All Episodes
Previous Next
May 16, 2023 - Jim Fetzer
01:15:28
Truth vs. NEW$ Part 2 (15 May 2023) with Don Grahn, Scott Bennett & Paul Taylor
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome back, folks.
This is Truth Vs. News, and this is May 15th, Monday, and we've got all kinds of things happening, even a rape trial going on, all kinds of things going on.
Jim, so lead us into it.
Well, Don, you got it right, and it's rather interesting that Reader Supported News, which is a far-left publication, published this article about the rape trial, which was very much from a left point of view, and I thought, Well, they've bounced my stuff before, but what the hell?
And I put up a comment about it, and to my astonishment, it stuck, and they seem to be opening up, which I'm very pleased to say.
In any case, this is rather fascinating in and of itself.
To wit, David A. Graham from the Atlantic, the astonishing E. Gene Carroll verdict.
Donald Trump has been found liable by a jury for an act of sexual violence perpetrated nearly 30 years ago.
The perpetual circus and endless scandals that tempt Donald Trump, whether in his personal life, business, or politics, can obscure the utter strangeness of the circumstances of any one case.
So pause to consider what happened today in a Manhattan courtroom.
A jury, after fewer than three hours of deliberation, has concluded the former president sexually abused and defamed the writer E. Jean Carroll Though jurors also concluded her accusation of rape wasn't proven.
The jury awarded Carroll about $5 million in damages.
That result is astonishing.
This is a former president of America being found liable by a jury of his peers for defamation resulting from an act of sexual violence perpetrated nearly 30 years ago.
The verdict is a sign of two competing truths about American society today.
The country is more willing to hold powerful men to account for their behavior, and yet, at the same time, it is still willing to give them power again and again.
The shock of the verdict is not because the allegation was particularly difficult to believe.
On one side was Carol, whose account of the incident was clear, consistent, and nauseating in its specificity.
Carol sued Trump for defamation after he brushed off the allegation by saying, she's not my type.
On the other was Trump.
The former president faced a challenge in defending himself in the case.
Much of Carroll's account matched a bogus modus operandi that at least 26 women who accused Trump of sexual assault have described.
Carroll interviewed five of them for a series in The Atlantic in 2020.
Trump denies the allegations.
Trump himself described his approach in the infamous leak recording from Access Hollywood, in which he boasted about sexually assaulting women.
You know, I'm automatically attracted to beautiful.
I just start kissing them.
It's like a magnet.
Just kiss.
I don't even wait.
And when you're a star, they let you do it.
You can do anything.
He said, grab them by the pussy.
You can do anything.
Trump also didn't bother to show up for the trial, claiming he wanted to swear New Yorkers at traffic jams his residents would cause.
Last week, while in Ireland, he said he'd fly home to appear in court, but surprising no one, he didn't.
Trump's absence might have reflected a recognition from the outset that he was likely to lose and a desire to distance himself from the case.
And although it's impossible to determine how much it was a factor in the trial's outcome by failing to show up, he sent a message to the jury that he wasn't invested in defending himself.
His lawyers reinforced the message by declining to call a witness and instead trying to break apart Carroll's case during cross-examination.
What kind of witness would Trump have called, anyway?
Finding an alibi witness for a moment 27 years ago would be tough.
And who would be a convincing character witness?
Carol's lawyers made Trump a presence in the courtroom, anyway.
Plain excerpt from a deposition for the case had devastating effect.
In one instance, going straight at Trump's not-my-type defense.
Carol's lawyer showed him a photograph of Carol, asked to identify her.
He most took care of her his ex-wife, Marla Mabels, whom Trump had to admit was his type.
More appalling was his discussion of the Access Hollywood tape.
Trump, both in the past and in the deposition, wrote that off as locker room talk.
But he couldn't bring himself to repudiate or even distance himself from the comments, even now, nearly two decades later.
Well, historically, that's true with stars, he said.
True with stars, they can grab women by the pussy, Carol's attorney, Roberta Kaplan, asked.
Well, that's what.
If you look over the last million years, I guess that's been largely true, Trump said.
Not always, but largely true, unfortunately or fortunately.
Unfortunately or fortunately.
And you consider yourself to be a star, Kaplan prodded?
I think you can say that, yeah, Trump replied smugly.
In citing the last million years as president, he seemed to believe he was still living in them.
Trump is not the first man to be both president and a sexual assaulter, but he is the first to have a jury find so.
The verdict against him shows that in at least one case, with one high-profile and unrepentant defendant, the old world in which powerful men could do anything they wanted to women has passed away.
Things have changed a little in the past 1 million years, or at least in the past 30.
So I tweeted, expecting it would be deleted.
This case should never have gone to trial.
What woman who has been raped cannot recall the year, much less the month, the week, the day, and the time?
And how could Trump defend himself with an alibi absent that information?
There was nothing specific about the date and time.
This was a fantasy, where Law & Order SVU had presented a rape in the lingerie department of Bergdorf Goodman seven years earlier.
She was a huge fan of The Apprentice and told Anderson Cooper that rape is sexy and promotes fantasies.
What is more probable?
That she was raped but can't remember even the year it took place?
Or that she has an infatuation with Trump and has fantasized this event?
Not a tough call.
I was attacked by JCM.
Told Anderson Cooper the rape is sexy and Bruno's fantasy?
Not true.
Trump said it, not her.
I replied, no.
It was her observation, not Trump's.
And she also admitted she's a fan of Law & Order, but claims she doesn't watch SVU episodes because they are too violent.
Having watched hundreds of both, what she is claiming is simply not believable.
She is living out a fantasy.
And here she is on with Anderson Cooper.
Listen to her.
You don't feel like a victim.
I was not thrown on the ground and ravished.
The word rape carries so many sexual connotations.
This was not sexual.
It hurt.
I think most people think of rape as a violent assault.
I think most people think of rape as being sexy.
Let's take a short break.
Think of the fantasies.
We're going to take a quick break.
If you can stick around, we'll talk more on the other side.
You're fascinating to talk to.
I don't think so.
Meanwhile, Robert Mill added, this is a shockingly funny article.
Take this one.
Carol sued Trump for defamation after he brushed off the allegation by saying, she's not my type.
So now concluding that someone is not your type, or more bluntly, that you're not sexually attracted to someone, is defamation?
So I guess every human being on earth defames some other person several times a day.
I guess it is a personal offense to learn that Trump is not sexually attracted to you.
But what does that say about About you, that you actually care?
Well, I guess anything can be a defamation, even being alive.
To me, it seems as if Carol defamed herself in her tell-all book about the rich and awful men who raped her.
She seemed to have sought them out and then exalted in being raped by them.
Interestingly, she does not mention Trump as a rapist in that book.
That story was invented later.
A New York judge and jury would convict a ham sandwich if they thought it was Trump's.
It doesn't matter what the charges were.
The fact that it was Trump's is enough for a conviction.
The perpetual circus and endless scandals that tend Donald Trump, whether in his personal life, business, or politics, can obscure the utter strangeness of the circumstances of any one case.
This is, of course, the formula of the Democratic Party, as Breyer John Escher terms it, to defeat Trump in 2024.
It was also the formula for 2020 and 2016.
Buckle up, Breyer John, it's going to be a very strange ride from here on.
Robert Mills then added this, "I think she has a rape fetish." Remember, this was a fad for a while in New York in the '90s.
Very many women were imagining that they were raped by all kinds of people.
The idea of recovered memories was invented.
These recovered memories were always short on essential details.
In the end, most of these cases were narcissistic fetishes.
In the case of Carol, it was particularly a fantasy.
She imagined being raped by rich and powerful men.
She names a lot of them in her book, but she does not name Trump.
That came up in the marketing of the book.
In the end, this was just extortion by court proceeding.
So she got $5 million out of Trump and the judge and jury helped her.
Trump's lawyer has filed an appeal.
So an appeals court will look over the evidence.
I don't see that there were any grounds for defamation.
You can't defame someone who is falsely accusing you of raping her.
The accusation, especially if it is false, gives the accused the right to be angry and upset with the accuser.
If Trump called her a skank or something else, he has a right to do that because she leveled a false accusation.
I had it.
Excellent, Robert.
Spot on.
Recovered memories indeed.
You have it exactly right.
Thanks for posting.
Other comments there, of course, were taking exception to what we were saying.
This John Escher guy might have a dozen there, just a series of attacking us, mostly by name-calling.
But I thought the points he and I were making are really devastating to the legal case brought against Trump.
Scott, your thoughts?
Well, it is, again, it is a hideous defamation of our courts, of our justice system.
It is a grotesque betrayal, an act of treason against the Constitution for prosecutors and judges to even have allowed something like this to be brought into a courtroom and, you know, be paid for by taxpayers This is an event that happened 30 years ago.
There's no evidence.
There's no location.
There's no memory.
There's nothing there except a fantasy from a psychotic, delusional old woman who has got a drinking problem or a slurring of speech problem or a mental problem or all of the above.
And Anderson Cooper, that little faggy CIA doll, recognized it and stuttered as he ran away to a commercial and they then came in behind the scenes and lambasted this woman for being so loose.
But, you know, again, we look at these things not with comedy, not with a sense of entertainment, not with a sense of you know, any kind of humorous disposition.
We look at this like we look at the death of a loved one.
We look at this like the death of an element of integrity in the American justice system in courts.
We all were raised to respect the black robe, to respect a court, to respect a judge, to respect the prosecutors and attorneys and lawyers for the expectation that they are maintaining law and justice and order
And maintaining the fences and the structures and the systems which protect people's rights and their contracts and their ability to make a living and build up America, build up Western civilization, build up society and make a better civilization.
That's at the origin of respecting these institutions and people.
So when I see this kind of circus It is absolutely infuriating and disgusting because it makes a mockery of everything that we're supposed to believe is actually animating the courts and the justice system.
This is a puppet show.
This is a disgusting example of, again, just how degenerate our society has become in the last 10 years, in the last 20 years.
But specifically in the last 10 years.
And you know what?
Again, Jim, if you're going to go after Donald Trump for this schizophrenic woman's allegations, then why aren't prosecutors going after Bill Clinton for the very real rapes that he did against Kathleen Willey?
The woman that he bit her lip and, you know, froze her in shock terror as he raped her.
What about Kathleen Willey?
Let's have her story.
Let's her raise to a level of criminal prosecution against Bill Clinton.
Let's talk about the others that his behavior involved.
Let's bring out the gay homosexual bathhouses of Barack Obama.
Let's explore Barack Obama's official forms and Michelle Obama, a.k.a.
Michael Vaughan Robinson, and how much that he filled out on government forms.
The hypocrisy is astounding.
And then we're looking also at Hunter Biden and Joe Biden, all of the connections to financial gain from Ukraine and China.
So this action against Trump, again, really shows the degeneracy.
I think it gives people an excuse to say, I'm done with the United States of America.
I'm done with giving any credibility or recognition to the government in any way, shape or form because of this childish insanity that has just ruined our reputation, both abroad and internally.
Jim?
Paul.
It seems like we continue to want to dive into the ditch.
We get in the ditch so easily that we're used to it.
You know, this kind of conversation, this kind of adjudication, everything about this has no sense for a civil society.
But it is indicative of what our society has become, and that is one of child's play, of easily entertained by stupid stuff.
by seeing the pain and people being hurt along the way, no matter what it is.
I mean, you know, that's what TikTok and all these things, you know, that all these, it's about this sudden, you know, see this thing go on to the next subject.
You know, go down the line of people who have been guilty of the same thing.
You know, the women that have placed themselves there in these predicaments, you know, to find a guy to tempt him to do these kind of things.
It happens.
Happens everywhere.
But that's not solving the problems of America.
Our real problems.
And our real problems are getting worse.
And our economy, our education, our kids are so woken, you know, the attention should be in the places that make us better and stronger, not in the places that are, you know, talked about, you know, behind the, you know, the men's room and in bars and things like that, where it's not really general public and wholesome stuff that represents a country that says, in God we trust.
So that's what I think.
I think the bottom line of these two cases against Trump is we no longer have the rule of law.
We have descended to the level of a banana republic.
We politicize, we weaponize the law and the judicial system against our political enemies.
In the past, we have been above that.
We actually have had a nation that sought To present equal justice under law to all Americans enshrined in the very idea that all men are created equal, which can't possibly mean physically, mentally, morally, because all men are completely different in that respect, but that they are entitled to equal justice under the law.
Here we see that violated egregiously.
Neither of the cases had any merit, and yet they were promoted with great zeal and enthusiasm by Democrats to pillory their political enemy, the guy they fear beyond all others.
Here we have an intriguing development I really didn't see coming.
Bobby Jr.
was asked whether he would run as Trump's vice presidential nominee.
Robert Kennedy Jr., a Democrat running for president, said he would not, under any circumstances, run with former President Donald Trump in the general election of 2024.
This put an end to any conjecture over the topic.
Kennedy, who declared his candidacy last month, sent a statement on social media saying, just to put an end to any rumors, under no circumstances would I accompany Donald Trump on a presidential electoral ticket.
He said our approach to government Our governance, our philosophies on leadership, and our position on certain basic topics couldn't be further apart.
One day before his statement, Erasmus in a report poll reviewed the majority of independents, as well as Democrats and Republicans.
He had a favorable opinion of the candidate.
While Democrats, in particular, continue to favor Biden over Kennedy and Marianne Williamson, likely voters as a whole were divided about the myth of Biden-Harris over Trump-Kennedy.
The poll found, in a contest between President Biden and VP Harris, 44% of probable voters would support Trump-Kennedy, while 44% would support Biden-Harris.
7% would support a different candidate.
5% are unsure.
In such a contest, Trump-Kennedy would have the support of 41% of unaffiliated voters, 72% of Republicans, 20% of Democrats.
Democrats would support Harris-Montaginian.
Biden was 72%, Republican 14, and unaffiliated 44.
A poll has released that Kennedy seemed to push what some have called a populist agenda, rejecting some of the claims made by his party's most extreme members.
For instance, Kennedy said last week one could be pro-immigration and pro-securing the border.
A statement made while the U.S.
has seen almost 5 million border crossers and illegal immigrants enter the country since Biden took office.
Actually, it's around 6.
America should be a land of freedom and wealth that welcomes immigrants who uphold the law and will enrich our community.
Immigration must take place in a legal and orderly way.
There is now anarchy at the border.
Criminal activity, unacceptable stress on border states such as Texas, and human trafficking.
It is a nightmare for humanity, Kennedy stated on social media.
He's also publicly discussed American censorship, calling it a direct assault against our democracy.
Biden says he can beat Trump easily in 2024.
Is he right?
Here's an unscientific poll, but I think highly indicative of the facts of the matter.
Yes, he's right.
Three percent.
No.
Trump will win 97.
Meanwhile, why, I'm almost ready to vote for Trump, even if he runs from death row, my dear friend and colleague Kevin Barrett.
Donald Trump is, in many ways, an odious figure, a narcissistic, semi-literate scoundrel who doesn't even pretend otherwise.
His primary redeeming qualities are a talent for channeling populist outrage and a certain reluctance to engage in bloody, pointless wars.
Normally, I only vote for people I like, such as Cynthia McKinney and RFK Jr., which is why I've never voted for a major party candidate in a general election.
I doubt very much that my first ever vote for a mainstream candidate will be for the loathsome Trump.
But the fake left oligarchs and their lapdog media are working overtime to convince me to at least entertain the possibility.
The thing is, the media legal and political landscape has grown so grotesquely one-sided that Trump claims that the system is rigged against him, which once seemed whiny and patchy.
...are increasingly being validated.
Big Media's deep state-assisted suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story was, for many of us, the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back.
Since that election, deciding outrage has been obvious and undeniable that just because Trump is paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get him.
And the outrages just keep coming.
As J. Mike Swingman and I remarked on False Flag Weekly News, the week's two big Trump events—his civil conviction for liable and sexual assault and his CNN town hall battle with Caitlin Collins—almost seem to have been orchestrated to spotlight Trump's unfair treatment at the hands of the establishment.
Jimmy Dore makes a good case that Trump's civil trial for sexual assault and defamation was a pure Democratic hit job.
Dore points out that New York's bizarre one-year repeal of the statute of limitations was specifically designed to grease the skids for Carol v. Trump.
Since when did governments start temporarily repealing statutes of limitations so they can go after political figures they don't like?
The move seems especially egregious because it involves an almost three-decade-old case in which the alleged victim can't even remember the year the alleged assault happened and has no evidence whatsoever other than her word against his.
If you're going to do something as extreme as suspending the statute of limitations so you can prosecute a specific case, shouldn't you at least have some evidence?
My advice to the Democrats is they might as well go all the way and prosecute Trump for murder.
Why murder?
For one thing, there's no statute of limitation on murder, so they wouldn't have to bother suspending it.
And just as Trump once said a stupid thing about grabbing women's genitals that made him sound like A kind of person who might do something like that.
He also once said, I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters.
So why not bring in an evidence-free prosecution against him for shooting someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue?
Just find someone willing to claim they saw Trump shoot someone to death in the middle of Fifth Avenue in 1995, or was it 1996?
It'll be their word against his.
And we all know Trump is a liar.
Why?
Because the media never stops telling us so.
No New York jury could possibly fail to convict.
And no New York judge could resist sentencing Donald J. Trump to death.
Yes, I know.
New York suspended the death penalty in 2004, but they could temporarily change that, just like they temporarily removed the statute of limitations in order to dispose of Trump.
Once Trump has been convicted and sentenced to death, we'll be able to breathe freely and get on with our lives, right?
Not so fast.
Trump lawyers will undoubtedly find a way to string out the appeals process, allowing him to become the first ever candidate to run for president from death row.
But what happens when he wins the election and his scheduled rendezvous with the electric chair happens to coincide with Inauguration Day?
Will Trump be helicoptered to Washington, D.C.
in handcuffs on January 20th, 2025, frog-marched into the Capitol, administer the oath of office, and then strapped into a special portable electric chair designed just for him and zap like a bug?
Will his hair turn an even brighter shirt of orange as it bursts into flame?
The Democrats would no doubt view as an inadequate payback for the horrors Trump unleashed there on January 6, 2021.
But still, think of the ratings!
Meanwhile, yes, for a serious analysis of mainstream inadvertently offering Trump favorable publicity, check out my Crescent International article, Ex-President's Legal Woes Prompt Up Charges or Symptoms of U.S.
Decline.
Scott, yours.
Well, you know, I could have called that for a while back that Kennedy wouldn't be Trump's running mate.
There's, you know, too many variables that are different, you know, social policy and foreign policy.
These are mathematical equations that, you know, conservatives and liberals, Republicans and Democrats are fundamentally different on.
What I do see happening is Trump will be the forerunner for the political candidacy of the Republicans.
Question is who's going to be his vice president?
And I've heard DeSantis put out there, but I've also heard that two people from the same state can't be president and vice president.
So that may be a problem.
I've heard Carrie Lake.
I've heard Kristi Noem of South Dakota.
And there's others, but I think a younger man to be the vice president is the key for Trump's election.
I also have said, and I stick by this, that Joe Biden is not going to be on a debate stage with Donald Trump.
That is a train wreck waiting to happen, and every Democrat knows that, and every American knows that, and every media official knows that.
So, that's not going to happen.
That train wreck is not going to occur.
They are not going to have Biden or any of his drones or puppets or fancy special effects illusions up on a stage with Donald Trump.
So, what are they going to do?
If they're not going to have the walking zombie train wreck of Joe Biden up there because of obvious failure reasons, they're going to do something else.
And what is that something else?
Well, I've said before, I speculate.
And I would bet that because of the violence that we see in the Democrat Party, in their woke-ism, in the communist overthrow of Donald Trump, we're hitting a new level of fascism and bloody violent tactics.
So I don't think the Democrats are going to have any problem assassinating Joe Biden and removing him and blaming it on A Trump candidate, or a Trump Republican, Christian, heterosexual, male, you know, supporter, voter.
They're already labeling all of these false flag shootings as the product of right-wing individuals.
So I've said they're going to take Gavin Newsom, the smiling Cheshire cat, they're going to move him into Kamala Harris's position as vice president, Before the 2024 election, and then they're gonna murder or assassinate or remove Joe Biden in order to generate the required drama for Gavin Newsom to play upon the soft, simple-minded independents who just vote, you know, on their feelings.
Assassinate, kill, remove Joe Biden, then Gavin Newsom will step up carrying his body like the Manchurian candidate and say, can't we all vote to get along?
Can't we all just do this in memory of Joe Biden?
You know, he's dead because of right-wingers and their guns and blah, blah, blah.
I could see that writing on the wall.
I could see them doing that.
And part of the reason I'm saying it is because I want to disrupt that plan.
I want to scuttle it.
I want to get it out there.
That if they are planning that, and I do feel in my heart they are, we need to be praying against it and exposing and standing against it.
Because frankly, Jim, I don't see any other way that the Democrats can hold on to power, and they're not going to release power.
We're never going to have a free and fair election in this country again so long as we continue to use the electronic voting machines.
The only hope is for people to stick their thumb in an inkwell and use their fingerprint to prove one man, one vote.
That's the only way because of the electronic voting machines being corrupted.
So we have to make some major shifts and changes before 2024 or else there won't be a 2024.
And I predict again They're going to initiate this removal of Joe Biden by assassination so they could create the turmoil, the martial law, the Civil War, whatever it is, they're going to create an emergency status, which only Mitch McConnell and, you know, all the other rhinos are more than happy to jump aboard.
Mitch McConnell, you know, hates Donald Trump.
Mitch McConnell hates Tucker Carlson.
So, you know, this is what we're dealing with.
RINOs like Mitch McConnell and Romney and McCarthy and all the rest of them, who are not on Trump's side.
They're not on America's side.
They're not on the Constitution's side.
They're on their own side for power and wealth.
So I anticipate they are going to be doing some maneuvers like this.
And unless there is a violent overthrow of these voting machines, unless there is a state and regional, in a sense, confederacy that rises up and says, in peaceful ways, we're not allowing any of these voting machines, we're not allowing any federal jurisdiction, we're not allowing any of the shenanigans that happened in the past, unless there is a revolutionary stance
Well, as you and Don are aware, but Paul may not, I've been predicting and remain confident that Trump's going to run with Tulsi Gabbard as his VP nominee.
you're going to witness, I think, a tremendous corruption and they're going to try and steal the election all over again.
Jim?
Well, as you and Don are aware, but Paul may not, I've been predicting and remain confident that Trump's going to run with Tulsi Gabbard as his VP nominee.
Paul, your thoughts?
Boy, I certainly hope not her, but definitely as I look at Robert Kennedy, I look at a man that the Bible calls a double-minded man.
In fact, as far as I'm concerned, he in the political arena is running around by himself because he, you know, what does he believe?
You know, what does he believe that would make Republicans vote for him?
And if he's sticking with the Democrats, that means he's okay with same-sex marriage and he's okay with abortion.
You know, and their suspect family, anyway, is going way back.
So, I don't see Donald Trump taking him on as anything.
I think that he's a guy out there talking stuff who is just another mouth out there making more noise in a crowded room where you can barely hear, as it is.
No, I don't know about Telsa Gabbard.
I don't care if she's another one like that.
I want people to be clear about what they believe in.
And I want the public to ask them, where do you stand on this stuff?
It's like with Larry Elder, the same thing.
You know, he gets pastors endorsing him and then they find out that he's not against same-sex marriage and he's soft on abortion, you know, and those aren't conservative traits.
People need to go back and reread the manual on conservatism based on our founding fathers and understand what being conservative is and vote for those candidates in that way.
So I think these people are just again it's that it's like that going back to Disneyland again you got the same clowns out on the street doing different performances and during different times of the day but they're still there and it just costs more money every time you come back.
Here's an interesting piece by the anti-New York Times picking up on poll results that appear to be honest for a change from the Washington Post and ABC showing Biden trailing Trump.
Another day, another clear indication the Patriots are now in control.
But Donald has opened up a shocking seven-point lead over Joe Biden in a Washington Post-ABC News survey.
The results are shocking, not because of Trump's statistical advantage, of course.
After all, He did, in fact, win the 2020 sting operation election by a huge margin once all of the voter fraud is discounted.
No, the big surprise here is that two of the high priesthood orders of the fake news Jew didn't press George.
Washington Post and ABC have actually conducted and published an honest poll.
This is a very significant and telling development, because media polling fraud is a necessary advance support of Democrat voter fraud.
Indeed, ABCWB conducted 11 national polls in 2019-2020.
All 11 polls showed the pathetic Biden comfortably ahead of Trump.
There was no fraud.
The final results were consistent with all of our polling data.
That's how the con works.
Donald Trump received huge polling boosts against Biden and DeSantis.
Trump leading Biden by 7 points in a hypothetical matchup.
Biden poll numbers look grim as he preps a re-election bid.
If the election of a president were today, for whom would you vote?
Trump 50, Biden 43.
Trump is already up by seven points, landslide numbers in terms of the Electoral College, and the spreading news of his commanding lead will only make the margin wider.
The negative naysayers at the anti-Q Black Hills Society are, of course, already swaying away this peculiar new phenomenon of honest polling.
As a case of Biden being so unpopular now that even the fake news wouldn't dare go so far as to put him in the lead on a rigged poll.
Much too brazen.
Yep, the recent history of stumbling, mumbling Joe Biden garnering an impossible 81.3 million votes, an American historical record, while campaigning in a mass from his basement as he led comfortably in all the fake polls of 2020 was not brazen.
The evident reality of the situation perceived and believed by the editorial board here at the anti-New York Times is this.
Under FEMA emergency continuity of government directives, which the nation is evidently operating under, the White Hats have the authority to induce the cooperation of the handful of criminal media moguls who operate the Wizard of Oz illusion machine.
It's a very simple matter to instruct the head honchos, who are all manifestly guilty of treason, to conduct and publish the basically sound polling data.
This portends that the election of 2024, whether President Trump is openly reinstated later this year or not, will be free of fraud.
Frankly, we suspect that all voter fraudsters have already been dealt with, with the low-level mules having been given plea deals and the high-level plotters enjoying their stay at Club Gitmo.
Here's more.
Q knew all about fake polling used to support fake ballots.
The White House purposefully let the fraud go forward in 2020, so as to catch the crooks and install a White House actor in a mask.
This living straw man is now being destroyed, and voter fraud will not happen again.
I only wish.
Biden's approval rating is at 36%, according to a new poll, the lowest for any U.S.
president at this point in their first term in 80 years.
Marjorie Taylor agreed.
The 2024 presidential primary in general is over.
America wants President Trump back.
The Trump train never actually derailed.
His inevitable third term will be public and authoritarian.
Meanwhile, Boobus Americatus won it, though.
I read in the Washington Post online today that Trump has opened up a seven-point lead over Biden.
Boobus Americanus, too?
I personally despise Trump, but I might have to hold my nose and vote for him in 2024.
My 401k is at stake, St.
Sugar.
You and millions of other normies will do likewise, Boobus Editor, when we factor in all the undecided chickens who are too afraid to admit to a bolster that they want Trump.
His leader's really 12 to 15 points.
Scott, your thoughts?
Well, again, I think we're blurring into a very interesting transition or sunset or twilight period in the American consciousness, in the American political institutions, in the American media, in the American educational system.
I just had a friend of mine who's an elderly lady and a substitute teacher.
She's a retired teacher, but she was at a high school and this boy was wearing a dress and she said to one of her colleagues, did you see that?
And she didn't say it to embarrass the kid.
She didn't say it in front of the kid.
You know, she just kind of saw him walking.
She said, did you see that?
You know, this lady is in her 70s, and she's never before seen a boy wearing a woman's dress on non-Halloween days, and she was reported by some other teacher that overheard that comment.
I guess she said it, you know, outside an office or something, or the teacher's lounge.
She was reported, and the principal pulled her in the office and said, I don't want you substitute teaching here anymore because you may embarrass our students.
So that tells me something.
You have young boys and girls in high school that are obviously mentally, emotionally ill, sick, traumatized, something's desperately wrong with them, that stems from their pathetic parents, and now the schools are enforcing this delusion, this madness, that the next step will be, of course, chop off your penis and your breasts and call yourself a woman.
This is happening in the American school system.
This is backed by the American media.
This is being championed and elevated by the American politicians.
This is being tolerated in some religious institutions and such.
So it tells me that the United States is transitioning from the sunlight, the daylight enjoyment of what we were as a nation into the darkness of madness of a curse upon this country that God is allowing.
This didn't just happen overnight.
This has been a long time coming.
And it was triggered by the collapse of the churches, the abandonment of moral responsibility by the pulpits and the churches and the religious institutions to be the salt and light in the It's been allowed by the changing of laws that allowed this slow fermentation to begin to exist in schools, in media, in businesses.
These laws change culture.
It doesn't just happen.
Laws change culture.
So we're witnessing an entire shift into the darkness of degradation in America.
And honestly, again, the only way to break this off is to completely separate, and separate with a declaration of violence against any Follower or attempt to intrude or attempt to capture or dominate the conservatives that are separating themselves from this death culture.
And that's what it really has to be described as.
These elements that push this madness, this Democrat ideology, this climate change worship, the eating of bugs, transgenderism, this is the worship of death.
This is the cult of madness and death.
Homosexuality is a cult of death.
Transgenderism is a cult of death.
We've been too polite and too squeamish and too cowardly to stand up and speak with the boldness that could provide the moral leadership, the moral recognition of God's law on this earth and in this country.
So because we've been silent, This cloud of darkness and death is really filling the House of America, as I've said before, like the carbon monoxide of a garage that's shut when the engine is running.
And we are witnessing people being quickened in this sleep and this delusion by COVID-19, the various other vaccines, and also the endless war that we've unleashed.
This is a very multidimensional act of sabotage and political suicide that we have self-inflicted onto ourselves, and we're just witnessing the fruits of this now, Jim.
My interpretation is different than Mike King's.
I think they're going with authentic numbers because they want to impeach Biden.
In other words, it's less traumatic than assassinating.
You're going to impeach him and then move in.
Kevin Newsom, just as you suggest, Scott, I think absolutely they can't afford to run with Biden.
But it's wishful thinking to think they're going to stop stealing elections.
Democrats can't win any election if they don't continue to steal them.
Paul?
Well, you're correct, Jim.
That's the only way they can win.
But the thing is that at least they've got a determination to win, and that really separates them from the Republicans because they determine and do what they have to do to win.
The Republicans stand around and talk about winning.
They don't know how to win.
They talk about it.
They have meetings.
They have lunches.
They have all these things.
They have rallies.
They do all these things.
They do the rabbit hole running, looking for ballots and all this stuff, and don't realize how it's really being just done by a computer.
And a lot of that stuff is just, you know, to distract them.
We just don't have a wise society anymore.
And they have too many options, and they can't pick and choose what's best for them.
And quite frankly, a lot of people have just given up.
Totally given up.
Out here in California, I talk to a lot of people.
They think that there's no chance of winning an election here in California.
They keep saying it's a blue state, and I tell them, no, it's not.
It's a red state.
Problem is, the people aren't showing up to vote.
We could overrun them with red votes if people would just show up and vote in California.
There's enough votes.
You know, stuff like that.
But people are asleep.
They're not paying attention.
And for them, it's just going to be another repeat of something bad from before.
And maybe it can be worse this time.
Maybe it won't be as worse, but it's just another repeat.
Well, until we return to paper ballots and hand counts, I don't think the Republicans can win a federal election.
Here's Brandon Smith suggesting that tolerance is overrated and is starting to gatekeep American society again.
This is just horrific.
Look at that image.
Whenever we have to address the issue of progressive ideology, the debate inevitably finds its way to the grand idealism of acceptance and tolerance.
The insertion by leftists are on the side of freedom and human rights, and that by confining or separating ourselves from certain behavior, we're revealing our bigotry and discrimination.
In other words, leftists assert all personal beliefs and behavior must be embraced by the populace in order for society to become pure.
Except this is not what they really believe.
Leftists argue for tolerance of ambivalent behavior while admonishing normal human, tribal, and biological relations.
They have a vision for the world, and certain beliefs are not accepted within that utopian fantasy.
The basis of the leftist religion is not a deity, it is self-perception.
They worship themselves and think the collective is valuable, so long as it reaffirms their identity.
Anything that might restrict their pursuit of self-aggrandizement is considered oppressive.
This is why they often argue in favor of moral relativism.
They have a delusion in their mind of what they are.
They see themselves as a fantastic gift to the world.
But if people are allowed to judge them on their moral failings, then they will always be reminded that they are not all that impressive.
They seek to control the views of the speech of others.
Well, they speak constantly of acceptance.
They rely on zealotry to achieve their objectives.
They are highly intolerant of people who do not want to participate in their movement or their activism.
In fact, one of the most used protest slogans of the political left is, silence is violence.
By refusing to support them, or even yourself, you automatically become their enemy, even if you don't directly oppose them.
At bottom, what leftists really promote is a series of double standards while using accusation of bigotry as a weapon to silence their critics.
They have taken control of the narrative because many Americans are afraid to say the truth out loud.
The truth is, tolerance is overrated and destructive.
Hatekeeping and discrimination to a certain degree are absolutely essential for the survival of humanity.
That is to say, intolerance of certain people, beliefs, actions, and ideologies is a good thing.
We need to bring back rational intolerance.
There are people within the liberty movement and conservative circles who hold more libertarian views on this issue, and some of them might suggest that my position runs contrary to the concept of the non-aggression principle.
They might say that as long as people are not harming us directly, then we should stay out of their way.
I say there's a fine line between tolerance and submissive pacifism.
Obviously, the globalist establishment and their puppets within the political left are relying on provocateur tactics to a certain degree.
One might suggest that they want us to lash out violently so they can demonize us further, or they want us to embrace government power more fully so they can point paint us as authoritarian.
This is a simplistic grade school view of provocateur methods, though, in reality.
The goal of provocateurs is not to get us to react.
Their goal is to frighten us into doing nothing.
Look at the circus surrounding January 6th, for example.
The establishment heard a protest of unarmed people who walked into a building and then left of their own accord into an insurrection.
Did some people get violent?
Of course.
Well, not a single person died because of the actions of protesters.
Was there property damage?
Nothing compared to the billions in damages caused by the BLM and Antifa riots.
But conservative protesters are being labeled enemies of the state and are being locked up right now, while BLM is labeled mostly peaceful.
The double standard is clear, but the reason for it is often misunderstood.
They do not want liberty movement organizations.
They do not want planned action.
They do not want open marches by conservatives.
They do not want the world to see our numbers.
They want us silent and complacent and uninvolved.
Provoking a reaction is not the end game.
The double standard is not the end game.
The end game is for conservatives to give up because they fear the double standard.
Every strategy of the left circles back around the massification of the population, whether they are accusing us of racism or transphobia or fascism or insurrection.
None of this matters.
The moment we abandon the fallacies of tolerance and block destructive efforts is the moment we become truly free and effective, or a certain situation in which the non-aggression principle does not apply.
Currently, the U.S.
is experiencing full-blown fourth-generation warfare in the span of less than a decade.
We have seen the imposition of critical race theory, trans ideology, Marxism, and a spectrum of regressive concepts invade public schools.
American children are being indoctrinated into the leftist fold in a dizzying propaganda blitzkrieg.
Now, the libertarian mindset would suggest that we simply pull our kids out of public schools and remove our participation.
That might work for some, but the vast majority of parents are going to continue placing their kids in schools because they feel they have no other choice.
We don't have the time needed to create new educational systems or alternatives.
School vouchers are a start, but even then it would take well over a decade for parents to adjust.
The only answer is to shut down the indoctrination, by force if necessary.
Leftist teachers who promote their ideology in class need to be removed from publicly funded schools.
CRT, gender fluid propaganda, and one-sided socialist concepts will have to be banned from these institutions.
Drag shows for kids need to be punished.
Gender affirmation surgery and chemical therapies for children need to be abolished.
The invasion of wokeness information into our media needs to be confronted and companies that promote it should be buried through boycotts.
Tolerance is killing us.
Intolerance is the answer.
While certain ideological movements might not target you personally, they will eventually destroy everything you love through attrition.
And it's never going to stop because moral relativism is always finding new ground to desecrate.
You will not be allowed to have principles.
You won't be allowed to call out bad behavior.
Everything evil will be made acceptable if you really want to know where we're headed as a civilization.
Check out this trend being protected by courts in Pennsylvania.
Satanic clubs for elementary school children at public schools.
Some of these clubs are already active.
The first inclination of those of us who defend constitutional values would be to cite religious freedom.
Oh, of course!
Satanic and Luciferian groups constantly argue they are not a religion per se.
Rather, they claim they are an ideological system.
The reason the after-school Satan Club uses the satanic moniker is because it is, by definition, religiously related.
An ideological club is not necessarily protected by U.S.
courts.
A religious club is protected.
But should this apply to every religious club?
In a way, it makes sense that this would be the natural evolution of leftist conquest.
Eventually, they're going to need some kind of religious framework to fill the void that politics leaves behind.
And what better religion than one that's founded in the belief of subjective morality and self-obsession?
In this specific instance, I don't accept that a cult built around promoting narcissism, moral relativism, and transhumanism should be allowed around children.
I think that communities should gather up their torches and pitchforks and run these people out of town.
But that's just me.
Is this intolerance?
Intolerance of behavior rooted in deconstruction is absolutely necessary.
Whether you are a religious person or agnostic or atheist, it's undeniable that some methodologies encompass the absolute worst in humanity and should not be embraced.
The narrative of tolerance is leading us down a path to quiet compliance and consent.
The political left and the globalist establishment like to play games with our principles.
It's the old Alinsi tactic of holding your opponents at their own list of standards while you operate with no standards at all.
That is to say, they use our love of freedom against us and suggest we must allow them to do what they want, or we are not living up to the rules we value.
However, It's not authoritarian to protect the next generation from indoctrination.
It's not hypocrisy to discriminate against the dark side.
If that makes me a bigot, so be it.
I'd rather live in a civilization of reasonable bigots than watch a world burn in the name of foolish equity.
Equity is a reality aversion that ends with everyone being equally dead by Demo's side.
Do not comply.
Scott, your thoughts?
Well, that sounds like I wrote it.
I mean, I couldn't say it any better.
I'm glad to see it's being picked up and it's being recited.
You know, Matt Walsh, I think, the guy who did the video, What is a Woman, He gave also a very good summary.
He said, for the left and the transgender and the LGBT and the homosexual groups and stuff that are saying they're being oppressed or they're being attacked by right-wing conservative Christians or they're being abused and they can't live, he said, we didn't start this.
We were living our lives peaceful.
We were living our lives with our families.
We had nothing to do with you.
And you were the ones who brought the fight to the conservative people.
You were the ones who said, we want to dress up like women, be men and dress up like women and pretend we're women.
We want to go into women's locker rooms and women's bathrooms.
We want to be able to go into women's prison cells and, of course, rape the women in there.
We want to redefine language.
We want to outlaw other kinds of language.
We want to totally redefine physical identity and all of the terms.
This was not done by conservatives.
This was done by Democrat, liberal, leftist, transgender, homosexual, wokeists.
They were the ones who brought this.
And that was Matt Walsh saying, you are the ones who brought this.
We had nothing to do with any of this.
And your narcissism and your ego is is so out of bounds.
And you shamelessly have been launching this ideological, religious crusade of violence against anyone that does not bow down or bend the knee or submit to your evil, demoniac agenda and philosophy.
So I think this is an overall philosophical paradigm shift, reorientation that the majority of people are making.
Uh, because it's no longer, you know, live and let live.
It's no longer allowing people, if you want to be in gay parades and dress in sadomasochistic leather whips and chains and march down the street in San Francisco, that's your business.
But when you start bringing that to school and drag queen happy hours and threatening to take children away from parents if they object to that, now you are creating the conditions for a societal revolution and a bloody, violent clash.
And Tucker said it, too.
I'll end it by saying Tucker said, Christianity and the transgender, homosexual, liberal agenda and ideology are incompatible, and they are a clash of civilizations, and they will never reconcile.
And I think we all know that, and it's coming to a point where those on the left that have pursued this transgender homosexual ideology are rabid mad dogs that are incapable of any semblance of human decency anymore.
And I think, sufficiently, the Christian right-wing conservative elements and other non-Christian elements are coming to the realization that these people are so poisoned, so bad, so insane, that they're unfortunately going to be met with no other fate than being put down and killed in a defensive posture because they're not going to stop attacking.
Jim?
Well, I learned something a long time ago.
It's an old saying that says, where there's no hope, there's no life.
As you go down the bullet list of what they want to offer the progressives, the left, the people that are on the immoral side of nature, you look down their list of all those components of it, and none of those things represent hope, which doesn't represent eventual life.
In fact, for the most part, most of their ideals represent death.
And that's what we keep, and we introduce death to our children every year, new method of death of some sort.
And the thing is, is that somehow we've got to just put our feet down and stomp them and say, we're done with this lunacy.
I mean, how much, you know?
How long do we stand there and watch this stuff keep going on, like the sideshows in Oakland, and the cops don't do anything, and they still happen, and they do it on the Bay Bridge, and they shut the bridge down.
Why don't they just stop it?
That's the question, you know, that we obviously are liking it to some degree, or we wish it would just kind of fade away on its own, but it's not going to.
We have to stand up against evil.
We have to be the providers of hope and truth that can create life.
Scott mentioned Tucker, and our final round concerns him.
Dominion Voting System is being pressed on their role in Tucker's firing.
Texas Governor Abbott called on Dominion to explain its role in Fox News' dismissal of Tucker Carlson, a former host accused the network days ago of firing him as part of its settlement.
Tucker and three other FOXOs were named in a writ charging the network with broadcasting false claims that voting technology was instrumental in the 2020 U.S.
presidential election being stolen from Donald Trump.
In my opinion, this is a fact, a provable fact, really ought to be beyond rational debate.
If Dominion wants to do business with Texas in the future, they should first answer a question about what role, if any, they played in silencing a prominent conservative journalist, Abbott tweeted, citing recent reports alleging Dominion demanded Tucker be fired as part of a litigation settlement with Fox.
Tucker's lawyers repeatedly accused Fox of breaching contract and fraud in a letter sent earlier this week, also claiming it had been fired in part of the network's $787.5 million settlement with Dominion.
Wait, the former host counsel claimed Fox broke an agreement not to leak Tucker's private messages to the media or use them to take any adverse employment action against him, as well as a promise not to settle with Dominion in a way which would indicate wrongdoing on his part or harm his reputation.
The letter's claim would invalidate the non-complete clause in Carlson's contract, freeing him to launch a Twitter-based news show he teased last week.
Tucker was told by a board member at Fox he'd been fired as part of the Dominion settlement, Axios reported, citing inside sources.
A Fox News person told Axios it was categorically false, that Dominion had made firing a required part of the settlement, while an outside attorney for Dominion confirmed Dominion did not insist on them firing Tucker as part of the settlement.
The voting machine defamation case against Fox was settled just as it was about to go to trial after internal messages from Tucker were unearthed in Discovery.
The messages' content was supposedly so repugnant That led the network to bay up, rather than risk putting Tucker on the stand to answer questions about what he'd written.
Some have questions, however, how reported examples describing group violence against Antifa protesters is not how white men fight, or referring to female viewers as post-menopausal, were any more controversial than the content of his or other Fox shows.
Sources who spoke to the New York Times nevertheless claimed Fox was so repelled it considered hiring an outside law firm to investigate other potential liabilities linked to Tucker.
Meanwhile, his messages have continued to link to the public.
But get this.
One little number on Tucker's latest post should terrify Fox News.
There was never any question Fox would suffer as a result of Tucker's termination.
The worry was how bad it would be.
Since Tucker was fired from his primetime broadcast, a variety of figures have begun to trickle in.
None of them bode well for Fox.
Some ought to frighten the living daylights out of you if you're a Fox executive or investor.
Tuesday's announcement by Tucker—he would be bringing his show, or a version thereof, to Twitter, of all places—shocked the traditional media sector.
A seismic announcement, however, serves little use if no one is present to hear it.
Raising some—based on some eye-popping metrics that tweet has generated, Tucker, is unconcerned.
By Thursday morning, the video had received over 25 million views.
A view is defined by Twitter as any time it's visible for at least two seconds.
Meanwhile, the tweet containing the video has received over 122 million views.
The majority of TV network would commit terrible atrocities to get such staggering social media statistics.
You can understand how big those numbers are by comparing the number of views to other recently circulated stories that were definitely viral.
Dwayne Wade, a retired NBA legend, for example, announced his induction into the Hall of Fame with a Tweetio vid that received 1.5 million views and just under 9 million tweet views.
Kid Rock, destroying stacks of Bud Light in the now iconic tweet, has gathered 11.2 million videos and 52.6 tweet views.
This trending tweet purports to reflect the manufacturing process for a McRib at McDonald's.
The video has received 8.5 million views.
Here's Tucker's first tweet after being fired from Pox.
Just in case you thought it coincidence that he somehow managed to catch lightning in a bottle.
Over 24.5 million have seen that Carlson video.
83.3 million have seen it in a tweet.
How could anyone in charge of anything at Fox not feel the weight of what they just lost when they look at these horrifying numbers?
Scott, your thoughts?
Well, as I've said before, when they struck down Tucker Carlson, he would only become more powerful.
And I think the best ticket for president and vice president would be Donald Trump and Tucker Carlson.
Tucker Carlson is smarter than anyone else in the political theater, and he best embodies that Daniel Boone, Davy Crockett, American pioneer that goes into politics not because he wants to, but because he has to.
Because the parasites and the criminal class insidiously insert themselves and manipulate government and law and agencies to their own profit.
That's what's happened in this country.
So I think Tucker Carlson would be a great vice president and great president, better than anyone else.
He's smarter than Tulsi Gabbard.
He's smarter than John F. Kennedy, or Bobby, whatever the hell the Kennedy guy's name is, or any of these other people.
So, we'll see if that's a long shot.
But, you know, I think Tucker is rising in his popularity.
He is only going to become more serrated and more Penetrating in his assault and exposure of these hypocrites and there's already legal teams that are acting on Separating him from his non-compete clause under Fox.
So the Fox contract that they tried to ensnare him around and say he can't compete, he has a legal team seeking to dissolve that entirely because Fox has betrayed in certain unseemly ways.
And again, the most recent example is Dominion Voting Machines was a manipulated entity in the voting fraud that occurred against Donald Trump, and Fox News entered into a legal agreement to not disclose all of that, and Fox News entered into a legal agreement to not disclose all of that, and part of this was silencing Tucker Carlson and firing him
So this is something that is not going away and it's only going to come out more and more.
And I think the more it comes out, the more other voices like Tucker's rise, you're going to see a massive shift of the majority of Americans to the right-wing conservative and moderate side, Jim.
I'm a huge fan of Tucker.
I believe legally Fox breached their contract with Tucker before he contemplated going to Twitter, so the temporal sequence makes it all legally on Tucker's side.
I don't think Fox could possibly prevail here.
Paul, your thoughts?
Well I believe that Tucker was on the short list for a long time anyways because Murdoch's wife hated Donald Trump and consequently she didn't like Tucker, would like to get him out of there as well.
But my question is, is why are these guys hanging out so long in a hellhole like Fox?
And not going out there and doing something independent, you know, the big hitters on that channel, and make Fox go completely out of business by taking away the business and going somewhere else.
You know, I mean, there's no reason why they can't do that.
It's hard to, you know, non-compete clauses are hard to enforce because you can't keep a person from working.
I know I've had many people leave my office working for me and go open companies, taking company information and lists and things like that.
I just let them do it, sink or swim.
But, you know, to try to squelch Tucker, you know, in any way or form.
If I was him, I would wait and really think about a real solid strategy and not do what my father used to say all the time.
Act in haste, repent in leisure.
He should really be thinking about a good strategy so he gets the biggest bang for his buck moving forward.
Because he doesn't know what's going to happen in the next six months or so.
There's some changes going on in the media world.
And you might want to wait for some of those changes to happen.
There might be better opportunities than Twitter.
I'm not sure about Twitter.
Well, Paul, it's been a joy having you here.
I do believe that Tucker and Elon Musk are a fabulous combination.
Tucker is the future here that's decimating cable news.
You'll be able to catch Tucker anytime you want by going to Twitter.
Easier to find.
His audience is going to grow enormously.
He'll have 10 times the audience at Twitter than he had at Fox.
Don, it's been joyful to have Paul here.
And Scott, of course, take us out.
Oh, it's been a great day.
And this is Troopers & Zoos here on the May 15th.
I think you got quite a lot to review and learn and share, so thank you for watching, folks, and we'll hope to see you next week here.
Oops, let's see.
Come on.
How do I get out of here?
Just wait.
First door on your left.
Oh, there it is.
There it is.
Okay.
I'm sorry.
I didn't... All right, come on.
I gotta go.
See you later.
Yeah, I gotta go too.
Just waved on.
▲
Export Selection