All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 8, 2022 - Jim Fetzer
01:02:23
Truth vs. NEW$ Part 2 (6 December 2022) with Don Grahn and Scott Bennett
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
And three, two, one.
And welcome back, folks, to Truth vs. News, Incorporated.
I'm Don Reiner, producer at JD.Consultants.
This is Truth vs. News, Incorporated.
And speaking of news and truth and corruption, we have some other things going on here.
We're trying to Apply to Waste, Fraud, and Abuse and go for the truth here on our show and on YouTube.
I reapplied for being back on after being off since February of 2019 with the Academy so I applied yesterday morning for that.
By yesterday afternoon I got the welcoming back and I could be doing a show so I loaded up Jim's first hour of our show last week.
And put it on there and three hours later I get from YouTube that we've been censored again.
So I was on YouTube available for three hours and the correction that they have is something else and it shows you which side they are on.
Are they on the side of truth?
Are we on the side of truth here?
Tell us if we're not telling the truth here but I think it's apparent which side they are on and it's not not very good is what's going on there.
So with that I guess I'll let Jim, lead on, or wait, no, Scott, you want to bring up about what we just talked about.
Go ahead.
Yeah, Don, I think, uh, it's, it's, you know what?
Hold on.
You need to edit that out.
What remind me again, what we were, we were just the last story.
Jim?
Yeah, that was my concern that we, we, it was a Raphael, uh, The mules, the Dem strategy, James Carville, 57 seats, and Raphael Warnock getting the benefit of all these mules, and then the Gavin Fenton reparations.
Yeah, that was the last one.
And the funding from Washington State to Georgia.
Right.
OK.
So edit that out, Don, and start the recording.
5, 4, 3.
- So five, four, three.
OK.
- Okay, here we go. - Well, looking at, starting with Gavin Newsom's claims that slaves somehow existed in California, which is in conflict with history, There were never slaves in California.
I think there's legal grounds to say you cannot spend the taxpayers' money on this, obviously.
But it's a grotesque theft and graft operation that, of course, California is suffering under with these leaders.
It's despicable.
But the other portions of the Warnock and the mules, the financial mules, which has an eerie similarity to 2000 mules, the ballot carriers, that again is a demonstration of domestic enemies.
Domestic enemies, like foreign enemies, are targets for killing in defensive operations, defense of your country.
This is a war.
This is a guerrilla war.
This is an attempt to overthrow the Republican form of government through this massive election fraud.
And there's no, you know, the saddest thing is the lunatic Democrats think any means to accomplish their goal is justifiable.
And their goal, of course, is death and misery and destruction through their socialistic impulse and stealing and, I mean, madness and defunding police and all the rest of the stuff that the Democrats push in their mental illness.
This can only be met with local political reaction, and it has to be done quickly.
And again, the Declaration of Independence prescribes that when government, and these are government operatives enabled by the media, become destructive of people's rights and liberties, it is the duty of the people to overthrow such government.
And that means they do not ask permission to overthrow They overthrow by violence and all means necessary, the tyranny that is being attempted to be opposed upon them.
And I've said it for a long time, I just cannot see This being resolved any other way because the Democrats have become mad dogs.
They have no mental restraint or reason left.
They have become hyper hysterical lobotomized zombie automatons that are pursuing an agenda and a political misery and dystopia.
That they don't even have the imagination to fathom.
They're just like walking robots.
So, this is going to inevitably be met by, I think, an American Civil War, and the sooner the better.
Jim?
I am apprehensive that you're exactly right.
While the GOP's new committee leaders prepare for a blitz of investigations, given that they've taken the slender control of the House of Representatives, it makes a big difference.
House representatives are promising aggressive oversight of Biden admin once they assume the majority, focusing on presidential son Hunter Biden, illegal immigration, and the origin of COVID-19.
They won't have enough votes to advance key legislative priorities if there's no Democrat buy-in, but their oversight could put Democrats on the defensive and dampen support for Biden going into 2024.
But bear in mind there was no support for Biden in 2020.
There was no support for Biden in 2022.
So whether or not there's any support for Biden in 2024 will make no difference unless we can fix the election rigging.
Jim Jordan is expected to serve as the next chair of the House Judicial Committee.
He's wonderful.
He helped form and then led the ultra-conservative House Freedom Caucus, voted on January 6 to object to County of Pennsylvania's electoral vote.
Trump thought so highly of him, he presented him with the nation's highest civilian honor, the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
Judicial handles oversight of the DOJ, Homeland Security, crime, immigration, civil liberties, usually one of the most partisan committees, but his combative style stands out even there.
The committee would be the place where any effort would begin to impeach a member of the Biden admin, as some Republicans have been proposing.
For Alexandra Mayorkas, the Secretary of Homeland Security.
Jordan's inquiries in recent months make clear they'll investigate FBI at Mar-a-Lago.
He's also advocated wide-ranging looks at the Biden immigration and origin of the COVID policies.
Oversight.
James Comer is expected to serve as the next chair of the House Oversight Reform Committee.
Made it clear investigating Biden's son, Hunter, will be a top priority.
They want to determine whether his activities have compromised the nation's national security and Biden's ability to lead.
He's also been laying the groundwork for investigating the U.S.-Mexican border by sending a letter to Mallorca seeking an array of documents and communication pertaining to their border policy.
That's just a slice of their focus.
We're going to investigate 40 or 50 different things, he said.
We have the capacity.
The federal government spending in response to COVID will also be under scrutiny.
Raquel McCullough from Texas is expected to serve as the next chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee investigating withdrawal from Afghanistan, which was so massively botched, including the loss of 13 U.S.
service members and a suicide bombing as it was taking place.
The way it was done was such a disaster and disgrace to our veterans, they deserve answers to many questions.
Kathy McMorris-Rogers of Washington is expected to be the next chair of Energy and Commerce, which has the broadest jurisdiction of any authorizing committee in Congress, from health care to environmental protection and national energy policy.
Representative Jason Smith, Adrian Smith, and Vern Buchanan have expressed interest in serving as the next chairs of the Tax-Writing, House Ways and Means Committee.
Other key spots?
Agriculture, Glenn Thompson.
Appropriation, Kate Granger.
Armed Service, Mike Rogers.
Budget Committee, multiple.
Financial Services, Patrick McHenry.
Homeland Security, multiple.
Intelligence, Turner, Natural Resources, Bruce Westerman, Science-Based Technology, Frank Lucas, Transportation and Infrastructure, Sam Graves, Veterans Affairs, Mike Bost.
Scott, your thoughts?
Well, the first thought is where is Marjorie Taylor Greene?
Why isn't Marjorie Taylor Greene a chairwoman of a committee?
My God, if there's anybody that should symbolize the hope for resurrection of the Republican Party resembling anything of manhood, anything of decent conservative impulses for freedom and transparency and character, it would be Marjorie Taylor Greene.
And what about Lauren Borbert or Burbay or whatever her name is from, I think, Colorado?
I mean, these limp-wristed beta males that have been around for how long?
I mean, what is their record for speaking?
What have they done?
And they're now, oh, well, we're on the musical chairs.
We're in the front of the line for a committee position.
I'm very doubtful about that, Jim, because I back Firebrands.
I back killers when it comes to rhetoric and figurative debate violence.
I want men who aren't going to debate like they're at a Barbie doll convention.
I want men who are going to debate and women that they're going to debate like Rambo with a knife in their teeth saying, who wants to come up here and debate with me?
And I only see Jim Jordan being one of those people and Marjorie Taylor Greene.
So the whole thing looks very skeptical.
I was struck by McCall saying, while we want to investigate Afghanistan, our service members deserve to know You know what service members deserve to know, and you know what I want to know, McCall, and I want to have in a hearing of the United States Congress?
I want to know why we were in Afghanistan in the first place.
I want to know what triggered Afghanistan.
Oh yeah, now I remember.
9-11.
Well, let's bring in experts who know something about 9-11.
Let's bring in the great Dr. Jim Fetzer.
Let's bring in Barbara Honiger.
Let's bring in Kevin Barrett.
Let's bring in Richard Gage.
Let's bring in all sorts of people who did the 9-11 memoirs with Robert David Steele.
Let's bring in some experts who know the science and the history and the geospatial scientific dimensions of the implosion of the World Trade Center Tower and the impossibility of the Solomon Building breaking up and falling into its own footprints because of a fire on the roof.
Let's look at the Pentagon and the absence of plane parts.
There's no wheels, there's no tail section, there's no engines.
I want to know those questions, Mr. McCall.
I don't want to know, and I don't care about how Democrats are incompetent, and they can't do anything when it comes to honor, so it doesn't surprise me that they pull out of Afghanistan like Humpty Dumpty falling off a wall.
That's their nature.
But I do want to know the deeper things that show the grotesque perversion and lies and manipulation of the American public on September 11, 2001, By the Republicans George Bush and Dick Cheney and Condoleezza Rice and Don Rumsfeld and Dove Zachheim and a whole host of other Project for a New American Century conspirators.
I want to know the whole story behind this Afghanistan which led to how many soldiers being killed and maimed and their families broken up and they're scarred for life.
I want to know all of these things, and this is what the American Congress and these committees are supposed to do if they have any honor, which they don't, and this is a demonstration of that.
So this entire political change You know, Jim, it could be short-lived because if they get up there and they start spouting off the same tired BS rhetoric about America leading the world and therefore we have to interject ourselves in military operations all over the world and blah blah blah and Ukraine is a good place and we need to keep giving money.
If the Republicans do that, they all deserve to die the death of the Democrats who violated and stole the election because they're no better.
And I think the American people are at the same position.
They are, they are sickened, they're disenchanted, they're outraged, many of them are too tired to get up and go into these rhetorical fights, you know, they kind of just walk away defeated, depressed, You know, popping their pills, taking their beer, watching their Super Bowl.
I see that all in my fraternity.
Half the guys, if not three-fourths of them, are completely, you know, defeated and they're absorbed in their leisure activities.
Well, you won't have leisure.
You won't have families.
You won't have anything in this country if you don't stand up And extinguish the lies with the fire extinguisher of truth and hoist and chop up these liars and these lies in the gladiatorial arena of the Congressional House and the Senate.
This is the one time where real militant rhetorical warriors are needed.
Jim Jordan's the only one that I see that I have any confidence.
Marjorie Taylor Greene is another.
But the real question is, is the Republican takeover of the House going to do that, or are they going to be another turtleneck, flatulent, simpleton, castrated fool like Mitch McConnell and McCarthy?
The jury is still out, Jim.
God, I think you make some excellent points.
Marjorie Taylor Greene would be an obvious choice.
She ought to be put out front and center.
Meanwhile, the U.S.
Court, and I'm surprised by this, has struck down the appointment of a special master to review the Trump record.
I thought the best decision the judge had made in this case was to appoint a special master.
According to the Court of Appeals, however, the law is clear.
We cannot write a rule that allows any subject of a search warrant to block government investigation after the execution of the warrant, nor can we write a rule that allows only former presidents to do so.
The ruling paves the way for the release of 22 pages of government docs stored at Trump's Florida home to DOJ investigators.
But where we know the FBI has already announced there was nothing there, that it was all innocuous, it was obvious, this was just a political stunt prior to the midterm to tarnish Trump.
The ruling, authored by two Trump appointees as well as one by W, said that pleas to keep the special master would represent a dramatic and unwarranted use of the court's authority.
I don't believe that for a second.
Trump's attorneys failed to meet multiple tests required to show the government abused its authority by searching his home.
I don't think that was a question, though they clearly did.
The court rejected the former president's claims to the documents.
As we've said, the status of a document in personal or presidential does not alter the authority of the government to seize it under a warrant supported by probable cause.
And by the way, It's horrific, but I'm told it was Ivanka and Jared who turned Trump in over this, which is a grotesque abuse.
I suspect it has permanently affected their relationship.
Attorney General Garland last month appointed a special counsel, longtime prosecutor Jack Smith, who appears to be a very nasty piece of work, to oversee DOJ as well as January 6th.
In other words, he's the anti-Trump guy.
He's the arch-villain.
DOJ lawyers contend it was necessary to recover the documents, but the evidence could also help bolster a case related to the record seized during the surge where they were stored.
They're talking about espionage act violation just showing it's one more effort to try to make Trump ineligible to run again.
They fear him that much.
The ruling unwinds a special master process ongoing since mid-September that Trump had been ordered to pay for.
Trump and his lawyers filed a joint briefing reviewing their disputes.
Scott, your thoughts?
You know, the other questions, of course, are the Department of Justice, FBI used a fraudulent search warrant because it was not inked by a blue ink, wet ink signature, as it is required by law.
They often just stamp a piece of paper.
That is not a legitimate search warrant instrument.
Of course, the other actions of going into the skiff and throwing papers on the ground and photographing it is another indication of fraud.
The insertion, perhaps, of documents Where are the video records of their intrusion into the property and their entrance into the facility?
And did anyone who went into the facility have a top-secret SCI clearance?
Because if they did not, they shouldn't have been in the facility.
That's the laws of handling classified secret and top-secret materials.
You have to have the equivalent clearance to be able to go into the room where the materials are stored.
I know, I had one.
And The agents, if they went into the facility and didn't have the proper clearances, all of that evidence is fruit of the poisonous tree.
All material is fruit of the poisonous tree.
The ongoing revelations of this, the attempt to try and smear Trump and arrest him and charge him in the Espionage Act, I think all of this is nothing but political rhetorical drama to try and remove Trump from the election.
You know, not realizing that it could very well, again, set the country into a state of revolution because it's not about what they do to Trump.
It's the fact that they do this in contempt of our Republican form of government.
This is the first time anyone's done this to an American president.
That's another issue.
It reveals more about the Democrats and their rhino supporters that they are now Lunatic tyrants just working for their own enrichment.
And of course, the king of the lunatics, Jared Kushner.
And if Ivanka Trump had participated in that, there's nothing more despicable than fratricide or whatever you want to equate that to.
But it's still in play.
We'll see how this pans out.
I think we're going to witness This being brought up in Congress, I think with the House and Jim Jordan, they're going to pull in the FBI and make them the number one target to be examined and forensically dissected and investigated on every level from the Hunter Biden laptop cover up that an FBI agent did when the A laptop shop owner brought the laptop after it had been left.
He brought it to the FBI.
His father, a 30-year veteran of the United States Air Force and an officer, took it and said, I've never been so humiliated and mistreated in my life going to the FBI and the FBI covering it up.
So the Congress needs to examine all of this because I don't think there's a greater enemy to the United States and the people than the FBI and I think the CIA are of course right along with them.
Nothing good has come from those agencies, Jim.
Very good, Scott.
Meanwhile, Twitter staff to be grilled before Congress for censoring the Hunter Biden laptop story.
James Comer, the GOP ranking member, made the remark on Friday on Fox News after Elon Musk dropped one of the so-called Twitter files, an expose of the inner workings of their censorship machine.
Every employee at Twitter involved in suppressing the Hunter laptop story will have an opportunity to come before Congress.
Musk and independent journalist Matt Tiabi unveiled a series of internal Twitter communication giving insight to the steps taken in order to suppress the story.
Republicans have long accused Twitter and some media outlets Of suppressing the story, which included reporting that bolstered claims that the president lied when he said he had no business dealing with his son.
And of course, we know all that.
He was lying about it.
To suppress the Biden-Hunter business, Twitter executives marked it unsafe, limiting its spread and even blocking it from being directly shared, Tiabi observed.
Such extreme restrictions had in the past been reserved only for content such as child pornography.
Messages between execs shared by Tayabi showed confusion about the actions taken.
I'm struggling to understand the policy basis for marking this as unsafe.
The disclosures show both Democrats and Republicans had access to Twitter's censorship system.
Each side lodged various requests and complaints.
But because Twitter is employed predominantly left-leaning political conviction, Democrats had more avenues to press their case.
The Epoch Times has been unable to independently verify, but all this appears to be absolutely straight and accurate.
Comer, in an interview, said the Twitter files showed New York Post reporting on the Hunter Biden laptop is being vindicated.
But this story is just the beginning.
We're going to have every single person on Twitter involved in this before the House Oversight Committee.
Tiabi noted there's much more to come, and it is coming in waves.
Scott, your thoughts?
Well, I think this is one of the top stories that's just coming out, and that is the revelation that Twitter employees have suppressed the Hunter Biden laptop story for political purposes, political reasons, aiding and abetting the Democrats.
It had come allegedly to, again, from the FBI and the top levels of the Democrat government leadership.
Trying to squash and erase the statement, the press, the freedom of speech.
So it enters a realm of government suppressing speech, which is a violation of rights.
And again, when the government becomes tyrannical and oppressive of your rights, it's time to overthrow such government.
This is one of those cases.
This is the very most important case in the history of the United States of America, where if the government has instructed, as they did Facebook, remember the FBI is an instrument of the executive power.
It is the agency created by Congress, some would say illegally and unlawfully and unconstitutionally, but nevertheless it is an agency that has been created to uh exercise the dollars attributed to them by congress the power of the purse and the executive branch the president is uh responsible for the direction of these agencies i know i worked in government and what what is obscene of course is that
The original FBI suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story was occurring when President Trump is supposedly in charge of the United States government.
He's the president and the FBI, under his control, under his jurisdiction, under his direction,
Is engaging in the suppression of American citizens' rights and the suppression of speech that the American public had they known of Hunter Biden's pedophilia and his raping of little Chinese girls and his whoring and prostitution and crack pipe smoking and his Ukrainian money laundering bribery and the Chinese Communist Party paying him 30 million dollars to get the big guy set up and on and on and on and on and on.
The American public didn't know any of that.
Mostly they're dumb as a bag of rocks and they watch a little bit of Fox News or a little bit of this, but they don't pay attention to this stuff as detailed-wise as we do.
But had they even got a glimpse, if there was any decent media whatsoever, aside from Tucker Carlson, that brought this up and said, new revelations, Hunter Biden, Chinese Communist Party, Ukraine, crack pipes, all sorts of bad stuff, what does this mean?
Joe Biden would not be the President of the United States and most of these people would be overthrown.
But they suppressed it.
And that's where I think the next stage is going to be.
I'm not getting into if Elon Musk is a good guy or not.
Putting that aside, let's just look at what the material facts say and let the truth lead us.
And the only answer is the Congressional investigation and request for prosecution Of all the FBI, law enforcement, government personnel were associated with the deprivation of rights under color of law of the United States citizens and the using of Twitter as an arm, as an agent of the government.
They do not have protection under this 203 thing and it needs to be completely overthrown, overhauled, and exposed.
Jim?
Yes, and of course, the exposure of the corruption only makes a difference if the machines are giving us straight votes, which they're not doing.
Ivy League Princeton University offers black plus queer and leather BDSM course.
I'm just embarrassed by this.
As a graduate of Princeton in 1962, I find this humiliating.
Years ago, young people aspiring to prosper may have taken leather-making lessons.
These days, however, it's of a steamier sort.
Some may recall select easy-going electives, underwater basket weaving, but times have changed.
Baskets under construction are absolutely Amish.
In 2022, universities offer more contemporary fare.
For example, Princeton next spring will host instruction on something fantastically frisky.
The official website advertises VIS-207, AAS-206, GSS-216, Black Plus Queer in Leather, Black Leather, BDSM Material Culture.
The course will be taught by Juan Leona McCullin, whose homepage touts her as a Princeton Arts Fellow, an award-winning visual artist, filmmaker, and curator.
College has come quite a long way, as has curating.
See, university launches graduate program to fight the rampant white supremacy of museums.
Description!
Black Queer BDSM Material Culture Resists Contextualization in Relationship to Biological Narratives because of the Underground Elements of the Community.
This course will explore the material culture of the community from three perspectives, architecture and location, Visual artists in exhibitions and Black queer BDSM communities with a significant research focus on finding and presenting new material.
We'll consider the fragility of archival engagement with these communities by surveying existing BDSM archives in research libraries, community groups, and individuals and their personal ephemera.
Schools are hard at work deconstructing that which came before, and where libertine views on sex are concerned is full sweet ahead.
Arizona Department of Education advised 10-year-olds to talk with strangers online about their sexual identities.
Vermont makes history.
Starts handing out condoms to 12-year-olds.
K-2 teachers wear QR codes promoting sex work and sex secrets.
Dirty work.
Universities try to sell students on the positives of sex.
Report.
Utah College Course invites students to watch pornographic films together.
University professor says sex work is the best thing for young adults.
Abolish capitalism and prison.
A more traditional take doesn't always work out.
Professor claims there are two sexes.
All but one of her graduate students walks out.
For instance, tantalizing training on BDSM boasts a rousing reading list.
Samples?
Sensational flash.
Race power and masochism.
The color of kink.
Black women, BDSD, and pornography.
The black body in ecstasy.
Reading race, reading pornography.
Fetishism is cultural discourse in the life.
A black gay ontology.
A taste for brown sugar.
Black women in pornography.
Decades ago, higher education was viewed as superiorly sophisticated.
Ivy League schools avoided unsightly exposure related to salacious subjects.
But these days, it's beautiful to be bald, and institutions don't mind getting caught with their pants down.
Meanwhile, the world's third largest democracy is outlawing premarital sex.
Lawmakers in Indonesia have approved a new criminal code that also bans cohabitation between unmarried couples.
Premarital sex in Indonesia will be punishable by up to a one-year prison sentence after lawmakers pass a massive overhaul of the country's criminal code, despite protests from human rights campaigners.
The new legislation, which will come into effect in three years and apply to both Indonesian nationals and visiting foreigners alike, bans all sexual relations outside of marriage.
It also prohibits unmarried couples from living together, which would be punishable by six months behind bars.
However, according to a copy of the amended code seen by the Associated Press, only close relatives, including a spouse, parent, or child, will be able to raise such complaints with the authorities.
The bill was supported by all political parties in the parliament.
It also criminalizes the promotion of contraception as well as blasphemy, insults against a president or state institutions, holding unauthorized protests and spreading views counter to the ideology of the Muslim majority name.
And, of course, in Islam, both the consumption of alcohol and sex outside of marriage is prohibited.
The new code was first proposed in 2019 and met with fierce protest.
Tens of thousands saying the legislation was a threat to freedom of expression and privacy rights.
Although lawmakers toned down some aspects of the bill, human rights campaigners have nevertheless blasted it as a massive setback for what is considered to be the third largest democracy in the world.
The tourism sector has also condemned the new legislation as totally counterproductive.
With Mulana Yasram, Deputy Chief of Indonesia's Tourist Industry Board, saying it will have a hugely negative impact just as the country begins a slow recovery from the COVID pandemic.
Indonesia Tourism Associate had previously suggested foreign arrivals to holiday destinations such as Bali were expected to reach pre-pandemic levels of 6 million by 2025.
The U.S.
Ambassador to Indonesia, Sung Kim, has also warned the new coat could mean less foreign investment, tourism, and travel.
Stating, "Criminalizing the personal decisions of individuals would loom large within the decision matrix of many companies determining whether to invest in Indonesia." Albert Ayres, the spokesperson for Indonesia's Justice Ministry, has defended the new laws, saying they are intended to protect the institution of marriage and Indonesian values.
So, Scott, your thoughts?
I studied this phenomenon at the Heritage Foundation and the Department of Health and Human Services during the Bush administration, and essentially the sexual devolution, disintegration, corrosion of a society, or the maintenance and preservation and blossoming of a society, is determined by their two paths in the sexual dimension.
One path, the right path, towards The preservation of the purity of the sexual relationship within the context of marriage and the binding marital bond between husband and wife to become mother and father and to raise the child within that framework where they receive both the masculine identity and the feminine identity of the mother and the father and there's extended families mother
Grandparents, aunts and uncles and cousins, that has been social science statistically proven to be the absolute healthiest place for a child to exist.
And the reason that's valuable is because the healthiest, most emotionally and intellectually well-formed child leads to the healthiest emotionally, intellectually well-formed society.
The opposite, if you go down the road of Cohabitation out of, you know, fornication, non-marriage, you know, multiple partners.
It leads to nothing but sexually transmitted diseases, welfare, criminality.
Look at the Black population, the death of the Black family or death of the Negro family that Senator Patrick Moynihan wrote in 1968-69.
It was the transformation of the black family into a mother that is wedded to the state in welfare, and the absence of fathers, and what do we have is the evolution of that 30, 40, 50 years later.
These are things that take a long time to melt down into the level of insanity that we have, but it all started With the degeneration and destruction of the sexual relationship and identity in America.
So America is, in a sense, the classic test case to examine what happened.
When America changed its laws in the 1940s and 50s and 60s.
So, because in this country, it used to be illegal to live in a house with someone that was not your wife.
You can't rent a hotel room with someone who's not your wife.
There was alienation of affection laws.
If a woman came to lure a man or vice versa out of a marital relationship, they could be prosecuted for alienation of affection laws.
uh those preserve the family and the marriage and the integrity with criminal laws to to punish people and send a message that it would not be tolerated and on and on the licensing of the legalization of homosexuality and the removal of it as being a mental illness and what has that done 20-30 years later You've got rainbow flag gay parades with gay parades with sadomasochistic leather pedophilia.
You've got, you know, drag queens now trying to lure little boys into being drag queens.
You've got the normalization of it into the college curriculum.
And it leads to what kind of an individual?
An individual who's medicated, most likely from a broken family.
And what does that lead to?
Well, we have a lot of shootings, allegedly, with these transgender individuals wearing purple hair.
The recent shooter was attributed as being one of these transgender schizophrenics.
So this is the evolution of the sexual dysfunctionality and the sexual perversion is a complete dysfunctional schizophrenic and perverse society.
So America is a test case.
Indonesia is exactly right to do this.
I support that law entirely without hesitation of any kind whatsoever.
Because I understand that it is the preservation of a healthy society, and if you don't preserve the integrity of the sexual purity within the context of marriage, you do the opposite.
You create a hedonistic Sodom and Gomorrah, sexually loose, which leads to mental illness and sexually transmitted diseases in every form, of evil and sickness.
This is a scientific fact.
It's not an opinion.
It is a fact.
And you look at history.
You look at the... I've got a whole book I wrote on my website.
People can download it and get it.
Mastering Man.
And it goes through the entire social science.
It was part of my dissertation when I was at the Heritage Foundation.
We looked at every single study from every university.
It took me six months and even more.
I was doing that in the government too.
To look at every study That was examining dimensions of family, sexuality, its correlation to a healthy coalesce.
I had Alan Carlson, Pat Fagan, Robert Rector, the titans of family and social science research.
And that's why I can say with absolute authority That it is essential for a society to pass laws to protect the integrity of their families, their marriage, and the sexual dimension, because failure to protect it will lead to a complete decay and demoralization and insanity
That you have no further to look at that these courses like you've just identified in Princeton, Jim, one of the originally one of the top universities in the country and has now become this bastion of lunatics and schizophrenics that are celebrating black leather-clad homosexuality.
If America continues down that road, Sodom and Gomorrah awaits, Jim.
Well, I guess my position personally would be slightly different because I tend to think, you know, humans are entitled to relationships.
I certainly promote heterosexual, you know, serious relationships, but I certainly would not be disposed to endorse such a stringent view myself.
Just let me mention we have the sensational False Flags and Conspiracies virtual conference 2022.
We now have the conference complete, and we have a $5 option.
For just $5, you can get any of the one-hour options, $5 apiece, or $100 for all 26.
option.
If you're just $5, you can get any of the one hour option, $5 a piece, or $100 for all 26.
Actually, there are 25, but a 26 will be added.
They all give unlimited access.
Meanwhile, my Supreme Court case—I'm very, very disappointed—has been declined.
But here's just a mention about the conference.
Pick and choose the speakers and topics you want to hear.
26 to choose between.
Just COVID, just False Flag, any combo you like.
$5 for 6 months of viewing each.
Check out the speakers and topics.
You can go to the link on my blog for False Flags and Conspiracies Virtual Conference 2022.
Here you see the variety of choices.
Holly Seliger on Central Bank Conspiracies and Shays' Rebellion.
Nick Kohlrstrom on Euro Terror 2004-2017.
Joe Wilson debunking the Green New Deal.
Miriam Hinnane, False Flags and Media Lies, really the development or the deconstruction of a PSYOP related to George Floyd.
Joaquin Hegopian, the genocidal agenda.
Jim Petzer, the death of democracy.
Ron Avery, you and Sandy Hook and SCOTUS.
Alexander Baker, you have no rights and there is no law.
Alex Scott, solving false flags with music.
Dina Pollard Sachs, COVID and the law.
Fred Luchter, which will be added.
He was unable to connect, but we're going to do it this week and add it.
The Missing Gas Chambers, Brian Davidson, Connecticut State Police Archives related as Sandy Hook, Katherine Horton, Human Wrongs and Rights.
In addition, Carl Herman, Everything is Alive, Monique Lukens, Exposing George Floyd, Variations on the Theme, Brian Davidson, The Buffalo Amateur Hour, Nick Kohlerstrom, Novichok Hoaxes 2018-2020, Edward Hendry,
The Pandemic and the Vax, Russ Winter, The Turtles on the Vespose, Giuseppe Vaffangulo, none dare call it genocide, Donald Javries, Hidden History and False Flags, Brian Davidson, Masonic Signs and Signals, Sarah Westhoff, Promoting the New World Order, Scott Bennett, You're not supposed to know.
Scott, it was sensational.
I was just so delighted with the outcome.
You're not supposed to know.
Scott, it was sensational.
Yeah.
I was just so delighted with the outcome.
Your thoughts?
Yeah, I was.
I really enjoyed Catherine Horton.
I think she's one of the most intelligent ladies I've listened to.
A brilliant geometric sort of tactical analysis of psychological profiles and behaviors and it was fascinating to see the corruption of organizations that occurs when you have psychopaths and lunatics and Sociopaths rising up in the ladder of corporate life.
Of course, Bill Binney was phenomenal.
Ole Damagard, I really enjoyed his Shoes of Death photographic montage of all of the false flag shooting events where shoes are present and the Masonic interconnection to that.
The entire conference was an exceptional presentation of things that people never see, never suspect, but once you see and hear, you can never forget.
And the only thing I would add to my biochemical labs was we did talk about the FTX cryptocurrency money laundering racket that the Democrats were using and funneling money to Ukraine, then translating it into cryptocurrency at FTX, Sam Bankman Freed's organization.
And then that FTX cryptocurrency was being put back into the Democrat candidates that were running for this election in 2022.
So, and of course the biochemical labs indicating the origins of COVID-19 and its original experimentations and all of the slides that have been caught and presented.
So, I think the overall conference was fascinating and people really will get a better education than they've ever gotten from anywhere else in any institution.
If they sit down and spend a weekend or, you know, a few days over a month To watch and listen to each one of these presentations.
They were truly astounding, Jim.
John, do you want to add some comments?
Oh, absolutely.
Where else could you get such a variety of solid truth and things that you won't get anywhere else?
This is it.
This is a prize.
This is a keepsake.
And $5 for one of those 26 hours is great.
Buy the whole thing for $100.
Well you can't get that anywhere and it happened for your life and it's something you can review and learn something that you'll never find anywhere else.
And Jim is just amazing mastermind of this whole thing, coordinator.
Hats off on his 62nd, 62nd, 82nd birthday here.
So today, so we really salute you brother Jim for doing a phenomenal job.
I just get goosebumps thinking about how Wonderful to have this association with you and Scott.
And I think everybody else can, even though YouTube doesn't want us to be seen.
Okay, go ahead.
Thank you, Don, for all those wonderful observations, kind words.
To my astonishment, my petition before SCOTUS for a re-hearing was denied.
SCOTUS can't figure out it was a scam even when I gave them a seat A Connecticut FEMA map from its offices at Sandy Hook Elementary, plus photos from Connecticut State Police files showing no bodies, no blood, no student deaths or chairs.
Petition denied.
Download to see for yourself.
What I'm pointing out is that Connecticut FEMA had on their schedule the drill at Dickinson Drive at the Sandy Hook Elementary School for 14 December 2012.
It's right on their schedule, and they even provided a map State of the Nation even declared this may be the single most important issue brought before the Supreme Court in our lifetime, but SCOTUS didn't have time for it.
Whether we have the right to a trial by jury in each and every state, SCOTUS could not be bothered.
Read and weep.
Moreover, Appendix E. Take a look at Appendix E, the sworn affidavit of a Texas-licensed private investigator.
He compared the state police report with the photos in its own archive, from which the metadata had been reviewed.
Here's down the hallway.
Looking down the corridor, the shooter walked to enter room 10 after passing up room 12, immediately to the left.
Notice the room on the right is 9, the conference room where the principal, the psychiatrist, and the teacher were killed.
This is the floor area that is described as having hoaxed from the principal and Sherlock, the psychologist, lying in pools of blood.
While some evidence of red substance is present, in my opinion, it is not consistent with the statement, pools of blood, nor, of course, are any bodies to be seen.
Meanwhile, other photos inside the classrooms not only show no bodies or blood, but no student desks or chairs, no teachers' desks, no American flags, not only proof it was not a mass murder, but proof it was not even an operational school.
Can you believe I provided SCOTUS with proof Sandy Hook was a FEMA drill presented as mass murder, including the FEMA manual, the Connecticut FEMA schedule, and images from Connecticut State Police showing no bodies and no blood, yet petition denied?
At this point in time, my position is that the evidence appears to be more consistent with the alternative account of a FEMA exercise presented as mass murder to promote gun control, signed Brian Davidson, a licensed Texas private investigator, Panoramic Investigations, A17936.
K17936. Scott, your thoughts. - Well, it's required of course to look at what photographs were taken If there's a shooting, you would have had photographs of every single dead body in the position where they lay from multiple angles.
You would have had every form of photographic forensic evidence taken to determine, you know, all the aspects of this murder.
None of that occurred.
There was no photographs whatsoever of the bodies, of how they were shot, how they laid.
You know, on and on and on, and I think your authoritative work on Nobody Died at Sandy Hook is certainly something that is not going to disappear.
The Supreme Court abandoning its duty only means this needs to be brought up in multiple ways at different times and different agencies.
You can never tolerate this.
You can never accept it, because if you accept it, Well, that's it.
The Supreme Court ruled you're accepting a lie, so you have to stand on the truth.
This was a lie.
This is completely false, and you will never accept this as being true, and nor will you accept any judgment, any direction from a court to recognize a lie by acquiescing and submitting to its order for payment or anything else.
You cannot Uh, you cannot, uh, you know, surrender to the lie.
You have to fight till the death for the truth, and newly discovered evidence is always, uh, always warrants a reopening of a case.
Jim?
Well, it was fairly astonishing, Scott, that I had laid out to the Supreme Court how the procedure for summary judgment in Wisconsin allowed the judge to decide the facts based on his subjective opinion.
Historically, juries decide facts.
Courts, judges, apply the law.
But in this case, the Wisconsin procedure allows a judge, based on his own subjective opinion, to decide whether evidence or facts are or are not reasonable.
And if he determines them to be unreasonable, he can merely set them aside as though they did not exist.
The plaintiff and I could not have been more at odds because he was insisting he had a child who died in a death certificate that was authentic at Sandy Hook, where it stated on the death certificate he had died on 14 December 2012 of multiple gunshot wounds at Sandy Hook Elementary School.
I, on the other hand, were insisting nobody died at Sandhug.
That was a FEMA drill presented as mass murder, which of course implied that any death certificate for alleged deceit would have to be fake.
And I even provided the manual for the exercise.
Now, It turns out that this abusive protocol, summary judgment, is inconsistent with that of other states.
I use it as my contrast case to Texas.
In Texas, in order to have a summary judgment to determine there are no disputed facts, You'd have to take all the positions declared by the defendant, me in this case, and then assume them to be true, hypothetically, and ask the plaintiff whether they agreed.
And only if they agreed, in this case, that it was a FEMA drill presented as mass murder to promote gun control, would there be no disputed facts, in which case a summary judgment could go forward.
But in the case of Wisconsin, in spite of the juxtaposition of positions, it could not have been more in contradiction.
The judge simply ruled again and again and again my evidence, my facts were not reasonable, even including the reports of two forensic document experts supporting my position.
It's therefore absurd, because in the courts of law, the way in which the authenticity of documents is determined is by forensic document experts.
I had not one.
I had two.
The plaintiffs had none.
It ought to have been definitive on that basis alone.
And yet, when I appealed the case to the Wisconsin Court of Appeals, they had in successive paragraphs, it is reasonable to believe that Adam Lanza shot his mother, then went to San Diego and shot 20 kids and six adults.
And in the following paragraph, it's unreasonable to believe it was a FEMA drill presented as mass murder to promote gun control.
Regardless of the evidence, it was stunning.
And since the Wisconsin Superior Court declined to review my petition, I was in a position to go to the United States Supreme Court.
But I must say, I am massively disappointed.
And a colleague of mine with whom I've discussed, in fact, Ron Avery, who had a presentation on the case for our conference, He's doing a radio show today where he's talking about a case the court did take, namely about whether a baker had the right to refuse to bake some kind of obscene cake for a gay couple.
The Supreme Court felt that was more important than whether or not American citizens are entitled to a trial by jury.
I think this is just as absurd as it gets, Scott, and I invite your comments and Dawn's yours first, Scott.
Well, what comes to mind, yeah, you're right.
It is obscene in choosing a case about a gay couple wanting to get married and have a cake maker make them a cake or not.
I thought that had been determined already that, no, you can't force someone to express work on something that violates their core beliefs as a human being and their religion.
But what comes to mind, of course, Jim, is On my perspective, and I think Don can weigh in too, you have to go on the attack now.
And you really have to sue the state and sue Posner for committing fraud against you, damaging you.
You need to do to them what they've done to you to position that what this whole racket has been about is the suppression of one of the greatest crimes against the American people.
How it's done.
I mean, a lot of the experts that were at the conference were legally astute.
But I think that's the way forward.
It has to be met with an aggressive lawsuit against them, go on the attack against them, and introduce the evidence that way.
And I'll defer to Don on how best to do that.
Yeah, just let me make one more point for the sake of appreciating the significance of this case, which the State of the Union declared to be the, it may be the most, single most important issue to come before the Supreme Court in our lifetime.
It was whether or not a defendant is entitled to a trial by jury to decide disputed facts.
And the fact that it was not permissible and it was obviated in Wisconsin made it a very odd case.
But there are other states, such as Massachusetts, in which it's also the case.
And there's even a federal review board for federal employees that uses a similar procedure, all of which appear to be wrong and violative of our constitutional rights, but by virtue of a peculiarity of history.
The United States Supreme Court, alone among the 10 First Amendments to the Bill of Rights, has not ruled that the Seventh Amendment applies to all 50 states.
So I was teeing it up for the Supreme Court to make that historic decision, and instead it decided to finesse it and kick the can down the road.
Don, your final thoughts?
Oh, wow.
I think this whole thing with this court case and everything else is a real travesty of justice.
It's just terrible.
I mean, it's awful for our country.
And I think that you can see that our country is really under attack from all sides.
I mean, it's very fibrous.
Going back to the Constitution, we are being attacked and it looks like we're not able to put up a good defense like the evidence that's in the 350 page book that's written by 17 scholars and others is just absolute.
And to go and just ignore that.
I can't imagine in my brain how that can be in a country that is just and fair and actually hopefully looking for truth and a good stable way to be a successful progressive nation and growing instead of being attacked.
So it's just bad.
So this has been one heck of a show.
Hold on, hold on, hold on.
I have to tell you something, okay?
I'm tired of Sad, sympathetic, you know, the country is, you know, courts are screwed up.
Yeah, we all know that.
They are defiled traitors.
I have no hope or confidence in the Supreme Court or any of these courts or justices.
Putting that aside, my original response, which I want an answer for, is how best to go on the illegal attack.
I do not care about defense.
I want attack.
I want to attack Posner.
I want to attack Wisconsin.
I want to attack this judge.
I want to attack all those who have engaged in a conspiracy to hide the evidence of this.
And yes, they've abused and perverted the court system.
We've heard legal scholars before say justice is whatever the courts say it is, right?
Well, I don't accept that, but the only way to not accept that is to go on the attack, attack, attack.
So, I want to just exercise some thinking about how do you go on the attack against Posner, for example, and the judge and otherwise to say, you have engaged in a conspiracy, you have engaged in a cover-up, you've violated my rights to freedom of speech, you have, I mean, there's probably endless laws and codes that you could put up to say this is, these are all the things that you have violated.
These are the criminal and civil laws you violated.
That Jim has a right to serve as a court lawsuit against them.
That's what I want to focus on, because that's the only way that you're going to survive this, is to go on the attack and get everything that they covered up in the defense, you have put on a table in the attack, and at the end of the day, a jury goes, yes, everything Jim has is right.
I want to hear about that, Doug.
And I think it might well be that deprivation of rights under color of law, Scott, to which you've alluded in the past.
Oh, sure.
Wow.
We do have some more action to take to get justice and truth to prevail over a country that's going downhill.
So, thank you so much for watching here today on Truth Vs. News.
December 6th, Jim's birthday.
I'm Donald Weiner, producer at JD.ConsultantsAtLive.com.
Be sure to share this show because you're never going to see a show like this anywhere else.
And I think it's very important when It's of supreme importance.
So thank you so much for watching, folks.
▲
Export Selection