All Episodes
Previous Next
March 9, 2023 - Jim Fetzer
01:18:53
Need to Know News (8 March 2023) with Michael Parker
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This is Jim Petzer in Madison, Wisconsin, joined today by Michael Parker in Los Angeles, California, where we're here to bring you all the news you need to know.
Chris Weinert is unable to join us today.
With us or against us fails in Munich and Ben Gelleroo as the U.S.
tries an offer they cannot refuse.
You can't be neutral in NATO's proxy war with Russia.
Foreign ministers for the U.S., Germany, and Ukraine have told leaders of global South countries at the Munich Security Conference on February 18th, neutrality is not an option.
Secretary of State Blinken echoed his German counterpart, stressing, you really can't be neutral.
Well, why not?
What motivates this mafia-style pressure?
Nearly 90% of the world isn't following us on Ukraine, blared a Newsweek opinion piece last September 15.
While the U.S.
and its allies in Europe and Asia have imposed tough sanctions on Moscow, 87% of the world population has declined to follow us.
Economic sanctions have united our adversaries in shared resistance.
Less predictably, the outbreak of Cold War II has also led countries that were once partners or non-aligned to become increasingly multi-aligned.
In 2002, before the invasion of Iraq, W told Western European leaders, you're either with us or against us, even if they didn't believe Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or anything to do with 9-11.
My Way or A Highway is the title of a section of the Munich Security Report.
Some non-aligned members felt this was a warning not to participate in China's Belt and Road Initiative, their preferred highway.
Immediately after the conference in India, Secretary of the Treasury Yellen said G20 countries must condemn Russia for its invasion of Ukraine and must adhere to U.S.
sanctions against Russia.
But India, the chair of the G20, demurred.
Others have been hesitant to join the gang against Russia.
French President Macron observed in Munich I'm struck by how much we are losing the trust of the global South.
Macron's we reveres to the NATO countries, especially the G7, adding the West has been losing the Global South and hasn't done enough to respond to the charge of double standards, including by not helping poor countries fast enough with COVID vaccines.
Vice President Kamala Harris observed, many countries sit on the fence.
And in my opinion, well, they should be.
China's top diplomat stole the show in Munich, telling the delegates it's imperative to return to the Minsk II agreement as quickly as possible, which would mean a ceasefire and autonomy for the Donbass, getting NATO out of Ukraine.
That Minsk, too, is a binding instrument negotiated by the parties concerned and endorsed by the UN Security Council, even though we know, in fact, that Minsk was simply used as a cover to allow Ukraine to strengthen its armament.
Blinken responded, changing the subject, claiming China is considering providing lethal support to Russia, and we made very clear to them that would cause a serious problem for us and in our relationship.
Ukrainian President Lenskiy has indicated he would consider aspects of the Chinese proposal, and he planned to meet President Xi Jinping.
It would be useful to both countries and global security.
On February 24th, China issued its Global Security Initiative concept paper calling on countries to adopt to the profoundly changing international landscape, in a spirit of solidarity, that major countries must uphold justice, fulfill their due responsibilities, support consultation on an equal footing, and facilitate talks for peace.
China's former ambassador to the UN introduced a concept paper encouraging relevant countries to stop adding fuel to the fire, stop blaming China, and stop provoking the situation by using references such as Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.
As if to clarify, it doesn't always have to be polite and diplomatic.
China's foreign ministry issued a frank and forceful document, a detailed indictment of the U.S.
as an actor that has interfered in the internal affairs of other countries, pursuing, maintaining, and abusing hegemony, advancing subversion and infiltration, and willfully waging wars, bringing harm to the international community.
A remarkable statement.
The U.S.
arbitrarily passes judgment on democracy in other countries, fabricates a false narrative of democracy versus authoritarianism, the document says, mentioning the failed 2021 Summit for Democracy in Washington Which drew criticism and opposition from many countries for making a mockery of this weird democracy and dividing the world.
The document quotes former President Carter that the U.S.
is undoubtedly the most war-like nation in the history of the world and cited a Tufts report, the Military Intervention Project, a new data set on U.S.
military interventions, 1776 to 2019, reporting the U.S.
from 1976 to 2019 reporting, the US undertook nearly 400 military interventions globally during that period of time.
Michael, your thoughts?
You are with us or you are against this rhetoric.
It was wrong under Bush.
It's wrong now.
And when we go pushing our way around the world over and over again, at the beginning of the Ukraine-Russia conflict, I was puzzled.
I'm being overly generous here.
I was like, why are we not trying to mediate this thing?
Why are we immediately taking a side?
Why in the past year have we followed that up with $120 billion in aid, money, weapons, etc. to Ukraine and we have done nothing to try to mediate the situation in Ukraine?
In fact, we have added fuel to the fire.
And so when these other countries around the world look at us and like, well, you know, in the past when we have sided with the US, they eventually throw us under the bus.
And so the last part of what you just read from Carter talking about how war like the United States has been.
As an American, I I choose and I hold true to a belief that one day we will return to the foundation that we were created upon and we will be a light on the hill again.
But it's been a long time since that has happened and this Ukraine issue is the latest example of that so when china is offering to try to broker peace or at least suggest a return to the bargaining table and a return to the minsk agreement for all of its warts and a ceasefire china's looking pretty good in this respect to me
and i don't blame third world countries in the southern hemisphere and abroad for thinking you know what Those sanctions against Russia really didn't amount to much, except they hurt the entire global economy.
So we're not eager to join the U.S.
in further sanctions or joining you, especially if you're with us or against this rhetoric.
It's just incredibly It's not even naive.
They know exactly what they're doing, and they're being a bully, and this is why, unfortunately, people hate the U.S.
Michael, I think you got it right.
I mean, the Minsk agreements were just used as a cover to strengthen Ukraine and prepare it militarily for the expected Russian invasion.
And the deceit and deception and the bad faith of the West is going to be a permanent fixture of the future, sad to say.
Meanwhile, Ron Unz has a fascinating piece on war and propaganda in the Russia-Ukraine conflict.
We recently passed the first anniversary, and the Wall Street Journal published a lengthy review of the 12 months of the conflict, summarizing what had happened and describing future prospects.
Ukraine is a West war now.
The initial reluctance of the U.S.
and its allies to help Kiev fight Russia has turned into a messy program of military assistance, which carries risks of its own.
Though hardly critical of our involvement, the writer noted America and its allies have already provided Ukraine with an astonishing $120 billion in military equipment and money, a figure far larger than Russia's entire defense budget.
As the title of the piece indicates, the West had effectively taken control of the war And if the effort to defeat President Putin were to fail, American global influence might be undermined and the future of the NATO alliance called into question.
Notable foreign policy luminaries John Mearsheimer, Jeffrey Sachs, Douglas McGregor, Lawrence Wilkerson, Have all raised the possibility that NATO risks its integration.
Especially in the wake of Seymour Hersh's disclosure, Biden illegally destroyed the Nord Stream Pipeline, some of Europe's most important civilian energy infrastructure, which was both an act of war and a war crime.
So in effect, war America is at war with Russia on Russia's own border.
And if we lose that war, The era of our global dominance that followed the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union may come to an end.
Although war has been of enormous world importance, I've written very little about the details of the conflict.
Lacking military expertise, doubting I could contribute anything useful, The neocon establishment totally controls Western mainstream media.
Over the last few decades, they've made propaganda, dishonest or otherwise, one of their most frequently deployed political weapons.
No sooner had the war broken out than media was awash with heroic exploits of the Ghost of Kiev, the martyrs of Snake Island, outright hoaxes widely disseminated and believed at the time.
We live in the era of smartphones, so video clips showing Russian tanks destroyed or Russian troops defeated and retreating were widely promoted by partisans of Ukraine.
But such anecdotal evidence seemed totally meaningless to me.
In 1940, the French Army suffered one of history's most lopsided defeats at the hands of the Germans.
Yet if smart phones had been around, it would have been easy for pro-French activists to provide hundreds of clips showing destroyed German panzers or German units suffering defeat.
The obvious problem led some to search out a means of more objectively determining combat losses.
Many began relying on the Oryx website, run by purportedly independent open sources.
Journalists and others began using the photographic evidence it provided to conclude the Russians had suffered enormous, virtually catastrophic losses, with the undergone but highly motivated Ukrainian defenders destroying huge numbers of tanks and other vehicles with high Russian casualties.
The alleged loss, documented by Ordex, seems absolutely staggering.
One of the main website itemized nearly 9,500 Russian armored vehicles lost, 6,000 destroyed, 2,800 captures, 1,800 tanks, over 500 captured by the plucky Ukrainians.
Each is linked to a photograph.
Most either upload separately or contained within a tweet.
For example, 244 destroyed or captured T-72B tanks are listed, all individually numbered and linked to the photographic evidence.
Obviously, not all destroyed Russian vehicles would have been swept up, so the true scale must surely have been considerably greater.
Ukraine's hardware losses were also categorized, but only totaled around 3,000 altogether.
Our mainstream media elements have been filled with stories of Ukrainian victories and Russian defeats.
Surely, the largest compendium of actual material provided by the Oryx website has been an important reason, therefore.
But my impression is many writers on military affairs are enthralled by photos of heavy equipment, whether intact or destroyed, and Ornok provides thousands of such striking images.
If the Russians had indeed suffered more than three times Ukrainian losses, with well over 500 of their tanks captured by the latter, A Ukrainian military triumph might have seemed very likely, so the Americans and their allies naturally rewarded their victorious protégés with a tidal wave of financial and military support that easily topped $100 million.
The supposed Ukrainian achievement was a remarkable one, According to Wikipedia, the largest land offensive in human history was Germany's 1941 Operation Barbarossa, with fewer than 7,000 armored vehicles.
But if we credit Oryx, over the last 12 months, Ukraine's doty patriots have totally annihilated a far greater Russian mechanized force, while their own losses have been only a fraction.
I only recently looked again at the Oryx website, and the first thought that came to mind was how one could possibly determine whether the images were real, faked, or duplicated.
According to Wikipedia, the Ukrainian military possessed thousands of tanks, many of the same models used by the invading Russians.
So if Ukrainian activists uploaded a photo of a destroyed T-72B to Ornyx, how could we be sure it was a Russian tank rather than Ukrainian?
What if different photos of the same wrecked vehicle were taken from different angles and uploaded?
The fighting in the Donbass began in 2014.
How could we be sure photographs provided were from current events rather than earlier?
None of the military enthusiasts I asked had answers to these questions.
During recent decades, Hollywood special effects wizards have displayed great skill in showing Spider-Men swinging between skyscrapers, the Incredible Hulk undergoing transformation.
Surely, producing simple photos of destroyed military equipment would be trivial, a cost almost invisibly small compared to a movie budget.
Consider that these simple photos uploaded to a Dutch website have been a crucial factor in attracting tens of billions of dollars from American and allied governments, giving each single image on the Oryx website a potential value of $10 million or more.
Producing fake photos is certainly safer and easier than destroying Russian tanks.
Doing so on an industrial scale would seem a very cost-effective propaganda strategy.
Putting the issue in crude terms, I doubt whether Russian losses may be accurately estimated by aggregating or analyzing what amounted to Ukrainian propaganda tweets.
Oryx's origins, moreover, raise other troubling issues.
From the Iraq war onward, the credibility of the U.S.
government has steadily deteriorated.
Then in 2014, a British blogger, Elliot Huggins, established Bellingcat, supposed to be an independent research organization.
In practice, his efforts seem to almost invariably produce conclusions closely aligned with American foreign policy interests in Syria, Ukraine, and other international flashpoints.
Numerous distinguished international journalists and other experts, including Seymour Hersh, Theodore Apostol, Carol von Wolferen, often came to totally different conclusions, but their views were usually ignored by the media, while Bellingcat was heavily quoted in Washington outlines as fully confirming the accusations of the American government.
According to the wiki page on Hornix, both its founders were BillingCat alumni, raising questions whether they were really as independent as they claimed to be.
Meanwhile, other American experts have provided very different assessments.
Colonel Douglas MacGregor, for example, a leading conservative military strategist, having a long career in NATO, a finalist for National Security Advisor, a senior advisor to Secretary of Defense, nominated to be ambassador to Germany, Very well connected.
He's repeatedly stated it's actually Ukrainian forces that have suffered horrendous casualties, including as many as 160,000 combat deaths, compared to far lower Russian losses of perhaps 20,000 or so.
Others, such as Scott Ritter and Larry Johnson, have agreed.
Across his numerous interviews, McGregor comes across as quite persuasive and confident.
Given the enthusiastic almost uniforms of more powerful Western political, financial, and media interests for the Ukrainian side, I find it difficult to understand why McGregor, Ritter, Johnson, and others would take such contrary positions unless they sincerely believe they were correct.
A BBC research effort recently used social media and other open sources to identify 14,709 individual Russian service members killed in the war, a number consistent with McGregor's estimate of around 20,000.
So we have diametrically conflicting positions with Ukrainian officials in Ornix claiming Russian losses have been many times greater than Ukrainian, but McGregor putting it perhaps eight to one in the opposite direction.
I personally lean more toward McGregor in perspective, but I doubt the issue matters much in strategic terms.
I've never regarded the operational level details as very interesting, haven't paid much attention, but if the Russian army were completely defeated by the Ukrainians and lost control of Crimea and the Donbass, that would have major global consequences.
I consider that possibility exceptionally unlikely.
Doubt anyone sensible thinks otherwise.
Instead, it seems almost certain The war will either become roughly stalemated or that the Russians will eventually crush the Ukrainians.
But unless the latter result draws in NATO and leads to a wider war, the possible risk including nuclear confrontation, I don't think the strategic consequences are much different in the two scenarios.
Before the war began, the Russians were widely expected to overwhelm Ukrainian resistance in a matter of weeks, and compared to those early expectations, the war has already been stalemated for a year or so.
In hindsight, Russia's failure to win a quick, decisive victory should not have been surprising.
Ukraine actually had an enormous regular army, many times the size of Germany's, far larger than that of any other European NATO country.
Much of Ukraine's military was fully trained to NATO standards, deployed more than half a million ground troops, outnumbered the attacking Russian forces by around three to one, many of its best units heavily entrenched in strong defensive positions.
It's thus quite understandable that the Russians have required a year of heavy fighting to grain ground.
Although Russia's operational progress has been slow and mixed, on the geostrategic level, they have already won a series of major victories.
China, Iran, India, Saudi Arabia, most other non-Western countries have clearly moved toward Russia, which also easily surmounted the unprecedented sanctions that most expected to cripple our economy.
The reckless American destruction of Nord Stream and the European energy crisis may eventually cause the collapse of NATO.
Putin's domestic approval rating is in the 80s, probably as high as it's ever been, and I don't see any of these results changing if the stalemate continues.
He wrote more about the war in the past.
I'll simply sum it up to say that it now appears that the Russians are prevailing in Bakhmut, and that as they prevail in Bakhmut, the probability the West is going to retreat from Ukraine becomes overwhelming.
Michael, your thoughts and observations?
I like Ron's work a lot, the person who penned this article.
I've interviewed him before.
And I also like the work of McGregor.
I, like yourself, agree with Colonel McGregor.
I don't think that he would be saying these things just to be a contrarian, to be on television.
In fact, he came under a great deal of criticism for saying these things from the very beginning.
One of my rules of thumb is whenever someone comes under great criticism, it makes me want to hear them more.
Especially these days.
If it seems to be not going along with the official story, it makes me want to hear them more.
And listen, the man has the credibility to back up what he says.
And I've heard many people say, oh my God, this is going to end up with Putin popping off a nuke.
I don't think that would happen.
I think that's A very unlikely event, and...
The idea that it's taken a year for Russia to even get to the point that it is now in this conflict with Ukraine also doesn't surprise me.
I did not know until reading Ron's article that Ukraine had 500,000 people in their military.
That is not an insignificant amount.
You always will.
I'm not going to say always, but you typically have the advantage both emotionally and tactically.
Is that the word tactfully or tact?
tactically yes tactically when you are fighting on your home turf right so russia okay what do they want to do they want to go in there and absolutely obliterate everything from the beginning no ideally what you would like to do is Crush them without crushing the infrastructure so that when this thing is over, you can move back into getting the country back into a functional situation.
So destroying all of the infrastructure and just crushing the country of Ukraine outright is not logical.
I don't think so.
Unfortunately, that means that the battle, the war, The conflict must go on longer.
Now you come with the U.S.
putting 120 billion dollars worth of aid and weapons into it.
Compound that with I think what is the probably the most profound aspect of this article which gets back to the American news media.
I had a couple, my wife and I had a couple over for drinks a couple of weekends ago and they're old old friends of ours and Pretty left.
They're not Marxists by any means, but they're pretty left.
They had not seen me in a long time, so I knew that in their mind they're like, wow, what is Parker, like a born-again Christian Trump supporter guy now?
No, I'm just what I've always been, which is I'm seeking the truth I'm a bit of a moderate.
I don't like war.
I am an anti-interventionist.
Anyway, the point of this is during the course of our conversation, my friend, the husband said, he goes, Michael, he goes, he asked me, he goes, what do you think about Ukraine?
I said, I said, I think it's a proxy war.
And he sat back in his chair and he goes, that makes us complicit.
I said, you're right.
I said, but Unfortunately, we have a news media that has beaten the public into submission with propaganda against the hearts and minds of not only the American populace, but of much of the European populace.
Just replaying these images over and over, which you and he speak to.
And then we get to the second part of the conversation.
He goes, Michael, he goes, Because I don't even know what to believe anymore.
And I think that's the crux of the issue.
I used to take umbrage when people would say, Parker, you do these radio shows.
Are you a conspiracy theorist?
Do you think we didn't go to the moon?
And I used to really get insulted by that.
But I use that as an example of now we're at a point where I think that even normal people have gotten to the point where they're realizing, holy cow, I really do not know what I can believe anymore.
If they are critical thinking people of goodwill, Regardless of what side they're on, if they weigh all of the issues of the track record of what we've just seen with the election, with 9-11, with COVID, with the January 6th travesty, now with this issue in Ukraine and our part of it, which dates back to Victoria, New Zealand in 2014.
So yeah, it is the U.S.' 's war.
We were part of starting it.
And this has played out pretty much, I think, the way they wanted it to, only it's taken a lot longer to come to an end.
And unfortunately, I think now we're at a point where I don't know when there will be it.
I thought at first this would end within a year.
Surely.
Now everyone's dug down and are doubling down and it seems like all parties, there's not really much impetus for them to back down now or move to the table.
It just seems like an all-out front.
No, everything's on the table now.
We're all in.
So when I hear This diplomat from China saying that, look, we do need some kind of a ceasefire, even if it's only in the Donbass.
We need to get back to the bargain table.
That gives me a little glimmer of hope.
Not many people here in the West may agree with that.
And a lot of people in the West are looking at these pictures that we argue.
Are these pictures real?
Are they not real?
And from the get-go, he also mentions, Ron Hunz mentions, you know, the ghost of Kiev.
At the beginning I was like, that sounds nuts.
That doesn't, that sounds incredibly unlikely that this Red Baron kind of character is up there just like killing it right and left.
And of course we find out later, well I think within 30 days, they admit, ah you know what okay so we did drum up that story but we're just trying to get the people fired up and all things should be on the table including propaganda.
This is not only a Disaster for the people of Ukraine.
It's a disaster for the people of Russia.
It's a disaster for the global situation.
And it makes the credibility and the cachet of the United States of America and of NATO, but especially the U.S., in my opinion, decrease even further.
Well, Michael, I agree 100%.
And the fact is, Bakhmut's going to turn out to have been the pivotal battle of the war.
The Ukrainians are sending children and old men to fight in the war.
They have an average lifespan on the front line of four hours.
Russia's decimating Ukraine at Bakhmut.
The war is all but over.
But there's going to be a lot of soul-searching in the future.
Meanwhile... James, I just want to say one thing.
I hope that it's almost over.
I hope that you are correct, man.
It's... Because the alternative is just continued carnage, right?
And just continued...
Illegal behavior by the United States, and I mean, did they ask any of us if we want to give all this money to Ukraine?
Of course I have feelings for the people of Ukraine.
One of my best friends is married to a Ukrainian wife, and I hear the stories and it breaks my heart.
So most Americans, we are known for our empathy and our compassion for trying to help others, but this doesn't feel like this time it's been completely genuine.
Another way we know it's essentially over, Michael, is because NATO cannot produce munitions at the rate Ukraine has been expanding them.
When you got no more shells to fight, you've lost.
Russia has a marvelous supply chain, a marvelous military-industrial complex, not handicapped by the search for profits that lead American military-industrial complex to produce substandard equipment, so they get maintenance contracts that double their profits.
So I think Putin has won a great victory in Ukraine, and it will be very clear In weeks, if not even days, to come.
Meanwhile, Trump won the CPAC straw poll as the Republican 2024 frontrunner in a landslide.
Trump was a preferred candidate to 62% of the attendees.
DeSantis came in second with 20%.
Two other GOP candidates, Nikki Haley and biotech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, garnered three and one percent.
I've heard that Ramaswamy is actually a World Economic Forum candidate, surprisingly enough.
Meanwhile, Iowa is set for a full slate of Republican hopefuls.
The Republican Party's abuzz.
Speculation as to who will be the presidential candidate.
I don't think there's really any doubt about it.
It will be Trump.
But we have DeSantis and Pence and others visiting Iowa in efforts to advance their cause.
DeSantis is scheduled to make an appearance next week, joining Trump and Nikki Haley in the key Republican battleground.
The visit sparked rumors of a potential dissent in his 2024 campaign.
He's been a vocal supporter of Trump and his policies.
His visit is sure to be met with enthusiasm from Republicans in Iowa.
Trump will be speaking in Des Moines on March 13, just a few days hence.
Nikki Haley will be returning to Iowa.
Pence is scheduled on March 18.
He recently made comments suggesting he's planning a 2024 run.
I don't think anyone is going to take Mike Pence seriously.
DeSantis is another matter.
But it's clear, while he has been a champion of conservative values and implemented policies that have improved the economy of Florida and made it a great place to live, His visit to Iowa will be met with great enthusiasm from Republicans, where his own policies have been instrumental in making Florida great again.
Trump's visit will also be highly anticipated.
Pence return?
Honestly, I don't think it's going to draw anything but yawns.
Mike Pence, I think, has been, in many ways, who never was.
Michael, your thoughts?
Well, I think you've called it right on all counts, and Mike Pence in particular is a really annoying individual, and no, I don't think anyone's going to take him seriously.
I think that he, Vivek Ramaswamy, And there was another person whose name I do not recall at the moment.
We're all kind of coming in about 1% at CPAC.
I will say this about Vivek Ramaswamy.
I didn't know the thing about the WEF, but I do find him a very interesting individual, and I do like what he's having to say.
Now, that being said, he doesn't stand a chance.
However, I think he knows that, and I think that Whether he's actually involved with the WEF or not, he's certainly saying things that I like and injecting some things into the conversation that need to be said, like getting rid of the FBI for one thing.
And so I like that he's in there.
One last thing on the WEF, and I don't know if this is true or not, but I've heard some people say, and you know, maybe they're trying to cover their tracks, That the W.E.F.
would often post pictures of particular people, really even without their permission, just saying, you know, based upon loose connections or social interactions, that they're a part of the W.E.F.
I can't confirm that that's the truth.
I would certainly hope that Vivek is not part of them, much as I hope that some of the other people that are supposedly related to the W.E.F.
are in fact related to the W.E.F.
Now back to Trump.
I think for certain Trump's the nominee.
DeSantis, I like DeSantis and essentially I would vote for almost anyone on the right at this point and I say that as a person who is really a Ron Paul kind of guy and I listen to Ron Paul quite frequently with his show with Beck Adams and you know they were talking about DeSantis and they have concerns about his foreign What's the word I'm looking for?
His foreign policy.
Yes.
And not so much his domestic issues, because clearly on domestic issues, man, he's been very, very good.
I think that Trump has the chops when it comes to foreign policy.
Now, so what happens?
So what happens?
I think that Trump gets the nomination.
I don't know who he will choose as VP.
I thought at first it would be DeSantis, and then DeSantis then cruises into 2028 as the frontrunner at that time.
I don't know who you'll choose.
I hope it's not Nikki Haley.
I do not like Nikki Haley.
But at the end of the day, whoever it is, I will vote for them because I don't see them putting up anybody on the Democratic side that I would want to vote for.
But all that being said, none of that really matters until we get a hold of our electoral situation, and we don't.
You know, people keep talking about how this is a conspiracy theory, that we have a lack of electoral integrity.
No, I don't believe that.
I believe that we've got full-blown major issues And if Trump is the nominee, you can bet they're going to pull out all the stops.
Rupert Murdoch, you know, on the right with Fox, everybody who handles the election facilities, it will be all hands on board, defeat Trump all over again.
And I've got to be honest, I don't think he can win, unfortunately, at this point.
I want to be wrong.
I want to be wrong.
I think all that stands between Trump and a massive electoral victory is electronic voting machines, Michael.
Yes.
I agree with you on all the points you were making there.
He can't run with DeSantis because they're both from the same state, unless he were to move back to New York City, for example, since that's recluded by the Constitution.
My best guess, actually, he's going to run with Tulsi.
I think he's going to run with Tulsi Gabbard.
I'd vote for that.
Yeah, I think it's a terrific—Trump and Tulsi, Tulsi and Trump, I think it's a terrific ticket.
Well, we've got to get rid of electronic voting machines or it doesn't matter.
The Democrats could run a ham sandwich and have it elected.
It's disgraceful.
Meanwhile.
Well, as our viewers know, we've been covering extensively here on the show, the war in Ukraine, looking at, of course, what's been unfolding on the battlefield and the geopolitics associated with it.
But one of the big stories that hasn't gone reported at all is the digital transformation of Ukraine.
What is going on here?
In fact, many people don't know that the Zelensky government has created a laboratory, turned Ukraine into what they call a digital transformation.
In fact, Zelensky himself has even set up an entire ministry dedicated to advancing this digital transformation.
What is this all about?
Redacted correspondent Dan Cohen just filed this investigation.
Watch. - On January 19th, USAID director Samantha Power appeared at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland to promote a digital identification smartphone app And one of the most incredible things that Ukraine has developed over the last few years is an app called DIA that now delivers 120 services to the people of Ukraine.
Standing next to power was Mikhailo Fedorov, Ukraine's Minister of Digital Transformation and Vice Prime Minister.
Fedorov is a graduate of NATO's Educational Program in Ukraine and the World Economic Forum's Young Leader Program.
He's the key figure implementing what is known as Ukraine's digital transformation.
a program to transform the country into an electronic state controlled by Silicon Valley, big tech corporations and U.S. military intelligence.
Thank you to the USAID team because we got support for Dia and we are ready to share our expertise with other countries because digitalization is the foundation of transparency and of democracy.
The Dia app is a central plank in this process.
It digitizes and centralizes documents, records and government and business transactions all into a digital identity.
This offers an unprecedented system of surveillance and control.
According to the World Economic Forum, digital identity determines what products, services, and information we can access or, conversely, what is closed off to us.
The DIA project is funded primarily by U.S.
aid as part of its larger project to implement digital ID systems throughout the world.
It was first introduced by Volodymyr Zelensky in May 2019, just four days into his presidency.
Michael, there's more to the story, but something most of us are unaware is that Ukraine's been used to introducing digital IDs, and I very much worry about, you know, money going digital and all that.
We'll have no privacy.
Our lives will be completely subservient to the government.
Your thoughts?
James, I didn't know about this prior till today.
It doesn't surprise me, but that looks That does not look good because it almost makes you think, well, wait a minute.
There's all the reasons that we thought they were having the war.
Is this yet another one?
So this can be the lab, the testing ground for this new universal electronic ID that we're going to use.
And we're going to say, hey, look, look at all the things you get with the digital ID.
This is all the services that can now be rendered to you.
But on the other side of it, there's the, of course, the algorithm ghetto.
You say something wrong or the wrong document shows up in your file or whatever it is or The wrong story gets passed around about you in social media.
I would assume that that digital identity now can become the albatross around your neck or the scarlet letter or whatever it is.
I did not know about this, don't like it, and getting back to that 120 billion dollars that the U.S.
has come up with from somewhere to give to this Ukraine effort I think a lot of that money never even leaves the U.S., and maybe a lot of it is going to Silicon Valley-funded companies to do shenanigans like this.
Oh, I think you're entirely on the right track, Mike.
Entirely on the right track.
very, very disturbing all this.
Meanwhile, Sarah Westall, breaking sweats president, has been named in a lawsuit with Pfizer, the U.S., for claiming that the Pfizer vaccine is effective for at least 12 months.
One of the claimants in the lawsuit was in a copy of his vaccine password and vaccine record.
The claim is based in lieu of a complaint filed by Pascal Nagydi, a British Swiss citizen, and an administrative judgment filed in the UK.
So where exactly is the head of the snake?
Sarah Wessel reports it appears to be the New World headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland.
She's done a fair amount of reporting about this.
Just a couple minutes.
We'll watch.
A very important one is the International Atomic Agency in Vienna.
The oldest police force is in the Vatican.
The global union of all police forces worldwide, with directives and the new manuals, is in Geneva.
The postal union, all post offices in the world, and all frequencies, ITU, the telecom union, from satellite to The radio in your bathroom is governed from Geneva.
Welcome to Business Game Changers.
I'm Sarah Westall.
I have three amazing people coming to the show.
Two are in Switzerland, one is in Canada, and then I'm in the United States.
They have a tribunal that's going on that's making headway.
They're judges on this tribunal.
It's an international tribunal.
I think that you will very much appreciate having them here and talking.
This is super long.
It's a super long one and so I don't know if I'm going to air all of it here or I'm going to do the part of it privately for my members but we get into all sorts of things and the bottom line is from my perspective is that we have to keep moving and that the energy is mounting and that people are mounting all fighting for humanity and it is growing and we're seeing it everywhere
The more that grows, the higher likelihood that we will win in the spiritual war that we are fighting.
Michael, there's much more to that, but the idea being there are lawsuits breaking out all over the world regarding the vax and what's going on here with the COVID and all that, which I find very encouraging.
Any thoughts of yours?
Well, this week, you know, you and I, and people of our ilk, because we do these kind of shows, have been talking about this pretty much from the get-go, so it's interesting to me that now, within the last couple of weeks, the talk of the lab leak thing is being taken seriously, supposedly.
My belief that that is just because we're playing the slowest possible game that we can play.
You know, the inevitable is everybody has figured it out for the most part.
Now whether they choose to believe it, which gets back to our second story about the media, because I think that the media requires that some of us choose to believe, even though we know it's nonsense.
And usually we choose to believe because it fits our political ideology that we already have.
So now we're talking about this issue that, well, maybe it was a lab leak in China.
Well, what they're not talking about that much is the pharmaceutical companies that made these vaccines, which were created to combat said virus, and the fact that now we also believe that even before the pharmaceutical companies like Moderna and Pfizer, well, and the fact that now we also believe that even before the pharmaceutical companies like Moderna and Pfizer, well, that actually these were
So, what I'm getting at is they're kind of slow rolling these issues out to us, giving us a little nibble of the big cake at a time.
Most of us already know what happened, but right now we're getting this little feeling, oh, well, maybe some justice is going to occur because they're talking about this lab leak in China.
Meanwhile, when they talk about the lab leak in China, it allows us to even further gin up more hatred and more China phobia.
And so it serves, you know, multiple purposes.
At the end of the day, this COVID virus, I believe, like many believe, was a product of American military intelligence pharmaceutical combos.
I think we offshored it to China.
Now, whether it was released intentionally or on accident from the Wuhan, China.
And I had Dr. Andrew Druff on my show towards the end of last year.
And, you know, and I was talking to him because basically I was just saying, I find it very hard to believe that this was a lab leak.
I feel like it was Made to look like a lab leak when in fact it was let out intentionally.
I could be wrong about that.
However, one thing that he was saying is that what the U.S.
does in many cases is it goes around the world looking at various labs, especially in third world countries where maybe your government is teetering on collapse.
Well, we don't want to let those labs fall into bad hands.
So we swoop in and we say, hey, listen, we're going to help you out here.
We're going to bring over some of our experts and we're going to oversee how you guys do things and we're going to give you a little work at the same side.
So all I'm saying is that I believe the lab leak story is just to get us through the next several months.
So now they're going to argue about that.
Meanwhile, they're going to continue to push for more and more vaccines.
More and more people realize that they shouldn't have them, but there's a lot of people who still Still seem to think that the vaccines are okay.
You're going to need to get them.
You're going to need to wear that mask.
They deny the evidence that is all around them as people get sick and I don't know what it will take.
I think some people will never get it because they decided this is the tent.
This is where this is where we stand and you can show me evidence all day.
You could show me videos of what took place inside the Capitol on January 6th, but I've already made up my mind.
So, those lion eyes of mine don't fit the predetermined opinion that I already have, so...
I'm rambling here, and I actually forgot where we got off.
No, no, no.
It was all good.
It was open-ended about lawsuits in Switzerland regarding the vaccine and all that.
So you're spot on, Michael.
You're spot on.
James, let me ask you about this so we can pass this on to the audience.
So was it last week that Biden was supposed to sign some type of agreement, which is basically handing over our sovereignty regarding how we deal with pandemics to the WHO?
Was that last week that he was supposed to do that?
Well, somewhere in this period of time, Michael, but it seemed to me dubious because, you know, this is the equivalent of a treaty that requires Senate ratification, and I just don't see that happening.
But there is that effort by the WHO to take control of the world from a medical point of view and implement a new world order, covertly than that passion.
So it's a very important question, a matter to keep an eye on.
I agree with all that.
James, I have... Good comments, good comments.
Thank you.
I have one personal... Yeah, go ahead.
I was just going to throw in one thing that you might find interesting.
So, in August of 2001, I was in Geneva at the UN, a month before 9-11.
I went over there, and forgive me if I've already told you this, but I went over there with an NGO, and the NGO was headed by A woman who lives here in Los Angeles who's the heir to a large sporting goods company and her mission is she would take local high school kids from the Los Angeles area to the U.N.
so that they could see how the U.N.
functioned and you know she was a U.N.
supporter.
We happened to meet on a plane at one point and had stayed in touch and she knew that I was even though I was not doing podcasting at that point I was involved with creating a Internet radio, but this is kind of before podcast.
She knew that I was interested in a lot of these subjects and mind you 9-11 still hasn't happened.
That won't happen for one more month.
Anyway, she invites me to be part of this group that goes over there.
So we were over there for two months.
I'm sorry, two months, two weeks.
And we stayed in a Buddhist monastery where they allowed us and like her and I don't know, these 15 or 20 high school kids from Los Angeles that we took over there to stay there.
And then every day we would get to go to the UN and we would get to work in the library, get to kind of see how things were done.
And this is just purely a personal antidote, but we would drive by the WHO building on the way there.
And the whole thing between the UN And the WHO, and this is just an emotional, my feeling, it was one of the creepiest places I've ever been.
It just had this very stale, lifeless, it didn't have a good vibe man, at all.
And we ended up coming back and then you know what happened after that.
But that was my experience at the UN in August of 2001.
Well, it's an interesting story, Michael.
I'm glad you shared it.
Yeah, I can well imagine there were creepy aspects of the WHO.
Meanwhile, we have a mother who's suing a D.C.
doctor who gave her kids a COVID vax without her consent.
It's hard to believe this has happened, but it's been taking place on a rather large scale.
An attorney representing Tonya McNeil filed a lawsuit for the District of Columbia against Janine A. Rithey.
According to the complaint, McNeil took her two older kids, 15 and 17, to the kids' mobile medical-clinical Ronald McDonald Care Mobile Clinic, operated by Georgetown Hospital, to complete their required annual physical for the 2022-2023 school year.
Lawsuit alleges Rathke, director of the clinic, held the children in the exam room longer than necessary and vaccinated them over their objection and without consulting their mother.
In order to attempt to obtain the children's consent, which they're unable to legally provide absent a parent or guardian, the doctor falsely informed them that the vax was mandatory for school attendance, said they could not lawfully decline if they wanted to attend school.
The suit, filed by D.C.
attorney Matthew Hardin, seeks damages for false imprisonment, battery, and fraud.
Children's Health Defense is financing the lawsuit.
CHD couldn't just sit still and not allow this wrong to go unpunished and not bring it to the public's attention.
McNeil explained why she's suing the doctor.
I feel people shouldn't be able to do whatever they want to do with other people, and especially not to children.
As a mother, I feel like you all just took my rights away from me, and you just did what you wanted to do to my kids.
I want justice in this case.
I feel something needs to be done.
This can't just continue to happen.
I could not, as a parent, agree more.
100%.
According to the complaint, Rethy's goal is to vaccinate all kids against COVID.
Our goal is to increase vaccination rates of children here in D.C.
for more than 30 years.
Our role has been to help address the problem of health disparities.
We're glad to be partnering with D.C.
Health and provide both regular childhood vacs and COVID to all children.
In addition to her role as Director of the Mobile Clinic, she is Chief of MedStar Georgetown University Hospital Division of Community Pediatrics.
McNeil said when she took her older kids to the clinic, she stayed outside to care for her infant as soon as the children entered the doctor's office.
She called her daughter's cell phone to let Ruthie know she was just outside if the doctor needed to consult her.
According to McNeil, the doctor did not ask or inform her about any vaccination, did not ask her to sign.
At the end, Ruthie came out to talk to her.
The doctor explains about her son's asthma treatment, but that's all they discuss.
She was shocked when her daughter complained her arm hurt pretty bad.
When McNeil asked, she said she was given the COVID shot, even though she told the doctor she did not want it.
When McNeil asked why she allowed the doctor to administer, her daughter said, when she had the needle in her hand and she was coming toward me, I backed up and asked, what is that needle?
She said, it was a COVID shot.
I said, I didn't want it.
She said, well, it's mandatory.
You have to get it to go to school.
Ruthie allegedly administered the shot to her daughter and then to her son.
He's 14.
And he said they didn't ask if he wanted it or not.
When they gave it to him, he said he thought he had to get it, because his sister had.
Both children received a Pfizer BioNTech.
Both children were upset and angry they'd been coerced into vaccination.
When she got home, McNeil called her doctor's office and asked him why they vaccinate her kids without her consent.
I would never have consented to you vaccinating my children.
I'm not vaxxed, I'm not getting vaxxed, and my kids were never supposed to be vaxxed for a COVID period under no circumstances.
The person on the phone said they're supposed to get them for school.
After hanging up, I was so irritated I even started crying.
She couldn't believe they put this poison into her children's body.
In July of 2022, the D.C.
public schools imposed a vaccine mandate for schoolchildren age 12 and up.
But on August 26, just weeks after imposing, they walked it back.
That means when McNeil's children saw the doctor, there was no school vaccine mandate in place.
The District of Columbia, in March of 2021, enacted the D.C.
Minor Consent for Vaccine Amendment Act, Which allowed children age 11 and older consent, recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, which is a disgraceful organization.
Without parental knowledge or consent, if the medical provider believed the minor is capable of meeting the informed consent standard, it also required health care personnel to provide accurate immunization records to the Department of Health and the school and school, but not to parents with religious exemptions.
D.H.C.H.D.
and Parental Rights Foundation filed the lawsuit to declare the act unconstitutional.
A judge on March 18, 2022, granted a preliminary injunction prohibiting the D.C.
Mayor, Department of Health, and public schools from enforcing the law.
That means at the time McNeil's children visited the clinic, they could not legally provide consent to be vaccinated without their mother's consent, McNeil said.
To do that to my innocent children.
They took her rights.
When she backed away from you, the doctor, and said she didn't want it, that should have been the end of it.
Or you, the doctor, should have called me to find out what I felt about the situation, but you basically told my child to lie so you could do what you wanted to do to my kid.
This is outrageous, Michael.
I'm very glad she's bringing this lawsuit.
Your thoughts?
Not a lawyer, but I think this exceeds malpractice because malpractice sometimes is a result of incompetence, right?
Well, in this case, they knew that those kids could not legally agree to this.
The mom's out there.
You didn't seek the consent of the mom.
And you just injected these people.
Now the other day I read something, and I don't know whether this is true or not, but a person is claiming that while they were sedated for an operation, they were injected with COVID.
So you have to wonder how many times these kinds of things happened.
And I've said it many times, I'll say it again, the medical profession, the scientific profession, are going to have a lot to answer for in the future in regards to COVID.
They used fear, they used pressure with their partners in the media to strong arm people into doing things before people have had the chance to fully understand what's going on here.
And just to reiterate, I heard someone talking the other day about the whole issue of the emergency usage authorizations that, you know, if Fauci had admitted that HCQ and Ivermectin were available as possible treatments, then you can't have an emergency use authorization, right?
This whole thing was built on a fallacy, and was it to cull the population?
Was it to make money for the pharmaceutical industry?
I don't know, but it is a gigantic, it is the humanitarian crime of this century.
It's hard to imagine one getting worse than this, but we got, you know, 80 years to go, so I'm sure they'll come up with something.
But when you're injecting kids, In an office, mobile or not, against their will, that young girl and that young boy, they're probably good kids just trying to do the right thing.
You're telling them they can't go to school.
And like my daughters, they felt ostracized if they did not get the inoculation.
And we had many, many It is.
It is.
I'm so glad she's bringing the lawsuit.
upset me.
And, but those kids, you know, they're, hey, they're, they're in fear probably of the doctor.
They're in fear of not being allowed to go to school.
What are they supposed to do?
Jump out of the way of a lunging doctor with a hypodermic needle.
This is shocking.
It is.
It is.
I'm so glad she's bringing the lawsuit.
Yes.
I agree with all your comments.
Meanwhile, DC, Dems break back down from a crime bill after pushback.
Washington, D.C.
Council Chairman Phil Mendelsohn announces he's withdrawing a controversial crime law from Congress that would have lessened criminal penalties as crime spikes in the nation's capital.
He said the changes would be reworked.
The Senate was expected to vote and kill the rewrite of the criminal law, which had received opposition even from Joe Biden.
Congress can weigh in to overrule the D.C.
City Council.
The House voted to do just that back in February.
The Senate is expected to still follow through with its vote on the matter this week.
This desperate maneuver not only has no basis in the D.C.
Home Rule Act, but underscores the completely unserious way the D.C.
Council has legislated, said Senator Bill Hagerty of Tennessee.
No matter how hard they try, the Council cannot avoid accountability for passing this disastrous, dangerous, soft-on-crime bill that'll make D.C.
residents and visitors less safe.
The law also grants non-citizens the right to vote, which in my opinion is completely lunatic.
Biden previously said he would not veto Congress if it voted to overrule the city council.
Crime is up 25% in D.C.
so far this year.
The bill would have reduced the max penalties for murder, armed robbery, armed home invasion, armed hijacking, unlawful gun possession, and some sex assault offenses, according to data from D.C.
government.
In 2023, homicides are up 31%.
Sex abuse, 113.
Motor vehicle theft, 110.
Arson, 300%.
Some categories slightly lower.
Assault with a deadly weapon, about the same.
The battle is typified controversy over how liberal leaders in America's largest cities are approaching criminal justice, even as homicides have risen markedly.
A recent incident put a face to the statistics.
Representative Angie Craig of Minnesota was robbed in an elevator at an apartment building in Washington.
That evening, 26-year-old Kendred Hamlin was arrested.
Hamlin has a lengthy criminal history with involvement in incidents near the Capitol.
Passing a bill that lures sentences for first and second degree murder, carjacking, assault against law enforcement officers, sexual assault, and other crimes under the guise of reform is laughable if it wasn't so dangerous, said a Heritage Foundation spokesman.
Furthermore, the Kid Glove Second Chance Law for violent juveniles has resulted in at least 120 criminals sentenced under the Youth Rehabilitation Law to progress to being charged with murder.
This isn't reform.
It's insanity.
White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre took a flurry of tough questions.
And so, look, the President's been very clear.
We need more to reduce crime, to make communities safer, to save lives.
And that's why he put together a Safer America Plan that just does that.
That, we believe, does exactly that.
She, of course, is a complete idiot.
Meanwhile, Elizabeth Warren swings for Washington, D.C.
statehood, doesn't understand the Constitution.
Warren took to social media to voice her opinion on a long-sought battle for the District of Columbia statehood.
D.C.
should be a state.
Senate Democrats have renewed the push to grant statehood to the District of Columbia.
That would give Washington, D.C.
citizens full revitalization in Congress.
D.C.
should be a state, she tweets.
The idea is one championed by Democrats to give their party exclusive representation from a left-wing stronghold.
However, Warren's argument has significant opposition from a source that often gets in the way of Democrat plans to usurp greater power—the Constitution.
The nation's capital is not a state, as described in Article 1.
It was never intended to be a state.
It was, instead, the seat of government of the United States.
The Department of Justice, under both Democrats and Republicans, has a history of agreeing statehood require a constitutional amendment, not simple legislation.
One boober tweeted, Democrats want D.C.
to become a state to gain two more Senate seats.
Our founding fathers explicitly prohibited D.C.
from becoming a state.
Pelosi's agenda is corrupt.
Critics were quick to point out Warren's dream of D.C.
statehood contradicts the Constitution.
Is it your one job to uphold a Constitution which categorically states the opposite, tweets the redheaded libertarian?
Senate Democrats don't have a great track record when it comes to compliance with the Constitution.
Draft a constitutional amendment and stop with the soundbites.
Coast Guard veteran Jason Roebuck fired back.
Journalist Christy Lee joked, Washington, D.C.
has already stayed a state of corruption.
New York Times, back in 2021, published, Even If a Bill Somehow Gave D.C.
Statehood a Green Light, Republican-controlled states would likely suit it challenges constitutionality.
Roger Pilon, a former Reagan administration official, testified before the House Oversight and Reform Committee that Congress cannot use a statute to eliminate a constitutional directive Or take away people's constitutional rights.
But taking away constitutional rights is what today's Democrat Party is all about.
Senate Democrats are facing a brutal map in 2024.
No wonder Warren and her colleagues are pushing a matter that would give their party two more lawmakers.
According to 270, to win, D.C.
is extremely left-wing and only becoming more so.
The district voted 92% for Biden in 2020.
The next most Democrat state was Vermont, with a mere 66%.
Since 1976, Ronald Reagan's landslide in 1980 was a Democrat's worst showing at a mere 75%.
At a mere 75%.
Michael, your thoughts?
We started that by talking about crime and rising crime.
I live here in Los Angeles.
We have a district attorney, George Gascon, who is absolutely terrible, who's not only funded by Soros, if it is my understanding, he is one of the people who worked with Soros to create the plan in the first place to then start funding the campaigns of district attorneys throughout the U.S.
And I have to tip my hat to the guy a little bit.
It's such a horrible yet genius idea.
It's like, let's corrupt the system on every level.
And when you look at rising crime and reducing penalties, letting people out of jail because supposedly, you know, we got overcrowding or during COVID.
I mean, I, I think.
To the audience, I apologize if I'm getting this wrong, but it is tens of thousands.
I want to say upwards of maybe 60,000 people that California let out during COVID.
And the point of all this is to say that this is a, along with Legal immigration and the general just disintegration of our social system, all is for one reason.
And that is to aggregate more power through the disintegration of our society.
So when they're talking about allowing Non-citizens to vote, allowing non-citizens to take part in law enforcement, which they're talking about here in California.
All of this, which seems absolutely insane to regular people.
It's because they want to tilt the table with the ultimate purpose of just more power, which is what the Washington DC situation.
I can't think of a state that would Or a place that would make a worse state.
And I don't know what the population of D.C.
is, but think about it.
A lot of people in D.C., of course they lean left.
And their media, their lifetime politicians, or they're part of the system that depends on politics for their day in and day out jobs, whether it's as pollsters, consultants, God knows what.
No.
D.C.
should not be a state, but that's not going to stop them, because they will just find another way.
And yes, they do hold the Constitution in contempt, because at the end of the day, it's not about making the nation better.
It's about assimilating more power.
Yeah, you make so many great points.
And of course, it's George Soros' dream to destroy America in his lifetime.
How bad is that?
Just disgusting beyond belief.
Meanwhile, We want to hear from you.
Send fan mail, pro or con, to live, need to know, at gmail.com.
Live, need to know, at gmail.com.
No, it's time to stop blaming the Khazarians for the crimes of the Rothschilds and other globalist financiers.
That ancient empire came and went and does not figure into the origins of a globalist cartel.
But Joaquin Higobian makes good observations, especially in the first part of the article.
The Rothschilds tried unsuccessfully to take over the American financial system until they merged with the U.S.
robber barons, principally Morgan and Rockefeller, in the formation of the Federal Reserve in 1913.
And he's absolutely correct about the hatred of the Rothschild toward Russia, and let's not forget Germany, which resisted their tentacles.
After the fall of the Soviet Union, the Rothschild plundered the economy of Russia, but Putin gradually restored the independence of its banking and industrial sackshores.
And China, which the Rothschild were once courting, has now set up international lending institutions in opposition to the Western globalist agencies, the IMF, World Bank, and more.
As the Eurasian axis grows stronger, the Western bankers grow weaker and more desperate.
Hence, the war in Ukraine and the Sabre rattling against China.
But the Rothschilds and their colleagues are now dead men walking.
Whether they know it or not.
Michael, your final thoughts?
I don't know that they're dead men walking.
These are men of tremendous wealth.
And, you know, there's the general thought that some of the most powerful people are the people that we never hear of.
And those are the ones who are actually pulling the strings of the leaders that we think are running things.
I want to be optimistic.
It's very difficult.
I know Joaquin.
I've interviewed him a few times.
I'm familiar with his ideas.
I don't have too much to add to that.
I agreed with much of what he said.
I don't have too much to add.
Well, you can add anything about anything you like, Michael.
Just your thoughts for today is just fine.
Anything you'd like to add.
Oh, I appreciate that.
Well, I'm watching just the situation with Ukraine.
It bothers me a lot.
Oh, here's something I want to throw in.
It's the whole Nord Stream issue, which we touched on at the top, and I want to just Touch upon that again.
So, I think it was obvious to anyone really thinking that clearly the U.S.
blew up the Nord Stream Pipeline from the get-go.
And, you know, months and months go by and, you know, we're talking about, well, who did it?
You know, and there's various countries that we think did it.
Then Seymour Hersh comes out with his paper, which explains that the U.S.
probably did it.
And then there was a It was a source.
I don't know if it was an anonymous source that came out subsequent to after that, who basically explained how the whole thing went down.
Now, flash forward to this weekend, where we get this report where American intel agencies are saying that, well, you know, we're pretty sure that that it was a it was it was.
It was a group that was favorable to Ukraine and not favorable to Russia.
But they don't say, is this a state-sponsored group?
They don't say if this is a small private... What basically I take away from that is them saying without saying is like, yeah, the U.S.
did it because we are a group that is pro-Ukraine, pro-Zelensky, anti-Russia, anti-Putin.
That's what I take away from that.
How can we say this?
Um, without saying it and trying to leave open the door for people to believe that it wasn't us.
Does that make sense?
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, sure, absolutely.
Thanks to Michael.
It is a war crime.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Thanks to Michael Parker for the excellence of his commentary today.
I'm just so delighted he could join and look forward to future conversations about issues like these.
Yeah, Michael, wonderful.
I hate to be a broken record, but until we get rid of electronic voting machines, We're victims.
We're helpless.
Nobody wanted Biden and Harris in 2020.
Nobody.
There was a rally where the two made an unusual joint appearance just a day before the election in Phoenix, Arizona.
Nobody.
Zero.
Zilch.
Nada.
Turned out.
Nobody gave a damn about them.
And the idea that they won the greatest number of votes in American history is simply lunatic and absurdity.
Midterms, similarly.
No one wanted a continuation.
Everyone believed the country is headed in the wrong direction.
Until we make electronic voting machines illegal, however.
The American people are going to be helpless to alter the future of our country to our great detriment.
Let it sink in.
No matter how strong our candidate, no matter how much we believe change is necessary, it's not going to happen until we get rid of those damn machines.
Take it to heart.
Meanwhile, spend as much time as you can with your friend, your family, the people you love and care about, because we still do not know how much time we have left.
▲
Export Selection