All Episodes
Previous Next
March 27, 2023 - Jim Fetzer
01:08:12
Need to Know News (27 March 2023) with Carl Herman and Holly Seeliger
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This is Jim Fetzer in Madison, Wisconsin.
Delighted to be joined today by Carl Herman in San Ramon, California, and Holly Seliger in Punta Gorda, Florida.
Holly, give me the right name.
I'm in Punta Gorda, Florida.
That's pretty close.
It's all wonderful.
We're here to bring you the latest in the news and what's going on here.
What you need to know.
We're going to begin with the latest shooting, of course, in Nashville, just coming over the wire.
It's a woman this time, who's supposed to have shot three kids and three adults.
A friend of mine said she ignored the Free Fire Zone sign, no arms allowed.
I mean, this is stupid beyond belief.
I think it's a sign of diversity, the diversity committed by the Biden administration.
They make her a A woman!
Carl, your thoughts?
And by the way, I've had extensive discussion with others following this.
No ambulances in sight, which is one of the key tells in its fate, because they won't allocate real medical resources for staged events.
Carl.
Yeah, as a trade historian, my view is just look at the history and whatever it is that's reported about whatever false flag historical event that they have participated in again and again and again, you just have to, first of all, reject any testimony coming out of them in corporate media.
That is unreliable at best, and likely this is going to be exactly what the other ones were in history, a false flag.
And by the way, this may be related to two of the Sandy Hook Victims coming out and doing a broadcast out of a pirate radio station in Florida, Holly, you may not know.
Emily Parker, whose real name is Margaret Cottle, and Vicky, who is a dead kid, and Vicky Soto, one of the dead teachers, whose real name is Vicky Aurelio, she's a daughter of the Newtown Town Clerk, have both come out to expose their roles in the Sandy Hook hoax.
Where Vicky was recast for a reprise in Uvalde, for which he's apologetic.
They did this Thursday night, and I'm doing my best to get the word out.
Your thoughts about all of the above?
Well, I think this definitely sounds like a, you know, equal opportunity event for women.
I've certainly never heard of a mass shooting committed by a woman, although we might have to do a little bit more investigation because I had heard of a mass shooting a couple years ago, maybe, maybe not even a year ago in Michigan.
And they said a woman committed a mass shooting in Michigan.
And then we found out it was actually a trans woman.
So it was a Man, who had recently changed into a woman so that kind of skewed the statistics as far as female shooters go so maybe we need to figure out if this is an actual, you know, biological woman or if this is someone that trans Trans woman or whatever the term is now, and there's also some interesting stuff going on in Tennessee.
There was a massive I think it was tornado or hurricane the other day.
The governor, the House and the Senate just passed an attempt to try to get Gold and silver as currency in Tennessee.
There also seems to be some strange investigations around the District Attorney General in Tennessee, so I've just noticed recently there's been a lot of news local news coming out of Tennessee, so this could be another part of the news cycle as we see here.
I don't know.
Hopefully no one was was actually hurt or injured during this, but like you said, this literally came out with the news couple hours before we've started to record.
Well, the shooting's a default position, as Margaret actually said during their broadcast.
All these school shootings are staged!
And Eric Holder, who is responsible for managing these and has been trying to contain their getting the word out, has got to be very unhappy about that.
And of course, you know, it spills over to Uvalde.
We even had video of Wayne Carver, who is a medical examiner in Connecticut, in Uvalde after he's supposed to have died.
I mean, the whole thing is falling apart.
So I think this may be a part of the effort to cover it up.
I do not think it can possibly succeed.
Meanwhile, we have the report that the U.S.
won't even let Ukraine think about peace talks.
Ukraine's Western backers are doing their best to prevent Ukraine from entering into any negotiations with Moscow, making remarks where President Putin and his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, are both promoting the idea of peace.
Washington, European capital, but first of all, Washington, filled with a desire not to let, under any pretext, Kiev enter into peace negotiations.
They simply don't let Kiev even think about it.
Now, when the masks are off, everyone shows off their bestial grin except for us, meaning Russia and China.
The Russian and Chinese leaders have talked about a 12-point roadmap for peace in Ukraine proposed by Beijing, which Putin has praised.
But it's very clear the West isn't going to allow peace to happen.
It appears they are hell-bent on war.
Meanwhile, Putin says Russia will deploy nuclear weapons to Belarus.
Announcing the decision, he compared the move to NATO's sharing program, where U.S.
nuclear weapons are in Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, Turkey.
There's nothing unusual here.
First, the U.S.
has been doing this for decades.
They have long deployed their tactical nukes on territory of their allied countries.
He also said the decision was related to UK sublime Ukraine with depleted uranium rounds, which really made Challenger two tanks.
That ammunition is radioactive, linked to cancer and birth defects, especially in Iraq, where there was a vast proliferation as a consequence.
The U.S.
said it hasn't seen any indication that Russia is planning to use nuclear weapons.
The plan, according to Putin, is to build a facility in Belarus to store them, which will be completed by July 1st.
Russia had previously provided Belarus with nuclear-capable Iskander missiles, helping to upgrade their warplanes so they can carry nukes.
We've already helped our Belarusian colleague to re-equip their planes.
Ten are already able to carry the type of weapon.
We've handed over a well-known and effective Esklander system that can carry them.
U.S.
and NATO officials have said they don't see a reason to adjust their own nuclear posture.
One way NATO could respond is to place more nukes in countries closer to Russia.
Yeah, that'll work out well.
The U.S.
has not deployed nukes at countries east of Germany that joined NATO after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact.
But some are willing to host nukes, including Poland, let me say.
None of those countries east of Germany were supposed to even belong to NATO, according to solemn agreements made.
Meanwhile, with the Soviet Union, with Mikhail Gorbachev before its dissolution, meanwhile, the EU declares it's willing to respond by further sanctions.
Well, none of those sanctions have worked out well for the West.
In fact, they've been more harmful to Europe than they have been to Russia, which is thriving and surviving.
Carl, your thoughts?
Well, first, the peace treaty that was Do you see me?
I just see a blank.
No, we don't have your image.
But there we go.
There we go.
There we go.
Interesting.
Okay, so the peace terms that were initially proposed by the Russians were, one, independence for the Donbass, and two, no NATO for Ukraine.
That's all that they had to do.
And these terms were imposed upon the US, UK, Ukraine, NATO, from eight years from 14 to 22 of shelling with artillery the people in the Donbass because they rejected the puppet that was placed into Ukraine and then once the Russians intervened with their military then the corporate media rhetoric shifted from Ukraine being corrupt to Zelensky being some kind of a hero for it.
So it is just ridiculous.
I'll leave a link to a 40-page white paper that I wrote back in 2005 that was leveraged by Congressman Kucinich for the impeachment of Bush and Cheney that outlines and details and explains and documents that the US routinely violates the treaties that they virtue signal others should hold up.
Especially the non-proliferation treaty with nukes, but in there is like nine other treaties the U.S.
routinely violates, including with biological and chemical weapons.
The U.S.
doesn't allow any inspections of any of their sites when they demand it upon others, and there's just no credibility for this lying, looting, illegal, rogue state empire.
Good.
Holly?
Well, I think that Russia can't really trust the United States since the last violation of the Minsk Accords, unfortunately, and NATO for that matter.
And I think that they're correct in desiring that NATO finally be broken up.
There's no actual use for it except for what we're seeing right now, which is really to strong-arm these European countries against their will, as we're seeing.
I think a lot of the, we're seeing protests in Germany right now and in France are really gone out of control.
And I think a lot of this also has to do with them still continuing to be part of NATO.
I'm sure if we actually spoke to some Europeans, it would be there.
They're also against the Ukrainian war and the fact that they're those countries are sending over weapons and money to them, just as the United States is at this point.
And it's turning into a quagmire.
They're trying to drag Poland into it.
Yes, yes, yes.
Good, good.
the Polish youth and young men over in Poland telling them they need to get ready to go to war.
And I'm assuming that they'll be strongly against that, even though traditionally they have been against Russia.
They understand that this is losing and it's only going to lead to more death and destruction as it spreads across Europe.
Yes, yes, yes.
Good, good.
Meanwhile, Zelensky is seeking to legalize cyber hacking against Putin to create a whole army to do it.
The Ukrainian government is working on a new law that would bring one of its volunteer brigades into an official military role.
They're called the IT Army, a group of hackers working to initiate cyberattacks against and prevent cyberattacks from Russia.
So far, they've claimed responsibility for taking Russian state media websites down while President Putin was delivering his State of the Nation speech.
They've also drawn a lot of criticism because they've attacked hospitals in Russia as well as other targets that are civilian in nature.
The group of hacktivists have also recruited volunteers from other countries.
All they need to join is a smartphone or a computer with a strong internet signal.
A new law being proposed would make its IT army an official part of the country's military.
It wouldn't be the first of its kind.
Estonian and Finland have full-scale cyber forces that augment their country's regular military divisions.
In other countries, reservists with a capability in the cyber world are used, instead of a dedicated group such as we find in Ukraine.
The National Coordination Center for Cyber Security, working under the National Security and Defense Council of Vladimir Zelensky.
The secretary of that group recently told Newsweek, the law on the creation and function of cyber forces within the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine should be adopted as soon as possible.
It would become the basis for building the state cyber defense capabilities, engaging cyber volunteers in these activities, and creating a cyber reserve who would be civilians, trained by Ukraine's military, having the ability to mobilize, help defend the country anytime there were a conflict within the cyber world.
Well, they're not providing more details on the law.
It looks as though they would absorb or replace the I.T.
Army's volunteers entirely, make it a more permanent and official branch of the military.
Apparently, members of the I.T.
Army are all for this new law.
They emailed responses to Newsweek, which was reporting this story, saying the interest they have would indeed be represented by this new law.
We've only trust efforts of the Working Group to legalize a massive fight in the cyber sector and welcome the moment when it will stop being the gray zone.
We believe integration of the IT Army into the Cyber Reserve will help in building a more effective defense against cyber threats.
Paul, your thoughts?
Well, let me try this video trick one more time.
There we go.
So what this means is that the US, the UK, NATO, and Ukraine, they already engaged in cyber warfare.
Everybody does it against Russia and whatever other target of opportunity that they want to hit.
And what I found particularly humorous in the article is talking about, oh yeah, yeah, they were volunteers before, as if.
There are a bunch of see all they do is virtue signal and pretend that there's some bold democracy upholding attacked people's defending freedom the same way that the US only asks for freedom around the world and nothing for ourselves.
So, and the virtue signal goes on in the article talking about eliminating some sort of a legal gray zone, eh?
As if they care about the rule of law at all.
So, that's all that we get are these narratives and this pretense, and it's covering up an empire.
But, until we get a breakthrough where the public can see enough to demand the arrest of the empire, then this bullshit is all we're going to get, and the Public serpents are going to do their best to remain hidden from the view of the public and they do it through virtue signaling.
Indeed.
Holly, your thoughts?
Well, I just think that we're having so much news right now as far as the economics here in the United States.
We've got like four banks that are in the process of collapsing, the inflation that's going through, the Fed has decided to raise rates again right now.
I think the war is a big cover for all this, this cyber attacks.
I think these local banks, we are going to see, we've already seen a little bit of this, but I think some of these smaller local banks are going to be hit by cyber attacks.
And I think that that's how a lot of the money is going to be missing for a lot of people.
And I would assume we're also going to see cyber attacks here in the United States.
And of course, that's going to be blamed on Russia and made part of this larger And there's some speculation that the bank collapse is going to be used to promote a central bank in the United States and digital currency.
We saw with the 2016 elections, the 2020 elections, etc.
So I think as they move from elections to where's all this money going, instead of looking at the money laundering for these wars, they're going to say it was a cyber attack.
And there's some speculation that the bank collapse is going to be used to promote a central bank in the United States in digital currency.
Would you want to comment on that?
Well, I think they're definitely trying that in some smaller countries right now.
I think they're trying it in Africa.
I think Nigeria, they tried to launch a CBDC and that failed.
People didn't want to use it.
So I think with inflation, they're going to have to do this under Biden.
Biden, obviously, you know, the Biden regime doesn't really seem to care about inflation.
So they can just push this inflation until people are begging for some sort of alternative right now.
And that, like you said, tying that Carl, would you like to add on this?
We've got to disconnect with Carl momentarily.
We'll have him back.
through cybercrime and hacking.
Carl, would you like to add on this?
We've got to disconnect with Carl momentarily.
We'll have him back.
Meanwhile, there's something known as the Holman Rule that would allow the House to fast-track proposals to get rid of government programs without extensive debate.
The slim majority of the House has just voted to give itself a streamlined way to fire civil servants and shut down federal programs it doesn't like.
The method known as the Holman Rule has been used in the past by both parties to cloak political decisions in the language and process of saving taxpayer money.
And a former Acting General Counsel of the U.S.
House of Representatives, author of a treatise on Congressional Procedure, I, the Author, know this method has been used in the past to push extreme political agendas through the political process without due consideration for the public interest, which is likely to happen again.
Florida Republican Kat Carmack spoke about Harmon Rule's adoption in January of 2023, calling federal officials, unelected bureaucrats, the true real swamp creatures here in D.C.
who have run roughshod over the American people without consequence.
Today marks our first move, certainly not our last, to hold them accountable.
Jacqueline Simone, public policy director of the American Federation of Government Employees, sees the rule differently because, of course, she's trying to protect all those civil servants who have assumed the role of policy shaping and decision making contrary to the democratic process.
It goes around everything that protects the civil service from political corruption.
Not just federal employees, but entire agencies.
It's precisely for theater and to create chaos and disrupt the operation of federal agencies, including law enforcement.
I don't think so.
The rule allows House members to transform the normal process of compiling appropriation bills into vehicles to fire government and poison shutdown programs.
Anything is ripe for cutting in the Home Men rule, from environmental protection agencies to government efforts for human rights to existing programs for addressing sale of semi-automatic weapons.
Normally, such cuts to staff or program would have to go through an extensive review process.
That includes initial drafting of a full-scale bill, subcommittee hearings and debates, testimony and evidence presented by a president's administration, press coverage, adaptation of Congress members' positions in light of the coverage, then votes held on edits to the bill, known as markups, after which separate committees vote on reporting the bill out The drafting of a committee report and even more.
Holman sidesteps all of those stages.
It allows provision for altering or abolishing programs he offered and made part of appropriation bill as long as they are alleged to save money.
Under Holman, Individual members offer amendments during house consideration of a bill on the floor.
As long as they cut spending, they are considered proper.
The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, for example, created a program to improve the technology infrastructure of the IRS and hire more auditors.
Estimates are the program will cost $80 million over a decade.
Proposed changes that go the normal route through many hearings might get bogged down under debate, but under Holman, a critic could just drop a change into the most vast part of the appropriation bill that cuts spending for the Treasury Department and kills or alters the program.
No one could stop that from happening unless they chose to vote against the entire appropriation bill, which funds a whole department of the government.
Similarly, EPA proposes to strengthen regulation limiting gas or oil methane emissions of potent greenhouse gas.
A house critic of the methane control could just pop into the bill on the EPA provision that cuts the program or the head's salary to a dollar or terminates it altogether.
Historically, the Holman Rule, named after William S. Holman of Indiana, wasn't a tool of only the Republicans.
It was developed in 1876, when a Democrat House majority faced a Republican president.
I wrote about the history in my book.
At the time, the Democrat Party held what would later be called the Solid South—today, those states are usually Republican—and sought to expel Yankee Reconstruction and repeal the laws behind it.
Democrats adopted the Homeman Rule to get those repeals of law passed President Grant.
The Homeman Rule could be and was put to diverse use in the early days.
A broad initial reconstruction of the rule by the House, reports the Congressional Research Service, resulted in putting a great mass of general legislation into appropriation bills.
It was used from 1876 to 1895, again from 1911 to 1983, brought back by the GOP in 2017, but Democrats dropped it in 2019.
One notable attempt in 2017, Republicans angry about evaluation of legislation by staff of the nonpartisan budget analysis division of the CBO.
They used Holman to try to abolish the division and move its employee to another part of the agency.
Holman allowed disgruntled Republicans to rush a proposal onto the floor.
The vote to eliminate the division failed, but significantly the use of the Home Men rule was promoted by the same faction of the Republican Party, the Freedom Caucus, advocating for it now.
There are a number of situations that could lead current House Republicans to use the rule.
First, they might want to unify their party to pass controversial appropriation bills in the face of anticipated unanimous Democrat resistance.
Allowing Holman may get legislative support from the fringe of the caucus.
House passage of provision to cut or wipe out programs and agencies has two effects.
House Republicans can demoralize agency employees who don't know whether to take jobs elsewhere or stay, and it may be passing by the whole Congress.
An attempt by the Senate Democrat majority to kill a House passed Holman rule when it considers legislation sent over from the House significantly would need 60 votes to move ahead.
That would require votes from almost a dozen Republicans, which may be impossible to get.
An appropriation bill with Holman provision would then go to conference, what would be a reconciliation.
Senate Democrats might go along, even with objectionable Holman, to get a buy-in from all the factions of the House need for passage of the appropriate bill to avoid a government shutdown, for example.
Carl, your thoughts?
Well, the Holman rule, that's just going to be more legalese to cover up the illegality of the government.
They're just going to pretend that they're following the rules and that this is legit.
You know, these legislative swords, they cut two ways, and I wouldn't mind at all a reversal if good guys could get in charge to get a lot of the programs throwing money at Ukraine and at COVID.
So, to demonstrate that we don't need to worry about the Holman Rule or whatever rule, is that we have a Congress that claims to be legitimate in passing bills, including giving thousands of pages to the members, and they need to vote on that the night before.
And I think it was Nancy Pelosi who famously said, we gotta pass the bill to find out what's in it.
So this type of bullshit and they pass illegal bills on their face, the Patriot Act, banks, bailouts, the illegal wars, election fraud, COVID provisions.
I mean, it's just a tragic comic joke.
So, you know, part of part of our audience is going to be Okay, all right.
But you don't have to worry so much about understanding the latest crime du jour and the bullshit du jour.
You need to have a background of specific areas of proof that you're legitimate to withdraw your consent and demand their arrest.
And again, this is not a constitutional republic at play in the United States.
If you really want to empower yourself, Start telling the truth and that this is a lying, looting, virtue signaling, rogue state empire.
I just observed this appears to be kind of a partial implementation of Schedule F. Trump is supposed to gut the senior executive service, that is, the deep state, making policy shaping a decision-making decision contrary to the Democrat process.
It had been impossible to get them out because of their civil service protection, so he created a Schedule F that would enable to do that, give him the legal authority.
Holman, looks like a partial implementation.
Hawley, your thoughts?
Well, admittedly, I don't know a whole lot about this, but I do know that, like Carl mentioned before, with passage of these illegal acts such as the Patriot Act, we have to go through court to try to get These repealed and by that time a lot of ways the damage is done once once Congress passes a lot of this and it gets signed by the president or are or through executive orders etc.
We have to go through this legal process and by then so much damage is already done and I think there have been bills trying to put forward where they have tried to block the passage of these massive bills, like limiting the number of pages.
I think, as he had mentioned, Nancy Pelosi saying we have to pass it to find out what's in it.
And some of these bills are like 3,000 pages long and they give it to people the night before.
And none of that should be legal as well.
And I just want to say, I did watch Trump's speech the other day, and I pretty much agreed with everything that he said, and Matt Gaetz as well.
I thought his speech was fantastic.
And I don't know if they're just preaching to the choir and they know exactly what people want to hear, or if any of this will actually be delivered upon, but It definitely was setting the record straight, whether he was talking about leaving Ukraine more and stopping World War III in 24 hours, or having more local control over school boards and the school budget, everything.
There's so many things that I think the people are hungry for, so I think that this would be a fantastic opportunity if any of this really does go through.
Wonderful.
Wonderful comments.
Get this.
The banking system is collapsing.
This is a tweet from Elon Musk.
Arrest Donald Trump.
How absurd it is.
But that's the way the Democrats think.
They want to blame everything on Trump.
They're responsible for nothing bad.
Would like to take credit for anything good, but they have nothing to show for it.
All they can do is blame Trump.
Ford is about to break out big EV losses for the first time.
The whole electric vehicle business is going to be a calamity of fiscal disaster for everyone who pursues it, with the exception, perhaps, of the limited-elite Tesla line.
Ford will begin reporting its financial results by business unit instead of by region, and will release revised results that will show how new business units, where EV is a separate unit, would have performed at 2021 and 2022.
The changes amount to the most detailed look yet by any legacy automaker into the finances behind the EV business.
Wall Street is taking a wait-and-see approach, expecting significant EV unit losses.
Here's the incoming Ford CEO on the left, and Ford Executive Chairman Bill Ford, in front of a 2021 F-150.
The board is about to tell investors what they've been long wondering.
How much has it transitioned to electric costing?
They plan to begin reporting their business results by unit instead of by region.
The units include Ford Blue, Ford's traditional internal combustion engine, its Model E electric unit, the Ford Pro commercial and government fleet, Ford Next, non-automotive mobility solutions, and its existing Ford Credit financial service subsidy.
These will amount to the most detailed look yet into the finances behind the EV business.
The carmaker is expected to release profits and losses, revenue, margins, earnings before interest and taxes, or EBIT, for each of the units.
As part of a sweeping rethinking of its business under CEO Jim Farley, Ford decided last year to separate primary profit engines, internal combustion—those, of course, are gasoline engines—and its commercial fleet from the company's emerging all-electric vehicles.
Not expected to be profitable for at least a few years.
I guarantee they will never be profitable.
Farley and other execs have emphasized reporting changes are just about disclosure, but reflects a way their executive team thinks about and runs the business.
The changes are significant.
It's not the first time Ford has reimagined its future or form a path different than other companies.
Wall Street's taking a wait-and-see approach.
Analysts maintain a hold rating on the stock with a $13.50 price range.
Shares traded Wednesday for about $11.70 a share.
Shares of Ford jumped by $8.40 the day execs announced the new business, but stock is down 35% since then.
Dragged lower by changing market conditions, supply chain issues, and underwhelming quarterly earnings.
The company will report its first quarter results on May 2nd and host a capital market day on May 22nd.
Farley argued that Ford's standalone EV will produce as much excitement as any pure EV competitor.
He described the legacy business, however, that is the gas automotive, a profit and cash business for the 120-year-old automaker.
As with other automakers and EV startups, Investors should expect deep losses when it comes to foreign electric vehicle business.
Model E is expected to include the company's EV platform, electronic battery motors, embedded software, and digital experience.
Morgan Stanley's Adam Jonas expects Model E to have a negative gross margin between 10 and 20 percent, with its yesterday's BIT margin between negative 20 and negative 30, implying significant losses.
Ford has said it expects 8% margin on its EVs by 2026 to boost its overall adjusted profit margin to 10%.
Their adjusted margin last year was 6.6%.
Deutsche Bank analyst Emanuel Rosner believed Ford could be incurring gross losses of about $9,000 per EV sold.
You can't stay in business long at that rate of loss.
The analysts expect Ford to reveal bodily operate of $6 billion for 2022.
That's after accounting for a significant R&D investment, roughly 65% of the company's R&D into the EV business.
It could report much deeper losses than investors expect, which could make Ford's target of 8% EV margin by 2026 particularly difficult to achieve.
No doubt.
Carl, your thoughts?
Gotta go down the history channel here for me.
My mentor Buckminster Fuller, in the 1930s, designed a car, the Dymaxion vehicle.
It could seat 12, teardrop-shaped, three wheels, could go 120 miles per hour, and get 30 miles per gallon.
Bucky found that none of the big car companies were interested in working with him for any development at all.
And if you take a look at the car companies, I mean, remember, we're on a planet where everything's captured all the agencies, all the businesses, and that includes.
All the innovative minds that would make an automobile.
Something that would use the most advanced technologies.
We only get scraps from the table.
Take a look at the concept cars and how exciting those things are, but they don't roll them out.
Everybody knows that if they rolled out that concept car, they would get so much business, but they just don't do it.
Go to wanttoknow.info.
Go to the top of the health section.
I'll put a link down in the show notes.
For free energy devices, so we live in a world where we have the capacity for demonstrated free energy devices, and yet we're still constrained by these huge companies who also could take the lead, but they don't for the research and the development and for the talk of it.
And we're left with.
Well, it's probably the quietest for sure.
Personal note with the Ford Mach-E, one of my sisters-in-law purchased one of those recently.
She's very excited about that.
My brother has the regular gas engine, very fast, very powerful Ford Mustang.
But my sister-in-law says that the Mustang Electric is the best car she's ever had.
Well, it's probably the quietest for sure.
Holly, your thoughts?
Well, I think people are realizing that the electric vehicles that they're putting out right now are just not a sustainable vehicle.
They're basically, if you even get a scratch on the battery, the whole thing is basically a wreck at that point.
It's hard to find parts.
It's hard to get repairs.
It's hard to find charging stations.
It takes hours for them to charge.
They're starting to put some charging stations around here, but you only see a couple of cars.
People don't have the money to spend on the cars right now, and people in Michigan are upset about them trying to switch to electric vehicles.
I did see an interesting article.
I don't remember off the top of my head the name of the company, but Gretchen Whitmer, the terrible governor over there, basically rolled out the red carpet for this electric vehicle company.
And people are complaining, saying that these individuals who work there have to sign a fidelity to the Chinese communist government.
So there's a big fight over that, over the electric vehicle company over there.
So they're seeing it as not even helping the American people.
And I have heard as well that Elon Musk, with his electric vehicle, Tesla has kind of expected that they're not going to be selling so well because the economy is so bad.
So they actually kind of lowered their expectations about selling.
So it doesn't look so bad on their books.
But people are just not really interested in the electric vehicles that are out right now, as Carl has mentioned before.
There's this technology and it's been around for tremendous advancements for all different types of vehicles, and it's just not available to the public.
I think you make so many excellent points, Sarah Hawley.
I mean, the whole thing is a disaster.
It's going to be a catastrophe any way you cut it.
It's very odd.
I've been saying for some time Tulsi may be Trump's VP, and here's an article about it.
But they found the oddest, most unflattering photo of Tulsi I've ever seen.
People have been surmising who Trump might select as his running mate.
Whether he'll name a head of winning the GOP primary or wait until he secures it, some names suggestive include South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley, not going to happen, South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem, a possibility, a long shot, former Fox News anchor Carrie Lake, who's going to have a great future, but too inexperienced to be qualified now, and Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the current governor of Arkansas, another dark horse candidate.
It's also been reported he's strongly considering Tulsi Gabbard, a former member of the House, as a Democrat.
She has a highly public profile.
Having been a prominent Democrat, she also ran for president at one point.
She We got it, Kamala Harris, during the debate, everyone may recall, and I'm convinced in Iowa she actually won the caucus, which is why they had the peculiar situation of being unable to report for days and days and days because the Democrat party was reconstructing what they were going to report.
She made even more headlines last year when she left the Democrat Party fed up with where it was headed.
She's been on Fox again and again, including Tucker.
I've seen her there many times and spoke at CPAC.
Abbott isn't officially a member of the party right now and independent.
Many people believe that could change in the future.
There's pure speculation Governor might be named, although I happen to believe it.
One of the reasons is she'd be a great person to target the woke policies of the Democrat Party.
She would have legitimacy to her claims as well, as a former member of the Liberal Party not that long ago.
She also falls in line with Trump views on foreign policy as a non-interventionist, not an isolationist, but a non-interventionist.
You know, America needs to stay out of a lot of the different situations it finds itself in, deliberately and unnecessarily.
In addition to play to conservative voters, Tulsi would have some draw with Democrats familiar with her name and what she did for the party.
Those non-die-hard Democrats might actually be convinced by what she's saying and leave the party themselves, or at least decide to vote for a presidential Trump-Tulsi-Tulsi-Trump ticket in 2024.
This all sounds fine and dandy, but would it actually happen?
According to this source, they think not.
It's unlikely Trump would pick Gabbard, they argue, because he had four other women on his shortlist who are staunch Republicans in his bowl.
Both Haley and Sanders work under his admin, while Lake and Noem are hardcore supporters of his policy.
But Gabbard makes for an interesting case, and one that would be exciting, to say the least.
By the way, I do believe that's the way he's going to go.
We also have GOP gaining new power as the Louisiana Democrats switch sides.
2022 might not have given us the red wave we hope for.
That doesn't mean there isn't a drastic shift going on anyhow at the state and federal level in Louisiana.
Striking development.
State Representative Francis Thompson, long been part of the legislative process, even the longest serving member of his party, is no longer going to associate himself with the Democrats.
The party, in his opinion, has strayed too far from his Christian faith and values.
The push the past several years by Democrat leadership on both national and state level to support certain issues—no doubt that would include abortion and transgenderism and teaching kids in kindergarten to masturbate and have drag shows—does not align with his values and principles.
He can no longer, in good conscience, deliberate with them.
Instead, he's joining the GOP caucus.
It might not seem like big news.
He's just a state representative.
Even himself, he says nothing has changed.
But it means he's formally registered with a party that fits him best.
It's not like he hasn't jumped the aisle to vote for the Republicans on issues before.
His conservative voting record over his years speaks for itself.
So it's not as though he'd suddenly be voting for things he wouldn't have voted for before.
But in the state of Louisiana, it makes a great deal of possible difference.
Carl, your thoughts?
We're the first story with Tulsi Goodcash.
That was a bad photo of her and I think what's happening is that the media are starting to shape expectations to politically assassinate Tulsi later.
Remember, Tulsi slayed Hillary.
Hillary in the primaries went off to say that Tulsi was a Russian agent and a Russian asset and Tulsi went out and thanked her very much for coming out of the closet with a tweet and just raked her over the coals as being the example of why the Democratic Party had been hollowed out into a worthless virtue signaling group of just spenders.
Now, so that means she's not coming back politically.
You got two governors, Nikki Haley and Huckabee Sanders.
Those are swamp creatures.
If we took a look at the election frauds and got the true count, there'd probably be a lot with that.
The Iowa caucus, of course, it's rigged.
If you go back a few election cycles for anybody who's paid attention to the campaigns of Dennis Kucinich on the left, Bernie Sanders on the left and Ron Paul on the right, you'll know exactly what happened, what Jim was talking about.
That, oh, yeah, you know, I have watched Kucinich win primaries and then the next morning, then he'll be reported to receive 4 percent of the vote.
And that's that's it.
That's all that you're going to get.
And then, you know, interestingly enough, as close as I was to Kucinich's campaign and staff, I couldn't get anything out of them for what was really going on and what Dennis really saw with that.
But when two of Kucinich's family members died, I think this was in the 2008 campaign, it might have been 12, And that's when Kucinich backed off for any presidential aspirations.
So part of this article, again, we need to take a step back and remind ourselves that we're operating under mathematically certain election fraud.
We don't have elections anymore.
It's all rigged.
And for that Louisiana legislator, good for him.
I mean, we need a lot more than that, but good for him.
Oh, I couldn't agree more.
Hawley.
Uh, well, I think, uh, so Tulsi Gabbard has a TV show right now, or a radio show.
She's very eloquent.
I think she's, uh, extremely intelligent, and, um, she has served her representatives very well.
I don't think she's really going to make any difference as far as drawing Democrats to Trump.
I think the Democrats are just they've got severe Trump derangement syndrome.
So I don't really think she's really going to add that many votes.
I mean, I think she would.
I don't know if she works well with Trump.
I think they're on the same page in a lot of ways.
And I think that, you know, she could be a great VP, but I don't think Trump needs her necessarily.
I don't really think Trump even really needs anyone of any specific big name to draw Democrats.
I don't think they're going to change their mind.
I think people made up their mind if they're going to hate Trump or if they love Trump.
I don't really think adding someone who is, you know, a former Democrat is going to help necessarily his campaign at this point.
Well, let me say, I think he wants to run with a woman.
And of all the women out there, it seems to me, Tulsi is by far the best qualified.
Now, she needs to come around on the Second Amendment, but I think that's easy once she understands that Americans use guns to defend themselves from assailants millions of times every year, saving an estimated 200,000 lives every year.
Now, that's significant.
Because the number that are supposed to die from gun violence every year is 70,000 roughly, more than half of whom are suicides.
So you're talking about many multiples of those who die from gun violence criminally who would be saved, have their lives saved by virtue of possessing weapons, which they typically don't even have to use, just show they have the weapon.
So I think Tulsi is convertible on the Second Amendment.
And the point I would make is she appears to me to be eminently qualified to become president of the United States.
And look at the enemies she's acquired.
Those are Trump's enemies.
I think he'd find her almost irresistible.
Further thoughts, Holly?
I think you're right.
I think she is a fantastic as far, you know, most of her beliefs are anti war, you know, standing against Ukraine.
I think that's one thing.
Unfortunately, I don't think that the Democrats don't seem to be very anti war anymore.
But I think you're definitely right about the Second Amendment as well.
And perhaps her military service, she'd be more open to that.
And, yeah, I think maybe having A woman run as a VP would be a good strategic move.
Maybe that could sway some female voters.
I don't know.
I don't see a more viable alternative.
Carl, your thoughts?
Well, it just depends.
It just depends.
The Americans want the truth.
And the principal truth that needs to be resolved is the election fraud.
Without that, it doesn't matter.
Now, if any of the major candidates, even if
Kucinich writes on Substack still and you know he talks a little bit of politics but nobody is going to stand where they need to stand for true leadership which is to say the most important fact is that we're under election fraud and it is provable and we can demonstrate it until that gets addressed then this is all just talk for Tulsi and Trump and whoever else is just kabuki theater.
I agree that Democrats could run a ham sandwich and win an election the way it's rigged these days.
Look what they did with Biden.
They essentially did exactly that.
Meanwhile, and this is fairly astonishing, the chutzpah of the Democrat Party trying to perpetrate a fraud of this level.
We have a Fetterman Hospital photo that's raising questions about a body double, because they're claiming they got Fetterman out of the hospital.
And look at this.
Here's the real guy.
Remember how incompetent he was during his debate?
It was a disaster with Oz.
Nevertheless, he came out.
He'd been hospitalized.
But look at this.
This is a new guy!
I mean, this is astonishing!
Here's Bridget Gabriel tweeting.
I'm not one to push conspiracy theory, but John Fetterman's face looks totally different.
Here's another.
Cat turd.
It's a miracle.
In only three weeks, John Fetterman got a total head replacement.
Man, he has some good doctors.
Here's another.
Steve Toback.
Either that ain't John Fetterman or dude literally got his head shrunk.
Here's another.
Delta Dawn.
Do the Democrats think the American people are this stupid to think Vetterman 2.0 is the same man as 1.0?
Either a doppelganger or a clone.
Cannot wait until we see the Hump and him in public.
Not going to happen because Vetterman is a deceit.
Let him lie in peace.
Stunning stuff, in my opinion.
This is completely fraudulent.
The Democrats have made a history of using body doubles.
Hillary's used six or eight.
I document it.
The President Biden is not the original Joe from Delaware.
It's a fraud.
Outrageous.
Carl, your thoughts?
Yeah, Jim, speak in my language to set that up.
All you gotta do is look at the history and the demonstrated frauds and body doubles.
I mean, whoever this actor is playing Biden, he literally should be arrested, because who the fuck is this guy?
If you want to say this is the president, okay, okay.
That's not his head.
His ear used to be...
Dangly, but now they're attached and his forehead used to be big and now it's small.
This is a different guy.
So, with that Fetterman photo, this is a good example about in professional history.
We take a look at the tools and that photograph, that's photographic evidence, documentary evidence, and you would take a look at it and pick it apart with experts.
I'm no expert in documentary evidence and photographic evidence, but just take a look at that picture.
There are aspects of it that look different, that look softer and brushed on that new photo, but And taking a look at the shapes of the ears, the bend in the nose, that bridge here, he's got a kind of a funky line here, and he's got unique shapes to both of his ears which seem to match up.
So, who knows, but Jim has it right when we can demonstrate these body doubles, and when we can also demonstrate that we have masquerades, trans men masquerading as women, With Big Mike Obama and Big Jack, the PM of New Zealand, the former PM, you know, we just don't have to play these games with them.
We can just withdraw consent.
Well, they may or may not have photoshopped the years in, but I guarantee 100% that's not the same guy.
You cannot change the shape and size of your skull.
That's a permanent property.
This is insulting beyond belief.
Holly.
Yeah, I saw it.
I think it was CNN the other day.
It was on at the gym and they were talking about, you know, they were even starting to float the idea like, gee, Fetterman's been out of work and been MIA for six weeks.
When is he going to come back and start voting for us?
You know, as a Democrat, they were kind of expressing concern about the whole thing.
And then that that photo was Circulating around and that looks like his wife.
So it's kind of strange that she's posing with someone that's obviously not her husband at all.
I mean, they even found like a really poor body double.
I think that they just expect people to be idiots.
I mean, he's got the like, you know, a similar beard, but that's it.
I mean, he's a white guy, I guess is what they're saying.
But nose, ears, shape of the head, everything, you know, there are people who do like the full body reconstruction looking at someone's bone structure and it's no way it's the same guy.
So eventually they're going to have to find someone else or run another election.
But for the Democrats, there's such a dumpster fire at this point that the fewer people that are showing up to vote, it seems like the better for them.
Well, they're terrified at losing control of the Senate.
And Fetterman and Feinstein, who's totally non-compass mantis, are the kiosks.
I mean, they have such a slender margin.
They're going to do anything.
And they're doing it!
And as far as Fetterman's wife, Jill Biden goes out with this guy!
He was a completely different guy!
I mean, it's so disgusting beyond belief.
I mean, it's enough to make you vomit.
Unreal.
Can they get away with it?
We'll see.
Meanwhile, the Babylon Bee, brilliant satire, trumped to be indicted for removing Mantis Tag in 1997.
New York District Attorney Alvin Bank is reportedly set to indict Trump this coming Tuesday for the removal of a mattress tag back in 1997.
According to sources, new evidence was discovered in the mattress tag gold case by grizzled detective Harry Jakes, who utilized modern advances in forensic science to play former President Trump at the scene of the crime.
We got him dead to rights, that brag, in an unnecessary press conference.
No one removes a mattress tag in my city and gets away with it.
The mattress tag in question belonged to a spring-air-confirm-a-foam mattress from 97, which historians claim featured a warning label advising mattress tags to not be removed.
Do not remove by penalty of law except by the consumer.
In a surprise move, Trump has not denied the troubling accusation, though he maintains doing so is not illegal.
The tag says, except by consumer.
I am a huge consumer, probably the greatest consumer ever, and I had every right to remove that tag.
The deep state is trying to dig up anything they can just to keep me from reclaiming the presidential throne, which I Independent fact checkers have rated Trump's claim a bald-faced lie, citing the fact the president does not sit on a throne.
Also, he is Trump, and that is bad.
The fact article does not make mention of the mattress tag issue directly, but does note Trump broke both federal and international laws, probably.
A unit of the United Nations Committee has been assembled to investigate whether the matter qualifies as a war crime.
This is an open and shut case.
Now he'll never be president.
I did it, Frank claimed before quickly correcting himself.
I mean, no one is above the law.
At publishing time, Trump's approval polling surged among mattress consumers who have long been befuddled by the mattress tag warning.
Meanwhile, they also review The Babylon Bee?
How different media are covering the Trump indictment?
The news world had been set aflame by the potential indictment of Trump for the crime of extreme patriotism.
My New York City Grand Jury deliberates.
Let's take a look at how it's being covered by the media.
New York Times.
Here are 10 crimes we hope Trump may have committed.
Washington Post.
We are the comic book artists that draw dramatic images of what a Trump arrest would look like.
Fox News.
Yay!
Trump might be indicted.
Oops, we mean no.
That's bad.
What is it you people want to hear again?
Salon.
I can't help but notice the DA is black and Trump is white, so maybe we could use this to start a race war.
Keith Olbermann.
Heavy breathing.
CNN.
Trump crimes make Pearl Harbor look like a happy picnic.
LA Times.
How the charges against Trump are being fueled by climate change.
Infowars.
Mexican president says Trump has been in jail for 34 years because of gay demons.
Drudge Report.
Excitement.
Incitement.
Indictment.
Refinement.
Enlightenment.
Associated Press.
Will Trump be indicted?
Maybe.
ESPN.
Trump's indictment illustrates why WNBA players deserve more money.
MSNBC.
Crucify him.
Epoch Times.
Here are 10 exclusive insights on the Trump indictment from the CCP agents who orchestrated the whole thing.
Daily Beast.
Orange Man Sad.
Looks like Donald Trump is going behind bars.
Mother Jones, yeah, we're still a thing.
BuzzFeed, eh, Donald Trump.
Daily Wire, you can help destroy a woke district attorney by buying $7 chocolate bars.
Not satire!
The Media Research Center is the only conservative organization exposing the media's attempt to undermine our Constitution.
Carl, your thoughts?
I appreciate the Babylon B's humor, and they do point to a real aspect in that drive to arrest Trump, is that what our opponents do is they project what they're doing onto their opponents.
And really, this is the most crude criminals in charge.
They have won power through election fraud, the wars are illegal, the bankster looting is illegal, the COVID forced injections are crimes against humanity.
So they're really in a difficult situation.
They have to make a rush to their final victory, and they have to do it by bombarding the poor sheeple with this disinformation that it's not they that are the real criminals, but it's the political opponents.
They have to unify the hate onto somebody else, and Trump is going to be that target.
And of course, corporate media is a necessary part of the empire.
They have to be there in order to push the narratives of the elites, and the leaders in the political branch, they're all puppets.
Corporate media, they're a type of puppet, but narrating the script so that it all can be believed, and then the people with the money, they're paying off all these minions in the background, and that's the basis of empire.
Indeed, Holly.
Well, I think Carl's right about projection here, and I think we've seen that since at least 2016 with Trump and the Democrats and going forward.
Basically, everything that they've either accused Trump or Russia has been some of their their own doing.
That's been the two Whatever, that seems to be their scapegoats for everything over the past few years, and we'll see if that continues or if people are going to continue to fall for that.
It seems like mainstream media has completely collapsed, so I'm not really sure what they're going to do with the 2024 elections.
I mean, obviously, they're getting caught in their own lies as far as even trying to arrest Trump, and he played them by throwing that out there before they were ready.
To have that information go forward so he played played basically like the art of war where you expose their tricks before it even happened and then they're turning around and saying oh well he made that up and he was able to foil that plan at least but we'll see how many more things can be thrown at his administration and everyone surrounding him before 2024.
The Democrats are scared shitless of Donald Trump.
They've never been up against an opponent who had such power and grip on the American people.
They are petrified, and they're going all out to destroy him.
It will not be successful, but it won't be for lack of trying.
Meanwhile, we want to hear from you.
Send fan mail to live-need-to-know-at-gmail.com.
Live-need-to-know-at-gmail.com.
Here we have need-to-know, convenient truths.
Beverly writes, Robert Kennedy Jr.
potential run for president.
I am not excited about this.
Unless R.F.K.
Jr.
fills a cabinet with a majority of Republicans who are deep state snakes or true independents, not dems in sheep's clothing, his policies will go nowhere.
Their flaws are many, but a Trump or DeSantis presidency is the only way to even halfway right the sinking ship that is the U.S.
And I wonder how effective R.F.K.
Jr.
would be in eradicating woke-ism.
I've heard him talk about vaccine dangers and the COVID scam, but don't recall any commentary about how woke-ism is destroying America.
I would fear him falling into Democrat habits of tolerating or being afraid to speak against political correctness, which has morphed into woke-ism.
RFK Jr.
would siphon votes from Trump or DeSantis.
Further, the Dems have created such a clusterfuck over the past couple of decades, they need to lose power for a while.
RFK Jr.
can be more effective as he is now, speaking out about corruption and using his legal training to bring charges against wrongdoers.
By the way, in addition, California law to ban chemicals in candy.
This is a good idea.
The chemical additives in foods and beverages have wreaked havoc over the decade on people's health, resulting in exploding roads of cancer, diabetes, and obesity.
The problem with this bill is it's been couching woke-ism.
The co-opted legislator says candy ads target people of color.
For example, example number 1001 of black people being used to further nefarious agendas.
Candy ads are everywhere, not just in predominantly black neighborhoods and in or on media aimed at blacks.
Perhaps the legislator is trying to have it both ways.
He gets money from chemical companies, so he really doesn't want this bill to pass.
But he also gets money from woke paymasters like Soros, so he had to promote woke legislation.
Beverly, thank you.
Meanwhile, final thoughts.
Carl, yours.
Well, thanks, Beverly, for bringing that up.
So RFK Jr., that is tantalizing.
And I did hear and receive information, and I did sign a petition to encourage RFK Jr.
to run.
But the information that we have so far, the guy is a leader with vaccine information and with the COVID crimes against humanity, which is great.
It's not going to be enough.
We need to have full truth.
And of course he's in perfect position to be able to roll out truth with what happened to his dad, what happened to his uncle.
What about those lie-started illegal wars of aggression because his dad took on the Vietnam War?
Potentially, he would be able to do something, but I think that is not going to do anything in significance until he gets more on board with the truth.
And for that bill in California, yeah, okay, we do need to understand the landscape.
We are under attack.
World War Three is destroying we the people, and that includes poison in our food, the GMOs, the Roundup soap poisons, the fluoride in the water, the shots.
This is a war, and I don't want to be too, you just gotta say it, it's a war to the death.
Our opponents want us dead.
And all we have on our side is apparently the truth.
We don't have enough power as yet to break through to the policy level.
We don't have the power even for RFK Jr.
to stand up and tell the truth with what happened to his own father.
So we do need this breakthrough.
And until we get it, then we are in a apparently deplorable position, an underdog position, to be sure.
And as long as the game is going on, Keep standing for the truth, keep looking for the breakthrough, because this game can change with a breakthrough of truth.
The people have seen enough in the background, and I think that they're willing to throw all those war criminals and criminals against humanity under the bus, if given a chance.
We are in a deplorable position, no doubt, because as Hillary observed, we are the deplorables.
Paulie, your final thoughts?
I think that comment was fabulous.
The email that you received, I think she's absolutely right about how basically Democrats need to sit it out.
When I'm saying the same thing with Tulsi Gabbard and other people who could create a Trump presidency, I don't think they should be bending towards the Democrats or trying to appease anyone or trying to get them to vote.
We need to address the election inconsistencies, I'll just say, and the voting machines, first and foremost, because I don't think the Democrats have as much power as people think they do if you actually looked at the actual machines and the algorithms.
And then secondly, I think regarding Kennedy, he's done fantastic work.
I've been following him for years and years regarding the jabs and the potential harm, the real harm that he has exposed for a very long time working so hard, so many court cases, so much precedent.
I think that that would actually help Trump's presidency as far as Operation Warp Speed and any sort of issues that people were having with that during his presidency.
So if there could be some truth and reconciliation regarding that and how all of that went down.
And RFK could be contributing to a lot of that and adding some legitimacy and perhaps some truth and reconciliation going forward, making sure that something like that does not happen again.
Well, what fabulous comments today from Carl and Holly.
I'm ecstatic to have Holly back here with us on these shows.
She does a wonderful job and adds an extra dimension.
I'm thrilled about it.
Bobby Jr.
might be an outside candidate, too, to be vice president with Trump.
I mean, it sounds odd, but by God, the people would respond.
The fact is that this gun control agenda, generating one phony shooting event after another, is going to be with us for the duration they want to take our guns, as has been well observed.
After some 274 years or so, why would they now want to take our guns?
It has to be because they're about to do something they know we would shoot them for doing.
Pay attention to what's going on.
We're doing our best to bring you all the news you need to know.
Spend as much time as you can with your family, your friends, the people you love and care about.
We do not know how much time we have left.
▲
Export Selection