All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 8, 2023 - Jim Fetzer
01:56:20
The Raw Deal (8 December 2023) with Deana Pollard Sacks
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Not just anybody.
You know I need someone.
I need my own skin so much.
Young things in bed.
I don't need anybody's helping anywhere.
I don't know these ways.
I'm not so self-assured.
I'm not gonna change my mind.
I'm not gonna go.
Help me if you can.
I feel it.
And I do appreciate you being around.
Help me get my feet back on the ground.
Well, this is Jim Fetzer, your host on The Raw Deal, where I'm very pleased to be joined today by Dina your host on The Raw Deal, where I'm very pleased to be joined today by Dina Pollard Sachs, a brilliant attorney Before she joins, at the bottom of the hour, however, I have some news reports.
Including, of course, that the war in Ukraine has been lost.
Here's an excellent summary.
Ukraine, another historic U.S.
war failure.
All of Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and more.
The war-indebted U.S.
empire is faltering toward its historic and final demise.
Every empire has its day in the sun.
The U.S.-led NATO alliance held its first NATO-Ukraine Council meeting this week in Brussels.
As usual, the cliched promises of supporting the Kyiv regime to the end were trotted out by all and sundry.
In truth, these NATO events for Ukraine, and more generally, are becoming yawn fests.
The whole sort of charade is only postponing the reality that a proxy war in Ukraine against Russia is a debacle for the Western powers.
This is not something to gloat over.
It is a tragedy and an abomination.
Up to 400,000 Ukrainian soldiers have been killed, as well as tens of thousands of Russian military personnel.
Total casualty figures are no doubt in the millions in addition.
Millions of civilians have been displaced as refugees in Russia and throughout Europe.
Hundreds of billions of dollars in euros have been raised from Western taxpayers to fund this bloody fiasco.
Not only that, but international tensions have been heightened between nuclear powers in a perilous pitch not seen since the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 and the depths of the Cold War.
Washington needs to come to its senses and negotiate a peaceful settlement on Moscow's terms.
It's as simple and as blunt as that.
It could have been achieved before the conflict erupted in May 2022, when Moscow was already offering a negotiable security treaty.
West rejected those terms out of hand now.
Now it will have to accept them, primarily.
There'll be no further NATO enlargement around Russia's borders, and that there'll be no inclusion of Ukraine in the American bellicose military bloc.
Inviting Ukraine to a NATO Council Summit is all theater of window grassing to get the impression the alliance is offering the former Soviet Republic something substantive.
In reality, it amounts to throwing up bare bones.
Analogous to overinflated promises made by EU leaders like President Ursula von der Leyen, who repeatedly talk of the prospect of Ukraine joining the bloc of the future.
The chances of that for a broken, rampantly corrupt, failed state like Ukraine are inconceivable.
Again, empty, cynical promises.
Washington and its NATO allies, however, are unwilling to admit the odious, incriminating reality because they have failed.
Russia has defeated them.
Biden and other Western partners have simply been the last weak link in the chain of events over many years where we've seen a characteristic of Western regimes.
The futile and reckless war in Ukraine has been decades in the making since its supposed end of the Cold War in 1990.
The treacherous breaking of promises by American President, especially Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, to Russia to not expand NATO.
And the insidious and vagueling of Ukraine to join the alliance from 2008 onward all have led to the current eruption of conflict.
This is a standard operating procedure for the United States, observes Jeffrey Sachs.
The United States always overpromises and oversells, thereby inciting prolonging wars and annihilation.
He described a failure in Ukraine as another absolutely stupid and avoidable war.
Meanwhile, we have Biden claiming he'll deploy U.S.
troops to fight Russia if $100 billion in Ukrainian aid is not approved.
The Republicans, I think in an astute move, have linked further support for Ukraine to border security.
Biden manifestly does not want border security.
He wants millions there who are even, now it turns out in their paperwork, being registered to vote, believe it or not.
A sheriff has revealed they're being given $5,000 gift cards.
They're being given $2,200 a month income.
They're being given food.
They're being given shelter.
And many are Chinese.
Where the threat has now been revealed by Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois proposing that if these migrants are willing to serve in the U.S.
military, that'll provide them a path to citizenship.
What it will do Does it provide the Biden administration with a military that is willing to fire on American civilians should civil war break out?
And many believe that we're headed in that direction.
This is a form of treason unprecedented in US history.
Biden continues that Putin attacks a NATO ally.
If he keeps going, then he attacks a NATO ally.
We're committed as a NATO member to defend every inch of NATO territory, and we'll have something we don't seek, and we don't have today—American troops fighting Russian troops.
Here it is, CBS News.
President Biden warns Russian President Putin will keep going if Russia takes Ukraine, for which there is no evidence whatsoever.
Putin has never shown any disposition not even to take all of Ukraine, God forbid.
We cannot let Putin win, Biden says, urging more Ukraine aid and funding from Congress.
This is simply the Eastern European domino theory we heard played out in Vietnam.
Extreme Republicans, he claims, are playing chicken with our national security, holding Ukraine's funding hostage to their extreme partisan border policies.
The Biden regime has racketed up its warfare-mongering and baseless talking points about Russia's military objectives in the face of resistance of members of Congress not to approve more military funding for Ukraine.
Well, get this.
December 7th.
Alex Jones claims government sources confirmed Joe Biden wanders the White House naked at night and is drugged up.
Tucker Carlson says Biden is pumped full of amphetamines.
This is the guy with his finger on our nuclear trigger?
In a recent bombshell interview released Thursday by Tucker Carlson that was yesterday, media personnel Alex Jones made not-so-surprising claims about Joe Biden's behavior within the White House.
In his discussion with Carlson, Jones asserted he has information from government sources suggesting that Biden roams the White House naked during the night allegedly unaware of his own identity.
The interview covered a spectrum of issues, but it was Jones' allegation regarding Joe Biden nighttime activities that left the most significant mark.
According to Jones, he has inside information from sources he claims are connected to the Secret Service and others within the government.
No doubt he has those sources.
Meanwhile, the Al Qasim Brigades have destroyed 28 Zionist vehicles in Gaza over the last 24 hours.
This complements our previous report of taking out over 100 Israeli tanks and armored personnel carriers.
Fulfilling the observations of Colonel Douglas MacGregor that by destroying all those buildings in Gaza, the Israelis were defeating themselves, because it would make it virtually impossible for tracked vehicles to be mobile and would give Hamas all kinds of firing positions and locations from which to hide, which is precisely how it's been playing out.
Gaza.
Over the last 24 hours, al-Qassim Brigade managed to completely or partially destroy 28 Zionist military vehicles, and all the combat fronts in Gaza stripped.
Abu Uday, the military spokesperson for al-Qassam Brigade, said in a statement this evening.
Now, this was posted on the 4th.
Abdul Abdega explained that Al Qasim fighters targeted the infiltrating Zionist forces at their bases and positions with anti-fortification shells and anti-personnel explosives, engaged them at close range, and confirmed deaths among them.
They also bombarded the military gatherings with heavy-caliber mortar shells and directed intense rocket barrages toward various targets at different ranges within the Zionist entity.
Now, Scott Ritter has a lot of observations about, and this is prior to the resumption of the fighting, which has now taken place, but listen to what he has to say.
How many times can I keep going back to this cheerful message?
Thank you for making the show happen.
Okay, I'm working on it.
I love to be insulted.
Don't ask stupid questions.
Happy holidays.
Simi from Kenya.
Haaretz newspapers said the Israeli army admits that a thousand officers and soldiers have been injured since the beginning of the war on Gaza, including 202 seriously injured.
What is the impact of this result on the possible resumption of attacks on Gaza?
Look, the bottom line is Israel got fought to a standstill by Hamas.
Israel wasn't winning the ground war.
Benjamin Netanyahu said going in that he was not going to accept any ceasefires and he would not exchange prisoners.
Good guard lawyer.
Day six.
It's not a ceasefire though.
It's a pause because politically we can't call it a ceasefire, but it's the same thing.
It's a ceasefire.
And they're exchanging prisoners things.
Why?
Because the IDF was getting their butts handed to him, not just in Gaza, but more importantly, up north on the Lebanese border against Hezbollah.
Israeli newspapers have come out and basically said that there's nothing the Israeli military can do to stop Hezbollah from taking over Galilee.
That's northern Israel, guys.
There's nothing, nothing they can do to stop it.
If Israel resumes their offensive against the Gazans, against the Palestinian people, Not only will their army be destroyed there, but their army will be liquidated in the North.
So, you know, Netanyahu's in a tough place.
He's literally backed himself into a corner with his own rhetoric.
He's trapped himself.
I think his best option right now is to get as many prisoners out, as many hostages out as he can, get them all out.
That means you have to exchange all the Palestinians that you've arrested over the years, the thousands that you're holding without charge, that you're torturing and beating on a daily basis.
Get rid of them, man.
Empty your prisons.
Save lives.
Go down in history at least with that, because right now Netanyahu's going down in history as the guy who destroyed Israel.
Remember, he was destroying Israel before October 7th.
He's the guy that rewrote the basic law about the judiciary, getting legislative control over the judicial branch so that he wouldn't go to jail.
He's a corrupt individual.
If he resigns now and he doesn't have protections, he'll go on trial.
He'll be found guilty.
He'll spend the rest of his life in jail.
That's what he's scared of.
This is what it's all about, ladies and gentlemen.
This is what's going on here.
This is Benjamin Netanyahu trying to save Benjamin Netanyahu, not doing the right thing either by Israel, by the Palestinians, by the world.
This is an extraordinarily corrupt and selfish man.
And hopefully his time is soon over as the Prime Minister of Israel.
Next question comes from V. Sirdar in Northern Ireland.
Can you comment on recent events in Sudan, please?
There doesn't appear to be much information on... How many times can I keep going back to this?
Well, that's interesting.
What's going on in Sudan, but Scott Ritter, I think, has got him right.
This is B.B.
Netanyahu trying to save B.B.
Netanyahu by going to war.
You may recall that W. was in the pits politically in the polling until 9-11, and then, because of unanimity among the people, To oppose a foreign attack, which was ostensibly by Arabs, absurdly.
I mean, 19 Islamic terrorists are supposed to have attacked us on 9-11, when in fact a half a dozen or more turned up alive and well the following day and made contact with the British media.
It was a clever plan designed by Bibi Netanyahu and Ehud Umar, who also served as a PM of Israel at the time of the dissolution of the Soviet Union in order to draw American forces into the Middle East, to take out a modern Arab state that served as a counterbalance To Israel's domination of the entire region, mind you, the Greater Israel Project.
And they succeeded by destroying Libya, perhaps the most humane society ever manifest on the face of Earth, and Iraq, of course.
Rumsfeld didn't want to attack Afghanistan because it was not a target-rich environment, but Iraq, an ancient civilization, was.
Shock and awe ensued, but they failed.
They were brought to a halt in Syria and never reached Iran, who were the ultimates on their Plan to take out seven nations in the next five years because of the intervention of Russian and Iranian troops at the request of the democratically elected president of Syria, Bashar al-Assad.
Paul Craig Roberts says, observe, what's going on now is really an attempt to finish off Syria and Iran, in other words, to complete the project to create the greater Israel initiated on 9-11 by Israel, which is far from our great ally but is our mortal enemy.
Any of you who are unfamiliar in 1990 who said that America is a golden calf, we're going to suck it dry and cut it up and live it as the greatest welfare state on earth because that's what we do with nations we hate.
Absorb the message.
Meanwhile, because they're being defeated in ground offensive, they're resorting to other tactics.
Israel is writing a risky plan to flood miles of Gaza's terror tunnels with seawater.
Zero hatch.
Israel's military has reportedly put in place controversial and high-risk plans to flood Gaza's vast network of underground tunnels used by Hamas with seawater.
High-powered pumps have already been set up at key locations in the Gaza Strip.
The plan is to force Hamas militants above ground, or else drown them, using a series of pumps to pull water from the Mediterranean Sea, expected to provide enough water to fully flood the tunnels within weeks.
According to details in the Wall Street Journal, U.S.
defense officials have been briefed on the option, and with pumps now in place, but it's not believed that the Israelis have pulled the trigger yet.
The Israeli Defense Forces finished assembling large seawater pumps roughly one mile north of the al-Shadi refugee camp around the middle of last month, the report indicates.
Each of at least five pumps can draw from the Mediterranean and move thousands of cubic meters of water per hour into the tunnels, flooding them within weeks.
Some U.S.
officials were cited as expressing concern about the plan, given the potential to kill more civilians and further destroy the Strip's infrastructure.
A prime issue is some 137 Israeli and foreign hostages remain in Hamas captivity after the end of last week's ceasefire and prisoner swap.
Very likely, all or many are being kept somewhere in the tunnel system in its cavernous rooms.
Hamas even has subterranean offices and command centers within.
Israel has thus far identified at least 800 tunnels, but believes the network is much bigger than what's known.
We're not sure how successful pumping will be, since nobody knows the details of the tunnels and the ground around them.
It's impossible to know it'll be effective, because we don't know how seawater will drain tunnels no one's been in before.
There's also the question of seawater destroying all together what's left of the Strip's already damaged water system, which draws on Gaza's increasingly saltier aquifer.
The whole flooding could also bring down more buildings or entire blocks, making the place uninhabitable for years to come.
But remember, they just want to drive all the Palestinians out of Palestine, dead or alive.
Just get them off of the Promised Land.
Wim Zeinenberg, who studied the impact of water on the environment in the Middle East, said assuming about one-third of the tunnel network is already damaged, Israel would have to pump probably a million cubic meters of seawater to disable the rest.
That is in process.
Here's a report about it, actually showing some of the tunnels they intend to flood.
No sound coming.
Meanwhile, Israel's strategy is cold and calculated and lacks any sense of decency.
I think this is an absolutely accurate report, and I believe I know the reason why.
That is, they have used AI.
They fed all the data about Hamas, about the civilian population in Gaza, and sought to construct a program that will kill the most Palestinians in the least amount of time.
Because AI systems are not thinking things, because they have no emotion and therefore no compassion, no empathy, no sense of morality.
They have constructed a system that is cold and calculated with no sense of decency that, in my opinion, explains it.
A UNICEF spokesman has said, alleged Gaza safe zones are zones of death.
James Elder says Israel's proclaimed safe zones are zones of death with increased risk of disease.
He says they're fully aware of the dire consequences in the alleged safe zone.
The decision to push 80% of the population into a zone 4% the size of Gaza is cold and calculated and lacks any sense of decency.
Meanwhile, Khan Yunus in Raftah.
Monday night was terrifying for residents of Yan Yunus in Raftah and 1.5 million evacuees.
There's been non-stop heavy artillery shelling, relentless airstrikes, and mass bombing.
As ambulance tried to get to the east side of Yan Khanus, fewer people were stranded and caught under heavy bombardment they were shot at, could not evacuate any of the injured or bring out any of those who were killed overnight.
Palestinian officials in Gaza say Israeli jets dropped phosphorous bombs in north and east of Khan Yunis, where the use of white phosphorous in civilian areas is considered a war crime due to its extremely dangerous effects on the human body.
It ignites instantly in contact with oxygen moving through the human body, including through bone, causing severe excruciating damage.
It's also caused harm when inhaled.
But, of course, Israel is violating every international convention—the Hague Convention, the Geneva Convention, the laws of war.
Violating, committing all kinds of collective punishment, war crimes, no doubt about it.
A Palestinian Red Crescent shared footage of a moment an Israeli artillery tank targeted the vicinity of two ambulances in Gaza, which were attending to casualties.
The U.N.
says no place is safe.
Journalists, of course, at least 63 have already been killed since October 7 and appear to be targeted deliberately.
The ADL admits Israel has lost a young.
Here's a sign.
Israel's killing children again.
Enjoy your weekend!
Leaked audio ADL Chief John Greenblatt says it's no longer left versus right on Israel, it's old versus young.
Polling shows Israel has totally lost the sympathy of the millennials and Generation Z. The second phase is going to proceed with fewer operations aimed at stabilizing Gaza, expected to continue until late 2024.
The Biden admin has pushed PM Netanyahu to allow the PA, the Palestinian Authority, to control Gaza after Hamas has defeated it.
But Tel Aviv will not listen.
No, not even the U.S.
can talk to them about this.
Meanwhile, Netanyahu accuses the entire world of anti-Semitism.
Why?
Because criticism of Israel for slaughter, for genocide, has been increasing worldwide.
They try to make it out that the world is being silenced on their purported rape of Hamas, of its Jewish women, but the evidence has simply disappeared.
As even Times of Israel admit, this is just nonsense.
To date, there is no physical evidence of rape by Hamas militants, nor any purported rape victims offering direct testimony.
Only outlandish stories like this from a purported male witness, who used this odd language to describe a beautiful woman with the face of an angel being raped by eight to ten Hamas militants.
The same witness claims he saw another Hamas militant who took a shovel and beheaded another woman.
Whose head rolled along the ground again?
Where is the evidence to back this up?
Israel has been caught lying multiple times about atrocities in Hamas hospital headquarters to justify its mass murder campaign in Gaza.
And stories like this are only starting to surface now?
It's unclear.
This is yet another fabrication in service of genocide.
Meanwhile, the House has passed a bill saying Zionism is anti-Semitism, which is simply absurd.
Even Jerry Nadler, the most senior Jewish member of the House, criticized the language of the bill ahead of the vote.
The resolution suggests that anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism.
That is either intellectually disingenuous or just factually wrong, and it unfairly implicates many of my Orthodox former constituents in Brooklyn, many of whose families rose from the ashes of the Holocaust.
Nidler claimed most anti-Zionism is anti-Semitism, which is himself conflating two distinct questions.
Anti-Semitism is criticizing or rejecting a person who is Jewish because they are Jewish.
Anti-Zionism is criticizing the theory of Jewish superiority, that Jews are entitled to the lands of Palestine and that they are superior to all other races who exist only to serve them.
Meanwhile, we have a report I find troubling.
Hamas terrorists surrender en masse.
Hamas terrorists have begun to surrender the area of Konyunis, one of the terrorist government's last strongholds.
And remember, they used the word terrorism where I might use the word freedom fighter.
The latest advance has the IDF operating in southern Gaza.
A move that sparked outrage among those who want Israel to stop short of destroying Hamas, but hide that desire behind humanitarian concerns.
Here's some photos.
Thank Yerushem for letting the Jewish people start Hanukkah with a smile.
Thank this mass surrender of Hamas terrorists in Gaza.
This should be the first of many.
Thank you, IDF.
More!
Every single member in support of Hamas needs to see this picture.
Let their spirit be utterly broken.
Let them surrender in droves.
Let the war end.
I'll be right back with my special guest.
stand by
Thank you.
Thank you.
Unfortunately, this platform for free speech has never been free.
We need the support of the people.
It is the people like you, yes, you, that keeps the station in the front lines of the battle against tyranny and oppression.
Please help support Revolution Radio so that free speech will not be silenced in a world that seems to be going deaf to the real truth.
With your support, we will be able to become an even bigger pillar of light in a dark, gloomy world.
Revolution Radio.
FreedomSubs.com.
The number one listener, supporter and radio station on the planet.
Revolution Radio.
Radio.
Radio.
Hey everyone, it's Barbara Jean Lindsay, The Cosmic Oracle.
If you have questions about your past lives or future plans, need answers from the cosmos about your love life or career, or just want to keep your finger on the pulse of the planet, check out my show, The Cosmic Oracle, here on Revolution Radio at freedomslips.com.
Thank you.
Thank you.
The opinions expressed on this radio station, its programs, and its website by the hosts, guests, and call-in listeners or chatters are solely the opinions of the original source who expressed them.
They do not necessarily represent the opinions of Revolution Radio and freedomslips.com, its staff, or affiliates.
You're listening to Revolution Radio, britannamslips.com, 100% listener-supported radio, and now we return you to your host.
Well, it's my great pleasure once again to introduce Dina Pollard-Saxx, who's a brilliant attorney who's been involved in many major who's a brilliant attorney who's been involved in many major and controversial issues.
To give us the latest report about what she believes is taking place on the legal scene today, where she has direct involvement to...
Dina, what a pleasure to have you here.
So good to see you again, Jim.
Thank you for having me.
Absolutely.
Begin wherever you would like.
Well, as you probably know, I've been chomping at the bit for a couple of years now, trying to get the right case, which I hope to get to the U.S.
Supreme Court, concerning a Liberty Clause challenge to the vaccine, the COVID vaccine mandates.
And I think I have found the right case, finally.
We're just putting together the fee agreements.
It's out of Massachusetts, and so I need local counsel per the federal rules.
The reason I wanted to do this was because I saw some problems in some of the cases that have been brought.
I'll just give you 1 example.
Some lawyers wanted to bring cases challenging the vaccine mandates because they're not really vaccines.
They're actually RNA technology, which is not technically a vaccine and people were calling.
The COVID shots vaccines way before the definition of vaccines was changed in the dictionaries to accommodate this stuff, the COVID shots.
And so they tried to go into court, for example, distinguishing Jacobson saying, well, that was a vaccine.
This isn't.
That's not what we want to do.
I have a background in constitutional law, having taught it, and I really always was interested in the Liberty Clause in particular, because to me, that's where all our cherished rights really lie, is the Liberty Clause.
Everything from medical privacy, to family relationships, to being able to live With family members who are not in your immediate family, you know, privacy, medical choices, all that comes within the Liberty Clause.
So I really always was especially interested in that clause and studied it.
And so when I saw what was happening, and by the way, it was Erwin Chemerinsky who taught me about the Liberty Clause back in 1986 or 87, whatever it was.
So I had a phenomenal constitutional law professor And just, you know, I really learned to love the Constitution and especially the Liberty Clause.
So when I saw what was happening, I thought, well, that's not the argument you want to be making.
And then the other big error I saw was lawyers going into court and telling the court there's a fundamental right to bodily integrity.
Well, no, that's never been declared.
It's never been declared a fundamental right.
The court has said many, many things indicating that it is a fundamental right, but they never said that.
So you don't want to go into court and tell the court something that isn't right.
You want to convince the court to acknowledge medical choices.
As a fundamental right, but you don't want to go in and tell them it's already a fundamental right when the Supreme Court has never said that.
So, I have a little bit of a different tact here, and I'm trying to get to court with a basic claim, and this client has other claims.
She has a, I think, a very clear non-delegation doctrine claim, and she also has a Liberty Clause claim.
Based on unconstitutional conditions of employment.
She worked at a university and she was fired for not getting the shots And she was scared and I think rightfully so she's an african-american lady and as most of us are aware Really terrible things have been done to african-americans and other people in medical experimentation in this country and otherwise so she had a valid fear of Her minister backed her up.
She tried to get a religious exemption.
Her doctor backed her up and she tried to get a medical exemption and they said no every step of the way and fired her.
And she had a great history of performance.
She had secured a significant grant to do research and she was teaching part-time as well.
And it's just so wrong to me to fire someone like her over her refusal to get a shot that, you know, really was experimental and she didn't need.
She's healthy.
She takes care of her own health and so This is a clean case, I feel, because we're not going to make those arguments that will distract the court from what I feel is the real issue is do these shots comport with the history and tradition of Liberty Clause jurisprudence as it relates to the bodily integrity cases, which are often the criminal cases or criminal procedure cases and the medical privacy cases?
And my answer, in my opinion, so clearly, no, you can't do this.
You can't make people put things into their bodies they don't want, especially when it comes down to the fact that we're all responsible for our own health.
Only we can really know what we need.
And so I have this case and I'm about to file it, I think probably early to mid 2024, we have to go through some procedural steps, of course, suing the government, giving them notice and giving them an opportunity to pay her lost wages and all that.
She lost, I think, 6 or 9 months of employment, tens of thousands of dollars.
And she ended up having to move to North Carolina to find a job.
So this was a significant setback in her life.
And I'm really excited to get that on file.
I have some really nice attorneys in Massachusetts that are helping.
And so that's, that's, I guess, my, my, my, my high point of what's going on.
And I think, as you may know, I started at my own 501c3 last year, the very end of last year called Lord Advocates, which is, can be found at lordadvocates.org.
And, We have not gotten a lot of donations and I'm going to talk about Dr. Gold's behavior and why I think people are just sort of donation hesitant now because of what they've seen done with tens of millions of dollars of donation money among certain organizations like America's Frontline Doctors who did nothing in the course after promising they would.
So people really aren't donating to my organization and I haven't put any money into marketing either so I'm hoping Little by little, people will find out who we are.
All of the attorneys that I'm working with are former tenured law professors with extraordinary expertise in civil procedure, federal courts.
One of them has expertise in reparations.
And I know that's, you know, kind of a dirty word, but I disagree with that.
I think it depends on the facts of the case.
And he actually had a case with Johnny Cochran and Charles Ogletree years ago, and they were poured out on limitations grounds.
But they actually had statements from banks from family members whose offspring were now looking for reparations, and they could prove that the bank denied their loans.
Back in the mid-1800s, and they put Negro on the line.
They denied the property loans because they were black.
That is, to me, and it was illegal at that time.
So to me, that is a case where reparations should flow.
Their families would have owned a lot of land right now, but for the banks, discriminating based on race.
So that's Alfred Brophy, who's on my board.
And we have a couple other people involved who are extremely good lawyers.
And then, of course, my husband is a certified appellate lawyer here in Texas.
And that's the kind of team you need.
We're going up against the Justice Department.
We're going up against the State Attorneys General.
It is not easy.
These are really good lawyers on the other side, the government lawyers.
A lot of cases have been poured out on mistakes, procedural mistakes, things like that.
So I'm really excited about this case and I'm hoping that at some point we'll start getting donations because I've been working for free now for a long time.
And on that note, I want to give a little shout out to my surfing friends in Waikiki who have consistently supported me.
And thank you to those people who are donating what they can because this is really, really important.
I feel we need the Supreme Court really badly right now.
And I think there's been some indications, certainly by Justice Clarence Thomas, that they haven't had the opportunity really to review, you know, under a Liberty Clause analysis, the efficacy or importance of the COVID shots.
The claims just haven't reached that court in the right framework.
So that's what I'm trying to do.
And on that note, you know, this is one of the problems I think we're having, a lot of us are having, is that people really aren't donating now as they were in 2020, 2021.
And one of the cases I'm involved in right now is a defamation lawsuit brought by Dr. Simone Gold against my client and Joey Gilbert and some other people.
But just a little background on this organization.
America's Frontline Doctors was organized and immediately began soliciting donations to try to secure medical freedom.
And I saw a video of Simone Gold back in San Francisco a couple years back promising, you know, a dream team of legal eagles and tens of millions of dollars poured in.
As I understand it, they've gotten well over 100 million dollars in donations.
And haven't done anything in court that I know of, um, at all.
And in fact, there's $30 million missing from the donation fund.
And it went missing during a time when Simone Gold was in charge of the organization and the CPA who was asked to see, I saw, I saw the report.
I saw the initial consultant's report by a accounting firm.
showing there was just $30 million just gone.
And the original CPA was supposed to provide documents.
And instead he departed from America's frontline doctors and nothing's been done.
And so all these lawsuits have ensued.
And I find it truly amazing some of the things that Simone Gold has done is It's just shocking and it's a case of such extraordinary, you know, narcissism of claiming.
The thing about narcissism people understand it's not the same as conceit.
Narcissism involves people who really don't have good self-esteem.
And they are not honest about what they've accomplished.
They're not honest about who they are.
That's what it's about.
It's about really seeking approval from others.
And this woman has done things that are so terrible.
And I'm not just talking about the money being lost.
For example, I never heard of her.
And I saw this video online, someone had sent me a couple years ago with this woman sitting back on a chair, you know, sort of in a In a very confident, very commanding, you know, voice telling people online that Kaiser is responsible under the Constitution and they're going to sue Kaiser.
And I thought, and then she went on to talk about Kruzan versus Missouri and totally butchered the case.
She didn't get anything right about the case.
She said it made a holding that there's a fundamental right to bodily integrity and that strict scrutiny applied.
The case said nothing like that.
I mean, this person hadn't even read the case.
Simone Gold didn't even bother reading the Wikipedia, you know, summary of the case.
And she went online and was talking about, And at first I thought, well, she's a doctor, you know, and doctors don't always necessarily understand constitutional issues.
But then I found out she had a lottery from Stanford and I was just absolutely floored.
So that point I contacted America's Frontline Doctors and said, you know, considering how much misinformation we're being accused of, I think that it's probably best to not have those kinds of videos online and specifically ask for them to take it down.
And I think they have taken it down.
But anyway, what started happening was people started catching on that she was doing things she shouldn't be doing.
And among other things, she created some kind of subsidiary and bought a house for three and three and a half million dollars in Florida and started living there and bought three very expensive vehicles and started using them as well.
And she resigned from the board and the board members, you know, testified that she resigned because she was about to go to prison for a while because of the January 6th, um, debacle.
And she was, um, apparently she, there was video of her kind of walking in and walking over someone who had been, um, knocked down and was on the floor.
I think it was a guard.
And the idea is that as a doctor, she probably should have stopped and helped him.
So she, you know, she was, I think, you know, kind of, Made a target to go after because she was a doctor and because they had that video on her.
But that to me is the least of my concerns about her, what she started doing.
And again, we don't even know who has all this money.
But I have to say, based on every piece of evidence I've seen, she knows where it is, or she certainly should know because she was in charge of the organization at the time the money went missing.
And A court finally, finally made a decision in, let's see, I think it was January 27th, 2023, where she both, you know, she had sued Joey Gilbert in Arizona at that time for defamation and everything else because Joey was calling her out for where's all this money and why are you living in like a three and a half million dollar house?
With donation money, that's absolutely, I mean, a fifth grader could almost tell you that donation money can't be spent on personal luxuries.
That's common knowledge, I think.
But what I did when I first started working for a 501c3 is I bought a book on 501c3 law, and it really isn't that complicated.
There's not a lot of oversight, though, and so people do a lot of things they shouldn't be doing.
But the thing that the author impressed over and over again is the money If it is characterized as donation money, it must stay in that character.
You can never go spend it for a vacation for yourself and things like that.
Well, some of the employees said she was spending, you know, up to $100,000 on private jets and things like that.
And that anyone should know you can't do that.
So finally, and this is why I want to get to that, this court order and Gold versus Gilbert et al out of Maricopa County, Arizona.
The court finally made findings and she, Simone Gold did resign.
And then what happened was she claimed she didn't resign and claimed she was writing letters with America's Frontline doctor letterhead saying she was, you know, the director or whatever on the board and she wasn't.
And so she's been hanging on to that and doing and continuing even after the court order.
And let me just read from the court order because I want to be really fair here.
Gold now contends that she only considered the possibility of resigning from the board.
She submits that an agreement was reached that she would resign in exchange for a consulting agreement with a monthly compensation of $50,000.
$50,000 a month, $600,000 a year.
And that America's Frontline Doctors would provide her with $1.5 million of seed money for GoldCare.
GoldCare is her for-profit organization.
Well, first of all, and now she's saying she never left the board.
Well, the court said that She clearly left the board.
There was no consideration.
There was no contingencies.
But she's changing her story.
And the court found, basically, that she's a liar and a perjurer.
The court didn't use those exact words.
But what the court did say, and I'm just going to actually read from this, that the board never voted to purchase the home in Naples for $3.6 million that she's living in.
She announced she was resigning.
She put it in writing that she had resigned and she suddenly changed her tune.
And what happened was, you know, the court found that, you know, she purchased a home and regularly resides there without board approval and that the donation funds are used, I'm quoting now, the donation funds are used to pay for household expenses Including a housekeeper and that gold has also used company money for security purposes, buying security guards for herself.
You know, like she needs that.
I don't know.
She's also purchased three expensive vehicles for her own use.
And she, and the court says, quote, there were no conditions to her resignation.
The narrative that gold has revived about her resignation is false.
So she basically went to court claiming things under oath and the court saying it's false because that's perjury.
Basically, so the notion that a non-profit company could take donated funds and pay them to a principal of the company to invest in a for-profit business is simply absurd.
Gold is a very intelligent physician and lawyer.
She had to know that such an arrangement was completely improper and likely illegal.
Her testimony is not credible.
And the court goes on and on repeatedly to say that she's not credible.
The notion that Gold's resignation was conditional on her receiving 1.5 million for wellness clinics is absurd.
As noted above, the notion that donated funds could be provided to Gold to invest in her for-profit business is ridiculous.
The court called her ridiculous.
This and that.
Well, after this came down Um, you know, and she was basically found by a court of law after consideration of numerous declarations, depositions and whatnot, to be lying to the court, not to be involved with America's Frontline Doctors in terms of being a board member.
She then turned around and sued my client.
And some others for defamation.
And she signed, and this is what I find truly remarkable, she signed this complaint against my client and Joey Gilbert under oath.
She verified, it's a verified complaint.
Verified complaints mean that you're basically attesting that the contents of that complaint are true.
So it has the same force and effect essentially as testifying under oath.
And one of the first things she says, In this complaint, in Florida, is that she is on the board or the director or whatever of America's Frontline Doctors.
Well, if court had made a determination, she's not.
So she's now verifying under oath to another court in another state that she's something that the court has already found legally that she's not.
So again, she's continuing her pattern of this.
And now you see why donors are so angry.
And now you see why donors are hesitant to donate to anybody.
Because they're seeing that they put a lot of money into her and her organization, and not only is nothing coming, but she's been spending the money on herself, based on all the facts I reviewed.
It's horrible.
And then, also in this verified complaint, she says that my client is a twice convicted felon on information and beliefs.
And that my client has businesses in Florida on information and belief.
But first of all, you can't verify something on information and belief.
That is quintessential hearsay.
And you can't attest to hearsay.
So a precipitant witness can attest to anything he saw.
Um, or felt or smelled or whatever, but it has to be something they perceived personally.
Experts are different.
Experts can rely on hearsay, but she didn't sign this as an expert.
She signed it as a percipient witness, and she just made stuff up.
My client has no business in Florida.
She's never been in Florida.
And she did that specifically to try to get jurisdiction because there's no minimum contacts with my client in Florida.
So this is a person, and then of course, accusing her of being a felon, that's just nasty.
Totally untrue, of course.
So this is a person who's caused such a rift.
And by the way, the attorney who signed this is Angela, I'm sorry, Angelina M. Gonzalez of Dickinson Wright PLLC in Fort Lauderdale.
I mean all I can say that is yikes what kind of a lawyer has her client sign something you know and verify it on information and belief when the facts are blatantly untrue and defamatory toward my client.
It's just so bad and so that's one of the things I'm dealing with and the reason why I'm so interested in this case is because I taught First Amendment law and I published on the First Amendment and When people sue other people to try to shut them up when they're telling the truth, or they're expressing opinions or fair comment, that is very dangerous to a society.
And there's a strategic lawsuit against public participation legislation in most states now to stop people from doing this.
But the irony is that America's frontline doctors It's an offshoot of a free speech foundation, which is a free speech coalition, which is a First Amendment based 501c3.
So for her to be doing this to try to shut people up about the truth about her, the truth is exactly everything she claims to be against.
And so it's been a really divisive thing in the health freedom movement because some people feel like we shouldn't say anything bad about anyone in the movement because we're all on the same team.
And my feelings about that are directly contrary.
I think it's our job to call out the frauds among us, because otherwise, we're doing the same thing that politicians do, and that all of Harvey Weinstein's co-conspirators did.
Well, he's our friend, or he signs our check, or, you know, those women are actress wannabes and they deserve it.
Whatever they would say to justify what these men did, they're taking a position, aiding and abetting Evil stuff.
And I, you know, it's incomprehensible to me why people would do that.
I'm a big believer in karma and energy.
And when you aid and abet someone like that on any level, I think that you're basically jumping into their karmic river with them and you're going to be pulled downstream with them in that negative karma.
So it's incomprehensible to me why people would think we have to defend people just because they claim to be health, freedom warriors like we are.
I'm willing to call her out and that's why I'm saying this right now.
She should be called out.
And frankly, her donors should start a class action to get their donation money back.
It's all being held right now in bank accounts because they're not doing anything.
There's so much infighting among board members and whatnot.
And the judge in Arizona actually said, You people need to file for receivership to get an accounting done.
So there were papers filed for receivership, but there's been no activity in the case, and I couldn't get an answer by the lawyers who filed the receivership.
I left messages for Nathan Metzger and Perry Casada.
They just haven't answered.
So I don't know what's going on, but what I do know is there's tens of millions of dollars sitting in an account.
And that money could be spent on proper litigation with the right kind of lawyers, with the right expertise, and instead it's sitting there.
So my opinion is that donors should file some kind of action, get their money back, and donate to organizations that will actually get the job done.
Now, Dina, this is all fascinating stuff.
Now, I presume you would be invulnerable to a defamation lawsuit for reporting these facts because courts have found these as legal findings.
I mean, I have a friend who said there's the truth and then there's the law.
The fact is, it would appear both are on your side in this instance.
Am I correct?
Absolutely.
But here's the problem.
It's so expensive to litigate.
And I feel that Simone Gould is trying to wallet whip the people around her who know what she's done.
And she sued a number of people who worked for America's Frontline Doctors who were on the board and my client who was just acting as a journalist.
But the wallet whipping is a very serious problem in the courts.
And, you know, of course, if she does have the 30 million dollars or if she has access to it, which I suspect she does, She's now using donation money to shut down the truth about herself.
It is disgusting.
So I met Simone Gold.
I was with Reiner Fulmich, gosh, when it was a couple years ago.
And my impression of her was not good in person at all.
And I was perplexed as to how someone like her Who never litigated, never published a single article on constitutional law, hasn't really done anything to show that she can handle this type of litigation, could have garnered so much support.
But I think that's a testament to where we are.
Our people are scared.
Our people are looking for a hero.
And frankly, because she's kind of a dorky kind of, you know, she's her her voice is high pitch.
She's.
Frankly inappropriate and professional in her presentations.
I think that that's kind of why people sort of she's sort of I'm not sure the right word unassuming in a sense and the way she handled herself on camera.
So that may be it and mostly just people were looking for someone to help them.
And so that's why I'm so excited now to get a case going that hopefully will do what People like her said they would do, and I can't promise an outcome in the courts, but what I can say is we will do everything possible to set this case up exactly right, so we have a shot at the Supreme Court making a ruling on whether our government can make us take anything into our bodies against our will, without true consent, in order to keep our jobs.
That's, to me, so outrageous.
Dina, this is of enormous importance for the public good, and I certainly encourage you and look forward to continuing our conversation on the other side of this break.
We'll be right back with Dina Pollard-Sax.
You can take five.
Dina Pollard-Sax.
Listen to Revolution Rape on freedomslopes.com.
We'll be right back.
- Was it a conspiracy?
Did you know that the police in Boston were broadcasting, this is a drill, this is a drill, on bullhorns during the marathon?
That the Boston Globe was tweeting that a demonstration bomb would be set off during the marathon for the benefit of bomb squad activities.
And that one would be set off in one minute in front of the library, which happened as the Globe had announced.
Peering through the smoke, you could see bodies with missing arms and legs.
But there was no blood.
The blood only showed up later and came out of a tube.
They used amputee actors and a studio-quality smoke machine.
Don't let yourself be played.
Check out And Nobody Died in Boston, either.
Available at moonrockbooks.com.
That's moonrockbooks.com. - - For one second, but the capital will have their dreams fairly.
You are lying to yourself.
Because we know who they are and what they do.
This is what they do.
and we must fight back.
You can torture us and bomb us Fire is catching.
And if we burn, you burn with the tree. - You awake, yeah, I hope.
We tried and we've tried for years and years to use passive resistance and loud voices to make a change.
The time is over.
Your governments around the world have no other goal than to decimate your entire existence.
The hands of the bankers and the elites.
The war is coming and it's your choice to decide if you want to be a warrior or a victim.
Denial is not a choice anymore.
Revolution Radio, freedomslips.com, the number one listener-supported radio station on the planet.
Not giving up.
revolution radio radio radio
it says no secret that the so-called mainstream media is best described as controlled propaganda Countless news stories are either totally ignored or spun with half-truths, and because of this, essential facts and vital information are often compromised.
Join Dr. Ott every Friday night on Studio B at 10 p.m.
Eastern and learn why the story behind the story was nominated for a Peabody Award in its second year of producing unparalleled broadcasting excellence in 1997.
That is, if you really care about learning the truth.
The opinions expressed on this radio station, its programs, and its website by the hosts, guests, and call-in listeners or chatters are solely the opinions of the original source They do not necessarily represent the opinions of Revolution Radio and FreedomSlips.com, its staff, or affiliates.
You're listening to Revolution Radio, bring them slips.com, 100% listener, supported radio.
And now we return you to your host.
Well, Dina, I've been fascinated by your allusion to Clarence Thomas.
And it seems to me the Democrats have been trying to reconstruct the court if they can't actually pack it.
They're going after Clarence Thomas.
I'd be very interested in your insights about what's going on there, whether they have any prospect.
I'd like to hear that they do not, but I'd be fascinated by your inside account of what's going on there.
Well, one of my friends of 23 years is on the committee to investigate him.
And this is a person I honor and respect completely.
He's very smart man and a civil rights lawyer as well.
And he has indicated to me recently that there is some, you know, information on Clarence Thomas that could hurt him.
It had to do with Investments or money changing hands, a house sale, something.
I didn't write it down.
I was just listening and I was upset about it because I don't want to see Clarence Thomas go.
Obviously, he's someone who I believe gets this issue with medical privacy and is willing to stand up for individual rights.
And so I think he's being targeted because of his political views.
I don't know what he has or hasn't done.
I have no personal knowledge, but I just really hope that he gets through this.
And, um, I think it would be politically incorrect to take him off the court.
I mean, I think that that's, we're dealing with a lot of racial issues in this country right now.
And why him?
Like, why is he being picked on?
Is it because he's a conservative?
Is it because he's black?
I don't know.
Um, I will tell you, my friend on the committee is also black and he's, um, not at all racist.
He's a very, very, very kind person.
And I've known him well for some time.
So I don't know what's going on.
I can only hope that somehow, some way it will just fade away.
But from what I was told, it looks a little bit questionable at this time.
The last thing we need is another person appointed by Biden because he is the president who signed a vaccine mandate that was ultimately declared to be beyond his Article 2 powers.
Why a president would do that?
I have only one explanation, and that is he wants to help Big Pharma.
He's bought or something.
There's just something wrong with the president stepping outside of his jurisdiction to do something like that.
And a lot of people also don't realize Pfizer was making about $1 billion a year before this pandemic.
And the first year of the COVID shots, I think it went up to around $15 billion.
And then up to like 30 billion the year after that.
So we're talking about a company that grew by, and don't quote me on exact amounts, but I remember reading it and saying, my God, grew by about 30 times because of the shots that they were providing people.
We now know they didn't disclose the risks.
They didn't disclose the risks of heart problems, myocarditis.
They didn't disclose properly the risks of fetuses when pregnant women took the shots.
And there were a lot of fetal deaths and they lost apparently a lot of the results.
I'm relying now on Naomi Wolf's website dailyclout.io.
I would recommend going there.
She's done a tremendous job of marshalling the evidence and bringing it to the public.
So Pfizer has been a very bad actor and they recently sued a country.
I can't remember which one they sued.
One of the countries wanting to get money from them and Ken Paxson, who's actually an adversary of mine in my case against TSU, has just filed a case against Pfizer, the state of Texas versus Pfizer, for misrepresenting the efficacy of the vaccines, the COVID shots.
But my concern as a lawyer, as a torts professor for many years, I believe the better case would be the failure to warn about the very serious risks.
I had a pilot call me not too long ago and he couldn't work for a year because he took the shots against his will.
I mean, United was going to fire him.
He needed his, you know, people have families.
Took the shots against his will.
Ended up getting so sick with myocarditis.
He couldn't fly for many months, lost a lot of money.
And, you know, what they've done in this pandemic is so incredibly sophisticated and contrived in my mind.
Because they made it so hard to get at the people who did this.
By having private employers enforce this unconstitutional mandate, you can't go after them.
That constitution only applies to the government.
So they've managed to create layers and to create distance between the bad actors and the victims, making it very hard to get at them, which is why I think people want to sue Kaiser and the constitution, which I mean, teaching constitutional law, I will tell you, it's really hard to establish the state action doctrine against a private employer or against any private entity.
It's almost never been done.
So I don't know what they were thinking.
I don't know if they were looking for money, because if they could find liability against Kaiser, of course, there's money where there isn't any real money against the government.
You can't get punitive damages against the government and punitive damages are where the big money is.
So I don't know if it was greed.
I don't know if the lawyers were just not very good at constitutional law.
And I don't know if the lawyers were being directed by somebody from Big Pharma or somebody on their side.
It was a lot of controlled opposition inside this movement.
I mean, there's just, frankly, I've learned so much being a part of this health care movement.
And one of the things I learned There's a lot of weirdos that are drawn to any kind of movement, and I'll just give you one example.
I got a call from this woman named Serena Nolan a few months back, and she said she's with the Ministry of Truth Film Fest, and so I naturally assumed, oh, it's church-related, you know, and so she offered me a donation to my 501c3 if I gave a presentation, and I said yes, and she offered a substantial donation, which I'm thinking is, you know, like a thousand dollars or more, you know, for a substantial donation.
So I prepared for, I gave a talk on geoengineering and the history of geoengineering law and why there's not many lawsuits, what we're going through trying to figure out how to stop the spraying of our skies with toxic chemicals.
And after my presentation, well, actually during the presentation, I saw that she was recording me.
We never talked about recording.
We never talked about, and I couldn't say anything because I was being recorded.
Like I didn't want to say, Hey, stop the recording.
I didn't know, having come on a Zoom call, I didn't know how many people were there.
So I really was in a position where I couldn't say much.
And so, um, afterwards I, you know, said, uh, after some time passed, I said, Hey, I haven't received a donation.
You know, are you going to send it?
And then she started making up all these reasons why she wasn't going to get the donation after she basically promised it to induce me.
And so I ended up, you know, writing some letters to Texans for vaccine choice who sponsored the event.
And this dine-in theater where it was being recorded, I think it's called Look Dine-in Theater in Dallas, and told them what she did.
She even started slandering me and my client, Renette Sennum and Jen Seven.
I'm sorry, Renette Sennum and Jen Seven, which are my clients and we're the ones trying to find a way to go after the geoengineering, you know, conduct that's going on all the time in our skies.
And it's not good for us.
And I do not believe they're trying to quell climate change, not based on what our experts say, and not based on what I saw.
Lyndon B. Johnson, I think it was Lyndon B. Johnson in a speech years ago say, like 1961, before he was even the president, he had a speech, like a commencement speech, and he said, he who controls the weather will control the world.
And I put it on my Facebook.
Um, and then I was blocked from Facebook for like, I don't know, four months or five months.
So anyway, um, this is about control.
It's about weaponizing weather, in my opinion, trying to shut down the countries that don't do what we want, take away their rain, take away their crops.
Um, it's really, really nasty because we do need our clouds.
We need our rain.
We need that to survive.
So, um, it's, it's, um, It's been a very difficult thing trying to get clear on how we're going to go after.
And I gave this audience, whoever they were, a lot of my professional work product and mental impressions because I wanted to give them something for this donation I was going to get.
Anyway, she turned around, she wiped out all the, all positive reviews on Facebook, all thumbs up.
You know, it was, someone called it awesome speech, all that.
She took those all off Facebook.
And tried saying that she didn't like the fact that I mentioned Ken Paxton in my speech.
Well, first of all, we had had communications about Ken Paxton before this event.
And I had said he's in a position to do something.
He hasn't done anything.
And he was just about to go into his impeachment trial at the time.
So this was literally a week or two before his impeachment trial.
Mentioning that the attorneys general aren't doing anything about this geoengineering is a fair comment.
I did nothing wrong.
And so she tried Using this to deny me, you know, the money that was owed to me.
And then she turned, she made a thousand dollar donation to Dane Wigington, which is another geoengineering organization, saying that, well, he's credible and you people aren't.
I'm like, well, that's really defamation because our people are very credible.
Our attorneys are stellar in my group.
I've chose these people who have, you know, we're law professors and, and, you know, so doing that and also making, Statements about Gen 7, which she has nothing to say.
Gen 7's done nothing wrong.
So, I found, and she also had made really derogatory comments about Dane Whittington in our correspondence prior to the presentation, saying that we're not going to have him speak because he's in the tank and all this stuff.
I'm like, okay, I don't know about that.
But this is a person who was smoking, apparently changed smoking during my presentation.
Um, has a, has a problem with a couple of arrest warrants and all sorts of, you know, speeding tickets and everything else.
And I don't know what all she's done, but she was also sued for breach of contract by a lawyer.
And she just simply didn't pay and just had an attitude and a direct verdict was entered against her.
She had no defense.
This is the problem.
We're seeing a lot of these entitled people who have nothing better to do than joining the health freedom movement.
And they're literally poaching the time.
The mental energy of those of us who are trying to do something.
So I have a problem with Texans for Vaccine Choice for not stepping up and helping me get my film.
I've asked for the film.
I have a problem with the Lookin' Dining Theater in Dallas because they didn't help me.
They're the ones who filmed it.
And I sent certified letters and they're ignoring me.
So I've really kind of backed off from these groups other than Warner Mendenhall's group.
Um, he has a big group on base camp and we all discuss.
It's a nice group of lawyers.
I'm sure we're infiltrated as well with some controlled opposition or whatever you want to call them.
But I do definitely want to be in touch with these lawyers because, uh, we need to, we need a team.
You know, I may have expertise in one thing, but I'm not an expert litigator at this point.
I'm not an expert in civil procedure.
So we need this team.
I'm pulling it together.
We've just created a new team.
And this new team that I started is heading up litigation against Pfizer based on battery law.
Plain and simple.
There was not informed consent.
You know, if you and the one that one example is given by Prosser and Keaton in a book on tort law is that if someone says, hey, let's go out back and duke it out, like they challenge you to a bar fight and you say yes, but the other person didn't tell you he's wearing brass knuckles.
That is not consent.
It's a very different set of risks to fight someone with brass knuckles versus someone with just their fists.
So the same analysis applies here.
The consent that was given, even if it was given, In a coerced situation, even if it was given because the employer said you're going to get fired, those people who will honestly say, yes, I gave consent against my better, you know, my better desire or whatever, if they reluctantly gave consent based on the idea that it's safe and effective, that is still not informed consent.
That is still not valid.
So we're now looking at going after Pfizer on a battery claim.
And I think it's a very strong claim and I do not see how Anyone could possibly say the PrEP Act or anything else can create immunity for basically criminal and tortious acts because there's never in the history of this country or English common law been immunity for intentional torts.
Intentional torts are a whole different body of law from negligence and strict liability.
So I'm not worried about that.
We haven't had immunity for murder or battery really since Kings and Queens.
Murder it well and get away with it.
But that's just not the way we progress as a country.
And that's never been the law of America.
So that's what I'm doing now with this group.
And meanwhile, I'm fighting in my court case against TSU.
You know, people keep telling me the courts are crooked, the courts are gone.
I keep saying, no, no, no, the courts, some of them are good.
You know, the Supreme Court's made some good rulings.
You know, they've struck down certain vaccine mandates.
They've done some things that are good under the non-delegation doctrine, but still the OSHA mandate was struck down.
So our courts aren't totally gone, but we definitely have some problems.
But in my own case, I'm seeing the most truly shocking and amazing Um, judicial opinions come down and as way of background, I went to work for the Thurgood Marshall School of Law in 20 in 2000 in the year 2000, and there were always problems.
There's someone there named James Douglas, who has.
Been there 50 years, mostly there.
He spent some time in some of the places, but this man was the president of the university, the dean of the law school, is known for being a racist.
In my discovery request, I asked for his personnel file.
They did not provide it to me, but they did provide it to another plaintiff named Pat Garrison.
So I was able to get what they should have given me, but didn't give me in discovery.
I mean, they just buy it, the law, nonstop.
TSU is totally, totally corrupt.
And in this, this evidence I got from another plaintiff was a speech called Mr. American White Man.
And James Douglas gave a speech basically just revealing his anger and hatred of the white community for what he perceives they've done to him.
And I haven't been a black man, so I don't know what he's been through, but I see him as a man in a lot of pain.
And a man who's done extraordinarily evil things.
And he's been sued for racism.
He's lost.
And then the Texas Attorney General paid his punitive damages award for him.
He testified to that in my case.
That's something you can't do.
I mean, the government isn't supposed to pay.
That's making the taxpayers pay.
For his willful, intentional discrimination against whites.
So in this context, I'm trying to get through, you know, I'm somehow sliding by my colleague, Diane, who's an extraordinary lawyer, brilliant woman.
She was forced out within a couple of years, but I somehow slid by.
So these two white women were hired.
She was forced out right away.
I lasted 20 years.
No one lasted.
I don't think any white females ever lasted more than 10.
And when I started getting to the case, I started finding out all sorts of things.
One of the things is that numerous white people, four off the top of my head, including me, had wages withheld by TSU.
And this is a practice they do all the time.
Just usually what it requires is you have to go march across campus and go to the administrative building and hash it out and say, hey, money was taken out of my paycheck.
And then they often put it back in.
So it's just a form of harassment.
But what a lot of people don't understand is when these little pieces of harassment that cost you an hour here, two hours there, five hours there, 20 hours somewhere else.
This is called a hostile work environment because it isn't like one thing they do will make or break your life.
But over the course of years, it builds up.
Over the course of years, these acts of hostility that may be subtortious, subcriminal, not quite up there, they add up.
And that's what we have a claim called hostile environment claims.
Well, I brought a hostile environment claim and had tons of evidence.
I mean, I had the complaint itself, 70 pages of example, after example, after example, of not only whites and females, and white females in particular, being abused by the Thurgood Marshall School of Law, but I also had numerous instances where black males were promoted Right after they were found guilty of discrimination or right after they thwarted the women's attempts to get gender equal gender pay.
We had we all have equal pay claims and TSU has been falsifying their compliance reports for decades.
I looked at about 15 years.
They are underreporting the black men's salaries by up to $70,000 a year.
Now keep in mind, these are the compliance reports required by state law, required by TSU's policy manual, that allows the compliance personnel to review to see whether or not women are being paid equally.
So they're falsifying this information.
So I find this out during litigation because I asked for the women's W-2s and the men's W-2s.
Well, the judge refuses to give me the women's W-2s.
Well, that's a violation.
I can't prove my side-by-side analysis that it's a gender thing if I don't have the women's W-2s.
Never got the women's W-2s.
The point is still on appeal.
But what I did find in seeing the men's W-2s was that all the men were making more than me, not just the few comparators I'd named.
So, of course, I moved the court to amend the complaint to add the comparators in my equal payout case because I now know they made more than me and I couldn't have known that because of the falsified Reports by TSU.
The judge denies my request.
How would I possibly have known?
So the judge also threw out my innocent 80 something year old judge in Houston, Texas, who came into the case because the black judge who was assigned the case recused himself.
And it happened a second time.
I had to bring a second case when the same judge in the first case refused to allow me to amend my complaint to add constructive termination when You know, four or five, four or five, five women with tenure resigned in a one year period, including all three white women.
Work a lot more hours, teach more classes and we're being paid way, way less than the men and the black men in particular.
So I did all this analysis.
I found all the court.
The court now won't let me amend my complaint to add constructive termination when five tenured women left in one year.
That is unheard of.
Three of us didn't have a position to did, but the rest left because and all of them were harassed.
One of them had a sexual harassment complaint against one of the one of the men there.
And they actually fired that man, a black male.
And his father is kind of an important person, a legislator, I think, somewhere in Georgia or something, Alabama, Georgia.
And they end up retaining him after he put up a fight.
And so the woman left.
This brilliant, brilliant woman left the law school, black female with degrees from Harvard and Cornell.
I mean, it is so outrageous.
So, of course, I brought a hostile environment claim based on gender and race.
And the court threw it out as a matter of law.
Didn't let me bring in any evidence of the physical assault, sexual assault.
The Fifth Circuit appears to be taking a position that if it didn't happen to you, you'll get to bring it in.
That is directly contrary to all the precedent in the Supreme Court.
When you have a hostile environment claim, you get to bring in how they treated other people in your group because it shows a pattern.
And also when you see something happening, To someone else, it affects you.
When I saw the way they treated this incredibly talented woman who made the sexual harassment complaint, it affected me because I realized they don't just hate me.
They're going to go against every female, even if she's Black, even if she has two Ivy League degrees.
So it had an impact on me.
Another one of my colleagues, another person with a Harvard degree, was sexually assaulted inside a Black male's office by the Black male.
Now, this male was her reporter for tenure.
And so he had power over her.
If he made, if he went to the committee and said, she shouldn't get tenure, that's going to have some weight.
So he did this while she's coming up for tenure.
And he had some weird John of God thing saying, I'm blessed by God, by super healing powers.
I want to heal you.
I mean, it's so, it's almost laughable, except that it's so tragic and sad.
This woman, I would say is, Probably the most intelligent person I've ever met in my life.
This female colleague of mine, she and Diane, the other one, these women are, I mean, I'm just astounded by their intelligence.
And I like them because of their extraordinary minds.
And I saw them both get forced out.
And the second one left with five autoimmune issues.
She had none before.
And she came there after a tragedy in her family.
Her husband died and left her with two little girls.
And this is how they treated her.
And they also gave her 13 course preps in 11 years.
That has never been done in the history of the country.
Normally, you get two course preps, and you keep them the rest of your career, so it becomes easy to teach.
So I saw this, and he threw out my claims, and then when it came to the motion for summary judgment on You know, the race discrimination, he threw out my gender claims off the bat.
Even though the ABA had made findings against the law school, fined the law school $15,000 based on their failure to address gender issues, the court still threw it out as a matter of law.
I mean, you have to wonder why a court would aid and abet this known practice by TSU.
Years ago, Rick Perry, the governor, had asked a man named Rick Sullivan to help TSU.
And he joined the board of TSU and we talked about it.
And basically everyone in Texas knows what's going on at TSU.
And Rick took the time without getting paid to join the board of TSU to help.
And he was unable to fix it.
And so, you know, I think one of the things, if I made a mistake in the case, I think the mistake was asking the court for an affirmative injunction to remedy the Equal Pay Act violations.
I asked the court, To force TSU to hire an accountant and find out what the gender pay disparity is and raise the women's salaries, all of them, to conform with the law.
That, I think, was what triggered this astonishing failure to follow the law by the court.
They knew that for probably the first time ever, they had a group of lawyers on my side that were going to We're going to make mistakes and we're going to get there.
The evidence I put into the court file in opposition to the motion for summary judgment included a declaration by a black female that was not paid for a class and she asked to be paid.
And James Douglas said to her, basically, uh, I'm not afraid of getting sued for discrimination because the lawyers, uh, insurance will take care of any judgment against me as in the past.
He actually had the audacity to say that to her.
And the attorney for the Ken Paxton's office, a guy named Drew Harris, refused to give her the names of witnesses, saying that basically they don't work for TSU any longer.
What doesn't matter.
If they work for TSU and TSU has their most recent information, they have to produce a discovery.
So this lady got wallet whipped out of court.
She ended up having to dismiss it, but she got a job somewhere else.
So, you know, I'm still in touch with her.
Another witness testified to her extraordinary, you know, schedule, which was because she's white.
The white females were the mules.
They hired white females from Harvard Law School, University of Texas, Berkeley.
They hired these white females who carry Way, way more than their fair share of the workload and who were also often producing a lot of scholarship as well and doing the job, whereas the black males and some of the Hispanic males were teaching one externship class.
Dina, we're going to break and we're going to invite callers after the break for Dina Pollard Sachs or for me about any of the issues we've been addressing here today.
540-352-4452.
540-352-4452.
We're here waiting to hear from you.
The bottom line is I'm absolutely, I'm not even upset about what the Fifth Circuit has done.
here waiting to hear from you.
The bottom line is I'm not even upset about what the Fifth Circuit has done.
I'm so fascinated.
... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...
... ... ... ...
The chat!
The chat.
It is the people like you.
Yes, you, that keeps the station in the front line.
I can open it.
No, I'm just going.
Please help support Revolution Radio so that free speech will not be silenced in a world that seems to be going deaf to the real truth.
With your support, we will be able to become an even bigger pillar of light in a dark world.
Revolution Radio, freedomslips.com, the number one listener support and radio station on the planet.
Revolution.
to radio, radio, radio, radio, radio.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Every Wednesday 8 p.m.
Thursday 8:00 PM Eastern time on studio B for monitoring is in good post.
Is it a guy to see that?
I've been stuck.
I'm telling them the people station.
Well, the government admits that 9/11 was a conspiracy.
But did you know that it was an inside job?
That Osama had nothing to do with it.
That the Twin Towers were blown apart by a sophisticated arrangement of mini or micro nukes.
That Building 7 collapsed seven hours later because of explosives planted in the building.
Barry Jennings was there.
He heard them go off and felt himself stepping over dead people.
A U.S.
geological survey conducted studies of dust gathered from 35 locations in lower Manhattan and found elements that would not have been there had this not been a nuclear event.
Ironically, that means the government's own evidence contradicts the government's official position.
9-11 was brought to us compliments of the CIA, the neocons of the Department of Defense, and the Mossad.
Don't let yourself be played.
Read American Nuked on 9-11.
Available at moonrockbooks.com.
That's moonrockbooks.com.
The opinions expressed on this radio station, its programs, and its website by the hosts, guests, and call-in listeners, or chatters, are solely the opinions of the original source who expressed them.
They do not necessarily represent the opinions of Revolution Radio and freedomslips.com, its staff, or affiliates.
You're listening to Revolution Radio, freedomslips.com.
100% listener-supported radio.
And now we return you to be your host.
The call lines are open.
Mitchell is standing by to field your call.
540-352-4452.
call 540-352-4452, 540-352-4452.
540-352-4452.
Dina, we're talking in the background about the issue of the corruption in the court, how, for example, they've been weaponized against Donald Trump.
In my opinion, none of the cases against Trump have a sound foundation, either in the facts or in the law.
They're purely intended as election interference, and it's indicative of the degree of corruption of the DOJ and the FBI that they've even been allowed to go forward Given that we're already in the midst of, in effect, a campaign season, your thoughts?
Well, I don't know about Donald Trump.
You know, in terms of the facts, I don't know what he did or didn't do, but I do think that this is an overriding feeling I have, and my thoughts have changed so much.
When you see this kind of injustice, like I saw in my own case, for example, you realize there's something really wrong here.
I think in my case, they see me as an uppity woman who needs to be put down.
In Donald Trump's case, I think they're empowering him.
I think they're trying to disempower him, but they're basically affirming that this man is very powerful because if he wasn't so powerful, they wouldn't need to do this.
If people didn't like him so much, they wouldn't need to do this.
And look at my own case.
I thought I never thought of myself as that powerful, but I'm starting to see, well, someone thinks I'm a threat.
I must have more power than I thought because they wouldn't be coming after me.
Would not be ruling against me and against decades and decades of legal doctrine that is very clear.
So yes, the courts have been weaponized against those of us speaking the truth.
And I it's so weird.
I actually find myself feeling kind of sorry for the judges like they've got some karma.
They're going to have to deal with because there's no escaping energy.
I've you know, I've been studying yoga and I'm really into yoga and just meditation and prayer more so than ever in my life.
Partly because of the times we're in.
And, you know, they can do what they will, but they will also be judged.
And the energy they're creating in their lives by, you know, attacking Donald Trump or attacking little old me, just one little person in Texas with a wealth of evidence in support of my case, by the way, I think it's a big mistake for them, for the judges.
So I would kind of keep an eye on what happens to these people over the next five or 10 years.
It does come back.
And my personal view is karma is speeding up and I can't explain it other than I just, I just seen it.
I've seen what happens to people who do bad things, who support evil people, who support injustice, who immunize bad people, bad players who've been hurting our people.
Like the courts have been immunizing, essentially, Big Pharma.
So I think that what's going to happen with Donald Trump is that this is going to bolster his popularity.
I think it's a mistake for those who are against him to show how powerful he is by, you know, I mean, they're trying to kill an ant with an atom bomb.
Right.
They're like, you know, what are they going to do next?
Raid his house?
You know, you know, with with the Marines?
I mean, They're affirming his power, and I don't think they understand energy very well.
This is something you learn, I think, more in your 50s and 60s than when you're younger, when you start seeing the patterns.
It's almost like rivers, karmic rivers, and you want to stay in karmic rivers with those who you want to flow with.
The last thing you want to do is jump in to, you know, James Douglas's karmic river, and this is what they're doing.
So you're then pulled with the tide of the negative energy.
So I think the people going against Donald Trump You know, unless there's something I don't know, I suspect it is political.
I think they're going to face consequences they're not going to like.
And I think one of those consequences is going to be that Donald Trump's popularity has been bolstered.
This is a privileged man, an entitled man, a man a lot of people may hate just because he's, you know, he's attractive, he's rich.
But by doing this to him, people are starting to maybe align with him a little bit and resonate with him saying, you know, I've had people do unfair things to me and he's had people do unfair things to him.
So it's almost creating a bond among a lot of our people who've been facing enormous injustices to say he's one of us.
They've made him one of us because of their mistreatment of him.
And again, I am not an expert on what's happened in this case, but my sense is that he is not being treated fairly.
Well, Dean, there's a lot of evidence in polling that exactly that is happening, that each time one of these indictments is brought, his support goes up.
And I think this is especially true in the black community, which has, or believes it has, suffered from so much inequitable application of the law.
Such as, you know, DWB driving when black.
You know, I had a friend who was an Indian.
He used to talk about DWI driving while an Indian, that they'd be arrested and harassed.
I think it's evoking a tremendous amount of support from a key voting bloc for the Democrat Party traditionally.
I think they're losing their grip.
Well, I've been reading this book called My Heart Will Triumph, written by one of the girls who saw the Mother Mary in Yugoslavia back in the early 80s.
I don't know if you know the story, but the Mother Mary appeared every night on the hillside and lots and lots of people saw it.
Six or eight children saw her every night, spoke with her.
Now, you know, I wasn't there.
I can't attest to what really happened, but what I can say is the book has had a big impact on me because some of the things that Marjana Solo talks about, the author, I resonate with.
I've seen some similar things in my own life and I've noticed them.
One of the things she said that struck me in this book was she says the Mother Mary said to her, anything made by man will fail.
Anything made by God will survive.
So in so many words, so my point is that they can try to construct a false narrative.
They can try to construct these unfair court proceedings and indictments and whatnot.
But if it doesn't come from God, it will never stick.
It's going to sort of disintegrate on its own and the people responsible.
And this is another book.
I'm reading right now by Joseph Murphy called the power of your subconscious mind an excellent book, by the way, it talks about how your mind and what you do in your life directly impacts your body.
So disease he says always starts in the mind.
So when you are doing things, you know are wrong.
You're making rulings as a judge, you know, don't comport with the law, your body will disintegrate, your cells will literally get diseased.
So I think that in the end, Again, I don't know what Donald Trump did or didn't do, but if this is a political ploy to bring him down, not only do I think it'll backfire, I think that the people responsible, you're going to see them get all kinds of physical ailments and problems because they've called it into their own lives by doing something so wrong and so against justice.
My producer, as it happens, shows up his own and is keen to add his own thoughts and commentary.
Mitchell, please join the conversation.
Hello, Jim.
Hi, Deanna.
How are y'all guys doing?
You know, Donald Trump is, of course, being cast as a martyr today, literally by all these political attacks.
The attempted, literally the overthrow, the attempted overthrow of the Trump presidency, literally while he was a While he was in the middle of his campaign, you know, the Obama administration plotted against Trump and the FBI brought in their own coup d'etat to the Trump campaign on January 6, 2017.
just on January 6, 2017, if many people may have forgotten, that that was the day that James Comey had his infamous Trump Tower dinner that that was the day that James Comey had his infamous Trump
dinner meeting where he literally came out of that meeting and memorialized it as he chose to in an attempt to literally blackmail the president-elect of the United States of America.
Now, many people seem to also forget that on January 5th of the day before, the Obama administration at the top levels met to discuss this the Obama administration at the top levels met to discuss this secret investigation that had been going on against the Trump
And then, of course, the Trump transition team, when the real so-called crux of the problem at the time was the General Flynn and the CISLAC calls.
So, you know, the deep state has been attacking Donald Trump since his campaign.
It's not a mistake that, you know, JFK was murdered, that literally all but sanctioned by Lyndon B. Johnson.
It's no mistake that Richard Milhouse, Nick was taken out by the CIA and the government spooks in a media leak strategy.
It's not a mistake that the murder of Martin Luther King Jr.
and Bobby Kennedy and other civil rights leaders happened the way it did.
It wasn't a mistake that Herbert Walker Bush threatened H. Ross Perot in the 1992 presidential election.
None of these things are a mistake, and it's the same thing with the literal political attack and persecution of Donald John Trump.
Yes, I couldn't agree more.
Politics are dangerous.
I've had a lot of people ask me, why don't you, you know, run for political office?
I have two law degrees.
I have a background in constitutional law.
I've written legislation for Congress and for numerous state legislators.
And my answer is, I don't want to be anywhere near those people.
I believe in energy.
I surround myself by people who are honest, pure, and good, to the extent I can.
I stay indoors a lot by myself.
I just think that that's dangerous.
Donald Trump has a lot more guts than I do, I guess I would say, to do this.
I think it's always been sort of the place people go to duke it out for power.
And I don't think seeking power is the way to live a good life.
There's a lot of dishonesty in politics.
Personally, I believe dishonesty ages your body.
I believe it literally weighs on you and ages your body.
So, I mean, I don't even know what to say about these people.
I don't know why they would want to even go into politics.
I don't understand it.
Because I see energy the way I do, and we know, And this is my yoga class, my yoga stays when I became a certified hot yoga instructor about a year and a half ago.
We had a whole section in the book about energy and you start exchanging energy in about six feet with someone.
So basically a lot of different religious doctrines have said stay away from bad people because if you hang out with them, they will infect your energy fields, your karma, whatever.
Now, I thought it was interesting that in the COVID, you know, pandemic, they were saying keep six feet away, but wait, The evidence said you have to be 12 feet away to avoid getting affected with COVID if someone sneezes on you or whatnot.
I mean, I saw it in the research project I was doing, 12 feet.
So why would they say six?
Well, six feet distance keeps us from connecting with each other on a human level.
Didn't protect us from getting COVID, but did stop us from connecting on a human level.
So there's so much abuse of knowledge, so much abuse of scientific knowledge right now going on.
And, uh, remember Donald Trump had stated he would never make the COVID shots mandatory.
So to me, and I was so happy to hear that, but I think that also turned people against him.
So, um, I wish people would see, you know, I mean, I, this is just my own opinion, but I see such clear relationships between how people lead their lives.
What they do to others, whether they engage in coveting, jealousy, defaming and career sabotage toward others, or whether they focus on themselves, as we are, I think, supposed to do.
So politics is all about, I think, trying to grab power and trying to get people to look at you or honor you or whatever.
And I think that that's why you have such terrible things happen in politics.
And I wouldn't touch it with a 10-foot pole.
I wouldn't go anywhere near those people.
I wouldn't want to be in the same room with them.
I'd much rather hang out with yogis and surfers.
These are the people who I've found to be some of the most benign, most kind, loving people I've ever been around.
So something about being in nature, grounding your feet to the ground, breathing, you know, connecting with nature is good for us and makes you not want the power.
Who wants that?
We're going to be climbing a tree somewhere.
Literally, I'd rather climb a tree and take pictures of squirrels.
So there's something really, really wrong.
And the television has been geared for the last, you know, 30, 40 years to make people want, you know, the certain lifestyle they see on television, to make them want what they don't have, to make them basically, and the 10th commandment says you shouldn't covet.
That's the 10th commandment.
That's bad for us.
It's bad to look at others.
It's good to focus on yourself.
And I see everything being geared to making people feel bad about themselves.
Making women feel like they're too fat or not tall enough.
Making men feel like you're not rich enough, you're not powerful enough, you're not a legislator, you're not anything.
I think people need to stop and get back to the basics.
And the fastest way to do that, in my opinion, is to get into nature.
But I'm writing a book right now about autophagy fasting.
And I want to bring this up because it's absolutely mind-boggling to me how a Japanese scientist got the Nobel Prize in 2016 for his research on autophagy and no one knows about it.
Autopogy kicks in about 16, 17, 18 hours into fasting, maybe 24 hours into fasting, and it's a state of metabolism where your body literally starts finding food from within.
So it goes at the good cells, the stronger cells dominate, and the stronger cells start eating cancerous cells, precancerous cells, cells with remnants of viruses, cells with remnants of vaccinations or pills.
And I've seen some of them under the microscope, some of what we see.
We know that.
And they're actually healing all kinds of things, especially inflammation, chronic pain, arthritis, autoimmune, and cancer.
The early research indicates you can cure cancer if it's not too advanced by fasting.
So I'm writing this book now about not just fasting, but about fasting does to you.
Not to mention taking a shot of apple cider vinegar every morning.
It does incredible things.
It changes the way your body processes food.
It changes the way your body converts food to fat.
It lowers your bad cholesterol as it raises your good cholesterol.
Apple cider vinegar is so cheap.
Fasting is free.
Why don't our people know how to cure their bodies from within?
Because we were given everything.
Our bodies are made to self-cure.
So I'm writing this book now about this to show people how, and by the way, I've lost I mean, I was never fat.
I was like maybe a size 4, but my size 4s were getting tight.
When I was at TSU, I had problems with being bloated like a lot of women there did.
A lot of women there gained a ton of weight.
I got out of TSU, immediately got healthier, got into the autophagy fasting, dropped 15 pounds.
I'm back in my high school Levi's.
I want to share this with the world.
You don't need meds, probably.
I mean, it depends.
I'm not a doctor, but a lot of people do not need meds.
My friend who turned me on to the topic of fasting had had surgery.
She was on all kinds of drugs.
Ozempec, antidepressants, you name it, she was on it.
She lost 30 pounds with fasting, got off all the medications and she looks better than she's looked in 20, I don't know, 23 years.
So, uh, you know, I wish people would focus on self healing because you're not really going to be as powerful to help others until you help yourself first.
But instead so many people are focused on, you know, um, trying to gain power.
Focusing on their looks too much.
You know, the Botox, all that stuff is so toxic to your system.
And then of course the Ozempec to lose weight, which is insane.
I never even heard of it.
My hairdresser was telling me that women are coming in with huge hair loss, like clumps coming out from Ozempec.
So they take this drug to try to lose weight and they lose their hair.
They need to learn about fasting.
So that's why I'm doing this book.
But I don't even know what else to say.
I think that people generally through our media, through Social media through Facebook, through Instagram, showing each other, look what I got, look what I got.
That is not the way to to garner happiness or healthiness or solidarity.
Each of us is different.
Each of us is born with our own karma, our own destiny.
We need to go back to the basics.
And I think that's going to cure a lot.
But back to Trump, I think I think I think I think he has a good chance of winning.
And I think that especially if they take out the ballot boxes and make people come in to vote or have more controls.
I mean, I watched 2,000 Mules and I was absolutely shocked.
I just, you know, I heard the rumors that the election might have been stolen.
But when I watched 2,000 Mules with my husband, we looked at each other and said, you know, this evidence seems pretty compelling.
It was scary.
You know, other countries get taken from the people in this way.
And I can't speak to whether the 2020 election was stolen, but I will say we better do a better job next time because we need to get the people back in power and to let the people lead who we want to lead.
I guarantee 100% 2020 was stolen massively by my best estimate.
Trump got over 100 million votes, Biden only 37, which is why they're resorting to this dramatic Technique of bringing in millions of illegals.
They not only want to change the demographics, they want to register them as voters, Nina, and that appears to be part of the package.
Sheriff, as I mentioned before you joined today, it's reported they're being given $5,000 gift cards, and of course they're getting $2,200 a month.
They're being given food, shelter, green cards.
It's all outrageous.
And then they're being given the option, or at least it's being proposed by the Democrats, of a path to citizenship by serving in our military, which, since it's gone woke, can't make its quotas.
I mean, who the hell wants to join to take showers with transgenders, for God's sake?
So they want to put migrants in there, and it'll have the additional benefit that they have to declare martial law.
They'll have a whole lot of what appear to be mostly Chinese soldiers who will be perfectly willing to fire on Americans, which American soldiers would not.
This is so dastardly, Dina.
I can hardly believe, but that's what the administration in power today is doing to the USA.
Well, the only thing I can say that I know from personal knowledge is my son was terminated.
My son is brilliant.
My son has been in every gifted program he's applied to.
He just has something.
He has incredible intuition, extraordinary test scores, and unusual skills with being able to basically read back a list of nonsensical terms in exact order.
I could never do that.
He's amazing.
My son did a great job in the military.
He took one shot.
I panicked.
I didn't know he took the Pfizer, the BioNTech, which was given in lieu of Comirnaty.
And remember, They FDA approved Comirnaty so that they could require the military men and women to take it.
Then they swapped it out for BioNTech, which was not approved and not legal under military law.
So my mom died after two shots of Pfizer.
She had one of those clots in her brain that she had no chance of survival.
She had an aneurysm in her brain.
So I found out my son took one shot of Pfizer and I zipped up to Fort Hood.
I was literally living in Malibu.
I zipped up, flew to Texas, drove up to Fort Hood, and I met with him in his doctor's office and said, my son isn't taking a second shot.
I'll do anything.
I can't, you know, he's got the same genetics as my mom.
And we all know that it does have to do with your genetics, how you respond to these shots.
And they basically would not, you know, give in at all.
And I remember walking around the base and just seeing all these, you know, beautiful young people, these soldiers looking down at the ground, walking along, looking like someone has just stolen their child.
I mean, they looked so demoralized.
And I thought to myself, is that because they're being forced to get these shots?
Because that was my sense.
It was during the big controversy with the military.
And I thought, you know, a lot of good... My son refused a second shot.
I gave him A significant amount of money just to make sure that he had transition money to go get an apartment and get a job or whatever.
I just was so desperate for him not to take those shots and so he didn't take the second shot.
He did get terminated but now he works for a government contract on the East Coast.
He's doing fine but he had like nine months of unemployment at age 26 and a lot of the military pilots and you know these are pilots Who it takes, you know, $5 million to train them and they walked off the job.
They're not going to get the shot.
So we've lost so much strength in America military and a lot of, you know, very intelligent military men and women rejected the shots.
So you're talking about really being left with a military that reluctantly took the shots or maybe, you know, didn't have the insight to look into it and do their own research.
And people who simply couldn't lose their paycheck.
That's what breaks my heart.
That's what makes me so angry is some of these men and women were the breadwinners for their family and they couldn't just walk off the job.
They reluctantly took the shot and some of them got sick.
So it's nasty.
I want to thank you for a wonderful interview here today.
Before we conclude, I'd like for you to reiterate where individuals can find more of your work or support your efforts.
Okay.
Well, lordadvocates.org is my 501c3.
It's online.
I describe the credentials of my lawyers.
I describe what we're doing.
And, you know, I think it's, and nothing, nothing, not one penny goes to anything other than lawyers fees, CPA costs, compliance, that kind of thing.
I haven't even spent any money on marketing.
Not that we have a lot of donations.
We don't, but my point is this time, if we get the funding, I will, Be in charge.
And I will make sure the right lawyers are hired.
We will not commit errors in court to the very highest level I can possibly promise.
We have my husband, a certified appellate lawyer who's an expert in not making errors in court because he's seen so many errors on appeal and he's tried to, you know, had to work to try to deal with that.
So your appellate lawyers are generally your best lawyers.
They, because they've seen after the fact the errors, the courts, the lawyers made at the trial court level.
So we have a great, strong team.
I've known my board members, one of them my whole life, since I was 13.
That's Gaynelle Godier from Gig Harbor and then Alfred Brophy from North Carolina.
So we have a great team.
We have terrific lawyers and we're on it if we can just get some funding.
Because right now, I'm basically the one lawyer working on things because we don't have the funding for me to hire people to help me.
But I think we'll get there.
You know, I think eventually people will catch on and see that this group is actually doing the kind of work that America's Frontline Doctors should have been doing and other groups should have been doing with their tens of millions where they've gotten nothing done.
So lordadvocates.org, you can reach me through there.
And you know, I welcome your comments, your suggestions, anything that you want us to look into.
To the extent we have the time and money, we will look into it.
But I list some of the things we're working on right now on that website.
Dina, it's been sensational.
I want to encourage everyone to have a great weekend and spend as much time as you can with your family, your friends, the people you love and care about.
Because again, I say, we do not know how much time we have left.
Thanks to Dina Pollard-Sachs and Mitchell Bubb for joining the conversation.
Have a great weekend.
See you back here on Monday.
Thanks, Jim.
Take care.
▲
Export Selection