you know, I'm not surprised that they've turned the case down.
	I wish they had taken it, but I think we do have a Zionist occupied government, a Zog, in play right now.
	And unfortunately, I think the tendrils of that government are going to constrict on us tighter and tighter until people simply refuse to comply with what's going on.
	And so sorry to hear that, Jim.
	Obviously, the case should have been heard, but I just don't think they're going to allow anything in the Sandy Hook realm to be publicized because it's too dangerous.
	Well, it's a curious coincidence, Scorpio, that these Alex Jones trials for damages, which many have described as kangaroo courts, were focusing on Alex Jones until the Supreme Court declines my petition.
	And now Alex Jones has decided he's going back to Austin, Easton.
	He's not going to be in court anymore, leading to speculation Perhaps I'm the only one.
	That the whole idea was to keep it hot on the public attention until the court rendered a decision in my case, in the hope that we'd be adverse, because I was a Sandy Hook skeptic.
	I thought, on the contrary, by affirming the applicability of the Seventh Amendment, where the role of the jury is to determine the facts,
	And the role of the judge is to apply the law in a situation where the judge is determining the facts and applying the law, and basically took all my evidence and declared it to be unreasonable as though it didn't even exist, which included government documents such as that FEMA manual for the exercise, government documents like the FBI Consolidated Crime Report for 2012,
	Showing in the intersection of murder and non-negligent manslaughter for Newtown, the number zero.
	That the final report on the Sandy Hook shooting by Stephen Sedinsky III, the Danbury State's attorney, does not create a causal nexus tying together the alleged shooter with his victims or the weapons he's alleged to have used and therefore is a forensic failure.
	That this individual could never have been convicted in a court of law Would make a difference here, but the judge was able to suppress it all on the basis of the Wisconsin methodology, which is hopelessly inadequate.
	I contrasted it with that in Texas, where in a summary judgment in Texas, you have to take all the defendant's assertions that it was a FEMA drill, nobody died, blah, blah, blah, as true, and then ask the plaintiff whether he agrees.
	And only if he agrees can it then be subjected to a summary judgment because then there are no disputed facts.
	If there are any disputed facts, they have to be sent to a jury for resolution.
	And of course, I'd have the opportunity to present all my evidence instead.
	The judge just ruled that everything I was presenting was unreasonable and made there be no dispute.
	In fact, even including the reports of two, not one, but two forensic document experts who sided with me.
	This is just unbelievable.
	I'm still in shock, Scorpio.
	I teed it up for them to do several important things and they let it go.
	Yeah, it's a miscarriage of justice.
	The whole thing has been, Jim, the idea that you can simply write a book that you didn't force anyone to read or buy.
	That puts you on the hook for over a million dollars is insane.
	And, you know, people have the right to read whatever they want.
	And you know the the book was certainly a fairly obscure book and for that to add up to a million dollars in damages is insane.
	Just like it's insane that they're saying Alex Jones owns 46 million dollars or whatever it is now.
	That's insane.
	I don't even believe that the the trial with Alex Jones is real entirely.
	I think that was a a show And I don't think he's going to pay any money at all.
	I really don't.
	Because he's still going strong.
	They haven't shut him down.
	So we'll see.
	Well, Scorpio, I sought to intervene in all three of those Alex Jones trials, as I sought to intervene in the Remington trial, to point out there's never been a judicial determination that anyone, not even one person, died at Sandy Hook.
	And I was rejected not only by the plaintiffs, the Sandy Hook parents, which was unsurprising, but even by the defendants.
	Remington preferred that I not involved.
	They'd rather shell out $73 million than have me pointing out that there's never been any proof that anybody died at Sandy Hook, that it's never been established through an adversarial judicial process.
	They didn't want that.
	I believe they're expecting the eventual outcome is going to be insurance policies on every gun of every gun owner And they're going to make billions as a consequence.
	And then, of course, the government will have a registry of all legally owned firearms so that it can confiscate at will.
	But of course, the criminals who are performing their crimes using weapons are not going to be subjected to the insurance or the confiscation requirement showing the whole agenda for gun control is grossly misconceived and violative of the right under the Second Amendment to keep and bear arms.
	And when the argument is made that the Founding Fathers didn't have military-style weapons in mind, that's ridiculous.
	The Founding Fathers had military weapons in mind because they wanted to have citizen soldiers who could come to the aid of the nation in a national crisis.
	Or to overthrow a tyrannical government.
	These governments we have now want none of the above.
	In particular, these Democrat administrations that are fostering all this nonsense upon us.
	You're welcome with any final thoughts, Scorpio.
	I really appreciate all the excellent comments you've made today.
	Yeah, and I think this concept about requiring some kind of insurance on guns, I think that's actually a really brilliant idea.
	It's probably something along the lines of what they're going to do because they can't confiscate all the guns.
	It's not possible.
	If you combine the insurance and then instead of having gun control, you have bullet control where you make bullets very expensive or difficult to get.
	Then you've got a de facto gun control.
	So I think they're going to do something along those lines.
	They can't do a gun grab or take people's guns.
	It's not going to happen.
	But they can make bullets very expensive and they can make gun owner insurance very expensive as well.
	And that Remington case is another case that really stinks.
	It seemed like Remington was just eager to pay 73 million dollars and it sets an extremely dangerous precedent.
	So does that mean that If someone hurts themselves with a hammer, we can sue the hammer company?
	Is that what this means?
	I mean, it's a ridiculous precedent, but it's already been set now, and it seemed to me Remington was playing along with it.
	Oh, Scorpio, thank you for the excellence of your commentary.
	I've already thanked Carl.
	I think this discussion is a very suitable conclusion to our program today.
	I'm sorry to say, The Supreme Court has disappointed me.
	I thought I had a perfect case.
	Now I have a real issue.
	It satisfied all four of the conditions and criteria for being accepted by the court.
	That it involved a conflict between the highest courts of two different states, in this case, Wisconsin and Texas.
	That was a publicly significant case because it involves the application of A proper process for summary judgment.
	It was a legally important case because it set up a situation where the Supreme Court could affirm the right to this trial by jury for all 50 cases, all 50 states, but it apparently failed the test of being likely to be accepted by the courts.
	Sad to say they rejected, they denied, And you gotta count me now joining those who have lost faith in the Supreme Court of the United States.
	Thank you for joining us today.
	Spend as much time as you can with your family, your friends, your loved ones.
	We truly do not know how much time we have left.

▲