Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Oct. 22, 2022 - Jim Fetzer

01:56:27

The Perfect Triangle #117 - 21 October 2022 - Guest: Jim Fetzer

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	of globalism and sovereign nations.
	And now, the perfect triangle.
	All right, welcome to the perfect triangle number 117.
	Today is a banner day, a red letter day, because the great James H. Fetzer, the Dean of Conspiracy Studies, they're no longer theories.
	They're all proven right.
	So these are studies, and the retired professor does it unlike anyone else.
	He's at the top of his game.
	And Jim, welcome back to the Perfect Triangle.
	How are you today?
	Oh, I'm just delighted to be with you here, Giuseppe.
	Well, what I've done is pioneered collaborative research by bringing together the best experts to sort out these things, knowing what I do not know may be my greatest strength.
	So I bring in people who are experts in areas where I'm not, and we critique one another's work, more or less, and reduce the probability of mistakes dramatically.
	The books I've done on JFK, the first three, Shattered, The Cover-Up, Discovered, The Autopsy, X-Rays Have Been Altered, A Conceal of His Side, Blowout to the Back of the Head, that there was evidence of a second shot to the head, that they substituted someone else's brain for that of JFK, that the whole movies had been massively edited, there were more frames missing than remained in the extant version of the Zapruder, for example.
	And I've simply continued that.
	Of course, since I was Founded Scholars for 9-11 Truth in December of 2005.
	I brought together hundreds of experts from around the world to collaborate.
	I mean, pilots, physicists, experts in engineering and all branches, civil, structural, electrical, aeronautical.
	I mean, so many aspects of 9-11 turned out to be Physical impossibilities.
	You know, if it's physically impossible, then you're seeing a fantasy.
	And we had that with the lack of impact, no collision effects with Flight 175 and the South Tower.
	We had that with the official trajectory of Flight 77 at the Pentagon, barely skimming the ground at over 400 miles an hour.
	Both are impossible.
	The way the building was designed, Flight 175, with a crumbled external to the building, body seats, luggage falling to the ground, tail, wings, none of it is there.
	We have photographs of the sidewalk and the roadway beneath the facades on both the north and the south tower.
	Those were fantasies, and the question becomes, how was it done?
	And then in relation to the trajectory of Flight 77, because of what's known as ground effect or downdraft, that plane in New York, it was a 767, in Pentagon, 757.
	Could not have got closer than 60 or even 80 feet to the ground, Giuseppe, which is higher than the Pentagon and 71 feet is tall.
	So, I mean, it just goes on and on.
	If you understand physics, immediately you're discovered.
	Take Shanks, for example.
	Two reporters said the eerie aspect of the crash site was there was no evidence of any blatant crash.
	That's because no blatant crash ever cried out loud, I'm telling you.
	So it's a matter of applying scientific principles of reasoning where the key is sorting out the authentic from the inauthentic evidence.
	I've just been lucky to bring together the right people to sort them out, and it's just gone on and on and on with Sandy Hook, Boston Bombing, Orlando, Dallas, Charlottesville, Parkland.
	I've done a huge amount on Las Vegas, so it's not resulted in a book, which I hope will still occur.
	And even on the moon landing, which covers also the death and replacement of Paul McCartney, which I gotta tell you, Giuseppe, turns out to be the most emotion-laden subject I deal with, even more so than the Holocaust!
	Oh, no.
	Yeah.
	We're gonna be on with Blackbird 9 in November to do a Paul-Paul show with him on his Wednesday night show.
	I think it's November 9th.
	Yeah, it is November.
	That'll be great fun.
	I'll show you the proof that they're not the same guy.
	I mean, it's very straightforward when you approach it objectively and scientifically.
	Well, to me, one of the most compelling areas of looking into Paul Fall is when those Italian forensic Ph.D.
	level experts started out to debunk it, and then they believed it.
	Yeah, because they discovered the teeth were different.
	This is typical of Brits.
	Paul had bad teeth and a narrow palate, whereas Fall had good teeth and a normal palate, and Fall, moreover, You know, Paul was engaged to Jane Asher, and you have photographs of them together, and they're virtually the same height, but when it falls with Janie, he towers over her by four inches!
	I mean, they can't possibly be the same person, and yet you would not believe the anxiety, the emotion, the outrage that I've been met with for those insults.
	I totally understand.
	You know what's interesting, Jim, is having been a, you know, a rock musician and a songwriter for 40 years and played to various levels of success, but when the Beatles started out, there was just those four guys and there were like many other English bands in the new incipient rock and roll movement.
	They were in Germany playing like 10, 12 shows, you know, and they really honed their craft.
	How could they have ever imagined to get to the heights they got and then to get sucked into this is so big and involved Tavistock, it involved literally the economies of many of the Western world and the stability of governments that they had to put in a fake guy to keep the whole thing rolling.
	I mean, it's just stunning if you think about how they started to where they got.
	Yeah, you're absolutely right.
	The Crown wanted to keep the money rolling.
	I mean, the UK made fabulous sums off of the Beatles.
	I had a peculiar exchange with Kevin Barrett, where I recently did a show with him.
	We wanted to know about Sandy Hook, and to my astonishment, he still believes Sandy Hook was real, or at least claims he's not convinced one way or the other, which I think is rather preposterous.
	But where Kevin and I had a debate over an article I discovered, Ringo's confession we replaced Paul.
	He didn't like the source.
	But the point is, that's an elementary fallacy.
	It's called the genetic fallacy.
	You can't judge a truth of a content by its source.
	It could be a very clever disinformation technique to publish accurate information in a bad source so people discredit it, just as Kevin did.
	Well, I took it as an hypothesis to be tested on its own, which is the right thing to do.
	Because even if you say bad source makes it probably, or you might suspect that it's phony, until you vindicate, until you try it out and test it, you can't actually arrive at a conclusion and what Ringo said was true.
	So I published a piece entitled Why, Ringo's confession, we replaced Paul, appears to be authentic.
	And in part, I was publishing this debate where Kevin was attacking me for suggesting such a thing because he was so convinced it was a bad source it couldn't be true.
	But I embedded the Italian forensic scientist, who, as you observe, they set out to refute it, to show actually it was the same guy, and they found proving the opposite.
	Yeah, Kevin Barrett's an interesting guy, he's a brilliant guy, but he's like, he, um, I don't know, he just has something, he just really, you know, disrespects you a lot, which bugs me, but on the other hand, you let it roll off your back, and he, you know, he just wants to try and position himself, in my opinion, having, I mean, I supported him for years on Patreon, I admire what he does, but, You know, sometimes you have to look beyond a source, as we both know, and look at the bigger picture.
	And if you factor in, each one of the individual Beatles, after Paul was replaced, have basically come out and told what really happened in some form of interview or something they did, right?
	All three of them separately have said, yeah, that happened.
	They don't, like, go on camera and say it happened, but the way they answered things and the way they did things, And one of the most striking things to me was when the Beatles were inducted into the Hall of Fame, the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, started by Jan Wenner.
	Only John, Ringo, and George went there.
	They didn't have Lyle Paul on there.
	I thought that was very telling as well.
	Maybe it was a different event where Ringo and Paul were there, and Ringo was saying, I'm the only living Beatle, you know, and yet Paul was there.
	Paul's gone on Letterman, you know, and talking with Letterman was saying, well, there's this rumor that you died and were replacing.
	So who is the replacement?
	He says, me.
	See, he's very clever.
	This guy is very clever.
	It's me who replaced him.
	And you know, Letterman thinks that's just hilarious.
	But in fact, he's speaking the truth.
	One of the most interesting stories is when Linda McCartney and he She came up to him to introduce herself.
	She says, I know you're not Paul.
	When did you join the band?
	And then just hit it off.
	And that was a real love affair, just as I believe Paul had a real romance with Jane Asher.
	Right, right.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	Yeah, you could see those, uh, the body language of the original Paul and Asher.
	And again, they look so much different.
	I mean, a guy in his 20s isn't going to suddenly go from 5 foot 6 to 6 feet.
	You know, it just doesn't happen.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, I know.
	I know.
	I dig it, Wes.
	It is ridiculous, but I don't know why Kevin can't see it any more than he can't see Sandy Hook.
	I mean, the evidence is simply over.
	He actually said to me, Giuseppe, and I didn't see it coming.
	I was rather floored.
	He said he thought I'd been an impediment to the truth community because of my continued commitment to Sandy Hook as having been a hoax.
	But my God, I've got all this evidence.
	I've had further confirmation, Giuseppe.
	Well, we now have the, it was archived, someone had the wherewithal to archive, but it's the Connecticut branch of FEMA in Bridgeport had the exercise, which was L-366.
	Which was a mass casualty drill involving children right on their schedule for the 14 December 2012 and they had maps of how to get back and forth from Bridgeport to the Dickinson Drive and they misspelled the name of Dickinson, interestingly, which is also the case on a kindergarten report card that the man who calls himself Leonard Posner, whom I pointed out in court from the beginning is a legal fiction,
	had put up on his Google Plus page.
	Well, can you believe that a kindergarten teacher would misspell the name of Dickinson Drive, which is I-N-S-O-N.
	It was on there as E-N-S-O-N.
	And on the Google map for Bridgeport, it has E-N-S-O-N as well.
	But, I mean, it's just amazing how much...
	And then, as you know, Brian Davidson actually got into the knickers of the Connecticut State Police and got into their photo file and all this fabulous stuff that we presented with you, including looking down the hallway where there's supposed to be two bodies and there's not a speck of blood going into Classroom 10.
	No bodies, no blood, no marks on the wall.
	Except you can see how they had used a drill on the aluminum frame of the windows there to simulate bullets.
	No one with any marksmanship experience or even familiarity with woodwork or metal shop would be taken in just that.
	It's just embarrassingly bad.
	And where they'd remove the metadata from the photographs out of consciousness of guilt.
	Yes, man.
	It is unbelievable, and it's unbelievable for you to have to live through this, Jim, because even if you're completely correct, or even if you're completely wrong, under the First Amendment, under the Fourth Estate journalistic protections, you have every right to research and write a book, even if you're wrong in every category, which you're clearly not.
	I mean, that book is so well-researched, and the fact that you didn't write the book, you managed a bunch of other writers, and you contributed some of it, And you're a Ph.D.
	tenured professor, you know how to play that game as far as representing and vetting information.
	So you put out, and I've read that book many times, a very compelling scenario as to what happened at Sandy Hook.
	I wasn't there.
	I don't know.
	I've looked into a lot of things.
	You know, what's her name?
	Deanna Spignola completely takes the other side.
	I've looked at her information.
	The fact is, is that all of you should have the right in this country under this Constitution to speak your peace, right?
	And Jim, how, you know, you grew up in the golden age of California.
	You really, you know, you believe in America.
	We've talked about this many times.
	How do you feel to be betrayed by this corrupt system when every step of the way you just act for basic judicial process of honoring what the law should do?
	And your case should have been dismissed the first time.
	And now you've spent years of your life, you know, fighting for the truth, which is clearly your right to say what you want.
	And you've gotten, I mean, this is clown world, Jim.
	How do you handle this?
	Well, I'm just happy I just hang in there, and I'm going to continue to do my best.
	I'm actually back in the Wisconsin court to appeal the taking order issued by the judge.
	He had made an initial order.
	I had to hire a new attorney for this.
	It was an expert in financial law, and she made impeccable arguments that in Wisconsin, this is a matter of statute.
	A monetary judgment, in this case, for $450,000 can only be satisfied by a monetary award.
	Well, books and blogs are intellectual property.
	They aren't money.
	So if you want to make a monetary award involving intellectual property, you have to assign it to a receiver who takes bids.
	And to put it up for a bid and see who wants this, to claim this, you know, the book, in the blog, blah, blah.
	And the judge didn't even do that.
	He just gave it directly to Posner, the legal fiction.
	I mean, he's got a team of lawyers who are running this shop.
	And I think it goes all the way back to the Obama administration.
	Absolutely.
	I believe the key player is Eric Holder from beginning to end.
	And I completely agree.
	He's still managing the situation behind the scene to make sure it doesn't get out of hand.
	So that, you know, when I put together all the pieces, when I got this complaint, it was bizarre on his face.
	Because the death certificate over which I was being sued, which Posner himself had put up on his blog, along with that kindergarten report card for his purported son, Noah, who is also a fictioner.
	I mean, I have proven this.
	I mean, there's not any question about it.
	They took his older stepbrother, who is actually the son of Reuben Vabner, his name is Michael, and he used photographs of Michael as a child to be Nova.
	I mean, and then they padded it all kinds of ways.
	And every time I made an effort to expose a hoax, such as my DNA testing, they were going to get a sample, they claim, in the possession of Wayne Carver, the medical, he's not supposed to be the repository of blood samples from a Well, sure.
	That's not where they're kept, exactly.
	Yeah.
	To compare with the Leonard Posner in court, I said, well, look, Your Honor, obviously they're going to match, because Leonard Posner, who's a fake, is actually Ruben Vavner.
	Noah Posner is actually made out of photographs of his son, Michael Vavner, when he was a child.
	So you're going to get a DNA match.
	I said, let's expand it.
	Let's get a DNA test from Leonard Posner, from Noah Posner, but also from Ruben Vavner and from Michael Vavner.
	Well, a judge could have that, man.
	It would have blown the whole case out of the water.
	I'd say, Giuseppe, in the totality of all these cases now I've had, I've probably had 80 motioned before the court, and every single one of those 80 have been decided against me.
	Wow.
	Unbelievable, Jim.
	I mean, this is like worse than a Stalin show trial.
	And what's interesting, if you tie it together, little did you realize, Jim, that Sandy Hook was a pivotal Uh, early foray into the Great Reset, really, if you think about it, because they really wanted to get those guns.
	I don't know if you saw today where Fidel Castro's illegitimate daughter, Fidelita, a.k.a.
	Justin Trudeau, proudly announced that as of today or whenever that, I don't know if it was today or yesterday, The clip was, but you can no longer buy or sell handguns in Canada.
	I mean, my God, did you ever think Canada would turn into a globalist, communist, enslaved nation state?
	I mean, it's unbelievable.
	You know, I was just happy growing up.
	I used to think Canada was a kinder, gentler version of the United States.
	Right.
	More freedom and liberty in Canada than you have in the U.S.
	And today it's the opposite.
	I mean, this Trudeau guy.
	Yes, he is the illegitimate son of Fidel.
	You're absolutely right.
	Yeah.
	And, you know, his father's wife, Fidel, gave birth to Justin Trudeau.
	Exactly right.
	I happen to have a great admiration for Fidel Castro as a great nationalist leader, and I think he did the people of Cuba a lot of good, but of course he was demonized endlessly by America because in nationalizing the holdings of United Fruit and Anaconda Copper, he deprived these big corporations of their profit margin from exploiting the resources of of Cuba, which they were treating in the neocolonialist way, you know, continue to exploit their natural resources, make big profits and give minuscule back.
	I mean, that was, of course, the cause of the revolution in Iran in 1953, when Kermit Roosevelt, who was a cousin of Teddy, engineered the first CIA coup to take out Mossadegh, the democratically elected head of the Iranian government and replace him.
	him with a Shah of Iran who ran a ruthless tyranny.
	I mean, the Shah's police were among the most vicious in the world.
	By the way, use that phrase, Stalin trial.
	Kevin Barrett came to my trial for damages.
	Now, mind you, we got to separate the determination of guilt or innocent, which in my case took place in a form, I would suggest, is inappropriate of a summary judgment.
	And I'll explain this in detail.
	So I'd already been found guilty, just as Alex Jones had already been found guilty.
	So what we're seeing on television are the trials for damages.
	And I had, similarly, a trial for damages, where there were a dozen Madisonians who came in.
	One man and 11 women, all of whom, just send me if you can believe this, claimed under oath they'd never even heard of Alex Jones.
	You think maybe they wanted to be on my court?
	Oh yeah, yeah.
	They never even heard of Alex Jones.
	They projected the image of Noah Bosner up there on the wall of the courthouse.
	The lead woman got real emotional.
	I mean, this is all totally fake and phony.
	But then it appears what's going on in Alex Jones' courtroom is equally fake and phony, only it's being broadcast worldwide as mine was not.
	But Kevin Barrett came to my trial for damages and wrote a brilliant piece.
	I mean, when you want to capture a sense of what went on in my case, read his, The Legal Vinching of a Truth Seeker, Jim Fetzer's Stalinist-Style Show Trial on UNZ.com.
	Really brilliant, brilliant piece.
	Wow.
	Yeah, no, I did read it, Jim, and he did, you know, that's where Kevin Barrett really, really shines is when he puts away his petty snarkiness and just uses his formidable intellect to get to the root of things.
	And I mean, when you think about what you went through and you're watching what Alex Jones is going through now.
	What do you make of the comparison between the two?
	What similarities do you draw and what differences do you draw?
	Well, let me mention, I sought to intervene in all three of Alex Jones' trials just as I sought to intervene in the Remington trial.
	In other words, I formally moved to be admitted as a party For the sake of emphasizing that there's never been a judicial determination that anybody died at Sandy Hook.
	And what was surprising about all four of those adverts is not only was I opposed by the parents, which was unsurprising.
	I mean, I consider them to be frauds who are, you know, money grubbers are trying to milk this for all it's worth.
	And it appears it's worth a lot.
	I mean, if Alex Jones can be Hit for a billion dollars for an opinion, an opinion that he didn't even offer all that often.
	Sandy Hook actually turns out to have been a loser for him most of the time.
	He was endorsing that it was real.
	Less than 1% of his shows were ever devoted to it, and most of that was affirming that it had been real.
	You know, I made an apology for hurting feelings, but that's the bottom line there, Giuseppe.
	Can you be sued in the United States for hurting someone's feelings because you have an opinion that they don't like?
	I mean, this is what appears to be the case.
	And of course they were using Alex as a piñata to beat up on and make it very clear that if you step out of line by challenging the official narrative coming from the United States government, you're liable to wind up like Alex.
	And what a perfect example, since he's so wealthy, so famous, he's so influential.
	That if they can take down Alex in a tune of a billion bucks for having an opinion that Sandy Hook wasn't real, my God, what can they do to the rest of us, right?
	So I sought to interview him in all four of those cases.
	Now, Remington, I was pointing out this, never been determined, you know, judicially, that anybody died.
	You'd think the defendants would leap on that.
	In the Remington trial, the insurers were willing to shell out $73 million and have me come in and explain that there'd never been this determination.
	$73 million.
	You might ask, why in the world would they do that?
	I'm convinced it was an investment.
	That they think the outcome of all these trials is going to be insurance for every legally owned gun in the United States.
	And if they're insuring every legally owned gun in the United States, they're going to make hundreds of billions of dollars in insurance money.
	It's going to go on forever.
	So 73 mils shelled out one time.
	That was small change for them.
	I'm convinced of that.
	Just happy.
	Now, in the Alex Jones, I sought to intervene in all three, and not only was I opposed by the parents, whom, as I say, it was unsurprising, I was opposed by the plaintiff.
	Alex actually, during a video deposition in Connecticut, declared he'd never even read Nobody Died at Sandy Hook, which is ludicrous.
	I mean, here, I brought together 13 experts, including six PhDs.
	We established this school had been closed by 2008.
	I now have reason to believe it was closed even earlier, that there were no students or teachers there, and that had been a FEMA drill.
	Representatives mass murdered to promote gun control, where we even had the FEMA manual, and the events on the ground correspond, and I documented all that in the book.
	They had, for example, a portable sign saying everyone must check in.
	Well, right in the manual, it says everyone must check in with a controller upon arrival so they can be paid.
	So all this is paid.
	All this is done with confidentiality.
	Listen, Giuseppe.
	My best take is the whole community was in on this.
	It was yours in the planning.
	They actually held auditions for who would play the various parts.
	They were given non-disclosure agreements.
	They were given financial benefits, including Not paying your taxes.
	So you got all these participants, and then the community got big bucks.
	I'm convinced the community got in excess of a hundred million taxpayer dollars for agreeing to do this.
	Now, Sophia Smallstorm was the first to point out this was a capstone event involving the whole community.
	She got it absolutely right.
	Because the research, which I continue to carry on to this day, has confirmed these details and aspects.
	And it's interesting, on December 31st, a lot of those nondisclosure agreements are going to expire.
	And the question becomes, is anyone going to not renew?
	They have financial incentives to renew, including not paying taxes, as I say.
	But the American people caught up with this.
	It began as long ago as 2006, Giuseppe.
	I'll tell you, the planning for this began as long ago as 2006, when Bush and Cheney were in office.
	I keep asking where was Eric Holder at the time, because I'm convinced he, in 1995, At a Democratic Women's Convention held in Washington, D.C., was talking about the necessity to brainwash the American people to change their attitude toward guns.
	But why should we change our attitude toward guns?
	I mean, the Founding Fathers were very clear in their mind that we needed to have a nation of citizen soldiers who could come to the aid of the country if we were invaded by foreigners or if we were beset with a tyrannical government.
	And while some want to argue The Founding Fathers didn't have military-style weapons in mind.
	In a sense, that's right.
	What they had in mind were military weapons themselves.
	They wanted citizen-soldiers.
	I mean, how could we have defeated the British at Lexington and Concord if we didn't have citizen-soldiers who were armed with the best military weapons of the time, which were muskets and rifles, you know, with powder and all that bit.
	Say, arguments against gun control are just ridiculous and invariably deceptive.
	They suppress that Americans use guns for defensive purposes to protect themselves from criminals millions of times every year, saving an estimated 200,000 lives.
	Now, if you put together how many people died from gun violence over the years, it's around 70,000, maybe 80.
	Well, Three times that many or more are actually having their lives saved by having guns to defend themselves.
	Most murders in the US, by the way, just happen to be armed with guns or with bare hands, people strangling or beating each other.
	And the overwhelming majority of gun violence is with handguns, not with rifles.
	They're used less than 5% of the time.
	So demonizing, see, they think the AR-15 looks scary.
	Well, the AR-15 is the most, it's lightweight, it's versatile, it's all-purpose, it's an ideal weapon.
	The government wants to take it away because that's the weapon that civilians could use most effectively against a tyrannical government.
	It's like Mao said.
	The party must command the gun, so the guns cannot command the party.
	Which is exactly what the founding fathers, because they knew the banksters, the globalists of the day, were going to eventually infiltrate the country, and they wanted the citizenry to be able to fight against that.
	That's the whole point of the Second Amendment, and it's so accurate.
	Well, Jim, we've reached the bottom of our music break.
	I chose this one because of what you've gone through.
	You've put up again and again with lies, and Three Dog Night made this song famous.
	But the man who wrote it, Rod Argus, I feel did a better version.
	So in honor of everything you're going through, Jim, here's the song, Liar.
	I won't ever leave, but you want me to but you want me to stay.
	Nothing you could do that could turn me away.
	Hanging on everywhere, believing the things I heard from being a fool.
	You've taken my life, so take my soul.
	If that's what you say, then I'll believe you.
	I want to be with you.
	As long as you want me to, I won't move away.
	Think about what you said.
	Liar! Liar! Liar!
	Liar! Liar! Liar! Liar!
	When I seen all Music
	May I see no night, may I see no day If I ever leave, will you want me to stay?
	You can't believe in me, I won't believe it I won't let you go That's what you said, that's what you said That's what you said
	Music Music Music Music Music Music
	Music Music Music Music Music Music Music Music
	Liar! Liar! Liar! Liar! Liar! Liar! Liar! Liar!
	you are listening to the perfect triangle with your host giuseppe mcg man I'm going to go.
	Liar! Liar!
	Okay, welcome back to the great, great James Fetzer.
	And we're discussing the egregious kangaroo court-like, Cheka-like, Stalin show trial-like ridiculousness of the decisions against Jim, who, number one, had the First Amendment on his side, speaking freely.
	Number two, had the journalistic fourth estate protections.
	But none of that mattered, Jim.
	And because of our friendship, I've pretty much known every step of the way You know, that you were dealing with this with thoughtful and intelligent integrity, and you were trying to find a lawyer who would work with you and get your message across.
	But you contrast that with what is going on with Alex Jones, who has enough money to buy the best lawyers money can buy, and it seems like he's just hiring one incompetent boob after another, and who literally And kind of through the trial when he accidentally emailed a whole bunch of private correspondence between Alex Jones and other instances of just absolute incompetence, legal incompetence.
	And Alex Jones just kind of like seems to be going along with it.
	Okay, no big deal.
	But this is his life.
	The guy's built an empire and it's all going to be taken from him.
	If I weren't in on it, I would be fighting to the nail and I'd have the best lawyers money can buy.
	So what's your take on this incompetence of Alex Jones and his legal representation every step of the way?
	Well, I'd like to contrast my case with his.
	In my case, I was systematically denied my evidence.
	I mean, I had a mountain of evidence.
	I received a complaint that was a legal absurdity because it claimed that a death certificate that was attached to the complaint that a file number of town and state certification was not materially different from the one I had published.
	That the guy who calls himself Podner had made available that had no file number, no town or state, and those are, of course, material differences.
	So the case was born in a legal absurdity.
	Now, I thought I had this massive evidence published in a book, blah, blah, blah, to introduce.
	I thought it would be valuable to make it available to the public.
	I did a little research about summary judgment.
	It turns out that in a summary judgment, you have to take the defendant's position to be true.
	And then you ask the plaintiff who's winging the lawsuit whether he agrees, and only if he agrees does it go forward as just a matter of applying the law because there are no disputed facts.
	Now, if there are any disputed facts, it has to be sent to a jury for trial.
	Juries decide the facts.
	Judges apply the law.
	Well, imagine when we had the very first scheduling conference.
	I've not been in court, but you've got everybody on the line.
	And he's declaring that while he understands my theory, because I'd laid it out in my answer, which began, assuming the plaintiff to be a real person, because by the time I get to the end, I'm explaining this isn't a real person.
	In my opinion, this is Ruben Vabner being presented as a Leonard Posner.
	I mean, that's already in my original answer just said.
	Yeah, exactly.
	The court didn't know my position here, and of course I outlined all the evidence.
	There's been a FEMA drill, blah, blah, blah, citing some of the docs, blah, blah, blah.
	So imagine my astonishment when at the first scheduling conference, now we've not even set foot in a courtroom, the scheduling conference, he declares that, well he understands my position, that Whether or not Sandy Hook occurred is not relevant to the accuracy of the truthfulness of the death certificate.
	And get this, Giuseppe, the death certificate says that a decedent Noah Posner died at Sandy Hook Elementary on 14 December 2012 of multiple gunshot wounds.
	How could it not be relevant?
	To the truth or accuracy, I was dumbfounded.
	I didn't have a legal counsel.
	There were others there who did have legal counsel, and I know at least one of them was simply floored and felt that the whole thing was, shall we say, not kosher.
	Then, a next move to deprive me of my legal rights was that I was submitting counterclaims for a fraud upon the court, an abusive process.
	This was using the court for an improper purpose.
	It falls in the category of a slap suit, a strategic lawsuit against public participation.
	They're illegal in some 32 states.
	Well, you're punishing somebody for exposing things the government doesn't want to be exposed, which most certainly was the case here.
	Also for fraud and theft by deception, because all these Sandy Hook parents were taking millions of dollars from sympathetic but gullible Americans on the false premise that they'd actually lost children at Sandy Hook.
	And then third, Fraud upon the court because this party would come under the name of Leonard Posner was in fact not Leonard Posner.
	So the judge bifurcated the case.
	See, I should have had discovery on all those issues.
	And who knows what all would have emerged from the discovery related to the, call it the case in chief, the original suit.
	But he said, no, we'll decide the first and then we'll turn to your counterclaims.
	And of course, we would never get there.
	The whole time, of course, My status as a journalist was hanging in the balance.
	I actually gave the court a seven or eight page document about my background as a journalist, you know, multiple blogs, all these radio shows, my publications, that even in cases I'd been paid for my reporting and blah, blah, blah.
	I don't think there's any standard by which I didn't qualify as a journalist and even The Posner attorney, whose name is Jake Zimmerman, was saying, Your Honor, you know, we'd like to have a decision on this, because if I'm a journalist and they can only find me at fault if I've been negligent, in fact, they were never able to find I'd been negligent,
	Well, I conceded that a couple of the reasons why I believed the death certificate was fake were mistaken when I learned the way they compose these death certificates in Canada.
	They're three different sections, three different authors.
	They got three different type fonts and all that, which I'd been unaware of.
	Nevertheless, my conclusion was true, which by the way, I'm not allowed to reaffirm by.
	I'm under a permanent injunction, Giuseppe, that I cannot reaffirm.
	So I'm merely describing the content of the- Right, right.
	Yeah, what I was arguing in the case.
	He never ruled on my status as a journalist, even though I gave him, before the oral hearing began, a seven or eight page document.
	You can find it on my blog at jameshfetzer.org, Why the Sandy Hook Posner vs. Fetzer Lawsuit Matters.
	You'll find the layout.
	It's really comprehensive for an overview of what was going on.
	Then, in addition, I secured the reports of two forensic document experts who substantiated me all the way.
	By this point, there were four different versions of the death certificate for the same decedent.
	Every one of the four was different.
	And the two forensic document experts, and this is their report now, was they were all four of them were fake!
	All four of them were fake!
	I thought I had a slam-dunk case.
	I mean, how could I be found guilty of defamation for declaring a death certificate as fake when I had two forensic documents who agreed that I was correct?
	That's how you decide the authenticity of death certificates.
	You go to the expert, and they did not have an expert to rebut me.
	But the judge just set it aside, saying it wasn't helpful.
	So he went ahead and found me guilty of liability in spite of the massive evidence I had that I was not Guilty that I committed no such offense.
	And it took me a good while.
	I did appeal this to the Court of Appeals for the 4th District.
	And that was illuminating in the following way.
	The Fourth District said, and I got to admit at the time I didn't fully appreciate what was going on there, just said it looked ridiculous to me.
	They said it's reasonable to believe Adam Lunds, they shot his mom, then went to Sandy Hook, shot 20 kids and six adults.
	In the consecutive paragraph, they said it's unreasonable to believe it was a FEMA drill where the school was closed and no students were there and blah, blah, blah.
	It turns out that in Wisconsin, they have a peculiar summary judgment process that allows a judge to exercise a subjective judgment about what's reasonable and what's not.
	And if he finds something unreasonable, he can set it aside as though it didn't even exist.
	And that's what happened to me.
	He just decimated my case by saying his side is unreasonable.
	Every argument I had was unreasonable!
	Unbelievable.
	It was just that.
	And then the Court of Appeals upheld it, and the Wisconsin Supreme Court declined to review it, meaning they agreed with the lower court.
	And it took me a long time to sort out.
	That meant what I had been subjected to was an improper summary judgment protocol because it violated my 7th Amendment right to a trial by a jury of the disputed facts because it enabled the judge to do away with disputed facts and find there to be no disputed facts in a case where the facts were massively disputed.
	I doubt you'll ever find a case where the two parties are greater dispute than I.
	Which led me to submit to the United States Supreme Court.
	Now, in the meanwhile, this Alex Jones stuff was percolating in the background, and they were trying to figure out a way to collect on the 450.
	And by the way, because I tried to find an impeachment witness to expose that it hadn't been Leonard Posner, but Reuben Babner, When I shared what I thought I was entitled to do, a video deposition, with a potential witness, who happened to be Wolfgang Halberg, the judge came down on me like a hammer and awarded, as a punishment for what he said was my contempt of court, another lawyer's fees, which isn't even done in Wisconsin.
	The lawyer's fees, which added even more than the $650 Thousand more!
	So I have this lien of 1.1 million hanging over me.
	So I go to the U.S.
	Supreme Court thinking I got a cast-iron case.
	The way in which summary judgment is in Wisconsin is anomalous.
	It differs from Texas, for example.
	My case would have been thrown out in Texas or sent to a jury, just as you implied earlier.
	That would have been a proper disposition.
	I would have had the opportunity to introduce witnesses, documents, testimony, the whole bit.
	That would have been a FEMA drill.
	That was what I was after.
	But the Supreme Court, after, you know, taking it under advisement, it made it all the way to conference, which is like through 10 of the 12 steps it takes to actually be heard, declined to hear my petition.
	I've had feedback.
	That it's the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court who was responsible for its rejection, that he's the guy who handles Sandy Hook.
	And I dare say we had this experience with the Chief Justice before with the Texas case over the election where the four states, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia, Pennsylvania, were before the court for massive violations of their own laws about how delegates are decided and votes are counted.
	And it was the Chief Justice, again, who turned it down.
	So I've been forced to conclude that the Chief Justice, John Roberts, is compromised.
	I say that with great reluctance, but I've been forced to that conclusion.
	Now, meanwhile, this Alex Jones stuff was percolating.
	I sought to enter in all four cases.
	As I said, I was rejected from all four.
	That case, like all the others, was decided on procedural ground, either by stipulation, by assumption, in the case of Alex Jones, by default.
	The judge, Barbara Bellis in Connecticut, declared that Alex had failed to conform to the discovery.
	Robert Barnes said he was in the courtroom, he was asking everyone, what had Alex Jones not provided?
	No one could answer the question.
	Alex had provided thousands of documents, They had all the hours he'd ever done on the air about Sandy Hook.
	When Barnes was in there, he said it was unlike any other courtroom he'd ever been in.
	This is the first now.
	This is actually the one in Texas.
	But I have comments to make about what was going on in Connecticut, where we've been through two of the three, but there's one to go.
	And he said it was unlike any courtroom he'd ever experienced before.
	There were three cameras rolling.
	One of them was set on the jury, and it looked to him like it was a made-for-TV movie.
	And I think he got it right.
	It's a made-for-TV movie.
	I also have had feedback from sources I regard as highly reliable that Alex will never shell out a nickel over any of this, and it's all political theater, and it's all massive stun.
	Another fraud on the American people.
	Robert Barnes has actually gone through an inventory of the legal rights of Alex Jones that have been violated in these cases and, you know, he's spot on.
	I mean, this whole thing is fraudulent.
	Fake trial of a fake case over a fake event that's issuing fake liability.
	I mean, the whole thing is fraudulent.
	And I say, if this is what the United States has come to, we've already witnessed a politicalization of the FBI, the politicalization of the Department of Justice.
	That's characteristic of third world countries.
	Banana Republic.
	What has distinguished the United States in the past have been our adherence to the rule of law, equal justice under the law.
	No matter who you are, you're going to get equal application of the law enshrined in the 14th Amendment, which, of course, includes a seven.
	I mean, this was another reason they should have taken my case just that.
	It's a peculiarity of history that, well, the Supreme Court has ruled that the other nine of the first 10 amendments apply to all 50 states.
	They've never made that ruling about the seven.
	Yeah, I was really astonished when during the taking, the taking where they are going after my blog and the book, they made the argument when I was claiming that I had benign my right to a trial by jury that the Seventh Amendment doesn't apply to the states.
	So I did research and Astonishingly, they turned out to be right, although there is a Supreme Court ruling about Puerto Rico, which is only a territory, saying the Seventh Amendment does apply to Puerto Rico as a territory, therefore, one gets reasonably inferred applies to all 50 states.
	I gave them the opportunity to make that ruling, to not only clean up summary judgment in Wisconsin, which I've now been told by a colleague who resides in Massachusetts, that they have a similar summary judgment, Well, this is two wrongs not making a right.
	I mean, these deprive the defendant of his right to a trial by jury.
	The Supreme Court could have cleaned it up, affirmed it for all 50 states.
	It would have been a historic case, and they should have done it.
	It's like the interaction between a book and a reader.
	You have a high-quality book, but you may have a reader who doesn't appreciate it, and that's a shortcoming of the reader.
	Here, this is a high-quality case, and the Supreme Court ought to have taken it.
	And when you have a divergence there, it requires an explanation.
	This case, as I argued in my appeal when I got shot down, By challenging the order to take my blog and the book.
	That was all improper, as I said, in violation of the statutes of Wisconsin.
	It wasn't money.
	It wasn't given to a receiver to take bids.
	And would you believe that the timing was exquisite, Jess Abbey?
	On the 27th of July, I was publishing about Alex Jones, you know, calling this a kangaroo court and publishing stuff showing Sandy Hook was a hoax.
	On the 28th, they began talking about Other Sandy Hook skeptics, Sophia Smallstorm, James Tracy, Wolfgang Halbig and me, they had a producer sitting in the stand read a message from Paul Joseph Watson to Alex Jones saying, we got to stay as far as possible from that batshit crazy Fetzer.
	Well, if anyone wanted to learn what that batshit crazy Fetzer had to say about Sandy Hook, they couldn't do it because they'd taken my blog and directed it to the documents about the taking.
	I mean, that's what they did.
	And by the way, that's another flaw.
	There's something, a doctrine known as judicial estoppel, which says that if a plaintiff brings a case on one set of criteria, in this case the book was defamatory, damaging to him, but then tries to capitalize on the same facts to benefit himself, as by taking the book, that he's a stop from doing it.
	He can't do that.
	Right.
	It's hypocritical, right?
	It's benefiting from something.
	In fact, He could not even remove the three defamatory sentences in the book and recycle it without violating the copyright.
	A common law copyright entitlement to the book.
	I didn't believe that was the case, but the judge went ahead and ruled they did.
	Now, if I had the book and I could publish a redacted version with just blacking out those three sentences, Giuseppe would sell like hot cakes.
	I could probably pay off $450,000 in a couple of years.
	I mean, it would sell a lot of copies.
	That's right.
	It wouldn't even deprive me of the right to To, you know, pay off the indebtedness as though it's going to hang in perpetuity over my head.
	And then they took the blog.
	Well, I had a backup blog, you know, in the works, so I was able to put it up.
	Now, you've got to get the H in there, JamesHFetzer.org.
	If you go to JamesFetzer.org you'll find the documents I'm talking about.
	But this whole thing is a sham.
	I went to the Supreme Court.
	Appealing this impropriety, and I argued it would be futile for me to appeal it in Wisconsin because they were ruling against me up and down.
	Because I was already there, I had a shot at it.
	Now what happened was that because I'm in the Seventh Circuit and Amy Coney Barrett has responsibility for the Seventh Circuit, went to her initially.
	Amy turned it down.
	But then under Supreme Court rules, you have the right to send it to another justice.
	I sent it to Neil Gorsuch, and Neil Gorsuch sent it to Contras.
	Now, I elaborated in that appeal why the Seventh Amendment was also involved here, something I'd not been aware of until I'd been hit with this argument during the The process of appealing by the Posner team that the Seventh Amendment didn't apply in Wisconsin.
	So it gave me extra ammunition to present to the court of why this case had to be taken by the court.
	But it also was contingent.
	The appeal was to put a stay on the case until my petition had been heard.
	And I believe what happened was The appeal never caught up with the petition.
	They denied the petition, and then when the appeal came forward, since it was to put a stay on the case till a petition was heard, but the petition had already been heard, I doubt they even read it.
	So now I'm trying to marshal a way to go back for reconsideration to the U.S.
	Supreme Court, but I have to have new evidence, and I'm working on that.
	Oh, good luck, Jim.
	Now, you have been looking into conspiracy studies.
	Once again, like I said in the intro, it's no longer theories.
	We're living it.
	This is actual investigation into reality.
	I've worked with you the last three-plus years on a half-dozen, dozen of these cases, but there's something weird about Sandy Hook.
	They're using it as almost like a mind control initiative to get to not reach people in their intellect, but reach them in their emotions in their in the fields.
	Right.
	And it's like, oh, those poor kids.
	And I can speak of fans of the shows who've contacted me privately and they're like, oh, don't you can't you imagine how awful the parents feel?
	It's like, no, I don't care.
	I'm sorry they lost their children if they did, but this is not the issue.
	It transcends their hurt feelings and their sorrow and their grieving.
	This is a fundamental right of this nation state, the right of free speech, the right of journalists to research and offer their opinion in books and articles.
	It has nothing to do, this is not an issue about how sad it makes the parents to have to revisit it, you know, that's nonsense.
	There's nothing about the First Amendment that entails you not hurt people's feelings.
	The First Amendment isn't to protect popular speech, that requires no protection.
	It protects unpopular speech.
	So I may hate or disagree with every word you have to say, I'll defend to the death your right to say it is the principle at stake here.
	And the idea Amazon was banning these books, and I'm convinced by the way they're acting as agents of the government, which is forbidden by the First Amendment, the freedom of speech and freedom of the press, so I'm endeavoring to go after Amazon.
	I'm also even backing the Wisconsin Court of Appeals over the taking order, because it was so clear-cut that you've got two simple principles, that monetary judgment can only be satisfied by money, and that Since your blog and the book are intellectual property, not money, they have to go to a receiver.
	Both of which were violated here as the Court of Appeals for the 4th District and it got pulled.
	The violation of those statutes by the Circuit Court judge just because he's their guy?
	I mean, I'm going to go back and test them again.
	Sir Karl Popper was emphatic that the best way to discover the truth, our most reliable instance, is debate.
	Unfettered debate, rational criticism, but you can't have unfettered debate if you're only allowed to endorse one side.
	You've got to be able to talk about the other side and the evidence on both sides, and that's why we're in the midst of a tyranny.
	They are vitiating our First Amendment right, freedom to speak, freedom of the press, and it's monstrous.
	And it includes, of course, not just Sandy Hook.
	It includes a 2020 election, the theft of which was simply overwhelming.
	It includes a COVID pandemic.
	Well, the pandemic was fake, but the vax is real and deadly.
	And now we have the CDC actually endorsing mandatory COVID shots for kids six months on up.
	This is catastrophic to Sandy.
	Yes, it is, Jim.
	This has crossed the line, and they put off taking public comment until the last day, and then they got besieged with thousands of negative comments protesting this up and down.
	So they just went ahead and approved it anyway by a 15 to 0.
	These people have to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
	Anthony Fauci appears to have been the bigwig behind all of this, all this phony tax and all this.
	He's going to turn out to be responsible for more deaths.
	And all of the great villains of history, Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Pao, Mao Zedong combined.
	Anthony Fauci is going to be responsible for more deaths, by far, than they were combined.
	Well, that was when I came back to the media.
	It was on your website.
	I wrote that article about Fauci's the greatest mass murderer.
	But Jim, I guess let's get real.
	You don't feel good about the testing on eight mice, even though all eight mice died?
	I know!
	I mean, it's just absurd!
	In fact, people like Bobby Kennedy Jr.
	are calling out that this is the new era of not even having to test medical procedures.
	They're just going to go ahead and issue them, even independent.
	And they tried to lock out all their data for 75 years.
	This is what the Warren Commission did, just sadly.
	75 years.
	And that's because that's the average lifetime of an American.
	So he wanted every American who was alive at the time JFK was whacked To be dead by the time the Warren Commission archives were open.
	And Pfizer wanted every American who was alive at the time they gave the vaccine to be dead by the time their files were open.
	Well, what a great first hour.
	And when we come back after the breaks, we're going to dive deeper into this heinous, murderous crime of the CDC, the cult of death continuation, proving these innocent children being mass murdered.
	Stay tuned after these messages.
	Stay tuned after these messages.
	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 a 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.
	You are listening to Speak Free Radio, the free speech internet radio platform.
	Over on the wrong side of the state, over on the Atlantic coast, Bartolo Gelsomino was just a hankering for a heap big hamburger.
	How hungry was Bart for a hamburger?
	Well, he apparently was starving to death.
	So, when Gelsomino yelled at the old lady to whip him up a burger and make it snappy, Anna told Bart to get off his lazy ass and fix it himself.
	Since these are not the words a starving maniac wanted to hear, nor were these words spoken in a manner a starving maniac wanted them spoken, Bart got off his lazy ass, walked to the kitchen, grabbed a knife, and killed his wife.
	With that little matter out of the way, Bart went to work on that hamburger he so ravenously craved.
	Once his hamburger hunger had been thoroughly sated, Bart realized he might be in a bit of trouble for stabbing Anna to death.
	Although the sassy bitch had it coming, unless he thought fast, Bart reasoned, that could prove one very expensive hamburger.
	And so, the Hub tore the hell out of the kitchen, trying to make it look like a burglar had been extremely hungry for a burger, and he was burglarizing the place, and when Anna had refused to fry him that burger, the burglar had gone burger bonkers.
	Bart would tell the cops he had seen it all.
	They would never guess, right?
	Well, in near-record time, maybe ten seconds or less, the case of the Bungled Burger burglary was solved and Bart, the mastermind murderer, now lays on his lazy ass in jail facing a murder-to-rap.
	The chow is gratis now, of course, courtesy of the county, but there are, alas, no hamburgers in the prison menu.
	Poor fellow.
	At the time of the incident, Bartolo Gelsomino was 79 and counting.
	Bart's ex-wife, Anna, who is and will always remain 71 forever.
	Who could make this crap up?
	Don't trust the media.
	We don't either.
	Between John Kaminsky and Patriot Pat, we have a century of experience decoding the lies.
	We'll tell you what's really happening when you can't hear it anywhere else.
	5 p.m., Mondays and Thursdays.
	Kaminsky goes ballistic behind enemy lines, speak free radio.com.
	Welcome back to our number two of the perfect triangle.
	October 21st.
	Man, the year's gone fast.
	Episode number 117.
	We keep piling up the numbers.
	It is an honor to have the legendary Professor James H. Fetzer.
	Jameshfetzer.org is his new website.
	We just got the real story behind his egregious miscarriage of justice that he's still fighting, and I believe he will continue to fight.
	And as we hit the break, Jim, we began to address, and then we'll open up the phone lines, just the criminal conspiracy, Jim.
	And it seems to me this is all tied together, again, not conspiracy theory, but conspiracy studies, that Sandy Hook trying to get people to be irrational about protecting their rights.
	And instead, it's the fields, all those poor kids, all those poor parents.
	And then Alex Jones, you know, trying to throw his case because he's probably going to be taken care of.
	And but it sets a precedent for all of us to no longer be able to tell the truth in independent media.
	And again, all this ties into the New World Order, the Great Reset, this one world government, the digital currency only, the social credit scores, you don't get your money.
	I mean, they're not giving up on this, Jim.
	And every little piece of the puzzle that falls into place, it's clear that this all ties together.
	Your thoughts?
	Oh yeah, I agree 100%.
	That idea of, you know, mistakenly sending all these text messages, that's no mistake.
	That was deliberate.
	I offered to Norm Pattis, who is AJ's principal attorney, to come in as an expert witness on Sandy Hook and explain why it was deliberate.
	Not unreasonable for him to have those beliefs, whether he continue to hold them now or not, that there were extenuating circumstances and that, you know, his liability ought to be minimal.
	As Robert Barnes has noted, the judge bellows.
	has restricted him from explaining that he only talked about a little tiny percent of the time, that it was actually a money loser for him, that most of the time he was asserting it was real.
	She has gagged him from talking about those things just at me.
	That's very, very peculiar and totally improper.
	But even Norm Pattis, when I offered to be an expert witness, he showed no interest whatsoever.
	And of course, here I sought to intervene in all three of those cases, plus the Remington.
	No bites, no response, no welcome.
	You'd think he could have put a lot of the weight on the book.
	He could have said, look, You know, I read this book and it convinced me or raised enough questions in my mind that I was disposed to say it hadn't happened.
	Now, maybe I've had further thoughts.
	But if he got the book into evidence, that would have changed the complexion of the whole matter, Giuseppe, just completely.
	Here's the book right here, signed by you.
	I have the color version, and it is an excellent book.
	I mean, and you have every right to publish it, and yet now, there was just someone in one of the chat rooms saying, where can I order it?
	And had to say, you can't.
	And that's just criminal.
	They were actually, see what happened was, when I put the book on sale on 22 October 2015, it sold nearly 500 copies in less than a month.
	When they banned it on 19 November, and I perceived it was all political, so I released it for free as a PDF.
	Now, they did not anticipate that.
	I have a friend.
	Who believes it's been downloaded as many as 10 million times as a PDF, which I regard as a great success.
	I never cared about money.
	I want to get the truth out.
	If that's true, which I'm unable to verify, then I celebrate it.
	But I'm convinced, by the way, the whole point of the lawsuit was to put them in a position to take the book.
	So they abused the fact that I had this finding of defamation to go against the various outlets that had the book for free.
	And to tell them that there's been a finding of defamation, implying they could be held viable for defamation if they were to allow it to continue to be held.
	And now they've taken the copyright.
	They have a stronger stance.
	I think they've been fearful that I might get the book out there again.
	Well, yeah, I mean, gotta have an underground spreading of that free PDF.
	I know I have copies of it.
	I know many other people in the independent media and chat rooms are incensed that this is being suppressed like the communist state that we're increasingly suffering under, but I'm doing my part to get that free PDF out to people.
	Anybody who wants it, you go to any of the Speak Free Radio chat rooms and we can get you a copy pretty easy.
	At least there's that, Jim.
	And the other thing that's insane, again, this all ties together, it's like we're in this Orwellian gaslighting where it's clear that the bubonic Jew jab is mass murder.
	It's illegal, immoral experimentation on humans with an unproven, untested genetic experimental injection, right?
	Shouldn't have never happened.
	Has nothing.
	It's coming out now that even Pfizer admitted that it doesn't do anything to block transmission, which is the only reason anybody would take that illegal jab, right?
	Would be to block spreading it.
	And it never even did that.
	But yet it's like in Orwell's 1984, they torture the prisoners enough so they show them something red and the prisoner, once they're broken, will say, no, that's green.
	even though they see it's red, right?
	That's what they're trying to do now with this ridiculous scam of injecting people with some type of bio-nanotechnology.
	There's so many deadly things in there.
	Where do you start?
	The PEG, the polyethanol gluconate, the hydrogel, the cancer cells that they call immortal cell lines that are injecting with cancer.
	I can go down the line and everybody I know, our dear friend, Dr. Judy Mikevitz, Dr. Lee Merritt, we've had her on our past shows.
	We've had Dr. Carrie Madej on.
	We've had so many other, Peter McCullough, we had him on last year.
	They're all saying the same thing.
	And yet, Jim, the science is settled.
	This green vial is red.
	Take the shot.
	I mean, what's wrong with people that they trust?
	This is mass murder, Jim.
	Every day, you see it and I see it.
	Every day, some young, vibrant athlete, a 19-year-old Mississippi State football player collapsed.
	An 18-year-old college softball player, female, collapsed, died.
	They're dropping dead left and right, Jim.
	It's just, what's wrong with people that they're not taking to the streets and literally, at this point, rioting over this intentional mass murder by these transnational globalists in service to the international banking cabal and the one world order, the great reset of the one world government.
	They just can't believe it.
	They are so invested in the conception of the government as being, you know, their custodian is benefiting them that we have this system of the CDC, the FDA, and the NIH that are looking out for our health and welfare.
	They can't believe it could be inverted.
	To promote our death on a massive scale, unprecedented in history, which is exactly what's going on.
	It's beyond their capacity to imagine it.
	Hitler made the observation, the big lie, that people will believe a big lie rather than a little.
	They're used to little lies, but they're not used to huge, humongous lies on this order.
	It's mind-boggling to them.
	They cannot begin to appreciate the very possibility.
	And they're going out and getting faxed!
	Yeah, yeah.
	Well, luckily, Jim, as we both know, the support acceptance of the latest boosters is barely 2%.
	So most people are realizing, well, I got the first couple, but I'm not getting any more.
	And at least there's that.
	But God bless them all.
	God help them.
	It's going to get so much worse for them.
	So Jim, go ahead.
	You've got me back into regular news coverage with Need to Know.
	On the Need to Know today, I talked about two stories in succession with my colleagues.
	One, 95% of corpses had received COVID vax within two weeks of death, according to a funeral director.
	And in fact, the percentage has gone up.
	Now it's 100% of the corpses he's processing have had the vax within two weeks of death.
	And then we move to the following, to wit, CDC votes to recommend COVID-19 shots that children and adolescents' annual immunization schedule in 15 unanimous votes.
	They're voting to bring this back.
	It's having a virtual 100 percent, you know, all the deaths are being caused by the vaccine.
	Even Biden claimed we were having an epidemic of the unvaccinated.
	It was never true.
	Indeed, as you well know, my friend, all the evidence shows there was no increase in deaths in any age group from the pandemic.
	It was artificially manipulated.
	John Rabaport and Edward Henry have been really good at explaining how there were 38 million cases of the flu the year before, the following only 2,000, because they took 37,998,000 cases of flu and simply reclassified them as COVID.
	And then they used a PCR test, which was never designed for diagnostic purposes, And set it at a level where they could guarantee.
	There you got it.
	Exactly right, Giuseppe.
	This is a monstrous fraud.
	People didn't stop having the flu.
	They now called it the pandemic.
	It was a rebranding.
	Rebranding.
	Enjoy your clot shot.
	Branding and marketing.
	Yeah, enjoy your clot.
	Some of these clots are just ferocious, Giuseppe.
	They are long, fibrous.
	There's stuff like Morticians I've never seen before in any body before the VAX.
	Illegal immoral experimentation Jim and we've already got a caller but let me I put up on the screen and if you're listening at speakfreeradio.com you go to the left button on the excellent website hit call in and there's multiple numbers in the US I'll read the common one 605-562-0400 there's numbers for UK, Australia, Belgium, Canada Finland, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Netherlands, Poland, and Ukraine.
	Love to hear from somebody in the Ukraine these days.
	But this is high-tech stuff, so once you get in, you gotta enter the access code 811-7272, followed by the pound sign, and then you'll be able to talk to the legendary Professor Jim Fetzer.
	And our first caller is from area code 720.
	what's your name and what's on your mind to talk with the good professor well Steve pinch yourself because you are All right.
	I can't hear anything, Giuseppe.
	Oh, shit.
	You can hear him, but I can't.
	Just a second, Steve.
	You can't hear him, Jim?
	No.
	Oh, man.
	I just fixed all this with Paul English.
	Let me...
	Try loading, uh, reloading the settings.
	Oh man, we fixed all this.
	That's really annoying.
	Okay, oh.
	Okay, uh, try, say again, Steve.
	Let's see if Jim can hear you.
	No.
	Nothing, G-man.
	Oh, you can't hear him?
	Okay.
	That's very bizarre.
	Can you hear Jim, Steve?
	What the hell?
	This is so weird.
	We tested this all and we got it all working.
	It's the exact same settings.
	Let me look and make sure the settings didn't get changed.
	Nope.
	Ox and... This is just so maddening.
	I mean...
	This is absolutely insane.
	Let's see, how can I try to fix it?
	I mean, literally, we tested this two days ago, simulated calls, did everything everybody could hear in StreamYard and in free conference.
	Let me just double check the free conference settings to make sure that... There are a surprising number of times when... When you're on?
	Yes, yes, yes.
	Because you're coming into a free conference.
	Go ahead and speak some more, Jim.
	Yes, yes, yes.
	Well, I want to hear our caller, indeed, how he wants to pose his questions and comments.
	I'm looking forward to it.
	Okay, so let's try and change this to... Let's try and change this to...
	Okay, this one's working and let's try and change this.
	Okay, go ahead now, Jim.
	Try it.
	Sure, Steve.
	Tell me, give me your thoughts.
	What do you got?
	Did you hear him, Steve, that time?
	You still didn't hear him?
	Okay, so this is so weird.
	Okay, let's try switching this to D.
	Oh man, this is just unbelievable to me.
	Okay, try now, Jim.
	Yeah, go ahead, Steve.
	I'm eager to hear.
	And then let's change this to D.
	Okay, try now, Jim.
	Yeah, go ahead, Steve.
	I'm eager to hear.
	You didn't hear him, Steve?
	Oh, man, this is just so unbelievable.
	If you want to be the intermediary, just skip me and tell me what Steve said, and I'll respond, and you can tell him what I replied.
	Yeah, let's do that.
	Go ahead, Steve.
	I mean, for some reason, Jim can't hear you, and this should be working.
	I don't know.
	Well, you can keep tinkering while we converse.
	Okay, Steve, I'll have to be the intermediary.
	What's your question?
	and then Jim will answer it and I'll pass it along.
	I don't even hear Steve now.
	Huh.
	Okay, let's go back to, uh, let's go back to the old set.
	And, uh, let's see what happens there.
	Unreal, Unreal, Unreal.
	Okay, so let's go back to the box there.
	Save those.
	And then reload this.
	And... Okay.
	Okay, Steve, are you there?
	Okay, go ahead and ask your question and we'll see if Jim can hear you.
	Otherwise, I will pass along.
	Okay, let me tell you. let me tell you.
	Jim, did you hear that or no?
	No, no, no.
	So Steve's first comment before the question was, I'll side with Kevin Barrett if I can watch Kevin and put himself and 15 kids in a 3 by 4 foot bathroom stall.
	Very good, very good, very good.
	Okay Steve, Jim laughed.
	Now please tell me your question.
	Dave.
	Sure, sure.
	Thank you.
	No, I can't answer that, but then I'll pass along to Jim as well.
	But I have had conversations with Dave as well as Jim, and Dave came to the conclusion after having a two-hour discussion with Ruben Vabner and Lenny Posner that that fellow that day I think my opinion is Dave made a business decision.
	He didn't want to lose a business.
	can read into it was Dave shrewd that way and just got out to protect his companies or did he believe it?
	I mean, that's, that's up for, up for, you know, debate and, and only Dave truly knows that.
	So Jim, your, your thoughts, his question is.
	I think you've answered it.
	Yes.
	I think you've answered it.
	Giuseppe.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	I think Dave, my opinion is Dave made a business decision.
	He didn't want to lose a business.
	He's got a, you know, wrong, So, I think that's probably it.
	And Jim fought for the truth.
	is one of his companies and I think he didn't want to jeopardize the whole shebang.
	Yeah, yeah, exactly.
	So I think that's probably it.
	And Jim fought for the truth.
	Steve, any other questions?
	Oh, that's a good question. that's a good question.
	Jim, Steve was wondering, with all the historical mass shootings, are any of them real?
	In your research, has anything actually occurred where people actually were mowed down in great numbers?
	Well, if you go down back to Columbine, they had a couple of dummies there.
	I mean, when you look at the footage, it's just astonishing.
	Aurora, I know less about, but that also appears to be totally fake.
	Everyone that I've investigated has been fraudulent.
	It includes a whole lot that I don't have books on.
	I've done more recent research with Brian Davidson about Buffalo and Uvalde.
	Those were also fake.
	The one in Texas at the little church there, which was real odd, that was clearly fabricated and fake.
	So the answer is all those I've investigated, they all turned out to be staged fake events.
	Wow, amazing.
	Kevin, I'm sorry, Stephen, Jim's question, answer rather, was everything that he's looked into since Columbine, he basically considers them all to be fake.
	Oh.
	Oh.
	You almost did.
	There's no way we can get him captured on your microphone.
	there just happens to be able to make it open that he can talk because I'd love to hear his words.
	Um, uh, Jim, this is so weird that Steve was honored to almost get to talk to you, which is frustrating, because Paul English and myself, we fixed this all, and it was all working.
	And I know there's people who want to mess with this, especially when Jim's involved, and they're doing a pretty good job, but this is weird.
	I'm looking now at an image I saved of exactly what the settings should be everywhere that worked two days ago when we tested a complete simulation, took in calls, did everything.
	Everybody could hear everything else.
	And now I'm looking at this and this is exactly set up the way it's supposed to Well, these are very tech savvy people.
	I'll tell you.
	I mean, the guy who calls himself Leonard Bosner was responsible for taking down some 1500 videos that had to do with Sandy Hook off of YouTube.
	He's taken out blog after blog.
	It came into my own blog.
	I've messed with my own blog, earlier blog.
	I think this one is not so easy to tamper with.
	But then he took the blog, JamesFetzer.org.
	I mean, he took the whole bloody thing.
	Yeah, crazy.
	So, you know, just when it would have been of most value to those who wanted to find out what that batshit crazy Fetzer had to say.
	That's exactly it, Jim.
	All right, well, you know, we have another caller and it's area code 281.
	I'll have to be the intermediary.
	What's your name and what's your question for the legendary Professor Jim Fetzer?
	Yeah, this is Cody in Illinois.
	Hey, good, we got it.
	Oh, you can hear him now, Jim?
	Yeah, I can hear him now.
	Cody, can you hear Jim?
	I could hear Cody there, crystal clear.
	Just a quick question, with people that are brainwashed and don't want to think that there's a conspiracy.
	Go ahead.
	What are the three main points that you guys should argue?
	Good.
	Did you hear that, Jim?
	For brainwashed normies, what are the three main points you should argue that this isn't woo-woo conspiracy, this is actually going on?
	Well, ask them if they would be willing to look at some of the evidence.
	I mean, if it's specifically about Sandy Hook, Are they aware that we even have the FEMA manual for a drill, a two-day exercise with a rehearsal on the 13th and going live on the 14th?
	Are they aware that there were porta-potties already in place that were pizza and bottled water available at the firehouse?
	Are you going to relay that?
	I'm not hearing anything.
	Oh, he heard you.
	He's answering it.
	You can't hear him, but he could hear you.
	Wow.
	Yeah, I can't hear him.
	Hopefully it'll be on the replay.
	Oh, why don't you just, why don't you mute, uh, I'll mute you in free conference and put on your speakers where you're listening to the show and then Jim will start the answer.
	Okay, I'll just disconnect and I'll listen.
	Okay.
	Go ahead, Jim.
	He's gonna disconnect and listen to the answer now.
	Okay, well I would suggest, you know, just asking whether they've actually looked at any of the evidence.
	Are they aware that there's even a FEMA manual for the exercise, that it was a two-day event with a rehearsal on the 13th going live on the 14th?
	Are they aware that events on the ground corresponded to the manual, that there was a sign, everyone must check in, that right in the manual it says everyone must check in with a controller on arrival in order to be paid, that there were Port-A-Potty's already in place.
	Pizza and bottled water available at the firehouse.
	Many were wearing name tags on lanyards.
	Parents were bringing children to the scene.
	Can they imagine parents bringing children to the scene of a child shooting massacre?
	But that was happening at Sandy Hook.
	Here's a nice, very specific, are they aware that Neil Hassan, who was a participant in the first Alex Jones trial, claimed that he held his son Jesse in his arms as he died, but that Wayne Carver, the medical examiner, declared during his press conference that the parents weren't allowed to come into contact with the children, That there was a time for that, but they identified them on the basis of photographs.
	Now, that's a nice point, because they can't both be right.
	It can't be true that Neil Heslin held his dying son in his arms, and Wayne Carver be right that they didn't allow the parents to come in contact with the children.
	So, which is right?
	Moreover, Well, they can't both be telling the truth.
	They can both be telling falsehood or lying, which, of course, is exactly what's going on here.
	So if you can hook them on a specific example, that might be enough.
	Or the fact that you can download the FEMA manual from my blog.
	It's in the book.
	And then there's this massive correspondence of events on the ground.
	In addition, there was no surge of EMTs the following day into the building.
	There was no string of ambulances to rush a little body off to hospitals where they could be pronounced dead or alive.
	No medevac helicopter was called.
	Triage tarps were put out, but no bodies dead or alive were put on a man.
	Although, according to Stephen Sedensky III in his final report, He claimed there were 489 students there that day.
	If you subtract 20, that would leave 469 to be evacuated.
	There was no sign of any evacuation.
	Here's another.
	We had this famous photograph of a string of about 15 kids seemingly being escorted to safety.
	Well, there was a second photograph taken by the same photographer Shannon Hicks for the Newtown Bee minutes earlier, and you can see there are a whole bunch of parents there just looking on casually with their arms folded.
	I mean, eight or ten parents just casually looking on, leading me to describe this photograph as lounging at the massacre while the policewoman rearranges the kids to get a better shot.
	So she took a little girl in a pink sweater and a short skirt and replaced her with a little boy in a long sweater and blue jeans.
	I mean, it's very clear what's happening.
	If you just juxtapose those two photographs or go to my blog or one of my presentations, there's a video, Sandy Hook update with Brian Rue, R-U-H-E-I-N.
	You can find very extensive laying out the correspondence between the events on the ground and what called for by the manual and where I actually show how Noah Posner was a fiction made out of photographs of his older brother, Michael Vabner, when he was a child.
	And you can see a GIF where you see Noah Posner turned into Michael Vabner.
	That's about as conclusive as it gets.
	There's more, but those are some highlights.
	All right, we've reached the bottom of the hour break, and this next song is Crazy Train cover, which is we're all these days on the crazy train.
	Crazy Train
	Crazy Train Crazy, that's how it goes.
	Millions of people living as foes.
	Maybe it's not too late to learn how to love, forget how to hate.
	Mental wounds not healing, life's a bitter shame.
	I'm going off the rails on a crazy train.
	I've listened to preachers.
	I've listened to fools.
	I've watched all the dropouts who make their own rules.
	One person conditioned to rule and control.
	The media sells it, and you live the role.
	Mental wounds still screaming, driving me insane.
	I'm going off the rails on a crazy train I know you think there's something wrong with me You gotta listen to my words.
	Heirs of the Cold War, that's what we've become.
	Inheriting trouble, I'm mentally numb.
	Crazy.
	I just cannot bear.
	I'm living with something that just isn't fair.
	Mental wounds stop healing.
	Who and what to blame?
	I'm going off the rails on a crazy trail.
	I'm going off the rails on a crazy train.
	Sending out an S.O.S.
	You are listening to The Perfect Triangle with your host, Giuseppe, the G-Man.
	Alright, welcome back to the final 30 minutes.
	Jim, I muted you because you were rustling around during the song.
	You're going to have to unmute yourself.
	And I restarted the whole audio engine thing, so we can still take calls if anybody wants to try.
	I know Jim heard the last call, hopefully by restarting it all, maybe.
	They can hear you as well, but the phone lines are still open.
	So Jim, what do you make of this potential for World War III while we're waiting to see if anybody calls in and joins us?
	It's very odd, Giuseppe.
	It seems the West is eager to have a war with Russia, but we're not prepared to fight it, and Russia is prepared to fight it doesn't want, so the outcome is going to be very unhappy.
	They have this monstrous submarine, the largest ever, That can release these mini subs, as it were, that are nuclear equipped so that they can create tsunamis off the coast.
	And because the tsunami is radioactive, set off to, say, the east coast of the United States, it could take out Everything from Boston to Washington, D.C., including New York City, and it's radioactive for the next 250 years.
	Set one off in the British, you know, the English Channel.
	Set one off the West Coast and the East Coast of the U.S.
	I mean, we're basically done for.
	Frankly, it's even easier with the United States.
	You just set off an EMP and they take out the electrical grid.
	Right.
	You know, we are totally vulnerable.
	And it's been the case for many, many years.
	And it's not been a suitable effort to try to correct it.
	But then look at this.
	We have this massive invasion across our border.
	And it is an invasion.
	Have no doubt about it.
	It is an invasion.
	Yes.
	Of billions.
	And the Democrats are doing absolutely nothing about it.
	And then we have this massive factory of death, of medical genocide.
	And again, the Democrats are doing nothing about it.
	I mean, I think at this point in time, they have so discredited themselves that if anyone votes Democrat, they might as well put a gun to their head, because that's the effect it's having on society.
	Let me add a couple of comments, by the way, about the stories I was reporting about the CDC decision.
	Here's one.
	What could go wrong with the CDC mandating COVID-19 vaccination for children where they can't attend public schools?
	Medical tyranny?
	Republican governors in all 50 states for the next 100 years and the end of the Democrat Party.
	I say it can't happen soon enough.
	And most of my life I voted Democrat.
	I always regard myself as a JFK, FDR Democrat because I believe in the social safety net of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment insurance, workman's compensation.
	I couldn't be making ends meet in my retirement.
	Just happy without Social Security.
	But once Donald Trump came on the scene, I mean, look, I voted for Bill Clinton twice, for Barack Obama twice.
	It had a lot to do with the alternatives, because the Republicans were putting out mediocre candidates.
	But when it was Hillary versus Trump, Hillary is so corrupt, one of the foulest stenches on the planet, and Trump was a breath of fresh air.
	And in this last step to the election of 2020, just completely outright.
	Carrie Lake, by the way, had a press conference just the other day where she rattled up 150 examples of Democrats declaring that the Republicans stolen the 150 examples.
	That's hilarious.
	She is a pistol, just sadly.
	She's got a great future.
	I anticipate 2024, assuming we're still alive, that it'll be Trump and DeSantis, who's absolutely fantastic.
	I'm a huge fan of DeSantis.
	Here's another comment about these stories.
	This is beyond disgusting.
	May those pushing us burn in hell or on earth.
	Don't let them do this.
	They'll be killing our children.
	This is madness.
	This is legal genocide.
	This will open the door to mandates for us all.
	John Hopkins' Dr. Marty Marquette blasts the CDC's plan to add the COVID vax to the childhood vaccine schedule.
	For us to be added with no clinical data.
	We're basically told, stop asking questions.
	What are they hiding?
	Why can't we see this information and more?
	So the CDC Center for Depopulation Craziness, so I think yours is even better, Giuseppe, is getting some blowback.
	Good to see.
	One of the comments, parents must not be forced to inject their children with a dangerous experimental drug fax.
	Other countries have halted the shots due to dangerous results in children.
	Children are not in danger from COVID.
	Studies are proving the shots are killing those aged 18 to 30.
	The public knows these things, and even more, though you—meaning the CDC—keep lying about it.
	They are not safe and effective.
	God help you if you proceed with this.
	Intra-genocide, I think, means mass killing of children.
	Giuseppe, those are all well-founded remarks.
	Especially, Jim, when you consider that the actual science, the actual data, is that all children of any type of functional immunity are 99.99997% immune to the so-called COVID-19.
	9.99997% immune to the so-called COVID-19.
	This is just mass murder.
	Let me put up...
	Go ahead.
	Go ahead, please.
	You were going to, I think, I was just going to say there's a simpler solution to what to do about Sandy Hook.
	Just go to my blog at jamesa.fetzer.org and do a search on Sandy Hook.
	There are probably a hundred articles there.
	Just find what you find convincing and share it.
	Or go to my Whipshoot channel Jim Fetzer.
	It's just Jim underscore Fetzer.
	It's actually literally bitchute.com slash channel slash Jim underscore Fetzer.
	And with an N slash.
	And do a search on Sandy Hook.
	Brian Davidson, who's a private investigator in Texas, and I have collaborated, he's got into the state police Photo Archive.
	Giuseppe, it turns out the state police were running the scene, running the show behind the scenes, and they kept photographs of everything, and they have now removed the metadata so that the, you know, out of consciousness of guilt.
	Yeah.
	I mean, Brian just exposed the whole bloody thing with a whole new line of proof, whole new line of proof.
	Well, Jim, good news.
	If you go to Telegram, Speak Free Radio Chat, one of the great listeners has posted the PDF of Nobody Died at Sandy Hook there.
	You can download it.
	I just downloaded it again, even though I have it somewhere on one of my flash drives.
	So, go to Speak Free Radio Chat room on Telegram, and you can download the book.
	So, if anybody wants to call in and test it, I know Jim could hear when I restarted the audio engine.
	Let me put up the Phone numbers again.
	Call in and speak to the legendary Jim Fetzer.
	United States 605-562-0400.
	Numbers in UK, Australia, blah, blah, blah.
	Lots of places, even Ukraine.
	And enter your access code when you call.
	811-7272-POUND.
	Our dear brothers on Speak Free Radio, who has his own shows and is a regular guest of mine, Malificus Scott, has a question for you, Jim, from the chat room.
	What do you make of the Dunblane massacre that was used to make guns illegal in the United Kingdom?
	Well, Sandy Hook appears to have been based on the Dunblane Massacre.
	Mary Maxwell has a wonderful book she'd release for free, Unreality.
	Sandy Hook messes minds.
	If you go to gumshoenews.com, up at the top it has books, and she has three or four books you can download for free.
	She explains the parallels between Dunblane and Sandy Hook.
	Now, Mary It's very interesting.
	She has both a PhD, I believe it's in English literature, but also an LLB.
	So she knows the legal nuances and she began believing it was real and gradually disentangled and understood how it was an elaborate scam.
	So this is a wonderful book to add to your library.
	Compliments of Mary Maxwell.
	Oh, I just downloaded it.
	Yeah, it's easy to do.
	And they pulled a similar thing in Australia.
	Port Arthur, colon, enough is enough.
	And so, wow, good for her that she's willing to... And then you had this absurd thing in New Zealand, the Christchurch shooting.
	That was so amateurish.
	The Buffalo was based on New Zealand.
	Right.
	In New Zealand, you can get 10 years for just having the video on your computer.
	Well, if you go to my jameshfetzer.org, check out JimTheConspiracyGuy.com, the 65 shows.
	JimTheConspiracyGuy.com, the 65 shows, because in May of 2020 to November of 2020, I had a separate channel called JimTheConspiracyGuy.
	I did 65 shows, and when I could no longer sustain that, I just put them, I linked them all to this one page on my new blog at jameshfetzer.org, And if you'll find the whole Christchurch there on the New Zealand expose, I mean, you're going to be blown away.
	And you'll see when Brian Davidson and I do an expose about Buffalo, how we talk about that it was really based on the New Zealand fraud, which was so amateurish, it was like a video game.
	Well, there you go.
	Looks like we have a caller, Jim.
	Let's see if you can hear them and they can hear you.
	Oh, shoot.
	Wait, wait.
	That's OK.
	It's still there.
	Go ahead, GaryCode781, what's your name and what would you like to discuss with Jim Fetzer?
	I just want to discuss a little bit of politics.
	Sure.
	I'm a real fan of Fetzer, I called before.
	But I just got so heated when he got excited about DeSantos and Trump.
	None of these people are calling out your fake shooting, fake anything.
	They're going with the program.
	Say, you're not going to see it.
	Give up on them, Jim, please.
	Please.
	Well, you know, I get that a lot.
	Donald Trump has made a connection with the American people like no other president in my lifetime, and I've been through quite a few.
	I was born in 1940, and I'm just telling you, Trump made a connection with the American people.
	Now, while he was president, he gave us a robust economy, he secured the borders, he made us energy independent, he called out the fake news, He created a situation where the lowest wage earners were seeing their wages rise at the highest rate because they weren't being competed with these migrants.
	If you just took those and agree, maybe he made a lot of mistakes, not calling out the fake news, maybe it's the fake shootings.
	When he's calling out the fake news, that is a giant advance in American history, just to recognize that the media are constantly barraging us.
	I say don't let perfect be the enemy of the good.
	Anyone who has lived through it will tell you the four years under Trump were overwhelmingly better than what we've been enduring under Biden.
	God knows it can get worse.
	And that's their agenda, I say.
	Yeah, it's not going to be perfect, but it would be one hell of a lot better.
	So I don't regard myself as being naive about this.
	Trump and DeSantis both have their flaws, but they aren't monsters like this Biden and the whole administration seeking to destroy America from the beginning, where they cancel the XL pipeline and permits a drill on federal land.
	Letting millions invade?
	My God, right there, that one issue Trump would never put up with that.
	So, he may not be able to solve all our problems, I agree with that, but he could solve some pretty damn important ones and potentially restore some sanity to the nation.
	That's my position.
	Well, Jim, one thing I'd like to get your thoughts on is, he did connect with a segment of the American population, but the The left-leaning, globalist, Bolshevik 2.0 types, he triggered them into literal insanity.
	I mean, he had said... I know!
	Trump's arrangements!
	It's amazing!
	It's going to go down in his psychiatric books!
	They're going to have to classify Trump's arrangements!
	It's lunacy!
	It's absolute lunacy!
	It is lunacy.
	What a phenomenon.
	So I agree that Trump is flawed.
	But he can do so much good for the country, and he's got a base.
	He's got fans that are so loyal.
	Believe me, they're not going to abandon him no matter how much the Democrats attack him.
	I do think DeSantis is wonderful.
	I think Ron Johnson, my senator in Wisconsin here, is wonderful.
	Carrie Lake is going to be a sensation.
	Tulsi Gabbard made the right move leaving the Democrat Party.
	She's endorsing Republican candidates.
	If we have an election, It's going to be a wipeout for the Democrat Party, and for that reason, since they can read the polls too, they're going to try to find some way to fend it off, to defeat it, even if it takes a nuclear war, where even small-scale tactical exchanges are predicted to bring about Eradication of one third of the Earth's population.
	In other words, even a relatively small scale nuclear exchange is going to have devastating effects.
	And I think, you know, I frankly believe Russia, if it's forced into a war, is going to go all out.
	And, you know, we're going to get those tidal waves or the EMP.
	We're going to be wiped out in a matter of hours, in my opinion.
	And, you know.
	And Biden and Blinken and these other numbskulls seem to want that outcome.
	I mean, I've never seen such a collection of misfits managing the American government.
	I say, if you envision George Soros as the acting president of the United States, then you'll get a better understanding of what's going on here.
	Well, especially, Collar and Jim, when you take into account that it's more important to the traitor Biden to have his Hebrew henchman, Merrick Garland, whose real name is Moshe Garfinkel.
	He's just a Jewish gangster thug sending the FBI in to intimidate parents at local school board meetings because parents don't want their children groomed to be trannies and groomed to tolerate homosexual advances and what parent would.
	And so, I mean, to me, Collar and Jim, you know, I'm no fan of Trump.
	And if DeSantis were for real, he's way too much in Israel's pocket.
	But compared to what Biden's doing, we need someone like DeSantis or Trump just to somehow keep some sense of normalcy in this country.
	That's a good approximation of my position, Giuseppe, exactly.
	And by the way, I've simplified how to handle this.
	Just go to my blog at jameshfessler.org and do a search on Sandy Hook.
	Or go to my Mitchu channel.
	You might want to copy and paste and put that in the chat room.
	Just have me right there when I put it in our private chat.
	Sure, I can do that.
	Because that gets them there.
	Just do a search.
	You're going to find all kinds of stuff.
	There are probably 40 different videos there about Sandy Hook.
	And I'll bet there are a hundred blogs on my, on my blog, individual blogs about San Diego.
	Pick and choose whatever you find most convincing and use that.
	Pauler, do you have a follow up to what Jim, Jim had answered to your statement about, don't forget about Trump and Santas, but compared to Biden, my God, they, I think they'd be better.
	And I'm no fan.
	Oh yeah.
	Listen, I was wrong.
	I was, I was completely wrong.
	How I came up.
	I'm not mad at Jim.
	I just want to thank Jim for everything he's done, and believe whatever you believe, like everyone else, to keep your sanity, because what you've been put through, I can't believe how strong you are.
	You're a good man.
	What gracious remarks.
	I so appreciate those words.
	Thank you so much for calling and for adding those thoughts.
	Wonderful.
	And, Jim, we have to both.
	I'm sure I can speak for you.
	When you call, you've got to share your opinions.
	That's what makes for a dull debate and discussion.
	I mean, it was great that you brought that up, and we shared our opinions, and we respect yours.
	I mean, that's what makes really good talk radio, I believe, Jim.
	Well, I don't learn anything from people who agree with me.
	I learn from people who disagree and maybe can show something I hadn't considered or some evidence I had missed.
	So I welcome exchange.
	I mean, in criticism, I thrive on it.
	So yeah, to me, what's really occurring, and we haven't really even gotten into this Kanye West thing, Jim.
	What do you think of Kanye West coming out, introducing White Lives Matter t-shirts, naming the Jew on The synagogue Satan Jew type, the Jew banker type on mainstream media.
	And then he gets, oh, you're crazy, Kanye.
	There's no such thing as Jewish power.
	And then the Jewish banking gangster Jamie Dimon tells him he's got 30 days to take his $130 million out of chase.
	Giuseppe Kanye is sensational.
	I'm just thrilled.
	Now, he was married to Kim Kardashian, apparently.
	Veronique was Trump's daughter.
	Yeah, he was married to Kardashian, yeah.
	Right, and Ivanka was trying to play him, too.
	And Ivanka, I'm astonished, turns out to be a critic of her father's own policies.
	That shocks the shit out of me.
	But I think Kanye is doing a sensational job.
	He reminds me, he's a male version of Candace Owens, who's just so fabulous, too.
	I mean, here you got Two highly articulate, intelligent, well-informed blacks who are prominent in the community speaking the truth.
	That's exactly what the situation calls for.
	And I love white lives matter.
	You know in the past that if somebody said all lives matter, they were demonized and attacked by the Democrats when obviously all lives matter.
	The black lives matter have been used to promote this reparations nonsense.
	We're supposed to bend over backwards.
	We're supposed to Give them all of our wealth in the name of equity?
	I'm telling you, I'm just happy the kind of political bullshit coming from the Democratic Party is disgusting.
	No one ought to think twice about voting for a Democrat.
	If there's some extraordinary example who actually is clean and who's not sold his soul to the progressive movement, who's not promoting wokeism, well, be my guest.
	And obviously, you're going to decide for yourself.
	I'm just saying, The track record of the Democrat Party today is disgusting and repulsive, and you ought to reject it.
	Well said, Jim, and as I've said before, there is no Democratic Party anymore.
	It's the Bolshevik 2.0 Party, or as our dear friend Lark from Texas, who's done a deep dive into this whole idea of Zion Communism, is much more sophisticated, and it's now Communitarianism.
	We do not have Democratic Party, we have a traitorous communitarian party serving the Great Reset, which is such a heartbreak, because I grew up, literally, when I was a little kid, we had a bleach factory, and that's what we'd do on weekends.
	The whole family would fill bleach orders, and then we got rewarded by going out to dinner.
	And so, you know, nobody in my family ever voted Republican, because we were working class at best.
	And I think we have another call, Jim.
	Indeed, we do.
	Area Code 248, welcome.
	What's your name and what would you like to discuss with the great Jim Fetzer?
	Yeah, it's great to hear Uncle Fetzer.
	He's fantastic, man.
	Great researcher.
	One of the great researchers probably of our time that'll go down.
	Is this Miles from Maine?
	Go ahead.
	Great to hear your voice, Miles.
	Keep speaking.
	Go ahead, Miles.
	What I was going to say is, you know, this is great with Kanye West.
	I think, I mean, he's doing more than 90% of the American people out here, if you ask me.
	And he's got the guts to do it.
	He's obviously got the money to do it.
	Here's what I find so puzzling in and of itself, and well, you know, it just kind of speaks for itself.
	You know, what was it, several years back, Kanye West got out there and attacked, verbally.
	Taylor Swift, was it?
	Oh, I said she didn't deserve it.
	You didn't hear anybody?
	Yeah, yeah.
	She's got a new album out.
	Go ahead.
	Exactly, and you didn't hear anybody say much or nothing.
	But boy, he gets on Tucker and gets on those shows and mentions you-know-who, and they can't stop telling him how bad he is.
	I mean, it was so obnoxious that apparently that, what's his name, Puff Dog, or whoever the hell he is over there, called him the dreaded N-word of all things.
	You know, now that's coming from Puff Dog.
	I'll tell you what guys, my favorite moment so far in the Kanye thing is when a couple days ago he was being lectured to by the vacuous, arrogant windbag Pierce Morgan and Kanye called him a Karen.
	I thought that was great.
	Oh, that was awesome.
	The other time I really watched Pierce Morgan get wiped out was when Larry Pratt from Gun Owners of America just ended his career.
	I mean, it was a career ender right then and there.
	Well, this is the music we're talking about.
	And I want to thank everybody for calling and thank the legendary Jim Fetzer.
	Good to hear you guys.
	Thanks for calling.
	Tune in tomorrow.
	Jim, it was great.

▲